Abstract
We apply the AUSGeoid data processing and computation methodologies to data provided for the International Height Reference System (IHRS) Colorado experiment as part of the International Association of Geodesy Joint Working Groups 0.1.2 and 2.2.2. This experiment is undertaken to test a range of different geoid computation methods from international research groups with a view to standardising these methods to form a set of conventions that can be established as an IHRS. The IHRS can realise an International Height Reference Frame to be used to study physical changes on and within the Earth. The Colorado experiment study site is much more mountainous (maximum height 4401 m) than the mostly flat Australian continent (maximum height 2228 m), and the available data over Colorado are different from Australian data (e.g. much more extensive airborne gravity coverage). Hence, we have tested and applied several modifications to the AUSGeoid approach, which had been tailored to the Australian situation. This includes different methods for the computation of terrain corrections, the gridding of terrestrial gravity data, the treatment of long-wavelength errors in the gravity anomaly grid and the combination of terrestrial and airborne data. A new method that has not previously been tested is the application of a spherical harmonic high-pass filter to residual anomalies. The results indicate that the AUSGeoid methods can successfully be used to compute a high accuracy geoid in challenging mountainous conditions. Modifications to the AUSGeoid approach lead to root-mean-square differences between geoid models up to ~ 0.028 m and agreement with GNSS-levelling data to ~ 0.044 m, but the benefits of these modifications cannot be rigorously assessed due to the limitation of the GNSS-levelling accuracy over the computation area.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The data sets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. The final terrestrial and airborne quasigeoid and geoid models will be submitted to the geoid repository of the International Service for the Geoid (IGS) for inclusion on their website: www.isgeoid.polimi.it.
References
Barnes D, Factor JK, Holmes SA, Ingalls S, Presicci MR, Beale J, Fecher T (2015) Earth gravitational model 2020. Paper presented to the AGU Fall Meeting 2015, San Francisco, USA
Brown NJ, McCubbine JC, Featherstone WE, Gowans N, Woods A, Baran I (2018) AUSGeoid2020 combined gravimetric–geometric model: location-specific uncertainties and baseline-length-dependent error decorrelation. J Geodesy 92:1457–1465. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-018-1202-7
Bucha B, Janák J (2014) A MATLAB-based graphical user interface program for computing functionals of the geopotential up to ultra-high degrees and orders: efficient computation at irregular surfaces. Comput Geosci 66:219–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2014.02.005
Claessens SJ, Hirt C, Amos MJ, Featherstone WE, Kirby JF (2011) The NZGeoid09 model of New Zealand. Surv Rev 43:2–15. https://doi.org/10.1179/003962610X12747001420780
Driscoll JR, Healy DMJ (1994) Computing Fourier transforms and convolutions on the sphere. Adv Appl Math 15:202–250. https://doi.org/10.1006/aama.1994.1008
Ekman M (1989) Impacts of geodynamic phenomena on systems for height and gravity. Bull Géod 63:281–296
Ellmann A (2005a) Two deterministic and three stochastic modifications of Stokes’s formula: a case study for the Baltic countries. J Geodesy 79:11–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-005-0438-1
Ellmann A (2005b) Computation of three stochastic modifications of Stokes’s formula for regional geoid determinations. Comput Geosci 31(6):742–755. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2005.01.008
Featherstone WE (2003) Software for computing five existing types of deterministically modified integration kernel for gravimetric geoid determination. Comput Geosci 29:183–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0098-3004(02)00074-2
Featherstone WE (2013) Deterministic, stochastic, hybrid and band-limited modifications of Hotine’s integral. J Geodesy 87:487–500. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-013-0612-9
