iMAGINE Seminar:

Satellite gravity gradients

05.06.2014
 Time Topic

09:00-09:20 Welcome Haagmans – Bouman - Ebbing

09:20-10:10 Gravity and gravity gradients – from Gz to a tensor Ebbing

10:10-10.30 Coffee break

10:30-11:20 Satellite gravity data and global gravity models– an Bouman

overview
11:15-12.10 Geological mapping and 3D modelling using satellite Ebbing
gradients

12:10-13:00 Lunch

13:00-13.45 Global crustal models and implications for heat-flow Ebbing

modelling
13.45-14.10 ESA gravity gradients data sets – How to access? Bouman - Haagmans

14:10-14.30 Coffee break

14:30-15:00 Feedback and discussion

2 Satellite seminar, Tromsø 05.06.2014

 STSE projects

http://goce4interior.dgfi.badw.de/
(DGFI - Munich, TNO - Utrecht, NGU -
Trondheim, CAU - Kiel)

‣Formula will likely be continued (3D Earth project (TBC))

ESA GOCE & Swarm | Roger Haagmans | Tromso, Norway | 03/06/2014 | EOP | Slide 4

ESA UNCLASSIFIED – For Official Use

GOCE+ Height Unification

GOCE | Christoph Steiger, Massimo Romanazzo, Björn Frommknecht, Roger Haagmans | San Francisco | 13/12/2013 | EOP | Slide 5

ESA UNCLASSIFIED – For Official Use

GOCE+ time variations

GOCE | Christoph Steiger, Massimo Romanazzo, Björn Frommknecht, Roger Haagmans | San Francisco | 13/12/2013 | EOP | Slide 6

ESA UNCLASSIFIED – For Official Use

GOCE+ projects --> new products for
the community

GOCE | Christoph Steiger, Massimo Romanazzo, Björn Frommknecht, Roger Haagmans | San Francisco | 13/12/2013 | EOP | Slide 7

ESA UNCLASSIFIED – For Official Use

GOCE+ air density response to Earthquake

GOCE | Christoph Steiger, Massimo Romanazzo, Björn Frommknecht, Roger Haagmans | San Francisco | 13/12/2013 | EOP | Slide 8

ESA UNCLASSIFIED – For Official Use

 GOCE+ Geophysics

Team 1: DGFI (DE), NGU (NO), TNO (NL)

NE Atlantic margin
Saudi Arabia

Team 2: UWB (CZ), AAS (AT), AUT (GR), DIAS (IR), GIS (DE), TUD (NL)
Mid-Atlantic ridge
Africa

Full gravity gradient products (GRACE/GOCE) 4th QRT 2014 for users
GOCE | Christoph Steiger, Massimo Romanazzo, Björn Frommknecht, Roger Haagmans | San Francisco | 13/12/2013 | EOP | Slide 9

ESA UNCLASSIFIED – For Official Use

GOCE -Gravity field and steady-
state Ocean Circulation Explorer

Mission period
17 March 2009 – 11 November 2013

Gradiometer; 3 pairs of 3-axis, servo-

controlled, capacitive accelerometers
(each pair separated by a distance of
about 0.5 m).

Launcher: Rockot (converted SS-

19), from Plesetsk, Russia.
 Gravity potential, gravity or gravity gradient

Topography [m] in the Gravity gradients

Indonesian Archipelago
Signal attenuates at
satellite height

Q
rQ
GOCE
ψ0
R

CHAMP

GRACE Satellite orbit

Observed Gravity data Gravity potential (shapes the Geoid)

(Haagmans, Prijatna, Omang, 2003)

ESA GOCE & Swarm | Roger Haagmans | Tromso, Norway | 03/06/2014 | EOP | Slide 11

ESA UNCLASSIFIED – For Official Use

 Regional modelling and data reduction ?

What is the influence of ignoring

the rest of the globe on gravity
(scalar) and gravity gradients
(“local 3D” view)?

What is this influence near the

surface and at satellite altitude?

Can it be useful to use gravity

near the surface and gravity
gradients at satellite level as
complementary information for
regional modelling?
 Application of satellite gradients
 How can we model satellite data?
 Is a topographic reduction necessary?
 Is there any additional benefit using (satellite) gradients? All
signal is theoretically in the potential?
 At which height should I use the data?
 Downward continued to surface? At satellite height?
 Do we need to consider a spherical Earth, if using satellites?
 Do satellite gradients have a sensitivity beyond global models or
terrestrial data?

13 Satellite seminar, Tromsø 05.06.2014

 Time Topic

09:00-09:20 Welcome Haagmans – Bouman - Ebbing

09:20-10:10 Gravity and gravity gradients – from Gz to a Ebbing

tensor
10:10-10.30 Coffee break

10:30-11:20 Satellite gravity data and global gravity models– an Bouman

overview
11:15-12.10 Geological mapping and 3D modelling using satellite Ebbing
gradients
12:10-13:00 Lunch
13:00-13.45 Global crustal models and implications for heat-flow Ebbing
modelling
13.45-14.10 ESA gravity gradients data sets – How to access? Bouman - Haagmans

14:10-14.30 Coffee break

14:30-15:00 Feedback and discussion

14 Satellite seminar, Tromsø 05.06.2014

 FTG: WIDE BANDWIDTH & IMPROVED SNR MEASUREMENT

Gradiometry measurements allow high resolution from dynamic

GGI : HIGH RESOLUTION DATA FROM A DYNAMIC ENVIRONMENT
environment

ARKeX Theoretical World:  Proof mass mounted on a spring

Conventional Gravity  Perfect measure of the Earth’s gravity

Integrated
Gravity Interpretation

Real World:  Cannot detect difference between plane’s motion and gravity signal

Imaging
Seismic
Conventional Gravity  GPS cannot correct high frequency signal, filtered profile
BlueQube

Gravity Better
Gradiometry Solution Real World:
 Two proof masses, measures difference in acceleration
Gravity Gradiometry “between” two masses
 Cancels out effect of motion of aircraft/boat

Satellite seminar, Tromsø

 Gravity: Force between two masses (Newton)

  m1 ⋅ m2
 
r1 − r2 m1

F (r1 ) = −γ   2 ⋅   F
r1 − r2 r1 − r2 
r1

r
Magnitude Direction  m2
r2
γ = 6.67 ⋅10 −11 Nm
2

kg 2

   
F (r1 ) = m 1 ⋅ g (r1 )
   g x 
  m2 r1 − r2
g (r1 ) = −γ   2 ⋅   =  g y 
r1 − r2 r1 − r2  
 gz 

Gravity is a vector quantity with components in the x, y, z directions (gx, gy, gz)
Gravity → density → geology (Geophysics)
   
   r − r0 g (r )
g (r ) = −γ ∫∫∫ ρ (r0 )   3 dV0
   V0
r r − r0

V0 r − r0 
r0 
ρ (r0 )

  
g (r ) ⇒ ρ (r0 )
gravity density

m
Unit : 1 mGal = 10 −5
s2 gz
Gravity tells us information about geology.
 Scalar potential, vector acceleration, tensor gradient
scalar field vector field tensor field
potential acceleration gradient

∂U
= gx
Gxx Gxy Gxz 
U(x,y,z) ∂x  
∂U
G
 yx G yy G yz 
= gy
∂y Gzx Gzy Gzz 
 
∂U
= gz
∂z
Gxx
spatial spatial
derivative derivative Gxy
gx
X X X Gxz Gyx
Y Y Y Gyy
gy
Z Z Z Gyz
U
Gzx
gz=g Gzy

Gzz

People also use U or T or G to denote the gravity and gradient components.

