OVERVIEW GRACE Monthly Estimates Compared with Surface ...€¦ · ESS EARTH SCIENCES SECTOR...

1
ESS EARTH SCIENCES SECTOR SECTEUR DES SCIENCES DE LA TERRE SST 1 3 4 A. Lambert J. Henton , . Winester 1 2 & 3 4 Natural Resources Canada (Geological Survey of Canada); Natural Resources Canada (Geodetic Survey Division); National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (National Geodetic Survey) 2 1 2 , J. Huang , N. Courtier , J. Liard & D GRACE monthly gravity estimates have been compared with annual surface gravity measurements at mid-continent North American sites to examine similarities and differences in observed trends and inter-annual variations. At some sites the GRACE trends are significantly different from the surface absolute gravity trends corrected for vertical movement, probably as a result of different spatial averaging of the dominant postglacial rebound signal. However, at sites where inter-annual variations are significant, there are strong similarities between GRACE and surface gravity data, indicating the presence of large-scale changes in groundwater storage. • Monthly GRACE gravity values were derived from the CSR-RL04 spherical harmonic monthly models for the period of April 2002 to January 2009. • Surface gravity observations have been carried out annually at mid-continent sites for well over a decade. The surface gravity values reported here are based on at least 24 hours of gravity observations using free-fall absolute gravimeters. • GRACE and surface gravity trends at mid-continent North American sites are in agreement at some sites but not in others. At Churchill the trend from surface measurements is expected to be higher than the GRACE trend as a result of Hudson Bay outflow, which should reduce the GRACE trend and increase the surface gravity trend. At other sites, such as Flin Flon and Saskatoon, the differences in trends are probably the result of the spatial averaging by GRACE. This possibility will be investigated in more detail at a later date. • Where significant inter-annual, gravity variations are observed, e.g., Pinawa and International Falls, there is good agreement between GRACE and surface, absolute-g measurements. Comparison with flow rate data for the Winnipeg River suggests that the inter- annual variations are related to large-scale variations in groundwater storage. GRACE DATA PROCESSING The flowchart on the right side describes the procedure used to determine gravity change estimates from the monthly GRACE gravity models [Tapley et al., 2004]. First, a de-correlation process is used to remove the stripe noise [see Swenson and Wahr, 2006]. Second, a least-squares model is used to solve for linear and quadratic terms, and to solve for annual and semi-annual seasonal variation amplitudes and their respective phases. The standard deviations of the spherical harmonic coefficients are used to form initial diagonal covariance matrices for each coefficient time series. If the estimated trend (linear & quadratic) and seasonal terms have posteriori signal-to-noise ratios greater than 4 for the coefficient time series, it is directly used to compute gravity anomaly change without further filtering. Otherwise the coefficients times series goes through a 450 km Gaussian filter [Wahr et al., 1998] before it is used to compute the gravity anomaly change. The unfiltered part constitutes 75% of the total gravity anomaly change. () ( ) () ( ) n i r t t B t t A t t a t t t v t C t C C nm C S i C nm C A i C nm i C nm i C nm nm i nm ,... 2 , 1 4 cos 2 cos ) ( 2 1 ) )( ( ) ( ) ( 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 = + + - + + - + - + - + = f p f p Fitting Model (7 unknowns): References • Faller, L.E., Y.G. Guo, J. Gschwind, T.M. Niebauer, R.L. Rinker, and J. Xue, 1983. The JILA portable absolute gravity apparatus, Bull. d’Information, Bureau Gravimetrique Int., 53, 87-92. • James, T.S. and E.R. Ivins, 1998. Prediction of Antarctic crustal motions driven by present-day ice sheet evolution and by isostatic memory of the Last Glacial Maximum, J.Geophys.Res., 103, 4993-5017. • Niebauer, T.M., G.S. Sasagawa, J.E. Faller, R. Hilt and F. Klopping, 1995. A new generation of absolute gravimeters, Metrologia, 32, 159-180. • Swenson, S., and J. Wahr (2006), Post- processing removal of correlated errors in GRACE data, Geophys. Res. Lett., 33, L08402, doi:10.1029/2005GL025285. • Tapley B. D., Bettadpur S. Ries J. C., Thompson P. F., Watkins M. M., 2004. GRACE measurements of mass variability in the Earth system, Science, 305:503- 505. • Wahr, J., Molenaar, and Bryan F., 1998. Time variability of the Earth's gravity field: Hydrological and oceanic effects and their possible detection using GRACE, J. Geophys. Res., 103, 30,205-30230. Absolute gravity trends are converted to trends seen by GRACE using the relation: g-dot = -1.053 * g-dot mass surface This relation arises when we correct the surface gravity rate for the effect of surface vertical velocity to arrive at the pure subsurface mass-redistribution effect: g-dot = g-dot – (-0.3086 μGal/mm)*z-dot mass surface surface where -0.3086 μGal/mm is the free-air gradient. z-dot can be eliminated from surface this equation using the relation: g-dot / z-dot = -0.15 μGal/mm surface surface from theoretical and postglacial modeling results [James and Ivins, 1998]. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 -2 -1 -1 0.75 1.25 0.25 0.50 OVERVIEW FLIN FLON -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Time (Yrs) Gravity (μGal) GRACE Gravity Abs-g GRACE Trend Abs-g Trend FLIN FLON -20 -10 0 10 20 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Time (Yrs) Gravity (μGal) GRACE Residual Abs-g Residual SASKATOON -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Time (Yrs) Gravity (μGal) GRACE Gravity Abs-g GRACE Trend Abs-g Trend SASKATOON -20 -10 0 10 20 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Time (Yrs) Gravity (μGal) GRACE Residual Abs-g Residual Figure 1. Map showing the variation of GRACE gravity trends (g-dots) over mid North America. Contour values are in μGal/yr. Inset plots show GRACE trends compared with trends derived from annual absolute gravity observations at seven sites. Absolute gravity trends observed on the moving Earth's surface (g-dot ) have been converted to trends seen by GRACE (g-dot ) [ see explanation – right ]. Additional inset plots compare surface mass de-trended GRACE data with de-trended surface gravity data showing similarities in their inter-annual variations. [ Shaded blue region - see Figure 1]. CHURCHILL -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Time (Yrs) Gravity (μGal) GRACE Gravity Abs-g GRACE Trend Abs-g Trend CHURCHILL -20 -10 0 10 20 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Time (Yrs) Gravity (μGal) GRACE Residual Abs-g Residual PINAWA -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Time (Yrs) Gravity (μGal) GRACE Gravity Abs-g GRACE Trend Abs-g Trend PINAWA -20 -10 0 10 20 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Time (Yrs) Gravity (μGal) GRACE Residual Abs-g Residual WAUSAU -20 -10 0 10 20 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Time (Yrs) Gravity (μGal) GRACE Residual Abs-g Residual WAUSAU -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Time (Yrs) Gravity (μGal) GRACE Gravity Abs-g GRACE Trend Abs-g Trend IOWA CITY -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Time (Yrs) Gravity (μGal) GRACE Gravity Abs-g GRACE Trend Abs-g Trend IOWA CITY -20 -10 0 10 20 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Time (Yrs) Gravity (μGal) GRACE Residual Abs-g Residual INTERNATIONAL FALLS -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Time (Yrs) Gravity (μGal) GRACE Gravity Abs-g GRACE Trend Abs-g Trend INTERNATIONAL FALLS -20 -10 0 10 20 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Time (Yrs) Gravity (μGal) GRACE Residual Abs-g Residual SURFACE GRAVITY INSTRUMENTATION & DATA PROCESSING CORRECTION OF SURFACE GRAVITY FOR VERTICAL MOVEMENT Mid-continent Gravity Measurements Absolute gravimeters: • JILA2, JILA4 (1987-1992) • FG5-102, FG5-111 (1993-2002) • FG5-106 (1995-present) (Faller et al., 1983, Niebauer et al., 1995) Absolute Gravity Data Processing Data corrections: • Solid earth tides • Ocean loading • Polar motion • Local atmospheric attraction & loading dC nm (t i ), dS nm (t i ) Statistical Test Gaussian Filter Harmonic Synthesis Gravity Anomaly Change De-Correlation Fail Pass SUMMARY OF RESULTS INTER-ANNUAL VARIATIONS: GRAVITY & RIVER FLOW RATES Pinawa, Manitoba and International Falls, Minnesota are situated in the Winnipeg River drainage basin [ Figure 1 , boundary approximated by shaded blue region]. Gravity variations at these two sites and variations from GRACE centered at the same sites correlate well with variations in the base flow rate of the Winnipeg River (Pine Falls) [ Figure 2 ]. GRACE Gravity vs. River Flow Rate -500 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Year -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 μGal equivalent 3 m /day Flow Rate, Winnipeg River GRACE International Falls GRACE Pinawa Absolute-g vs. River Flow Rate -500 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Year -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 Flow Rate, Winnipeg River Abs-g International Falls Abs-g Pinawa μGal 3 m /day Figure 2. De-trended, surface gravity variations at Pinawa, Manitoba and International Falls, Minnesota compared with flow rates on the Winnipeg River (at Pine Falls) [ left panel ]. De-trended GRACE monthly gravity values centered on Pinawa and International Falls compared with the same Winnipeg River flow rates [right panel]. Approximate boundaries of the Winnipeg River drainage system are shown in the blue region of Figure 1 (near the Pinawa & International Falls absolute gravity sites). Canada's Natural Resources Now and for the Future 1. Geological Survey of Canada (Pacific) Natural Resources Canada Sidney, BC, Canada 2. Geodetic Survey Division (CCRS) Natural Resources Canada Ottawa, ON, Canada 3. Geodetic Survey Division (CCRS) Natural Resources Canada Sidney, BC, Canada 4. National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration National Geodetic Survey Boulder, CO, United States Poster Presention 2009 Workshop on Monitoring North American Geoid Change Boulder, CO Oct 21-23, 2009 GRACE Monthly Estimates Compared with Surface Gravity Variations at mid-North American Sites GRACE Monthly Estimates Compared with Surface Gravity Variations at mid-North American Sites

