Re: About isostatic computation and -N+l (gravfft)

Yes Joaquim, I'm getting exactly that, but I would like to set -N+l. I don't know what happened to the second part of my first e-mail, so I will quote it: "Is there a way to avoid the demeaning? Setting -N+l does nothing, so I don't know whether this is a bug or if -N+a is really needed."


Thank you
Gabriel



Em Quinta-feira, 14 de Novembro de 2013 16:46, J. Luis <[email protected]> escreveu:
 
On 14-11-2013 18:26, Gabriel Dragone wrote: 
Hello,
>
>
>I have a doubt concerning the isostatic calculation done by gravfft (-T). Using, for example, Te=0 and a compensation depth (-Z) of 35000 m, I would expect that all topography had its root bellow 35000. Nevertheless, since -N+a is set, the response is a fluctuation around it. 
>
The FFT method (Parker's), after detrending,  implies that the
    solution is 'waves' about zero but there is one term in the equation
    that represents the average compensation depth (that's what -Z
    does). So naturally your solution should be about the 35 km depth
    (parts above and others bellow). Isn't that what you get?



Is there a way to avoid the demeaning? Setting -N+l does nothing, so I don't know whether this is a bug or if -N+a is really needed.
>
The man says "-T implicitly sets -N+a". This is for better
    convergence of the Parker's method'

Joaquim

To unsubscribe, send the message "signoff gmt-help" to [email protected] 

To unsubscribe, send the message "signoff gmt-help" to [email protected]