DOCSLIB.ORG

Local Geoid Determination with in Situ Geopotential Data Obtained from Satellite-To-Satellite Tracking

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Local Geoid Determination with in Situ Geopotential Data Obtained from Satellite-To-Satellite Tracking Local geoid determination with in situ geopotential data obtained from satellite-to-satellite tracking C. Jekeli, R. Garcia Civil and Environmental Engineering and Geodetic Science Ohio State University, 2070 Neil Ave., Columbus, OH 43210 Abstract. A new satellite mission to map the “drag-free” and non-gravitational accelerations Earth’s gravitational field (GRACE) is based on must be measured independently using on-board inter-satellite tracking using micro-wave ranging accelerometers. Also, the altitude of the GRACE which can be used to solve for parameters of a satellites is significantly higher (450 km) than that global spherical harmonic model of the proposed for GRM (160 km). The principal gravitational field using traditional satellite orbital differences, however, lie in the objectives of perturbation analysis. An alternative algorithm GRACE; the latter are oriented primarily to the has been developed to use the inter-satellite range- short-term Earth dynamics and the implications on rate, supplemented by GPS baseline vector climatic changes (Wahr et al., 1998), derivable velocities and accelerometer data, to estimate in from the time-varying gravity field and associated situ geopotential differences. The collection of with global ocean and atmospheric currents and these data, treated as a set of boundary values in mass/thermal transport, and the large-scale potential theory, should yield higher geopotential hydrology on continents (including mass balance resolution in the polar latitudes than provided by a of ice sheets and glaciers). truncated spherical harmonic model because of the On the other hand, the static gravity field, high concentration of data in these areas. On the averaged over several years, is also a product of other hand, in situ data must be downward the mission, advertised as a global spherical continued for local geoid determination, whereas harmonic model up to degree and order 150 this is already incorporated in the spherical (resolution of 130 km). By the nature of the harmonic models. Simulations confirm that GRACE orbits, being nearly polar (the inclination although spherical harmonic estimations also yield is 89°), there is considerable densification of higher accuracy near the poles, local geoid measurements and increase of track cross-over estimation from in situ geopotential difference angles in the polar regions, as well as abrupt lack measurements is even more accurate at the poles, of data in small (200 km diameter) caps centered by a factor of two or higher for the case of on the poles. The higher density and directional nineteen days' worth of GRACE data. heterogeneity of the data present an opportunity for more local, high-resolution, gravity modeling, Keywords. Satellite-to-satellite tracking, geoid while the discontinuity presents a challenge in the determination, downward continuation, spherical combination of GRACE data with existing harmonic model regional gravity data. The fundamental GRACE measurement is the near-instantaneous range between the two 1. Introduction satellites. The ranging is accomplished with a microwave (K-band) satellite link that provides A satellite mission dedicated to the improvement two one-way ranges, each obtained by comparing of our knowledge of the Earth’s gravitational field an on-board generated phase to the received by the use of a direct measurement system has phase. Both the transmitted and the on-board now been approved and is expected to be realized phases are generated by the same ultra-stable in 2001: GRACE, the Gravity Recovery And oscillator (USO). In addition, accelerometers Climate Experiment (Tapley and Reigber, 1998). measure non-gravitational accelerations of the GRACE is a variant of the erstwhile GRAVSAT center of mass of each satellite, and star cameras and GRM mission concepts (Keating et al., 1986) ensure accuracy in the orientation of the in that two low-altitude satellites will track each transmitting and receiving K-band horns, as well other as they circle the Earth in identical near- as the accelerometers. The range values are to be polar orbits. Unlike GRM, the satellites are not obtained at a sampling rate of 10 Hz. These will - 1 - be decimated and filtered to produce range-rates system, while the term with the explicit and range-rate-rates (line-of-sight (LOS) dependence of V on time accounts for the time- accelerations) at a sampling rate of 0.2 Hz. The varying nature of the potential, primarily due to predicted accuracy in the decimated, filtered Earth’s rotation. These two terms and the range-rate is 10±6 m/s . A second band (Ka-band) constant can be calculated from the accelerometer will be used to calibrate first-order ionospheric and GPS position/velocity data and from initial ∆ delays in the signal. conditions; they are combined as one term, V . In addition, each satellite is equipped with a The difference of gravitational potentials GPS antenna and receiver, running off the same between two satellites and referenced to a given USO. The GPS data will be used for orbit low-degree spherical harmonic model is then determination and atmospheric sounding on the given by (the details of the derivation are found in basis of GPS satellite occultations. The GPS data (Jekeli, 1999)): rate is nominally 1 Hz, but greater for the δρ occultation measurements. The K-band ranges T12 = x01 12 can be used with orbit determination algorithms to estimate the spherical harmonic coefficients T δ (spectral components) of the Earth’s gravitational ± x02 ± x01 e12 x12 field (Yuan et al., 1988; Cui and Lelgemann, 2000). (2) δ δ T Instead of the conventional global (spherical ± x1 ± x01 e12 x012 harmonic) gravity modeling approach we propose to derive local gravity field parameters from the in T 1 2 situ data products of GRACE. In situ data ± x δx ± δx ± ∆V , 1 12 2 12 12 products are defined as those data observed directly by the on-board instruments and subjected to minimal preprocessing, where the K-band where the appended 0 signifies a reference field ranging system is considered one of the “in situ” quantity and δ the corresponding residual, a instruments. These products include the range- single subscript 1 identifies the quantity as rate and line-of-sight (LOS) accelerations derived belonging to the first satellite, a double subscript from the inter-satellite ranges, accelerometer and 12 implies a difference of corresponding star tracker measurements on both satellites, GPS quantities at the two satellite points, and e is a phase data obtained on both satellites, as well as GPS position and velocity vectors of both unit vector. The significance of (2) lies in the fact satellites. that the disturbing potential difference, T12 , is δρ related to the residual range rate, 12 , between the satellites, plus correction terms that can be 2. Observation Models computed from other data. Simpler models can be derived for the line-of-sight acceleration, but we The models that relate the measurements to local do not consider these here. gravitational quantities, such as at-altitude Clearly, the accuracy of the in situ disturbing geopotential differences and gravitational potential difference depends on the accuracy with acceleration differences, have been developed by which the correction terms can be computed. A Jekeli (1999). We start with the energy equation: cursory analysis of (2) yields a quantification of the sensitivities of the correction terms to orbit t t error (either absolute or relative between the 1 2 ∂V V= x ±FΣ k xk dt + dt ±E0 , (1) satellites). From Table 1 we see that the 2 k ∂t t0 t0 correction terms are most sensitive to the relative position vector between the satellites, which, if accurate to 1 mm, contributes an error of about for the gravitational potential, V, in inertial space, 2 2 T 0.008 m /s to the disturbing potential difference. where x =x , x , x is the velocity vector of 1 2 3 This is commensurate with the accuracy the satellite, Fk is a component of specific force anticipated from the range-rate, since the average acting on the satellite (such as atmospheric drag), t speed of the satellite is 7700 m/s . is time, and E0 is a constant. The specific-force The registration of the measurement within a term represents the dissipative energy of the particular coordinate frame may contribute an - 2 - error as well. However, if the orbits of the two imλ satellites are highly correlated (as they would be if χ θ θ θ nm =Pnm cos e , (5) determined with relative GPS positioning), then the potential difference is not sensitive to and where λθ is the longitude of a point on a registration errors. single revolution of a Keplerian, circular orbit whose co-latitude is θ (see Figure 1). Table 1: Sensitivity of T12 correction terms to orbit error. Given observations T =T + ε corrupted 12 12 T12 orbit quantity sensitivity 2 by white-noise errors with variance σ , we can absolute position 0.02 m2/s2 per m form the following least-squares estimate of a 2 2 baseline vector 8m /s per m finite number of geopotetnial coefficients (say up 2 2 to degree n ): absolute velocity 0.2 m /s per mm/s max 2 2 baseline velocity 0.5 m /s per mm/s ±1 γ * * nm =AA A T12 , (6) For our simulations, we assume that disturbing potential differences have been obtained by where the values of the elements of the matrix, A, suitably processing the measurements from the * suite of GRACE instruments, principally the K- can be inferred from (4) and A is its Hermitian band ranging assembly, the accelerometers, and (Jekeli, 1996; Lemoine et al., 1998, chapter 8). GPS according to models (1) and (2). One may The geoid undulation is related to the disturbing now proceed along two different approaches potential according to Bruns’ formula: toward the computation of the geoid undulation.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • THE EARTH's GRAVITY OUTLINE the Earth's Gravitational Field
    GEOPHYSICS (08/430/0012) THE EARTH'S GRAVITY OUTLINE The Earth's gravitational field 2 Newton's law of gravitation: Fgrav = GMm=r ; Gravitational field = gravitational acceleration g; gravitational potential, equipotential surfaces. g for a non–rotating spherically symmetric Earth; Effects of rotation and ellipticity – variation with latitude, the reference ellipsoid and International Gravity Formula; Effects of elevation and topography, intervening rock, density inhomogeneities, tides. The geoid: equipotential mean–sea–level surface on which g = IGF value. Gravity surveys Measurement: gravity units, gravimeters, survey procedures; the geoid; satellite altimetry. Gravity corrections – latitude, elevation, Bouguer, terrain, drift; Interpretation of gravity anomalies: regional–residual separation; regional variations and deep (crust, mantle) structure; local variations and shallow density anomalies; Examples of Bouguer gravity anomalies. Isostasy Mechanism: level of compensation; Pratt and Airy models; mountain roots; Isostasy and free–air gravity, examples of isostatic balance and isostatic anomalies. Background reading: Fowler §5.1–5.6; Lowrie §2.2–2.6; Kearey & Vine §2.11. GEOPHYSICS (08/430/0012) THE EARTH'S GRAVITY FIELD Newton's law of gravitation is: ¯ GMm F = r2 11 2 2 1 3 2 where the Gravitational Constant G = 6:673 10− Nm kg− (kg− m s− ). ¢ The field strength of the Earth's gravitational field is defined as the gravitational force acting on unit mass. From Newton's third¯ law of mechanics, F = ma, it follows that gravitational force per unit mass = gravitational acceleration g. g is approximately 9:8m/s2 at the surface of the Earth. A related concept is gravitational potential: the gravitational potential V at a point P is the work done against gravity in ¯ P bringing unit mass from infinity to P.
    [Show full text]
  • A Hierarchy of Models, from Planetary to Mesoscale, Within a Single
    A hierarchy of models, from planetary to mesoscale, within a single switchable numerical framework Nigel Wood, Andy White and Andrew Staniforth Dynamics Research, Met Office © Crown copyright Met Office Outline of the talk • Overview of Met Office’s Unified Model • Spherical Geopotential Approximation • Relaxing that approximation • A method of implementation • Alternative view of Shallow-Atmosphere Approximation • Application to departure points © Crown copyright Met Office Met Office’s Unified Model Unified Model (UM) in that single model for: Operational forecasts at ¾Mesoscale (resolution approx. 12km → 4km → 1km) ¾Global scale (resolution approx. 25km) Global and regional climate predictions (resolution approx. 100km, run for 10-100 years) + Research mode (1km - 10m) and single column model 20 years old this year © Crown copyright Met Office Timescales & applications © Crown copyright Met Office © Crown copyright Met Office UKV Domain 4x4 1.5x4 4x4 4x1.5 1.5x1.5 4x1.5 4x4 1.5x4 4x4 Variable 744(622) x 928( 810) points zone © Crown copyright Met Office The ‘Morpeth Flood’, 06/09/2008 1.5 km L70 Prototype UKV From 15 UTC 05/09 12 km 0600 UTC © Crown copyright Met Office 2009: Clark et al, Morpeth Flood UKV 4-20hr forecast 1.5km gridlength UK radar network convection permitting model © Crown copyright Met Office © Crown copyright Met Office © Crown copyright Met Office The underlying equations... c Crown Copyright Met Office © Crown copyright Met Office Traditional Spherically Based Equations Dru uv tan φ cpdθv ∂Π uw u − − (2Ω sin
    [Show full text]
  • Geophysical Journal International
    Geophysical Journal International Geophys. J. Int. (2015) 203, 1773–1786 doi: 10.1093/gji/ggv392 GJI Gravity, geodesy and tides GRACE time-variable gravity field recovery using an improved energy balance approach Kun Shang,1 Junyi Guo,1 C.K. Shum,1,2 Chunli Dai1 and Jia Luo3 1Division of Geodetic Science, School of Earth Sciences, The Ohio State University, 125 S. Oval Mall, Columbus, OH 43210, USA. E-mail: [email protected] 2Institute of Geodesy & Geophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan, China 3School of Geodesy and Geomatics, Wuhan University, 129 Luoyu Road, Wuhan 430079, China Accepted 2015 September 14. Received 2015 September 12; in original form 2015 March 19 Downloaded from SUMMARY A new approach based on energy conservation principle for satellite gravimetry mission has been developed and yields more accurate estimation of in situ geopotential difference observ- ables using K-band ranging (KBR) measurements from the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) twin-satellite mission. This new approach preserves more gravity in- http://gji.oxfordjournals.org/ formation sensed by KBR range-rate measurements and reduces orbit error as compared to previous energy balance methods. Results from analysis of 11 yr of GRACE data indicated that the resulting geopotential difference estimates agree well with predicted values from of- ficial Level 2 solutions: with much higher correlation at 0.9, as compared to 0.5–0.8 reported by previous published energy balance studies. We demonstrate that our approach produced a comparable time-variable gravity solution with the Level 2 solutions. The regional GRACE temporal gravity solutions over Greenland reveals that a substantially higher temporal resolu- at Ohio State University Libraries on December 20, 2016 tion is achievable at 10-d sampling as compared to the official monthly solutions, but without the compromise of spatial resolution, nor the need to use regularization or post-processing.
    [Show full text]
  • Vertical Structure
    ESCI 341 – Atmospheric Thermodynamics Lesson 7 – Vertical Structure References: An Introduction to Dynamic Meteorology, Holton Introduction to Theoretical Meteorology, Hess Synoptic-dynamic Meteorology in Midlatitudes, Vol. 1, Bluestein ‘An example of uncertainty in sea level pressure reduction’, P.M. Pauley, Mon. Wea. Rev., 13, 1998, pp. 833-850 GEOPOTENTIAL l The acceleration due to gravity is not constant. It varies from place to place, with the largest variation due to latitude. o What we call gravity is the combination of the gravitational acceleration and the centrifugal acceleration from the Earth’s rotation. o Gravity at the North Pole is approximately 9.83 m/s2, while at the Equator it is about 9.78 m/s2. l Though small, the variation in gravity must be accounted for. We do this via the concept of geopotential. l Geopotential is essentially the potential energy per unit mass. l A surface of constant geopotential represents a surface along which all objects of the same mass have the same potential energy. l If gravity were constant, a geopotential surface would lie at a constant altitude. Since gravity is not constant, a geopotential surface will have varying altitude. l Geopotential is defined as z F º ò gdz, (1) 0 or in differential form as dF = gdz. l Geopotential height is defined as F 1 Z Zº=ò gdZ (2) gg000 2 where g0 is a constant called standard gravity, and has a value of 9.80665 m/s . o Geopotential height is expressed in geopotential meters, abbreviated as gpm. l If the change in gravity with height is ignored, geopotential height and geometric height are related via g Z = z.
    [Show full text]
  • 6. the Gravity Field
    6. The Gravity Field Ge 163 4/11/14- Outline • Spherical Harmonics • Gravitational potential in spherical harmonics • Potential in terms of moments of inertia • The Geopotential • Flattening and the excess bulge of the earth • The geoid and geoid height • Non-hydrostatic geoid • Geoid over slabs • Geoid correlation with hot-spots & Ancient Plate boundaries • GRACE: Gravity Recovery And Climate Experiment Spherical harmonics ultimately stem from the solution of Laplace’s equation. Find a solution of Laplace’s equation in a spherical coordinate system. ∇2 f = 0 The Laplacian operator can be written as 2 1 ∂ ⎛ 2 ∂f ⎞ 1 ∂ ⎛ ∂f ⎞ 1 ∂ f 2 ⎜ r ⎟ + 2 ⎜ sinθ ⎟ + 2 2 2 = 0 r ∂r ⎝ ∂r ⎠ r sinθ ∂θ ⎝ ∂θ ⎠ r sin θ ∂λ r is radius θ is colatitude λ Is longitude One way to solve the Laplacian in spherical coordinates is through separation of variables f = R(r)P(θ)L(λ) To demonstrate the form of the spherical harmonic, one can take a simple form of R(r ). This is not the only one which solves the equation, but it is sufficient to demonstrate the form of the solution. Guess R(r) = rl f = rl P(θ)L(λ) 1 ∂ ⎛ ∂P(θ)⎞ 1 ∂2 L(λ) l(l + 1) + ⎜ sinθ ⎟ + 2 2 = 0 sinθP(θ) ∂θ ⎝ ∂θ ⎠ sin θL(λ) ∂λ This is the only place where λ appears, consequently it must be equal to a constant 1 ∂2 L(λ) = constant = −m2 m is an integer L(λ) ∂λ 2 L(λ) = Am cos mλ + Bm sin mλ This becomes: 1 ∂ ⎛ ∂P(θ)⎞ ⎡ m2 ⎤ ⎜ sinθ ⎟ + ⎢l(l + 1) − 2 ⎥ P(θ) = 0 sinθ ∂θ ⎝ ∂θ ⎠ ⎣ sin θ ⎦ This equation is known as Legendre’s Associated equation The solution of P(θ) are polynomials in cosθ, involving the integers l and m.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Dynamic Meteorology.Pdf
    January 24, 2004 12:0 Elsevier/AID aid An Introduction to Dynamic Meteorology FOURTH EDITION January 24, 2004 12:0 Elsevier/AID aid This is Volume 88 in the INTERNATIONAL GEOPHYSICS SERIES A series of monographs and textbooks Edited by RENATADMOWSKA, JAMES R. HOLTON and H.THOMAS ROSSBY A complete list of books in this series appears at the end of this volume. January 24, 2004 12:0 Elsevier/AID aid AN INTRODUCTION TO DYNAMIC METEOROLOGY Fourth Edition JAMES R. HOLTON Department of Atmospheric Sciences University of Washington Seattle,Washington Amsterdam Boston Heidelberg London New York Oxford Paris San Diego San Francisco Singapore Sydney Tokyo January 24, 2004 12:0 Elsevier/AID aid Senior Editor, Earth Sciences Frank Cynar Editorial Coordinator Jennifer Helé Senior Marketing Manager Linda Beattie Cover Design Eric DeCicco Composition Integra Software Services Printer/Binder The Maple-Vail Manufacturing Group Cover printer Phoenix Color Corp Elsevier Academic Press 200 Wheeler Road, Burlington, MA 01803, USA 525 B Street, Suite 1900, San Diego, California 92101-4495, USA 84 Theobald’s Road, London WC1X 8RR, UK This book is printed on acid-free paper. Copyright c 2004, Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Permissions may be sought directly from Elsevier’s Science & Technology Rights Department in
    [Show full text]
  • 'Geophysical Applicability of Atomic Clocks: Direct Continental Geoid Mapping'
    Title Geophysical applicability of atomic clocks: direct continental geoid mapping Authors Ruxandra Bondarescu 1, Mihai Bondarescu 2,3, György Hetényi 4, Lapo Boschi 5,1, Philippe Jetzer 1, Jayashree Balakrishna 6 Affiliations 1 Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland 2 University of Mississippi, Oxford, MS, USA 3 Universitatea de Vest, Timisoara, Romania 4 Swiss Seismological Service, ETH Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland 5 Institute of Geophysics, Department of Earth Sciences, ETH Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland 6 Harris-Stowe State University, St. Louis, MO, USA Accepted date. Received date; in original form date. Abbreviated title Atomic clocks map the geoid directly Corresponding author György Hetényi, [email protected], tel.: +41-44-632-4381, fax: +41-44-633-1065 1 Summary The geoid is the true physical figure of the Earth, a particular equipotential surface of the Earth’s gravity field that accounts for the effect of all sub-surface density variations. Its shape approximates best (in the sense of least squares) the mean level of oceans, but the geoid is more difficult to determine over continents. Satellite missions carry out distance measurements and derive the gravity field to provide geoid maps over the entire globe. However, they require calibration and extensive computations including integration, which is a non-unique operation. Here we propose a direct method and a new tool that directly measures geopotential differences on continents using atomic clocks. General Relativity Theory predicts constant clock rate at sea level, and faster (resp. slower) clock rate above (resp. below) sea level. The technology of atomic clocks is on the doorstep of reaching an accuracy level in clock rate (frequency ratio inaccuracy of 10–18) which is equivalent to 1 cm in determining equipotential surface (including geoid) height.
    [Show full text]
  • Heights, the Geopotential, and Vertical Datums