Transcript of OVERVIEW GRACE Monthly Estimates Compared with Surface ...€¦ · ESS EARTH SCIENCES SECTOR...

Page 1: OVERVIEW GRACE Monthly Estimates Compared with Surface ...€¦ · ESS EARTH SCIENCES SECTOR SECTEUR DES SCIENCES SST DE LA TERRE A. Lambert 1 J. Henton 3, . Winester 4 1 Natural

ESS EARTH SCIENCESSECTOR

SECTEUR DES SCIENCESDE LA TERRESST

1 3 4A. Lambert J. Henton , . Winester1 2 & 3 4 Natural Resources Canada (Geological Survey of Canada); Natural Resources Canada (Geodetic Survey Division); National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (National Geodetic Survey)

2 1 2 , J. Huang , N. Courtier , J. Liard & D

GRACE monthly gravity estimates have been compared with annual surface gravity measurements at mid-continent North American sites to examine similarities and differences in observed trends and inter-annual variations. At some sites the GRACE trends are significantly different from the surface absolute gravity trends corrected for vertical movement, probably as a result of different spatial averaging of the dominant postglacial rebound signal. However, at sites where inter-annual variations are significant, there are strong similarities between GRACE and surface gravity data, indicating the presence of large-scale changes in groundwater storage.

• Monthly GRACE gravity values were derived from the CSR-RL04 spherical harmonic monthly models for the period of April 2002 to January 2009.

• Surface gravity observations have been carried out annually at mid-continent sites for well over a decade. The surface gravity values reported here are based on at least 24 hours of gravity observations using free-fall absolute gravimeters.

• GRACE and surface gravity trends at mid-continent North American sites are in agreement at some sites but not in others. At Churchill the trend from surface measurements is expected to be higher than the GRACE trend as a result of Hudson Bay outflow, which should reduce the GRACE trend and increase the surface gravity trend. At other sites, such as Flin Flon and Saskatoon, the differences in trends are probably the result of the spatial averaging by GRACE. This possibility will be investigated in more detail at a later date.

• Where significant inter-annual, gravity variations are observed, e.g., Pinawa and International Falls, there is good agreement between GRACE and surface, absolute-g measurements. Comparison with flow rate data for the Winnipeg River suggests that the inter-annual variations are related to large-scale variations in groundwater storage.

