Purpose. Investigation to study quasigeoid computations based on the regional gravimetric data and different types of nonorthogonal basis functions was assessed to be important. When measurements from only restricted regions of the Earth surface are available, global spherical harmonics loose their orthogonality in a limited region, so the determination of the coefficients of the model, usually by using the least squares method, is numerically unstable. In spite of this fact, there is a specific solution for Laplace equation for the situation of a spherical cap when the boundary conditions are appropriate. Methods. Our solution uses the gravity anomalies in the Arctic area taken from the Arctic Gravity Project (AGP). The method applied on this data set is adjusted spherical harmonic analysis (ASHA). Computation of the quasigeoid heights was performed by the “Remove  Restore” procedure in three steps. On the first step the free air gravity anomalies of the EGM 2008 model up to degree/order 360 were substracted from the initial gravity anomalies of the AGP to get rid of the low frequency gravity field content. On the second step the approximation of the residual gravity anomalies was based on the ASHA method. The construction of the normal equations matrix may lead to the time consuming procedure. For this reason the discrete orthogonality property in longitude for the chosen basis system was taken into account and led to the significant decrease of the computational time of the residual coefficients . On the last step the residual quasigeoid heights (high frequency components of the gravity field) were computed via the residual harmonic coefficients and added to the global contribution of quasigeoid heights taken from the EGM2008 model up to degree/order 360 (low frequency components of the gravity field). Results. Hence the gravity field model was constructed and compared with AGP gravity anomalies. Also the obtained model of quasigeoid heights was compared with quasigeoid heights from 49 GNSS/leveling points. Scientific novelty and practical significance. In this paper the modification of ASHA method was developed, which makes it possible to significantly accelerate the process of computing the unknown coefficients in the construction of local gravitational fields. This allows to compute local gravitational fields of higher orders. It is well known that quasigeoid accuracy depends on the order of model.
 Churchill, R., Fourier Series and Boundary Value Problems. (2nd ed.), 1963, New York: McGrawHill

De Santis, A. Conventional spherical harmonic analysis for regional modeling of the geomagnetic feld. Geophys. Res. Lett., 1992, 19, pp. 1065–1067.
https://doi.org/10.1029/92GL010683. De Santis, A. & Falcone, C., Spherical cap models of Laplacian potentials and general fields. In Geodetic Theory Today, F. Sanso' (ed.), Springer, Berlin, 1995, pp. 141–150.
https://doi.org/10.1007/9783642798245_254. De Santis, A. & Torta J., Spherical cap harmonic analysis: a comment on its proper use for local gravity field representation. Journal of Geodesy, 1997, 71, pp. 526–532.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s0019000501205. Haines, G. V. Spherical cap harmonic analysis. Journal of Geophys. Research., 1985, 90, pp. 2583–2591
https://doi.org/10.1029/JB090iB03p02583
6. Dzhuman, B. Approximation of gravity anomalies by method of ASHA on Arctic area. Geodesy, Cartography and Aerial Photography, 2014, 80, pp. 62–68.
7. Hobson E. W. The Theory of Spherical and Ellipsoidal Harmonics. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press., 1931/
8. HofmannWellenhof, B. & Moritz, H. Physical Geodesy. Wien New York: Springer Science + Busines Media, 2005, p. 403.
9. Hwang, C. & Chen, S. (). Fully normalized spherical cap harmonics: application to the analysis of sealevel data from TOPEX/POSEIDON and ERS1. Geophys. J., Int. 129, 1997, pp. 450–460.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365246X.1997.tb01595.x10. Jiancheng, L., Dingbo, C. & Jiancheng, N. Spherical cap harmonic expansion for local gravity field representation. Manuscr. Geod., 1995, 20, pp. 265–277.
11. Marchenko, A. Parameterization of the Earth's Gravity Field: Point and Line Singularities. Lviv: Lviv Astronomical and Geodetic Society, 1998, p. 210.
12. Marchenko, A., Barthelmes, F., Meyer, U. & Schwintzer, P. Regional geoid determination: an application to airborne gravity data in the Skagerrak. Scientific technical report STR01/07, 2001, p. 48.
13. Marchenko, A. & Dzhuman, B. Construction of the normal equations matrix for modeling of local gravitational field. Geodesy, Cartography and Aerial Photography, 2014, 79, pp. 29–34.
14. Moritz, H. Advanced physical geodesy, Karlsruhe: Wichmann, 1980.
15. NGA, The National Imagery and Mapping Agency, 2008. Retrieved from
http://earthinfo.nga.mil/GandG/wgs84/agp/
16. Pavlis, N., Holmes, S., Kenyon, S. & Factor, J. An Earth Gravitational Model to Degree 2160: EGM2008. Geophysical Research Abstracts, 10, EGU2008–A–01891, EGU General Assembly, 2008.
17. Seeber, G. Satellite Geodesy. (2nd ed.) Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2003.
https://doi.org/10.1515/978311020008918. Sideris, M. Geoid determination by FFT techniques. International School for the Determination and Use of the Geoid. Budapest University of Technology and Economics, 2005, p. 64.
19. Sneeuw, N. Global spherical harmonic analysis by leastsquares and numerical quadrature methods in historical perspective. Physical Geodesy., Wien, New York: Springer, 1994, p. 713. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365246X.1994.tb03995.x