Featherstone WE, Filmer MS (2012) The north-south tilt in the Australian Height Datum is explained by the ocean’s mean dynamic topography. J Geophys Res 117:C08035. https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JC007974
Featherstone WE, Kirby JF (2000) The reduction of aliasing in gravity anomalies and geoid heights using digital terrain data. Geophys J Int 141:204–212. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-246X.2000.00082.x
Featherstone WE, Evans JD, Olliver JG (1998) A Meissl-modified Vanìček and Kleusberg kernel to reduce the truncation error in gravimetric geoid computations. J Geodesy 72:154–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001900050157
Featherstone WE, Kirby JF, Hirt C, Filmer MS, Claessens SJ, Brown NJ, Hu G, Johnston GM (2011) The AUSGeoid09 model of the Australian Height Datum. J Geodesy 85:133–150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-010-0422-2
Featherstone WE, McCubbine JC, Brown NJ, Claessens SJ, Filmer MS, Kirby JF (2018) The first Australian gravimetric quasigeoid model with location-specific uncertainty estimates. J Geodesy 92:149–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-017-1053-7
Filmer MS, Featherstone WE, Kuhn M (2010) The effect of EGM2008-based normal, normal-orthometric and Helmert orthometric height systems on the Australian level network. J Geodesy 84:501–513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-010-0388-0
Filmer MS, Featherstone WE, Claessens SJ (2014) Variance component estimation uncertainty for unbalanced data: application to a continent-wide vertical datum. J Geodesy 88:1081–1093. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-014-0744-6
Flury J, Rummel R (2009) On the geoid–quasigeoid separation in mountain areas. J Geodesy 83:829–847. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-009-0302-9
Foroughi I, Vaníček P, Kingdon RW, Goli M, Sheng M, Afrasteh Y, Novák P, Santos MC (2019) Sub-centimetre geoid. J Geodesy 93:849–868. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-018-1208-1
Forsberg R (1987) A new covariance model for inertial gravimetry and gradiometry. J Geophys Res 92(B2):1305–1310. https://doi.org/10.1029/JB092iB02p01305
Forsberg R (2002) Downward continuation of airborne gravity data. The 3rd meeting of the International Gravity and Geoid Commission ‘Gravity and Geoid 2002’, Thessaloniki, Greece
Forsberg R, Featherstone W (1998) Geoids and cap sizes. In: Forsberg R, Feissel M, Dietrich R (eds) Geodesy on the move. International Association of Geodesy Symposia, vol 119. Springer, Berlin
Forsberg R, Olesen AV, Einarsson I, Manandhar N, Shreshta K (2014) Geoid of Nepal from airborne gravity survey. In: Earth on the edge: science for a sustainable planet. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 521–527. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37222-3_69
Förste C, Abrykosov O, Bruinsma S, Dahle C, König R, Lemoine J-M (2019) ESA’s Release 6 GOCE gravity field model by means of the direct approach based on improved filtering of the reprocessed gradients of the entire mission. GFZ Data Serv. https://doi.org/10.5880/ICGEM.2019.004
Goyal R, Featherstone WE, Claessens SJ, Devaraju B, Balasubramania N, Dikshit O (2019) A numerical approach to the mass-prism integration for fast determination of terrain corrections. The 27th IUGG General Assembly, Montréal, Québec, Canada
GRAV-D Team (2017) Block MS05 (Mountain South 05); GRAV-D Airborne Gravity Data user manual. Monica A. Youngman and Jeffery A Johnson. BETA Available DATE. http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/GRAV-D/data_MS05.shtml
Hackney RI, Featherstone WE (2003) Geodetic versus geophysical perspectives of the ‘gravity anomaly’. Geophys J Int 154:35–43. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-246X.2003.01941.x
Heiskanen WA, Moritz H (1967) Physical geodesy. WH Freeman and Co, San Francisco
Huang J, Holmes SA, Zhong D, Véronneau M, Wang Y, Crowley JW, Li X, Forsberg R (2017) Analysis of the GRAV-D Airborne Gravity Data for geoid modelling. In: Vergos G, Pail R, Barzaghi R (eds) International symposium on gravity, geoid and height systems 2016. International Association of Geodesy Symposia, vol 148. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/1345_2017_23
Ihde J, Sánchez L, Barzaghi R, Drewes H, Förste C, Gruber T, Liebsch G, Marti U, Pail R, Sideris M (2017) Definition and proposed realization of the International Height Reference System (IHRS). Surv Geophys 38:549–570. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10712-017-9409-3
Jarvis A, Guevara E, Reuter HI, Nelson AD (2008) Hole-filled SRTM for the globe: version 4: data grid. Web publication/site, CGIAR Consortium for Spatial Information. http://srtm.csi.cgiar.org/
Jekeli C (2000) Heights, the geopotential and vertical datums. Report No. 459. The Ohio State University, Columbus, USA
Kern M, Schwarz K-P, Sneeuw N (2003) A study on the combination of satellite, airborne, and terrestrial gravity data. J Geodesy 77(3–4):217–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-003-0313-x
Li X (2018) Modeling the North American vertical datum of 1988 errors in the conterminous United States. J Geod Sci 8:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1515/jogs-2018-0001
Li X, Wang YM (2011) Comparisons of geoid models over Alaska computed with different Stokes’ kernel modifications. J Geod Sci 1:136–142. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10156-010-0016-1
McCubbine JC, Featherstone WE, Kirby JF (2017) Fast Fourier-based error propagation for the gravimetric terrain correction. Geophysics 82:G71–G76. https://doi.org/10.1190/GEO2016-0627.1
McCubbine JC, Amos MJ, Tontini FC, Smith E, Winefied R, Stagpoole V, Featherstone WE (2018) The New Zealand gravimetric quasigeoid model 2017 that incorporates nationwide airborne gravity. J Geodesy 92:923–937. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-017-1103-1
Moritz H (2000) Geodetic reference system 1980. J Geodesy 74:128–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190050278
Nagy D, Papp G, Benedek J (2000) The gravitational potential and its derivatives for the prism. J Geodesy 74:552–560. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001900000116
Pavlis NK, Holmes SA, Kenyon SC, Factor JK (2012) The development and evaluation of the Earth Gravitational Model 2008 (EGM2008). J Geophys Res Solid Earth 117:B04406. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JB008916
Rapp RH (1989) The treatment of permanent tidal effects in the analysis of satellite altimeter data for sea surface topography. Manuscr Geod 14:368–372
Rapp RH (1997a) Use of potential coefficient models for geoid undulation determinations using a spherical harmonic representation of the height anomaly/geoid undulation difference. J Geodesy 71:282–289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001900050096
Rapp RH (1997b) Global models for the 1 cm geoid—present status and near term prospects. In: Sansὸ F, Rummel R (eds) Geodetic boundary value problems in view of the one centimeter geoid. Lecture notes in earth sciences, vol 65. Springer, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1007/bfb0011708
Rexer M, Hirt C, Pail R, Claessens SJ (2014) Evaluation of the third- and fourth-generation GOCE Earth gravity field models with Australian terrestrial gravity data in spherical harmonics. J Geodesy 88:319–333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-013-0680-x
Roelse A, Granger HW, Graham JW (1971, 2nd ed. 1975) The adjustment of the Australian levelling survey 1970–1971, Technical Report 12. Division of National Mapping, Canberra, Australia
Sánchez L, Sideris M (2017) Vertical datum unification for the International Height Reference System (IHRS). Geophys J Int 209:570–586. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggx025
Sánchez L, Čunderlík R, Dayoub N, Mikula K, Minarechová Z, Šíma Z, Vatrt V, Vojtíšková M (2016) A conventional value for the geoid reference potential W0. J Geodesy 90:815–835. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-016-0913-x
Sandiford M, Quigley M (2009) TOPO-OZ: insights into the various modes of intraplate deformation in the Australian continent. Tectonophysics 474:405–416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2009.01.028
Sjöberg LE (1981) Least squares combination of satellite and terrestrial data in physical geodesy. Ann Geophys 37(1):25–30
Sjöberg LE (2003) A general model of modifying Stokes’ formula and its least-squares solution. J Geodesy 77(7–8):459–464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-003-0346-1
Sjöberg LE (2010) A strict formula for geoid-to-quasigeoid separation. J Geodesy 84:699–702. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-010-0407-1
Sjöberg LE (2013) The geoid or quasigeoid—which reference surface should be preferred for a national height system? J Geod Sci 3:103–109. https://doi.org/10.2478/jogs-2013-0013
Smith D (2007) The GRAV-D project: gravity for the Redefinition of the American Vertical Datum. http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/GRAV-D/pubs/GRAV-D_v2007_12_19.pdf
Smith DA, Milbert DG (1999) The GEOID96 high resolution geoid height model for the United States. J Geodesy 73:219–236. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001900050239
Smith WHF, Wessel P (1990) Gridding with a continuous curvature surface in tension. Geophysics 55:293–305. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1442837
Smith DA, Holmes SA, Li X, Guillaume S, Wang YM, Bürki B, Roman DR, Damiani TM (2013) Confirming regional 1 cm differential geoid accuracy from airborne gravimetry: the geoid slope validation survey of 2011. J Geodesy 87:885–907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-013-0653-0
Tenzer R, Hirt C, Claessens S, Novák P (2015) Spatial and spectral representations of the geoid-to-quasigeoid correction. Surv Geophys 36:627–658. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10712-015-9337-z
Van Westrum D (2019) Field observation results from the 2017 Geoid Slope Validation Survey in Colorado, USA. The 27th IUGG General Assembly, Montréal, Québec, Canada
Vaníček P, Featherstone WE (1998) Performance of three types of Stokes’s kernel in the combined solution for the geoid. J Geodesy 72:684–697. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001900050
Vaníček P, Kleusberg A (1987) The Canadian geoid—Stokesian approach. Manuscr Geod 12:86–98
Voigt C, Denker H (2015) Validation of GOCE gravity field models in Germany. Newton’s Bull 5:37–48
Wang YM, Becker C, Breidenbach S, Geoghegan C, Martin D, Winester D, Hanson T, Mader GL, Eckl MC (2015) Results of analysis of the geoid slope validation survey 2014 in Iowa. 26th General Assembly of the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics (IUGG), Prague, Czech Republic
Wenzel H-G (1983) Geoid computation by least squares spectral combination using integral kernels. In: Proceedings of the International Association of Geodesy General Meeting, Tokyo, Japan, pp 438–453
Wessel P, Smith WHF, Scharroo R, Luis JF, Wobbe F (2013) Generic mapping tools: improved version released. EOS Trans AGU 94:409–410. https://doi.org/10.1002/2013EO450001
Wieczorek MA, Meschede M (2018) SHTools—tools for working with spherical harmonics. Geochem Geophys Geosyst 19:2574–2592. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GC007529
Wong L, Gore R (1969) Accuracy of geoid heights from modified Stokes kernels. Geophys J Roy Astron Soc 18:81–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.1969.tb00264.x
Wu Y, Abulaitijiang A, Featherstone WE, McCubbine JC, Andersen OB (2019) Coastal gravity field refinement by combining airborne and ground-based data. J Geodesy 93:2569–2584. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-019-01320-3
Zilkoski DB, Richards JH, Young GM (1992) Results of the general adjustment of the North American Vertical Datum of 1988. Surv Land Inf Syst 52:133–149
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge NGS/NOAA for making available all data sets used in the IHRS Colorado experiment. We also thank W.E. Featherstone and J.C. McCubbine for provision of software and advice on its use. In addition, thanks go to R. Goyal for assistance with the computation of terrain corrections. Finally, we acknowledge the thorough reviews of an earlier version of this manuscript by R. Pail and two anonymous reviewers. All figures were created using the Generic Mapping Tools (GMT) software (Wessel et al. 2013).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Sten Claessens and Mick Filmer designed the research, analysed the data and wrote the paper. Sten Claessens performed the computations.
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Claessens, S.J., Filmer, M.S. Towards an International Height Reference System: insights from the Colorado geoid experiment using AUSGeoid computation methods. J Geod 94, 52 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-020-01379-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-020-01379-3