GRACE DATA PROCESSING

The flowchart on the right side describes the procedure used to determine gravity change estimates from the monthly GRACE gravity models [Tapley et al., 2004]. First, a de-correlation process is used to remove the stripe noise [see Swenson and Wahr, 2006]. Second, a least-squares model is used to solve for linear and quadratic terms, and to solve for annual and semi-annual seasonal variation amplitudes and their respective phases. The standard deviations of the spherical harmonic coefficients are used to form initial diagonal covariance matrices for each coefficient time series. If the estimated trend (linear & quadratic) and seasonal terms have posteriori signal-to-noise ratios greater than 4 for the coefficient time series, it is directly used to compute gravity anomaly change without further filtering. Otherwise the coefficients times series goes through a 450 km Gaussian filter [Wahr et al., 1998] before it is used to compute the gravity anomaly change. The unfiltered part constitutes 75% of the total gravity anomaly change.

()( ) ()( ) nirttBttA

ttatttvtCtC

Cnm

CSi

Cnm

CAi

Cnm

iCnmi

Cnmnminm

,...2,14cos2cos

)(2

1))(()()(

00

20000

=++-++-+

-+-+=

fpfp

Fitting Model (7 unknowns):

References• Faller, L.E., Y.G. Guo, J. Gschwind, T.M. Niebauer, R.L. Rinker, and J. Xue, 1983. The JILA portable absolute gravity apparatus, Bull. d’Information, Bureau Gravimetrique Int., 53, 87-92.• James, T.S. and E.R. Ivins, 1998. Prediction of Antarctic crustal motions driven by present-day ice sheet evolution and by isostatic memory of the Last Glacial Maximum, J.Geophys.Res., 103, 4993-5017.• Niebauer, T.M., G.S. Sasagawa, J.E. Faller, R. Hilt and F. Klopping, 1995. A new generation of absolute gravimeters, Metrologia, 32, 159-180.• Swenson, S., and J. Wahr (2006), Post- processing removal of correlated errors in GRACE data, Geophys. Res. Lett., 33, L08402, doi:10.1029/2005GL025285.• Tapley B. D., Bettadpur S. Ries J. C., Thompson P. F., Watkins M. M., 2004. GRACE measurements of mass variability in the Earth system, Science, 305:503- 505.• Wahr, J., Molenaar, and Bryan F., 1998. Time variability of the Earth's gravity field: Hydrological and oceanic effects and their possible detection using GRACE, J. Geophys. Res., 103, 30,205-30230.

Absolute gravity trends are converted to trends seen by GRACE using the relation:

g-dot = -1.053 * g-dotmass surface

This relation arises when we correct the surface gravity rate for the effect of surface vertical velocity to arrive at the pure subsurface mass-redistribution effect:

g-dot = g-dot – (-0.3086 µGal/mm)*z-dotmass surface surface

where -0.3086 µGal/mm is the free-air gradient. z-dot can be eliminated from surface

this equation using the relation:

g-dot / z-dot = -0.15 µGal/mmsurface surface

from theoretical and postglacial modeling results [James and Ivins, 1998].

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

00

0

0

1

-2

-1

-1

0.75

1.25

0.25

0.50

OVERVIEW

FLIN FLON

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Time (Yrs)

Gra

vit

y(µ

Ga

l)

GRACE Gravity Abs-g

GRACE Trend Abs-g Trend

FLIN FLON

-20

-10

0

10

20

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Time (Yrs)

Gra

vit

y(µ

Ga

l)

GRACE Residual

Abs-g Residual

SASKATOON

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Time (Yrs)

Gra

vit

y(µ

Ga

l)

GRACE Gravity Abs-g

GRACE Trend Abs-g Trend

SASKATOON

-20

-10

0

10

20

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Time (Yrs)

Gra

vit

y(µ

Ga

l)

GRACE Residual

Abs-g Residual

Figure 1. Map showing the variation of GRACE gravity trends (g-dots) over mid North America. Contour values are in µGal/yr. Inset plots show GRACE trends compared with trends derived from annual absolute gravity observations at seven sites. Absolute gravity trends observed on the moving Earth's surface (g-dot ) have been converted to trends seen by GRACE (g-dot ) [see explanation – right]. Additional inset plots compare surface mass

de-trended GRACE data with de-trended surface gravity data showing similarities in their inter-annual variations. [Shaded blue region - see Figure 1].