Coordinate systems might be (X, Y, Z) or (N, E, D) as shown in subscripts.
 Gravity is derivative of potential
Gravitational field isconservative (work depends on end points, not on path taken).
Vector gravity field g ( x, y, z ) may be derived from scalar potential U ( x, y , z ).

∇U(x,y,z) = g(x,y,z)

∂U
= gx Derivative of potential
∂x x y z
∂U
∂y
= gy (g , g , g )
x y z

∂U
= gz
∂z
X

Z
 Gravity is derivative of potential
Gravitational field isconservative (work depends on end points, not on path taken).
Vector gravity field g ( x, y, z ) may be derived from scalar potential U ( x, y , z ).

∇U(x,y,z) = g(x,y,z)

∂U
= gx Derivative of potential
∂x x y z
∂U
∂y
= gy (g , g , g )
x y z

∂U
= gz
∂z
X

Z
 and gravity gradient is derivative of gravity.
Gradient: change in gravity components along three axial directions.
Cube Response
∂ ∂ 2
Gxx = gx = U
∂x ∂x∂x
∂ ∂2
Gxy = gx = U
∂y ∂x∂y … and so on
Gxx Gxy Gxz

Derivative
x y z

x Gxx Gxy Gxz 

Component

 
Gyx Gyy Gyz

Gyx Gyy Gyz 

y

Gzx Gzy Gzz  X

 
z
Y
Gzx Gzy Gzz
Z
 Symmetry

 The order of differentiation doesn’t Cube Response

matter:
∂ 2U ∂ 2U
Gxy = = = G yx
∂y∂x ∂x∂y Gxx Gxy Gxz

Gxz = Gzx
G yz = Gzy
 The gravity gradient tensor is Gyx Gyy Gyz

SYMMETRIC.
X

Y
Gzx Gzy Gzz
Z
 Laplace’s Equation  Zero Trace
 Laplace’s Equation applies in Cube Response
source-free regions:

∂ 2
U ∂ 2
U ∂ 2
U
∇U=
2
+ + 2 =0
∂x 2
∂y 2
∂z Gxx Gxy Gxz


Gxx + G yy + Gzz = 0

 The trace of the gravity gradient tensor is Gyy Gyz

zero
 Only 5 independent components of the
gravity gradient tensor. X

Y
Gzz
Z
Gravity gradients
 Example 1: Gzy and Gzx
Cube Response
( g z ( y2 ) − g z ( y1 )) ∂g z
Gzy = y2 − y1 =
∂y
( g z ( x2 ) − g z ( x1 )) ∂g z
Gzx = x2 − x1 =
∂x
Gzy

Gzx
X
∂g z
gz Y
∂y
Z
 Example 2: Gyy and Gxx

( g y ( y2 )− g y ( y1 ))
Gyy = y2 − y1

Gyy

Y
Gxx
Z
 Example 3: Gzz

( g z ( z2 )− g z ( z1 ))
Gzz = z2 − z1
G2 is closer to cube and measures stronger gravity than G1

G1 G2 Gzz =
( G2 − G1 )
∆z
∆z
G2
G1

Z
 Units of Gravity and Gravity Gradiometry

Survey Type Measurement Fundamental Unit Unit

Gravity Survey Acceleration Meters/Second/Second mGal

Gravity Gradiometry Change in Meters/Second/Second/Meter Eötvös

Survey Acceleration

Gravity
gz
1 mgal = 10-5 m/s2

Gravity Gradiometry
Gzz, Gzx, Gxx, Gzy, Gyy, Gxy

1E (Eötvös) = 0.1 mGal / km = 0.1 microGal / m

 Some considerations: Coordinate systems

(Des Fitzgerald, 2011)

• GOCE
- NWU (north, west, up)
29 Satellite seminar, Tromsø 05.06.2014
 Gradient data and rotational invariants
• Gradients are dependent on the orientation of the coordinate
system, which may differ from the orientation of random geological
features
• Conventionally, the vertical and horizontal gradient are used for
interpretation:

• Invariants have the advantage to be independent from the

coordinate system and help to delineate the outline of density
contrasts.
• Pedersen and Rasmussen (1990) demonstrated the use of
rotational invariants of the gravity tensor:

• These rotational invariants are independent from the orientation of

flight lines and facilitate to detect sources randomly orientated in
any coordinate system

30 Satellite seminar, Tromsø 05.06.2014

 Gradient data and rotational invariants
• Gradients are dependent on the orientation of the coordinate
system, which may differ from the orientation of random geological
features
• Conventionally, the vertical and horizontal gradient are used for
interpretation:

• Invariants have the advantage to be independent from the

coordinate system and help to delineate the outline of density
contrasts.
• Pedersen and Rasmussen (1990) demonstrated the use of
rotational invariants of the gravity tensor:

• These rotational invariants are independent from the orientation of

the flight lines and facilitate to detect sources randomly orientated
in any coordinate system

31 Satellite seminar, Tromsø 05.06.2014

 Gradient data and rotational invariants
• Gradients are dependent on the orientation of the coordinate
system, which may differ from the orientation of random geological
features
• Conventionally, the vertical and horizontal gradient are used for
interpretation:

• Invariants have the advantage to be independent from the

coordinate system and help to delineate the outline of density
contrasts.
• Pedersen and Rasmussen (1990) demonstrated the use of
rotational invariants of the gravity tensor:

• These rotational invariants are independent from the orientation of

the flight lines and facilitate to detect sources randomly orientated
in any coordinate system
Martin Panzner, NTNU

32 Satellite seminar, Tromsø 05.06.2014

 Gradient data and rotational invariants
• Gradients are dependent on the orientation of the coordinate
system, which may differ from the orientation of random geological
features
• Conventionally, the vertical and horizontal gradient are used for
interpretation:

• Invariants have the advantage to be independent from the

coordinate system and help to delineate the outline of density
contrasts.
• Pedersen and Rasmussen (1990) demonstrated
I1 the use ofI2
rotational invariants of the gravity tensor:

• These rotational invariants are independent from the orientation of

the flight lines and facilitate to detect sources randomly orientated
in any coordinate system

33 Satellite seminar, Tromsø 05.06.2014

Martin Panzner, NTNU
 Gradient data and rotational invariants
• Gradients are dependent on the orientation of the coordinate system, which may
differ from the orientation of random geological features
• Conventionally, the vertical and horizontal gradient are used for interpretation:
Horizontal gradientG
• Invariants have the advantage to be independent from the coordinate system and
help to delineate the outline of density contrasts.
• Pedersen and Rasmussen (1990) demonstrated the use of rotational invariants of
the gravity tensor:

• These rotational invariants are independent from the orientation of the flight lines
and facilitate to detect sources randomly orientated in any coordinate system

Martin Panzner, NTNU

34 Satellite seminar, Tromsø 05.06.2014

 a) Gzz b) Horizontal gradient IGxzGyz

c) I1 d) I2

35 Satellite seminar, Tromsø Martin Panzner, NTNU 05.06.2014

 Gradient data and rotational invariants

• Pedersen and Rasmussen (1990) showed that the invariant ratio

lies between zero and unity for any potential field. When the causative body as
seen from the observation point looks more and more 3D like, then I increases
and eventually approaches unity.
• For a strict 2D case, I is equal to zero for all measurement points

36 Satellite seminar, Tromsø 05.06.2014

Example: Vredefort

Beiki 2011
Example Vredefort

Beiki 2011
Gzz Dimensionality I

Beiki 2011
http://www.gradiometry.com/
 Advantage of using gradients
 Gradients are less sensitive to regional fields/gradients

 Higher sensitivity to near-surface structures

 Gradients are useful to calculate invariants from Cartesian models

and to compare to global gravity gradients
 Rotational invariant
 No tensor rotation necessary

=> What about satellite gravity gradients?

