Confirming 1 cm differential geoid accuracy: The Geoid Slope Validation Survey of 2011 Dru Smith 1, Simon Holmes 1, Xiaopeng Li 1, Sbastien Guillaume 2,

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

A Comparison of topographic effect by Newton’s integral and high degree spherical harmonic expansion – Preliminary Results YM Wang, S. Holmes, J Saleh,

Advertisements

Lecture 5 – Earth’s Gravity Field GISC Schedule for next two weeks You are responsible for material in Chapters 1-4 in text as well as all lectures.

GNSS DERIVED HEIGHTS- PART 2 NOS/NGS - 59

GRAV-D Gravity for the Re-definition of the American Vertical Datum

National report of LITHUANIA THE 4th BALTIC SURVEYORS FORUM, 2013, Ventspils, LATVIA Eimuntas Parseliunas Geodetic Institute of Vilnius Technical University.

Space Weather influence on satellite based navigation and precise positioning R. Warnant, S. Lejeune, M. Bavier Royal Observatory of Belgium Avenue Circulaire,

Modernizing the Geopotential Datum: Replacing NAVD 88 Daniel R. Roman, Ph.D.

Geographic Datums Y X Z The National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) and the Defense Mapping School Reviewed by:____________ Date:_________ Objective:

Dynamic Planet 2005 Cairns, Australia August 2005

NOAA’s National Geodetic Survey USGG2009 & GEOID09: New geoid height models for surveying/GIS ACSM-MARLS-UCLS-WFPS Conference FEB 2009 Salt Lake.

Using Aerogravity to Produce a Refined Vertical Datum D.R. Roman and X. Li XXV FIG Congress June 2014 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Session TS01A, Paper.

Modeling Airborne Gravimetry with High-Degree Harmonic Expansions Holmes SA, YM Wang, XP Li and DR Roman National Geodetic Survey/NOAA Vienna, Austria,

G13A Towards a New Vertical Datum Daniel R. Roman 1, Xiaopeng Li 2, Simon A. Holmes 3, Vicki A. Childers 4, and Yan M. Wang 1 1. Geosciences Research.

Use of G99SSS to evaluate the static gravity geopotential derived from the GRACE, CHAMP, and GOCE missions Daniel R. Roman and Dru A. Smith Session: GP52A-02Decade.

Error Analysis of the NGS Gravity Database Jarir Saleh, Xiaopeng Li, Yan Ming Wang, Dan Roman and Dru Smith, NOAA/NGS/ERT Paper: G , 04 July 2011,

Vicki Childers, Daniel Winester, Mark Eckl, Dru Smith, Daniel Roman

Mission Planning and SP1. Outline of Session n Standards n Errors n Planning n Network Design n Adjustment.

Advances and Best Practices in Airborne Gravimetry from the U.S. GRAV-D Project Theresa M. Damiani 1, Vicki Childers 1, Sandra Preaux 2, Simon Holmes 3,

Modern Navigation Thomas Herring MW 10:30-12:00 Room

LINK TO SLIDES: ftp://ftp.ngs.noaa.gov/dist/whenning/FWS2011/

Institut für Erdmessung (IfE), Leibniz Universität Hannover, Germany Quality Assessment of GOCE Gradients Phillip Brieden, Jürgen Müller living planet.

SU 4100 GEODETIC POSITIONING Instructor: Indra Wijayratne.

GRAV-D Project Update Vicki Childers, Ph.D. GRAV-D Project Manager.

Geoid Modeling at NOAA Dru A. Smith, Ph.D. National Geodetic Survey National Ocean Service, NOAA November 13, 2000.

Geoid Height Models at NGS Dan Roman Research Geodesist.

Towards the unification of the vertical datums over the North American continent D Smith 1, M Véronneau 2, D Roman 1, J L Huang 2, YM Wang 1, M Sideris.

Gravity-Lidar Study for 2006: Refined Gravity Field For the North-Central Gulf of Mexico Dan Roman National Geodetic Survey Jarir Saleh National Geodetic.

Lecture 7 – More Gravity and GPS Processing GISC February 2009.

Operations and Analysis Division Field Operations Branch Norfolk, VA.

Improved Hybrid Geoid Modeling and the FY 2000 Geoid Models Dr. Daniel R. Roman January 16, : :30 Conference Room 9836.

B ≥ 4 H & V, KNOWN & TRUSTED POINTS? B LOCALIZATION RESIDUALS-OUTLIERS? B DO ANY PASSIVE MARKS NEED TO BE HELD? RT BASE WITHIN CALIBRATION (QUALITY TIE.

Terrestrial Gravity Plans at NGS Dru Smith Mark Eckl Vicki Childers Workshop on North American Gravimetry10/18/20101.

Integration of Future Geoid Models Dan Roman and Yan M. Wang NOAA/NGS Silver Spring, MD USA December 3-4, 2008.

The GRAV-D Project and The Future of NAD 83 and NAVD 88 A briefing for FEMA leadership Dru Smith, Chief Geodesist NOAA’s National Geodetic Survey.

The National Geodetic Survey Gravity Program Benefits and Opportunities Juliana Blackwell, Director National Geodetic Survey (NGS)

National Height Modernization Program Renee Shields Christine Gallagher Great Lakes Region Height Modernization Consortium Fall Meeting 2012 Lansing, Michigan.

Evaluating Aircraft Positioning Methods for Airborne Gravimetry: Results from GRAV-D’s “Kinematic GPS Processing Challenge” Theresa M. Damiani, Andria.

Airborne GPS Positioning with cm-Level Precisions at Hundreds of km Ranges Gerald L. Mader National Geodetic Survey Silver Spring, MD National Geodetic.

Evaluating Aircraft Positioning Methods for Airborne Gravimetry: Results from GRAV-D’s “Kinematic GPS Processing Challenge” Theresa M. Damiani, Andria.

GALOCAD GAlileo LOcal Component for nowcasting and forecasting Atmospheric Disturbances R. Warnant*, G. Wautelet*, S. Lejeune*, H. Brenot*, J. Spits*,

New Vertical Datum: plans, status, GRAV-D update FGCS San Diego, CA. July 11, 2011 Mark C. Eckl NGS Chief of Observation and Analysis Division, New Vertical.

GRAV-D Part II : Examining airborne gravity processing assumptions with an aim towards producing a better gravimetric geoid Theresa Diehl*, Sandra Preaux,

Improved Covariance Modeling of Gravimetric, GPS, and Leveling Data in High-Resolution Hybrid Geoids Daniel R. Roman, Ph.D. Research Geodesist.

Dozen New Things in 2-0-Dozen! Marti Ikehara: California Geodetic Advisor

Numerical aspects of the omission errors due to limited grid size in geoid computations Yan Ming Wang National Geodetic Survey, USA VII Hotine-Marussi.

OUTLINE:  definition and history  three major models  how are reference shapes used  geodetic systems G EODESY.

Spectral characteristics of the Hellenic vertical network - Validation over Central and Northern Greece using GOCE/GRACE global geopotential models Vassilios.

Effect of High Resolution Altimetric Gravity Anomalies on the North America Geoid Computations Yan M. Wang and D. Roman National Geodetic Survey NOAA Montreal,

Initial Results of the Geoid Slope Validation Survey of 2011 Dru Smith 1, Simon Holmes 1, Xiaopeng Li 1, Yan Wang 1, Malcolm Archer-Shee 1, Ajit Singh.

Lecture 21 – The Geoid 2 April 2009 GISC-3325.

Towards optimizing the determination of accurate heights with GNSS APRIL 14, 2015 Dan Gillins, Ph.D., P.L.S. and Michael Eddy, Ph.D. student.

International Symposium on Gravity, Geoid and Height Systems GGHS 2012, Venice, Italy 1 GOCE data for local geoid enhancement Matija Herceg Per Knudsen.

Recent Investigations Towards Achieving a One Centimeter Geoid Daniel R. Roman & Dru A. Smith U.S. National Geodetic Survey GGG 2000, Session 9 The Challenge.

ST236 Site Calibrations with Trimble GNSS

A comparison of different geoid computation procedures in the US Rocky Mountains YM Wang 1, H Denker 2, J Saleh 3, XP Li 3, DR Roman 1, D Smith 1 1 National.

GEOID03 in Louisiana and Alaska Dr. Yan M Wang and Dr. Daniel R Roman Geodesist, NGS/NOAA ACSM Annual Conference and Technology Exhibition Orlando, FL.

Federal Geodetic Control Subcommittee Update to Coordination Group Juliana Blackwell Subcommittee Chair Director, National Geodetic Survey

Investigation of the use of deflections of vertical measured by DIADEM camera in the GSVS11 Survey YM Wang 1, X Li 2, S Holmes 3, DR Roman 1, DA Smith.

Progress towards a common North American Geoid in 2012 Daniel Roman, Yan Wang & Xiaopeng Li National Geodetic Survey Geosciences Research Division.