CHURCHILL

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Time (Yrs)

Gra

vit

y(µ

Ga

l)

GRACE Gravity Abs-g

GRACE Trend Abs-g Trend

CHURCHILL

-20

-10

0

10

20

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Time (Yrs)

Gra

vit

y(µ

Ga

l)

GRACE Residual

Abs-g Residual

PINAWA

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Time (Yrs)

Gra

vit

y(µ

Ga

l)

GRACE Gravity Abs-g

GRACE Trend Abs-g Trend

PINAWA

-20

-10

0

10

20

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Time (Yrs)

Gra

vit

y(µ

Ga

l)

GRACE Residual

Abs-g Residual

WAUSAU

-20

-10

0

10

20

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Time (Yrs)

Gra

vit

y(µ

Ga

l)

GRACE Residual

Abs-g Residual

WAUSAU

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Time (Yrs)

Gra

vit

y(µ

Ga

l)

GRACE Gravity Abs-g

GRACE Trend Abs-g Trend

IOWA CITY

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Time (Yrs)

Gra

vit

y(µ

Ga

l)

GRACE Gravity Abs-g

GRACE Trend Abs-g Trend

IOWA CITY

-20

-10

0

10

20

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Time (Yrs)

Gra

vit

y(µ

Ga

l)

GRACE Residual

Abs-g Residual

INTERNATIONAL FALLS

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Time (Yrs)

Gra

vit

y(µ

Ga

l)

GRACE Gravity Abs-g

GRACE Trend Abs-g Trend

INTERNATIONAL FALLS

-20

-10

0

10

20

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Time (Yrs)

Gra

vit

y(µ

Ga

l)

GRACE Residual

Abs-g Residual

SURFACE GRAVITY INSTRUMENTATION & DATA PROCESSING

CORRECTION OF SURFACE GRAVITY FOR VERTICAL MOVEMENT

Mid-continent Gravity Measurements

Absolute gravimeters:

• JILA2, JILA4 (1987-1992)

• FG5-102, FG5-111 (1993-2002)

• FG5-106 (1995-present) (Faller et al., 1983, Niebauer et al., 1995)

Absolute Gravity Data Processing

Data corrections:

• Solid earth tides

• Ocean loading

• Polar motion

• Local atmospheric attraction & loading

dCnm

(ti), dS

nm(t

i)

Statistical Test

GaussianFilter

HarmonicSynthesis

Gravity Anomaly Change

De-Correlation

FailPass

SUMMARY OF RESULTS

INTER-ANNUAL VARIATIONS:GRAVITY & RIVER FLOW RATES

Pinawa, Manitoba and International Falls, Minnesota are situated in the Winnipeg River drainage basin [Figure 1, boundary approximated by shaded blue region]. Gravity variations at these two sites and variations from GRACE centered at the same sites correlate well with variations in the base flow rate of the Winnipeg River (Pine Falls) [Figure 2].

GRACE Gravity vs. River Flow Rate

-500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010Year

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

µG

al

eq

uiv

ale

nt

3m

/da

y

Flow Rate, Winnipeg River

GRACE International Falls

GRACE Pinawa

Absolute-g vs. River Flow Rate

-500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010Year

-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

Flow Rate, Winnipeg River

Abs-g International Falls

Abs-g Pinawa

µG

al

3m

/da

y

Figure 2. De-trended, surface gravity variations at Pinawa, Manitoba and International Falls, Minnesota compared with flow rates on the Winnipeg River (at Pine Falls) [left panel]. De-trended GRACE monthly gravity values centered on Pinawa and International Falls compared with the same Winnipeg River flow rates [right panel]. Approximate boundaries of the Winnipeg River drainage system are shown in the blue region of Figure 1 (near the Pinawa & International Falls absolute gravity sites).

Canada's Natural ResourcesNow and for the Future

1. Geological Survey of Canada (Pacific)

Natural Resources CanadaSidney, BC, Canada

2. Geodetic Survey Division (CCRS)

Natural Resources CanadaOttawa, ON, Canada

3. Geodetic Survey Division (CCRS)

Natural Resources CanadaSidney, BC, Canada 4. National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration

National Geodetic SurveyBoulder, CO, United States

PosterPresention

2009 Workshopon Monitoring

North AmericanGeoid Change

Boulder, COOct 21-23, 2009

GRACE Monthly Estimates Compared with Surface Gravity Variations at mid-North American SitesGRACE Monthly Estimates Compared with Surface Gravity Variations at mid-North American Sites