2011
DOI: 10.1007/s11200-011-0002-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Gravitational attraction and potential of spherical shell with radially dependent density

Abstract: Solutions to the direct problem in gravimetric interpretation are well-known for wide class of source bodies with constant density contrast. On the other hand, sources with non-uniform density can lead to relatively complicated formalisms. This is probably why analytical solutions for this type of sources are rather rare although utilization of these bodies can sometimes be very effective in gravity modeling. I demonstrate an analytical solution to that problem for a spherical shell with radial polynomial dens… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Atmospheric correction is usually calculated based on a simple approximation according to Wenzel (1985). By the term true atmosphere, we mean the model of the atmosphere derived from the effect of a spherical shell with radially dependent density using the US standard atmosphere 1976 (Karcol, 2011) with an irregularly shaped bottom surface formed by the Earth's surface, calculated globally (Mikuška et al, 2008). The difference between atmospheric correction calculated by both approaches for the AlpArray region (calculated for selected database points) is shown in Fig.…”
Section: A Short Remark On Future Treatment Of True Atmosphere and Distant Relief Effectsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Atmospheric correction is usually calculated based on a simple approximation according to Wenzel (1985). By the term true atmosphere, we mean the model of the atmosphere derived from the effect of a spherical shell with radially dependent density using the US standard atmosphere 1976 (Karcol, 2011) with an irregularly shaped bottom surface formed by the Earth's surface, calculated globally (Mikuška et al, 2008). The difference between atmospheric correction calculated by both approaches for the AlpArray region (calculated for selected database points) is shown in Fig.…”
Section: A Short Remark On Future Treatment Of True Atmosphere and Distant Relief Effectsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This modern array has used over 628 sites for more than 39 months across the greater Alpine area such that no point on land was farther than 30 km from a broadband seismometer (Hetényi et al, 2018). While seismic imaging of the entire Alps in 3D became a reality following decades of active-and passivesource projects, imaging efforts in gravity reached 3D earlier thanks to the availability of national data sets of the Alpine neighboring countries with partly high-resolution and 3D modeling approaches among others (Ehrismann et al, 1976;Götze, 1978;Kissling, 1980;Götze and Lahmeyer, 1988;Götze et al, 1991;Ebbing, 2002;Ebbing et al, 2006;Marson and Klingelé, 1993;Kahle and Klingelé, 1979). However, these land data sets for historical reasons were acquired in national reference systems and were seldom shared, preventing high-resolution pan-Alpine gravity studies using homogeneously processed data.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In general, the precision can be affected by many parameters, such as W, size of the Tesseroid, and Gauss-Legendre nodes. We create a homogenous spherical shell, which has analytical solutions to calculate the gravitational acceleration [29], [30] and can be perfectly subdivided into Tesseroids as well. The true gravitational acceleration of computation point P caused by the spherical shell can be written as:…”
Section: The Synthetic Data Tests a Precision Evaluation On Thementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The GP V true at the computation point P on and outside the spherical shell can be accurately calculated (Heiskanen and Moritz, 1967;Vaníček et al, 2001;Karcol, 2011) as follows:…”
Section: Numerical Tests For Formulasmentioning
confidence: 99%