    Heights, the Geopotential, and Vertical Datums Christopher Jekeli Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Geodetic Science Ohio State University September 2000 1 . Introduction With the Global Positioning System (GPS) now providing heights almost effortlessly, and with many national and international agencies in different regions of the world re-considering the determination of height and their vertical networks and datums, it is useful to review the fundamental theory of heights from the traditional geodetic point of view, as well as from the modern standpoint which addresses the centimeter to sub-centimeter accuracy that is now foreseen with satellite positioning systems. The discussion assumes that the reader is somewhat familiar with physical geodesy, in particular with the foundations of potential theory, but the development proceeds from first principles in review fashion. Moreover, concepts and geodetic quantities are introduced as they are needed, which should give the reader a sense that nothing is a priori given, unless so stated explicitly. 2 . Heights Points on or near the Earth’s surface commonly are associated with three coordinates, a latitude, a longitude, and a height. The latitude and longitude refer to an oblate ellipsoid of revolution and are designated more precisely as geodetic latitude and longitude. This ellipsoid is a geometric, mathematical figure that is chosen in some way to fit the mean sea level either globally or, historically, over some region of the Earth’s surface, neither of which concerns us at the moment. We assume that its center is at the Earth’s center of mass and its minor axis is aligned with the Earth’s reference pole.
    [Show full text]
  • National Weather Service Glossary Page 1 of 254 03/15/08 05:23:27 PM National Weather Service Glossary
    National Weather Service Glossary Page 1 of 254 03/15/08 05:23:27 PM National Weather Service Glossary Source:http://www.weather.gov/glossary/ Table of Contents National Weather Service Glossary............................................................................................................2 #.............................................................................................................................................................2 A............................................................................................................................................................3 B..........................................................................................................................................................19 C..........................................................................................................................................................31 D..........................................................................................................................................................51 E...........................................................................................................................................................63 F...........................................................................................................................................................72 G..........................................................................................................................................................86
    [Show full text]
  • Accuracy Evaluation of Geoid Heights in the National Control Points of South Korea Using High-Degree Geopotential Model
    applied sciences Article Accuracy Evaluation of Geoid Heights in the National Control Points of South Korea Using High-Degree Geopotential Model Kwang Bae Kim 1,* , Hong Sik Yun 1 and Ha Jung Choi 2 1 School of Civil, Architectural, and Environmental System Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon 16419, Korea; [email protected] 2 Interdisciplinary Program for Crisis, Disaster, and Risk Management, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon 16419, Korea; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +82-31-299-4251 Received: 9 December 2019; Accepted: 18 February 2020; Published: 21 February 2020 Abstract: Precise geoid heights are not as important for understanding Earth’s gravity field, but they are important to geodesy itself, since the vertical datum is defined as geoid in a cm-level accuracy. Several high-degree geopotential models have been derived lately by using satellite tracking data such as those from Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) and Gravity Field and Steady-State Ocean Circulation Explorer (GOCE), satellite altimeter data, and terrestrial and airborne gravity data. The Korean national geoid (KNGeoid) models of the National Geographic Information Institute (NGII) were developed using the latest global geopotential models (GGMs), which are combinations of gravity data from satellites and land gravity data. In this study, geoid heights calculated from the latest high-degree GGMs were used to evaluate the accuracy of the three GGMs (European Improved Gravity model of Earth by New techniques (EIGEN)-6C4, Earth Gravitational Model 2008 (EGM2008), and GOCE-EGM2008 combined model (GECO)) by comparing them with the geoid heights derived from the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS)/leveling of the 1182 unified control points (UCPs) that have been installed by NGII in South Korea since 2008.
