You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
These should be stored with C_nm and S_nm separate from each other, a flag specifying whether the coefficients are normalized, and (tbd) the uncertainty around these coefficients (which will allow tools to generate gravity clones, and provide lossless info from PDS)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
ChristopherRabotin
changed the title
Context should include gravity fields. These should be stored with C_nm and S_nm separate from each other, a flag specifying whether the coefficients are normalized, and (tbd) the uncertainty around these coefficients (which will allow tools to generate gravity clones, and provide lossless info from PDS)
Context should include gravity fields
Jun 18, 2023
Note that this cannot be done using a clever heapless structure because there are too many items (it's a triangular number). Instead, this new format should follow a packed array approach, similar to what's in the DAF format. It may be worth making up a new such format, e.g. DAF/GRV with gravity coefficients.
I'm not convinced that a DAF is a reasonable approach here. DAF has a summary with a validity domain, unique ID, etc. But gravity fields are essentially always valid, and one chooses a degree and order. The more I think of this, the more I think it should be separate from ANISE and work only in Nyx.
These should be stored with
C_nm
andS_nm
separate from each other, a flag specifying whether the coefficients are normalized, and (tbd) the uncertainty around these coefficients (which will allow tools to generate gravity clones, and provide lossless info from PDS)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: