SLR-Based Evaluation and Validation Studies of Candidate ITRF2005 Products

Thumbnail Image

Files

SLR-based Evaluation and Validation Studies of Candidate ITRF2005 Products.pdf (553.07 KB)

Links to Files

https://cddis.nasa.gov/lw15/docs/papers/SLR-based%20Evaluation%20and%20Validation%20Studies%20of%20Candidate%20ITRF2005%20Products.pdf

Permanent Link

http://hdl.handle.net/11603/19816

Collections

UMBC Joint Center for Earth Systems Technology (JCET)
UMBC Faculty Collection
UMBC Physics Department

Author/Creator

Author/Creator ORCID

Date

Type of Work

conference papers and proceedings
Text

Department

Program

Citation of Original Publication

Erricos C. Pavlis, M. Kuzmicz-Cieslak and D. E. Pavlis, SLR-Based Evaluation and Validation Studies of Candidate ITRF2005 Products ,

Rights

This item is likely protected under Title 17 of the U.S. Copyright Law. Unless on a Creative Commons license, for uses protected by Copyright Law, contact the copyright holder or the author.
Public Domain Mark 1.0
This is a work of the United States Government. In accordance with 17 U.S.C. 105, no copyright protection is available for such works under U.S. Law.

Subjects

Abstract

The recent release of candidate solutions for adoption of the new ITRF2005 International Terrestrial Reference Frame (ITRF) initiated numerous tests and comparisons over the past months. This presentation focuses on the evaluation tests we performed with the ITRF2005P and ITRF2005D products, primarily with Satellite Laser Ranging (SLR) tracking data. Since over two decades now, SLR tracking data contribute to the definition of the TRF, primarily in defining its origin and scale. LAGEOS 1 and 2 are the main targets contributing to this, and we use their data, as well as a limited number of independent data to gauge the improvement gained by going from ITRF2000 to either of the two new candidate solutions. An easy and immediate observation is that either of them is only slightly different from ITRF2000, in contrast to what was observed during the release of ITRF2000. This seems natural though, since ITRF2000 dealt with many problems observed with its predecessor and used a uniformly high quality input from nearly all techniques. We concentrate here on the differences between the two and the impact of such factors as the improvements in the analysis methodology, the underlying models, the use of IERS Conventions 2003, and the latest improvements in modelling SLR observations.