New Datum: Vertical (Geopotential) FGCS Silver Spring, MD. July 24, 2011 Mark C. Eckl NGS Chief of Observation and Analysis Division, New Vertical Datum.

Proposal for a comprehensive vertical datum for North America, Central America and the Caribbean Dru Smith, Dan Roman, Vicki Childers, Mark Eckl, Monica.

GRAV-D: NGS Gravity for the Re- definition of the American Vertical Datum Project V. A. Childers, D. R. Roman, D. A. Smith, and T. M. Diehl* U.S. National.

The use of absolute gravity data for validation of GOCE-based GGMs – A case study of Central Europe 1), 2) Walyeldeen Godah 2) Jan Krynski 2) Malgorzata.

Integration of Gravity Data Into a Seamless Transnational Height Model for North America Daniel Roman, Marc Véronneau, David Avalos, Xiaopeng Li, Simon.

Initial Results of the Geoid Slope Validation Survey of 2011 Dru Smith 1, Simon Holmes 1, Xiaopeng Li 1, Yan Wang 1, Malcolm Archer-Shee 1, Ajit Singh.

Integrating LiDAR Intensity and Elevation Data for Terrain Characterization in a Forested Area Cheng Wang and Nancy F. Glenn IEEE GEOSCIENCE AND REMOTE.

Subsidence Monitoring and the GRAV-D project Dru Smith, Dan Roman, Daniel Winester, Mark Eckl NOAA’s National Geodetic Survey Subsidence Workshop -

Daniel Rieser, Christian Pock, Torsten Mayer-Guerr

Geoid Enhancement in the Gulf Coast Region

Advances and Best Practices in Airborne Gravimetry from the U. S

Presentation transcript:

Confirming 1 cm differential geoid accuracy: The Geoid Slope Validation Survey of 2011 Dru Smith 1, Simon Holmes 1, Xiaopeng Li 1, Sbastien Guillaume 2, Yan Wang 1, Sébastien Guillaume 2, Yan Wang 1, Beat Bürki 2, Dan Roman 1, Mark Eckl 1 GGHS2012 Venice, Italy 1 = NOAA’s National Geodetic Survey 2 = Institute of Geodesy and Photogrammetry, ETH Zurich, Switzerland GGHS: Venice, ItalyOct 11, 20121

Genesis of the survey “...the gravimetric geoid used in defining the future vertical datum of the United States should have an absolute accuracy of 1 centimeter at any place and at any time.” -- The NGS 10 year plan ( ) Admirable!...Achievable? GGHS: Venice, ItalyOct 11, 20122

Goal of the survey Observe geoid shape (slope) using multiple independent terrestrial survey methods – GPS + Leveling – Deflections of the Vertical Compare observed slopes (from terrestrial surveys) to modeled slopes (from gravimetry or satellites) – With / Without new GRAV-D airborne gravity GGHS: Venice, ItalyOct 11, 20123

Why not rely on existing surveys? Most existing marks are not GPS or gravity friendly Existing leveling is decades old Existing leveling and GPS are tied to unmonitored passive control coordinates Overlap of existing gravity, GPS or leveling is minimal in space and widely separated in time Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy4

Choosing the Place and Time for a New Survey Criteria: – Significantly exceed 100 km – Under existing GRAV-D data – Avoid trees and woods – Along major roads – Cloud-free nights – No major bridges along the route – Low elevations – Significant geoid slope – Inexpensive travel costs Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy5

The Chosen Line Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy6 325 km 218 points 1.5 km spacing South Texas July-October, 2011 hot…Hot…HOT!

Surveys Performed GPS: 20 identical. units, 10/day leapfrog, 40 hrs ea. Leveling: 1 st order, class II, digital barcode leveling Gravity: FG-5 and A-10 anchors, 4 L/R in 2 teams DoV: ETH Zurich DIADEM GPS & camera system LIDAR : Riegl Q680i-D, 2 pt/m 2 spacing, 0.5 km width Imagery: Applanix 439 RGB DualCam, 5000’ AGL Other: – RTN, short-session GPS, extra gravity marks around Austin, gravity gradients Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy7

Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy8 GPS DoV Leveling Gravity LIDAR/ Imagery

Empirical Error Estimates Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy9   h (OPUS-S) : cm – GPSCOM combination: ~ 4 mm – (no significant baseline dependency) => 16 mm RMS over GSVS11  ,   : 0.06 arcseconds – ~ 0.43 mm / 1.5 km => 6.6 mm RMS over GSVS11

Existing Geoids vs GSVS11 Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy10 Austin (North end) Rockport (South end)

Existing Geoids vs GSVS11 Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy11 Austin (North end) Rockport (South end)

Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy12

Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy13 EGM2008 is better here USGG2009 is better here

Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy14 Adding GOCO2s makes things worse here Adding GOCO2s makes things better here

Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy15 Airborne Gravity Improves the Geoid across ALL DISTANCES

Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy16 New software makes things worse here New software Makes things better here

Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy17 Let’s remove this from all of the other bars to leave geoid-only RMSE

Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy18 The “1 cm geoid”

Agreement with DIADEM DoVs (arcseconds) ModelMeanSTDExtreme Values USGG / 0.53 EGM / 0.49 xEGM-GA (w/ Airborne) / 0.45 xUSGG-GA-R-K480 (w/ Airb & RTM) / 1.08 Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy19  ModelMeanSTDExtreme Values USGG / 0.55 EGM / 0.47 xEGM-GA (w/ Airborne) / 0.51 xUSGG-GA-R-K480 (w/ Airb & RTM) / 0.51  N/S E/W

Old minus new leveling Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy20 North (Austin) South (Rockport)

Conclusions For GSVS11, adding airborne gravity data improves geoid slope accuracy at nearly all distances <325 km – E/W deflections (“pointwise slopes”) improved, but not N/S deflections Gravimetric geoid models and GPS are a viable alternative to long-line leveling Improvements still being made to high resolution geoid modeling Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy21

Future Work Dozens of studies, comparing all of the terrestrial positioning techniques of GSVS11 Dig deeper on GRACE / GOCO2s disagreements with GSVS11 GSVS13: IOWA!!! – Higher elevation, more complicated geoid, additional measurements (borehole gravimetry?) Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy22

Questions/Comments? Oct 11, GGHS: Venice, Italy

Extra Slides Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy24

How to read the next chart 1)Pick any 2 (of the 218) points (P i and P j ) separated by a distance “d ij ” 23,871 possible (i,j) pairs of points 0.4km < d ij < 325km 2)Compute residuals:  (h-H-N) over distance:  (h-H-N) = (h i -H i )-(h j -H j ) – (N i -N j ) 3)Accumulate statistics on residuals for all (i,j) pairs in a bin 4)Each d ij bin contains ~2000 pairs of points Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy25

High Resolution Geoids (vs GPS / Leveling; cm) Bins of d ij, km h/H error budget USGG2009 (1’x1’) EGM2008 (5’x5’) USGG2012x01 (1’x1’) New software USGG2012x02 (1’x1’) New software + Airborne data ± ± / / ± ± / / / ± ± / / / ± ± / / / ± ± / / / ± ± / / / ± ± / / / ± ± / / / ± ± / / / ± ± / / / ± ± / / / ± ± / / /-1.0 Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy26 All separation distances show improvement with GSVS11 survey when airborne gravity are introduced. New software shows modest improvement at medium wavelengths

Tallies SurveyPerson- Weeks Primary Equipment Recon32Mark Setting Truck, Standard survey disks Static GPS35Trimble Net R5, R7 ; Zephyr Geodetic Antenna TRM Leveling120Leica DNA03, Trimble DiNi11 DoV32DIADEM Gravity30FG-5, A-10, L/R D and G meters R-S GPS3Trimble R8_GNSS RTK RTN3Trimble R8_GNSS RTK LIDAR4Riegl Q680i-D, NOAA King Air Imagery4Applanix 439 RGB DualCam, NOAA King Air Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy27

Tallies Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy28 Total persons involved: 46 – NOAA Employees: 43 First time in the field: 6 Issues: – Medical Emergencies: 4 – Flat tires: 3 – Inoperative equipment: 2

Note EGM vs 220 Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy29

SHM representation of geoid agreement with GSVS11 Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy30

Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy31 Austin (North end) Rockport (South End)

Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy32

Experimental geoids and USGG2009 vs GSVS11 h-H Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy33 Kern USGG2 009 Air?NNYYNNYYN RTM?NYNYNYNYN/A / / / / / / / / ± / / / / / / / ± / / / / / / / / ± / / / / / / / / ± / / / / / / / / ± / / / / / / / / ± / / / / / / / / ± / / / / / / / / ± / / / / / / / / ± / / / / / / / / ± / / / / / / / / ± / / / / / / / / ± 1.6

Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy34

Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy35 Weekly reports on a crew-by-crew basis from July 18 through November 4

Oct 11, 2012GGHS: Venice, Italy36