Fundamentals of lunar gravity field recovery

2002 ◽  
pp. 7-34
Author(s):  
Rune Floberghagen
Keyword(s):  
Gravity Field ◽  
Lunar Gravity ◽  
Lunar Gravity Field ◽  
Gravity Field Recovery

Simulation of the Lunar Gravity Field Recovery Based on Lunar Solo and Bi-Orbiters

2007 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 399-403
Author(s):  
Jian-Guo YAN ◽  
Jing-Song PING ◽  
Fei LI ◽  
K Matsumoto ◽  
Guang-Li WANG ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gravity Field ◽  
Lunar Gravity ◽  
Lunar Gravity Field ◽  
Gravity Field Recovery

The simulation of lunar gravity field recovery from D-VLBI of Chang’E-1 and SELENE lunar orbiters

2008 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 337-340 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jianguo Yan ◽  
Jingsong Ping ◽  
K. Matsumoto ◽  
Fei Li
Keyword(s):  
Gravity Field ◽  
Lunar Gravity ◽  
Lunar Gravity Field ◽  
Gravity Field Recovery

scholarly journals Same-beam VLBI observations of SELENE for improving lunar gravity field model

Radio Science ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. n/a-n/a ◽  
Author(s):  
Q. Liu ◽  
F. Kikuchi ◽  
K. Matsumoto ◽  
S. Goossens ◽  
H. Hanada ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gravity Field ◽  
Field Model ◽  
Lunar Gravity ◽  
Gravity Field Model ◽  
Lunar Gravity Field ◽  
Vlbi Observations

Lunar gravity field modeling critical analysis and challenges

2010 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 322-349 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manoranjan Sinha ◽  
N.S. Gopinath ◽  
N.K. Malik
Keyword(s):  
Gravity Field ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Lunar Gravity ◽  
Lunar Gravity Field ◽  
Field Modeling ◽  
Gravity Field Modeling

scholarly journals Simulation study for the determination of the lunar gravity field from PRARE-L tracking onboard the German LEO mission

2008 ◽  
Vol 42 (8) ◽  
pp. 1405-1413 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank Flechtner ◽  
Karl Hans Neumayer ◽  
Jürgen Kusche ◽  
Wolfgang Schäfer ◽  
Frank Sohl
Keyword(s):  
Gravity Field ◽  
Simulation Study ◽  
Lunar Gravity ◽  
Lunar Gravity Field

Analyzing the haracter of Lunar Gravity Field by LP165P Model and Its Effect on Lunar Satellite Orbit

2006 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 348-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jian-Guo YAN ◽  
Jin-Song PING ◽  
Fei LI ◽  
Wei WANG
Keyword(s):  
Gravity Field ◽  
Satellite Orbit ◽  
Lunar Gravity ◽  
Lunar Gravity Field ◽  
Lunar Satellite

scholarly journals A degree-100 lunar gravity model from the Chang’e 5T1 mission

2020 ◽  
Vol 636 ◽  
pp. A45
Author(s):  
Jianguo Yan ◽  
Shanhong Liu ◽  
Chi Xiao ◽  
Mao Ye ◽  
Jianfeng Cao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gravity Field ◽  
Field Model ◽  
Tracking Data ◽  
Lunar Gravity ◽  
Love Number ◽  
Orbital Inclination ◽  
Gravity Field Model ◽  
New Model ◽  
Lunar Gravity Field ◽  
Formal Error

Context. Chinese lunar missions have grown in number over the last ten years, with an increasing focus on radio science investigations. In previous work, we estimated two lunar gravity field models, CEGM01 and CEGM02. The recently lunar mission, Chang’e 5T1, which had an orbital inclination between 18 and 68 degrees, and collected orbital tracking data continually for two years, made an improved gravity field model possible. Aims. Our aim was to estimate a new lunar gravity field model up to degree and order 100, CEGM03, and a new tidal Love number based on the Chang’e 5T1 tracking data combined with the historical tracking data used in the solution of CEGM02. The new model makes use of tracking data with this particular inclination, which has not been used in previous gravity field modeling. Methods. The solution for this new model was based on our in-house software, LUGREAS. The gravity spectrum power, post-fit residuals after precision orbit determination (POD), lunar surface gravity anomalies, correlations between parameters, admittance and coherence with topography model, and accuracy of POD were analyzed to validate the new CEGM03 model. Results. We analyzed the tracking data of the Chang’e 5T1 mission and estimated the CEGM03 lunar gravity field model. We found that the two-way Doppler measurement accuracy reached 0.2 mm s−1 with 10 s integration time. The error spectrum shows that the formal error for CEGM03 was at least reduced by about 2 times below the harmonic degree of 20, when compared to the CEGM02 model. The admittance and correlation of gravity and topography was also improved when compared to the correlations for the CEGM02 model. The lunar potential Love number k2 was estimated to be 0.02430±0.0001 (ten times the formal error). Conclusions. From the model analysis and comparison of the various models, we identified improvements in the CEGM03 model after introducing Chang’e 5T1 tracking data. Moreover, this study illustrates how the low and middle inclination orbits could contribute better accuracy for a low degree of lunar gravity field.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document