41 Satellite seminar, Tromsø 05.06.2014
Flying
height
 AGG surveys:
35-300m above
terrain

height
Flying
height
 AGG surveys:
35-300m above
terrain
 GOCE satellite:
224-270 km
above

height
 Flat Earth
vs.
Spherical
calculations

44
 Flat Earth
vs.
Spherical
calculations

45
 Flat Earth
vs.
Spherical
calculations

46
 Flat Earth vs. Spherical calculations

Uieda 2011

47
 Flat Earth vs. Spherical calculations

Marussi Tensor

The Marussi tensor expresses the

gradients in relation to the radial distance
48 r, the latitude φ and longitude λ.
 Application of satellite gradients
 How can we model satellite data?
 Is a topographic reduction necessary?
 Is there any additional benefit using (satellite) gradients? All
signal is theoretically in the potential?
 At which height should I use the data?
 Downward continued to surface? At satellite height?
 Do we need to consider a spherical Earth, if using satellites?
 Do satellite gradients have a sensitivity beyond global models or
terrestrial data?

49 Satellite seminar, Tromsø 05.06.2014

 Topographic and Bouguer correction
Complete Bouguer correction is defined as
1) Gravity effect of Bouguer slab
2) spherical correction
3) Terrain correction
 Topographic and Bouguer correction
Complete Bouguer correction is defined as
1) Gravity effect of Bouguer slab
2) spherical correction
3) Terrain correction

h describes height above reference level or water depth and is different for each station.
 Topographic and Bouguer correction
Complete Bouguer correction is defined as
1) Gravity effect of Bouguer slab
2) spherical correction
3) Terrain correction
 Topographic and Bouguer correction
Complete Bouguer correction is defined as
1) Gravity effect of Bouguer slab
2) spherical correction
3) Terrain correction
 Topographic and Bouguer correction
Bouguer calculation is always possible if only station height is known,
can be quickly calculated.
Terrain correction requires high-resolution topography for surface data
(25 or 50 m for local sources which have highest effect)
 Topographic and Bouguer correction
BUT: NOT WORKING WELL FOR GRADIENTS
(Slab of constant thickness has not effect on gradients, terrain important)
=>TOPOGRAPHIC MASS REDUCTION (Computational demanding)
 Topographic and Bouguer correction
For satellites: point of obervation above topography (e.g. 250 km)
=> no high-resolution topography needed
Topographic and Bouguer correction
TOPOGRAPHIC MASS REDUCTION (for gravity and gradients) possible
Gravity gradients due to
topography at satellite
height

Uieda 2011
 GOCE data in 225 km height

59 Satellite seminar, Tromsø 05.06.2014

 Topographic effect in 225 km height

60 Satellite seminar, Tromsø 05.06.2014

 Topographic reduced GOCE data

61 Satellite seminar, Tromsø 05.06.2014

 Application of satellite gradients
 How can we model satellite data?
 Is a topographic reduction necessary?
 Is there any additional benefit using (satellite) gradients? All
signal is theoretically in the potential?
 At which height should I use the data?
 Downward continued to surface? At satellite height?
 Do we need to consider a spherical Earth, if using satellites?
 Do satellite gradients have a sensitivity beyond global models or
terrestrial data?

62 Satellite seminar, Tromsø 05.06.2014

 Time Topic

09:00-09:20 Welcome Haagmans – Bouman - Ebbing

09:20-10:10 Gravity and gravity gradients – from Gz to a tensor Ebbing

10:10-10.30 Coffee break

10:30-11:20 Satellite gravity data and global gravity models– Bouman

an overview
11:15-12.10 Geological mapping and 3D modelling using satellite Ebbing
gradients

12:10-13:00 Lunch

13:00-13.45 Global crustal models and implications for heat-flow Ebbing

modelling
13.45-14.10 ESA gravity gradients data sets – How to access? Bouman - Haagmans

14:10-14.30 Coffee break

14:30-15:00 Feedback and discussion

63 Satellite seminar, Tromsø 05.06.2014