X-Sympa-To: ids.analysis.forum Received: from hector.cls.fr (osis.cls.fr [62.161.32.21]) by hermes.cls.fr (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA23609 for ; Fri, 10 Jun 2005 16:38:22 +0200 Received: by hector.cls.fr (Postfix) id 6D475C6D5E; Fri, 10 Jun 2005 14:38:22 +0000 (GMT) Delivered-To: ids.analysis.forum@cls.fr Received: from rly15d.srv.mailcontrol.com (orange-103.cls.fr [62.161.32.14]) by hector.cls.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B434273C0 for ; Fri, 10 Jun 2005 14:38:22 +0000 (GMT) Received: from nmta3.jpl.nasa.gov (nmta3.jpl.nasa.gov [137.78.160.108]) by rly15d.srv.mailcontrol.com (MailControl) with ESMTP id j5AEcC1Z015972 for ; Fri, 10 Jun 2005 15:38:14 +0100 Received: from xmta3.jpl.nasa.gov (xmta3.jpl.nasa.gov [137.78.160.111]) by nmta3.jpl.nasa.gov (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id j5AEbvrC003150 for ; Fri, 10 Jun 2005 07:38:10 -0700 Received: from [128.149.70.153] (mac01120073755.jpl.nasa.gov [128.149.70.153]) by xmta3.jpl.nasa.gov (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id j5AEbtip019478 for ; Fri, 10 Jun 2005 07:37:56 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 07:37:51 -0700 To: IDS_Analysis_Forum From: Pascal Willis Subject: DORIS station discontinuities Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="============_-1093708223==_ma============" X-Source-IP: mac01120073755.jpl.nasa.gov [128.149.70.153] X-Source-Sender: Pascal.R.Willis@jpl.nasa.gov X-AUTH: Internal IP X-Modified-HTML: 1 X-Mailcontrol-Inbound: DZOw9w!0zrgDC+VCZYdiV!5tlkt3OnCB16COtuSiUsY= X-Spam-Score: -4.7 X-Scanned-By: MailControl A-05-01-00 (www.mailcontrol.com) X-Validation-by: ries@csr.utexas.edu This is a multi-part message in MIME format... --============_-1093708223==_ma============ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Dear Martine, thank you for your contribution. We can now start some useful discussion on these aspects AREA There was an Earthquake after June 23, 2001 (50 cm displacement). Furthermore, after the Earthquake the motion is non-linear for quite some time (as confirmed by GPS time series). The DORIS solution for AREA after this Earthquake must not been used in CATREF (unless you use a filter instead of linear model per segments). The fact that the INASAN still provide results will alter results from all solutions in the combination. This was presented several time before The period of observations to be deleted is also an important part of information for the ITRF2004 because if one group release results during these periods and not the others, this will affect everybody. I think you should add something on your Web page as well. See some proposals in the following article Defining a DORIS core network for Jason-1 Precise Orbit Determination based on ITRF2000, Methods and realization, P. Willis, J.C. Ries, J. of Geod., 2005, in press. FAIB there is a discontinuity of about -5 cm in latitude after the Earthquake of November 3, 2002. This is document in the following article (in press for the past 2 years, sorry) DORIS as a potential part of a Global Geodetic Observing System, P. Willis, Y Bar-Sever, G. Tavernier, in GGOS Science Rationale, H. Drewes (Ed.), J. of Geodyn., in press as discussed in this document, this is confirmed by GPS observation as well TRIB there was an Earthquake on July 31, 2004. I do not understand your question mark The major point is that when there is a doubt it is always better to put a break in the analysis because you have the possibility after the computation to look at the discontinuity amplitude and constrain it to be zero. If you don't put a discontinuity and there is one, you are in big trouble. So, in my opinion, the "wait for more confirmation" is going to be a problem. Your list should be the sum of all discontinuities found by ACs + discontinuities found by yourselves. Of course the fact that all groups agree or not on the discontinuity is an important piece of information Looking forward answers from other groups Pascal -- Pascal Willis Jet Propulsion Laboratory, MS 238-646 Ph : 1-818-393-4748 4800 Oak Grove Drive FAX: 1-818-393-4965 Pasadena CA 91109 Em : Pascal.R.Willis@jpl.nasa.gov --============_-1093708223==_ma============ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline DORIS station discontinuities
Dear Martine,

thank you for your contribution. We can now start some useful discussion on these aspects

AREA There was an Earthquake after June 23, 2001 (50 cm displacement). Furthermore, after the Earthquake the motion is non-linear for quite some time (as confirmed by GPS time series). The DORIS solution for AREA after this Earthquake must not been used in CATREF (unless you use a filter instead of linear model per segments). The fact that the INASAN still provide results will alter results from all solutions in the combination. This was presented several time before

The period of observations to be deleted is also an important part of information for the ITRF2004 because if one group release results during these periods and not the others, this will affect everybody.

I think you should add something on your Web page as well. See some proposals in the following article

Defining a DORIS core network for Jason-1 Precise Orbit Determination based on ITRF2000, Methods and realization, P. Willis, J.C. Ries, J. of Geod., 2005, in press.

FAIB there is a discontinuity of about -5 cm in latitude after the Earthquake of November 3, 2002. This is document in the following article (in  press for the past 2 years, sorry)

DORIS as a potential part of a Global Geodetic Observing System, P. Willis, Y Bar-Sever, G. Tavernier, in GGOS Science Rationale, H. Drewes (Ed.), J. of Geodyn., in press

as discussed in this document, this is confirmed by GPS observation as well

TRIB there was an Earthquake on July 31, 2004. I  do not understand your question mark

The major point is that when there is a doubt it is always better to put a break in  the analysis because you have the possibility after the computation to look at the discontinuity amplitude and constrain it to be zero. If you don't put a discontinuity and there is one, you are in big trouble. So, in my opinion, the "wait for more confirmation" is going to be a problem. Your list should be the sum of all discontinuities found by ACs + discontinuities found by yourselves. Of course the fact that all groups agree or not on the discontinuity is an important piece of information

Looking forward answers from other groups
Pascal
--
Pascal Willis
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, MS 238-646     Ph : 1-818-393-4748
4800 Oak Grove Drive                      FAX: 1-818-393-4965
Pasadena CA 91109                         Em : Pascal.R.Willis@jpl.nasa.gov


Click here to report this email as spam.

 --============_-1093708223==_ma============--