    [Show full text]
  • Egmlab, a Scientific Software for Determining the Gravity and Gradient Components from Global Geopotential Models
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Springer - Publisher Connector Earth Sci Inform (2008) 1:93–103 DOI 10.1007/s12145-008-0013-4 SOFTWARE ARTICLE EGMlab, a scientific software for determining the gravity and gradient components from global geopotential models R. Kiamehr & M. Eshagh Received: 8 December 2007 /Accepted: 7 July 2008 / Published online: 12 August 2008 # Springer-Verlag 2008 Abstract Nowadays, Global Geopotential Models (GGMs) Keywords Deflection of vertical components . GPS . are used as a routine stage in the procedures to compute a Geoid . Geoidal height . Global geopotential model . gravimetric geoid. The GGMs based geoidal height also Gravity anomaly. Gravity gradients . Levelling . Sweden can be used for GPS/levelling and navigation purposes in developing countries which do not have accurate gravimetric geoid models. Also, the GGM based gravity anomaly Introduction including the digital elevation model can be used in evaluation and outlier detections schemes of the ground In the 1960s and 1970s, satellite geodesy provided geo- gravity anomaly data. Further, the deflection of vertical and desists with global geopotential models (GGMs), which are gravity gradients components from the GGMs can be spherical harmonic representations of the long and medium used for different geodetic and geophysical interpretation wavelength (>100 km) components of the earth’s gravity purposes. However, still a complete and user-friendly field. The new satellite gravity missions CHAMP and software package is not available for universities and GRACE lead to significant improvements of our knowl- geosciences communities. In this article, first we review the edge about the long wavelength part of the Earth’s gravity procedure for determination of the basic gravity field and field, and thereby of the long wavelengths of the geoid.
    [Show full text]
  • Datums, Heights and Geodesy
    Datums, Heights and Geodesy Central Chapter of the Professional Land Surveyors of Colorado 2007 Annual Meeting Daniel R. Roman National Geodetic Survey National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Outline for the talks • Three 40-minute sessions: – Datums and Definitions – Geoid Surfaces and Theory – Datums Shifts and Geoid Height Models • Sessions separated by 30 minute breaks • 30-60 minute Q&A period at the end I will try to avoid excessive formulas and focus more on models of the math and relationships I’m describing. General focus here is on the development of geoid height models to relate datums – not the use of these models in determining GPS-derived orthometric heights. The first session will introduce a number of terms and clarify their meaning The second describes how various surfaces are created The last session covers the models available to teansform from one datum to another Datums and Definitions Session A of Datums, Heights and Geodesy Presented by Daniel R. Roman, Ph.D. Of the National Geodetic Survey -define datums - various surfaces from which "zero" is measured -geoid is a vertical datum tied to MSL -geoid height is ellipsoid height from specific ellipsoid to geoid -types of geoid heights: gravimetric versus hybrid -definition of ellipsoidal datums (a, e, GM, w) -show development of rotational ellipsoid Principal Vertical Datums in the U.S.A. • North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88) – Principal vertical datum for CONUS/Alaska – Helmert Orthometric Heights • National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD
    [Show full text]