Article : Comparison of different gravity field implied density models of the topography
Authors : Sobotka, J.University of Wrocław, Institute of Geological Sciences, Department of Structural Geology, Wrocław, Poland, firstname.lastname@example.org, Sedighi, M.K.N. Toosi University of Technology, Faculty of Geodesy and Geomatics Engineering, Tehran, Iran, email@example.com,
Abstract : Density within the Earth crust varies between 1.0 and 3.0 g/cm³. The Bouguer gravity field measured in south Iran is analyzed using four different regional-residual separation techniques to obtain a residual map of the gravity field suitable for density modeling of topography. A density model of topography with radial and lateral distribution of density is required for an accurate determination of the geoid, e.g., in the Stokes-Helmert approach. The apparent density mapping technique is used to convert the four residual Bouguer anomaly fields into the corresponding four gravity im-plied subsurface density (GRADEN) models. Although all four density models showed good correlation with the geological density (GEODEN) model of the region, the GRADEN models obtained by high-pass filter-ing and GGM high-pass filtering show better numerical correlation with GEODEN model than the other models.
Bibliography : 1. Buttkus, B. (2000), Spectral Analysis and Filter Theory in Applied Geophysics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
2. Featherstone, W.E. (1997), On the use of the geoid in geophysics: A case study over the North-West Shelf of Australia, Exploration Geophysics 28, 2, 52-57, DOI: 10.1071/EG997052.
3. Hackney, R.I., W.E. Featherstone, and H.-J. Götze (2004), Regional-residual gravity field separation in the Central Andes using global geopotential models, ASEG 17th Geophys. Conf. and Exhibition of the Australian Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 15-19 August, Sydney, 4 pp.
4. Huang, J., P. Vaníček, S.D. Pagiatakis, and W. Brink (2001), Effect of topographical density on geoid in the Canadian Rocky Mountains, J. Geodesy 74, 805-815, DOI: 10.1007/s001900000145.
5. Lemoine, F.G., S.C. Kenyon, J.K. Factor, R.G. Trimmer, N.K. Pavlis, D.S. Chinn, C.M. Cox, S.M. Klosko, S.B. Luthcke, M.H. Torrence, Y.M. Wang, R.G. Williamson, E.G. Pavlis, R.H. Rapp, and T.R. Olson (1998), The development of the joint NASA GSFC and NIMA geopotential model EGM96, Technical Report NASA/TP-1998-206861, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, USA.
6. Mickus, K.L., C.L.V. Aikent, and W.D. Kennedy (1991), Regional-residual gravity anomaly separation using the minimum-curvature technique, Geophysics 56, 2, 279-283, DOI: 10.1190/1.1443041.
7. Nahavandchi, H. (2003), A comparison of different procedures of handling the effects of close and distant topographic masses in gravimetric geoid computations with the classical and recent formulae, Newton's Bulletin 1, 55-77, Cote INIST: 10508, 35400014242177.0060.
8. Najafi-Alamdari, M. (1996), Contributions towards the determination of precise regional geoid, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton,Canada.
9. Pagiatakis, S.D., D. Fraser, K. McEwen, A.K. Goodacre, and M. Veronneau (1999), Topographic mass density and gravimetric geoid modelling, Boll. Geofis. Teor. Appl. 40, 189-194.
10. Pagiatakis, S.D., and C. Armenakis (1999), Gravimetric geoid modeling with GIS, Int. Geoid Service Bull. 8, 105-112.
11. Sedighi, M., M. Najafi Alamdari, Y. Djamour, and H.R. Nankali (2007), Comparison of geopotential models – A case study in Iran, Geophys. Res. Abstracts 9, 02142, SRef-ID: 1607-7962/gra/EGU2007-A-02142.
12. Singh, A.P., D.C. Mishra, and G. Laxman (2003), Apparent density mapping and 3-D gravity inversion of Dharwar crustal province, J. Ind. Geophys. Union 7, 1, 1-9.
13. Tabatabaee, S.H. (1992), 2D-filter design and use in gravity and magnetic survey of south-east region of Iran Chahbahar area, Geophysical Report of N.I.O.C. exploration directorate.
14. Thurston, J.B., and R.J. Brown (1992), The filtering characteristics of least-squares polynomial approximation for regional/residual separation, Canad. J. Exploration Geophys. 28, 2, 71-80.
Qute : Sobotka, J. ,Sedighi, M. ,Sedighi, M. , Comparison of different gravity field implied density models of the topography. Acta Geophysica Vol. 57, no. 2/2009