Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T00:55:59.315Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The ZMOA-1990 Nutation Series

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2016

T.A. Herring
T.A. Herring*
Affiliation:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 54-618 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA. 02319.

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

We present a new nutation series for the Earth (ZMOA-1990) based on (1) the rigid Earth nutation series developed by Zhu and Groten [1989], (2) the normalized response for an elastic, elliptical Earth with fluid-outer and solid-inner cores developed by Mathews et al. [1990], and (3) corrections for the effects of ocean tides and anelasticity, computed to be consistent with the Mathews et al. [1990] normalized response function. In deriving this series, only two parameters of the geophysical model for the Earth have been modified from their values computed with PREM: the dynamic ellipticities of the whole Earth, e, and of the fluid outer core, ef. The adopted values for these parameters, determined from the analysts of very long baseline interferometry (VLSI) data, are e=0.00328915 which is about 1% higher than the value obtained from PREM and 6×10−5 times larger than the IAU adopted value, and ef=0.002665 which is 4.6% higher than the PREM value. The above values were obtained from an adjustment of −0.3 ʺ/cent to the IAU-1976 luni-solar precession constant for e, and from the amplitude of the retrograde annual nutation for ef. The ZMOA-1990 nutation series agrees with estimates of the in-phase and the out-of-phase nutation amplitudes obtained from VLBI data to within 0.5 mas for the terms with 18.6 year period, and to better than 0.1 mas for terms at all other periods except for the out-of-phase terms with annual period (differences 0.39 mas, retrograde, and 0.13 mas, prograde), and for the in-phase term with prograde 13.66 day period (difference −0.25 mas).

Type
Part 1. Oral Papers
Information
International Astronomical Union Colloquium , Volume 127: Reference Systems , 1991 , pp. 157 - 166
Copyright
Copyright © United States Naval Observatory 1991

References

Brosche, P., Seiler, U., Sündermann, J., and Wünsch, J. (1989) Astron. Astrophys., 220, 318–320.Google Scholar
Dong, D., and Herring, T. A. (1990) EOS Trans. AGU, 71, 482.Google Scholar
Gwinn, C.R., Herring, T. A., and Shapiro, I.I. (1986) J. Geophys. Res., 91, 4755–4765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hager, B.H., Clayton, R. W., Richards, M.A., Comer, R.P., and Dziewonski, A. M. (1985) Nature, 91, 541–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herring, T.A., Gwinn, C. R., and Shapiro, I. I. (1986) J. Geophys. Res., 91, 4755–4765, (Correction, 1986, J. Geophys. Res., 91, 14165.)Google Scholar
Herring, T.A., Buffett, B. A., Mathews, P.M., and Shapiro, I.I. (1990) “Forced nutations of the Earth: Influence of inner core dynamics. III. Very long baseline interferometry data analysis,” J. Geophys. Res., in press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinoshita, H., and Souchay, J. (1990) “The theory of the nutation for the rigid Earth model at the second order,” submitted Celes. Mech. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathews, P.M., Buffett, B. A., Herring, T.A., and Shapiro, I. I. (1990a) “Forced nutations of the Earth: Influence of inner core dynamics. I. Theory,” J. Geophys. Res., in press.Google Scholar
Mathews, P.M., Buffett, B. A., Herring, T.A., and Shapiro, I. I. (1990b) “Forced nutations of the Earth: Influence of inner core dynamics. II. Numerical results,” J. Geophys. Res., in press.Google Scholar
Morelli, A., and Dziewonski, A. M. (1987) Nature, 325, 867–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neuberg, J., Hinderer, J., and Zurn, W. (1987) Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc, 91, 853–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rochester, M.G. (1976) Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc., 46, 109–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sailor, R.V., and Dziewonski, A. M. (1978) Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc., 53, 539–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seidelmann, P.K. (1982) Celes. Mech., 27, 79–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sipkin, S.A., and Jordan, T. H. (1980) Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 70, 1071–1102.Google Scholar
Wahr, J.M., and Bergen, Z. (1986) Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc., 87, 633–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wahr, J.M.. and Sasao, T. (1981) Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc., 64, 747–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, G.G., Newhall, X X, and Dickey, J. O. (1990) “Luni-solar precession—determination from lunar laser ranging,” Astron. Astrophys., in press.Google Scholar
Zhu, S.Y., and Groten, E. (1989) Astron. J., 98, 1104–1111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhu, S.Y., Groten, E., and Reigber, Ch. (1990) Astron. J., 99, 1024–1044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar