Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Colorado geoid modeling at the US National Geodetic Survey

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Geodesy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The geoid computation method currently used at the US National Geodetic Survey is based on the analytical downward continuation solution of the Molodensky geodetic boundary value problem. The quasigeoid is computed first in 1′ × 1′ grids for the whole area, and then, the geoid is obtained by adding the geoid–quasigeoid separation term based on the simple Bouguer anomalies. A few variations in data combination and topographic/gravity reductions are tested, and three models are selected for the Colorado experiment. Historical GPS/leveling data are used as a guide in the computations. The standard deviation of geoid differences between the historical GPS/leveling data and geoid models is 5.2, 5.0 and 4.9 cm for the models of the initial run, the first and second iteration, respectively. After the models were submitted to the Colorado experiment, they were validated using the GSVS17 (Geoid Slope Validation Survey 2017) GPS/leveling data. The standard deviation of the geoid differences on 223 GSVS17 marks is 3.2, 2.6 and 2.3 cm for the three runs, respectively. In addition to the (quasi)geoid models, the geopotential numbers at 223 GSVS17 marks are also computed and submitted to the Colorado geoid computation experiment and it is evaluated in Sánchez et al. (2020 this issue).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  • Ågren J (2004) Regional geoid determination methods for the era of satellite gravimetry. PhD dissertation, Royal Institute of Technology

  • Flury J, Rummel R (2009) On the geoid–quasigeoid separation in mountain areas. J Geod 83:829

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forsberg R (1984) A Study Terrain Reductions, Density Anomalies and Geophysical Inversion Methods in Gravity Field Modelling. Report No. 355, Department of Geodesic Science and Survey, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH

  • Forsberg R, Tscherning, CC (2008) An overview manual for the GRAVSOFT, Geodetic Gravity Field Modelling Programs, 2nd edition

  • Heiskanen W, Moritz H (1967) Physical Geodesy. W.H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang T (2016) Wang, YM (2016) On the spectral combination of satellite gravity model, terrestrial and airborne gravity data for local gravimetric geoid computation. J Geod 90:1405–1418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-016-0932-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moritz H (1980) Advanced Physical Geodesy. Herbert Wichmann Verlag, Karlsruhe

    Google Scholar 

  • Roman DR, Wang YM, Henning W, Hamilton J (2004) Assessment of the New National Geoid Height Model, GEOID03, Proceedings of the American Congress on Surveying and Mapping 2004 meeting

  • Sánchez et al. (2020, this issue) Strategy for the realization of the International Height Reference System—IHRS

  • Sánchez L, Ågren J, Huang J, Wang YM, Forsberg R (2018) Basic agreements for the computation of station potential values as IHRS coordinates, geoid undulations and height anomalies within the Colorado 1-cm geoid experiment. Version 0.5, October 30, 2018

  • Sjöberg LE (2007) The topographic bias by analytical continuation in physical geodesy. J Geod 81:345–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sjöberg LE (2010) A strict formula for geoid-to-quasigeoid separation. J Geod 84:699

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith DA, Milbert DG (1999) The GEOID96 high resolution geoid height model for the United States. J Geod. 73:219–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith DA, Roman DR (2001) GEOID99 and G99SSS: one arc-minute models for the United States. J. Geod. 75:469–490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith DA, Roman DR (2010) How NOAA’s GRAV-D Project Impacts and Contributes to NOAA Science, https://www.ngs.noaa.gov/GRAV-D/pubs/GRAV-D_Contribution_to_NOAA_Science.pdf, May 7, 2010

  • Smith DA, Holmes SA, Li X, Guillaume S, Wang YM, Bürki B, Roman DR, Damiani T (2013) Confirming regional 1 cm differential geoid accuracy from airborne gravimetry: the Geoid Slope Validation Survey of 2011. J. Geod. 87:885–907

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • VanWestrum D et al. (2020, this issue) Geoid Slope Validation Survey in the Rugged Terrain of Colorado, U.S.A

  • Wang et al. (2020, this issue) Colorado geoid computation experiment—Overview and Summary

  • Wang YM, Saleh J, Li X, Roman DR (2012) The US Gravimetric Geoid of 2009 (USGG2009): model development and evaluation. J Geod 86:165–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang YM, Holmes S, Li X, and Ahlgren K (2017) NGS Annual Experimental Geoid Models – xGEOID17: What is new and the results, IAG-IASPEI, Kobe, Japan July 30—August 5, 2017

  • Wong L, Gore R (1969) Accuracy of geoid heights from modified Stokes kernels. Geophys J R astr Soc 18:81–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zilkoski DB (1992) North American Vertical Datum and International Great Lakes Datum: They Are Now One and the Same. In: Proceedings of the U.S. Hydrographic Conference ‘92, Baltimore, Maryland

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Geodetic Survey, NOAA, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD, 20910-3282, USA

    Yan Ming Wang, Xiaopeng Li, Kevin Ahlgren & Jordan Krcmaric

Authors
  1. Yan Ming Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xiaopeng Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kevin Ahlgren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jordan Krcmaric
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

YMW, XL, KA and JK computed the models and prepared this paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yan Ming Wang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, Y.M., Li, X., Ahlgren, K. et al. Colorado geoid modeling at the US National Geodetic Survey. J Geod 94, 106 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-020-01429-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-020-01429-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation