Rene Forsberg, Arne V. Olesen Dept of Geodynamics DTU-Space, Technical University of Denmark GOCE and airborne gravimetry - A perfect match.

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

Instruments used in gravity prospecting
From TOPEX-POSEIDON to JASON Science Working Team Meeting GRACE Mission Status Arles, France November 18-21, 2003 Byron D. Tapley (Principal Investigator)
Repeat station crustal biases and accuracy determined from regional field models M. Korte, E. Thébault* and M. Mandea, GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam (*now.
Dynamic Planet 2005 Cairns, Australia August 2005
45 th Annual Alaska Surveying & Mapping Conference February 21-25, 2011 Hilton Anchorage Hotel Impact of Airborne Gravity Surveys on Geoid Modeling in.
Airborne Gravity Processing 101 Sandra Preaux
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,
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,
Sea-ice freeboard heights in the Arctic Ocean from ICESat and airborne laser H. Skourup, R. Forsberg, S. M. Hvidegaard, and K. Keller, Department of Geodesy,
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,
Institut für Erdmessung (IfE), Leibniz Universität Hannover, Germany Quality Assessment of GOCE Gradients Phillip Brieden, Jürgen Müller living planet.
GRAV-D Project Update Vicki Childers, Ph.D. GRAV-D Project Manager.
1 Assessment of Geoid Models off Western Australia Using In-Situ Measurements X. Deng School of Engineering, The University of Newcastle, Australia R.
ESA Living Planet Symposium, Bergen, T. Gruber, C. Ackermann, T. Fecher, M. Heinze Institut für Astronomische und Physikalische Geodäsie (IAPG)
A spherical Fourier approach to estimate the Moho from GOCE data Mirko Reguzzoni 1, Daniele Sampietro 2 2 POLITECNICO DI MILANO, POLO REGIONALE DI COMO.
Outline  Construction of gravity and magnetic models  Principle of superposition (mentioned on week 1 )  Anomalies  Reference models  Geoid  Figure.
GOCE OBSERVATIONS FOR DETECTING UNKNOWN TECTONIC FEATURES BRAITENBERG C. (1), MARIANI P. (1), REGUZZONI M. (2), USSAMI N. (3) (1)Department of Geosciences,
Last Time: Ground Penetrating Radar Radar reflections image variations in Dielectric constant  r ( = relative permittivity )  3-40 for most Earth materials;
Improved Hybrid Geoid Modeling and the FY 2000 Geoid Models Dr. Daniel R. Roman January 16, : :30 Conference Room 9836.
C.C.Tscherning, University of Copenhagen, Denmark. Developments in the implementation and use of Least-Squares Collocation. IAG Scientific Assembly, Potsdam,
The National Geodetic Survey Gravity Program Benefits and Opportunities Juliana Blackwell, Director National Geodetic Survey (NGS)
Evaluating Aircraft Positioning Methods for Airborne Gravimetry: Results from GRAV-D’s “Kinematic GPS Processing Challenge” Theresa M. Damiani, Andria.
Evaluating Aircraft Positioning Methods for Airborne Gravimetry: Results from GRAV-D’s “Kinematic GPS Processing Challenge” Theresa M. Damiani, Andria.
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.
Data Requirements for a 1-cm Accurate Geoid
Establishing A Gravity Plan Ohio Department of Transportation October 14, 2011.
Numerical aspects of the omission errors due to limited grid size in geoid computations Yan Ming Wang National Geodetic Survey, USA VII Hotine-Marussi.
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,
Lecture 21 – The Geoid 2 April 2009 GISC-3325.
A Brief Introduction to Gravity UT Intro to Geophysics Class March 10, 2009 Austin-Bergstrom Airport Theresa Diehl, Ph.D. Research Geodesist NOAA National.
Gravity Lidar Study for 2006: A First Look D.R. Roman, V.A. Childers, D.L. Rabine, S.A. Martinka, Y.M. Wang, J.M. Brozena, S.B. Luthcke, and J.B. Blair.
Tide corrections from KGPS and a precise geoid
Regional Enhancement of the Mean Dynamic Topography using GOCE Gravity Gradients Matija Herceg 1 and Per Knudsen 1 1 DTU Space, National Space Institute,
International Symposium on Gravity, Geoid and Height Systems GGHS 2012, Venice, Italy 1 GOCE data for local geoid enhancement Matija Herceg Per Knudsen.
IAG Scientific Assembly – Cairns, Australia, August 2005 The GOCE Mission GOCE (Gravity field and steady-state Ocean Circulation Explorer) will be.
Full Resolution Geoid from GOCE Gradients for Ocean Modeling Matija Herceg & Per Knudsen Department of Geodesy DTU Space living planet symposium 28 June.
C.C.Tscherning, Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen. Improvement of Least-Squares Collocation error estimates using local GOCE Tzz signal standard.
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.
Airborne gravimetry: An Introduction Madjid ABBASI Surveying Engineering Department, Zanjan University, Zanjan, Iran National Cartographic Center (NCC)
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.
Geodetic Applications of GNSS within the United States Dr. Gerald L. Mader National Geodetic Survey NOS/NOAA Silver Spring, Maryland USA Munich Satellite.
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.
Improving Regional Geoid by optimal Combination of GRACE Gravity Model and Surface Gravity Data YM Wang, DR Roman and J Saleh National Geodetic Survey.
Mayer-Gürr et al.ESA Living Planet, Bergen Torsten Mayer-Gürr, Annette Eicker, Judith Schall Institute of Geodesy and Geoinformation University.
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.
1 NGA Mission - Data – Collaboration 2009 Workshop on Monitoring North American Geoid Change 21 Oct 2009 NGA Mission - Data – Collaboration 2009 Workshop.
1 Least Square Modification of Stokes’ Formula vs. Remove- Compute-Restore Technique Lars E. Sjöberg Royal Institute of Technology Division of Geodesy.
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.
An oceanographic assessment of the GOCE geoid models accuracy S. Mulet 1, M-H. Rio 1, P. Knudsen 2, F. Siegesmund 3, R. Bingham 4, O. Andersen 2, D. Stammer.
Last Time: Introduction to Gravity Governed by LaPlace’s equation: with solution of the form: If we have a spherical body with mass M and constant (or.
GOCE Gravity Field Models – Overview and Performance Analysis Th. Gruber*, R. Rummel* & High Level Processing Facility (HPF) Team *Institute of Astronomical.
GOCE and Antarctica Rene Forsberg DTU Space, Denmark Credit: Planetary visions/CPOM/ESA CryoSat.
Integration of Gravity Data Into a Seamless Transnational Height Model for North America Daniel Roman, Marc Véronneau, David Avalos, Xiaopeng Li, Simon.
D.N. Arabelos, M. Reguzzoni and C.C.Tscherning HPF Progress Meeting # 26, München, Feb , Global grids of gravity anomalies and vertical gravity.
GOCE geoids and derived Mean Dynamic Topography in the Arctic Ocean Ole B. Andersen & Per Knudsen. DTU Space – Copenhagen, Denmark.
1 UPWARD CONTINUATION OF DOME-C AIRBORNE GRAVITY AND COMPARISON TO GOCE GRADIENTS AT ORBIT ALTITUDE IN ANTARCTICA Hasan Yildiz (1), Rene Forsberg (2),
B. Amjadiparvar(1), E. Rangelova(1), M. G. Sideris(1) , C. Gerlach(2)
Satellite Altimetry for Gravity, geoid and marine applications (MSS + LAT) Dr Ole B. Andersen, DTU Space, Denmark,
Dynamic Planet 2005 Cairns, Australia August 2005
Geodesy & Crustal Deformation
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
Outline Construction of gravity and magnetic models Reference models
Presentation transcript:

Rene Forsberg, Arne V. Olesen Dept of Geodynamics DTU-Space, Technical University of Denmark GOCE and airborne gravimetry - A perfect match for geoid determination -

Airborne Gravimetry Basic principle:  g = y - h´´ -  g eotvos -  g tilt - y 0 + g 0 -  (h - N) y: measured acceleration h´´: acceleration from GPS y 0 : airport base reading g 0 : airport reference gravity h : GPS ellipsoidal height  g eotvos : Eotvos correction  g tilt : Gravimeter tilt correction Current accuracy approx: km along-track filtering

Airborne Gravimetry – DTU-Space gravimeters Chekan-AM - GPS slaved platform - Dual quartz pendulums in viscous damping fluid Lacoste&Romberg S - Simple damped platform - Zero-length spring overdamped

Airborne gravimetry - IMU Auxillary strapdown IMU’s can reach the 1 mGal level Chile 2013 gravityflt elevations iMAR IMU Green, LCR blue (D. Becker, TU Darmstadt)

Airborne Gravimetry – error sources Filtering – lack of resolution Gravimeter scale errors – large difference on E- and W-heading flts Turbulence – unlinear effects in spring sensors Platform tilt correction – serious source of unlinear errors Base tie accuracy – absolute g-station information uncertainty Cross-over adjustment – source of aliasing … dont use GOCE can rescue biased airborne (and marine) data!

Chekan-AM test results - Denmark S-N and N-S flights Chekan accuracy: ~ 1 mGall Salt dome

Geoid – use of GOCE and airborne data Remove-restore principle: collocation + spherical FFT: The anomalous gravity potential T split into 3 parts – 3D fields (Molodensky formulation) T = T EGM/GOCE + T RTM + T res T EGM – spherical harmonic model EGM08 augmented with GOCE below ca. deg 200 (linear transition) T RTM – residual terrain effect (RTM) by prism integration T res – residual (i.e. unmodelled) local gravity effect Gridded data on surface transformed to residual geoid by Stokes/Molodensky integration - spherical FFT with Wong-Gore modified kernel

Analytical downward continuation and terrain effects - Least-squares collocation (planar or spherical self-consistent models) - Allows easy merging of surface and airborne data, time efficient in blocks - Alternate: Fourier methods (if survey flown at constant level..) - Use of remove-restore terrain reductions stabilize solution (terrain effects have to be filtered with the airborne data filter)

Examples of aerogravity results Mongolia nm line spacing + helicopter border survey (MonMap/NGA) Purpose of survey: National geoid + EGM08 Accuracy estimate from x-overs: 2.3 mgal rms

Comparison to GOCE as a function of max degree N (R5 direct) Unit: mGal NMeanStddev Data Airborne GOCE

Arctic Ocean 2009 LOMGRAV2009 – Ken Borek C-FMKB Ops from Eureka, Alert and Station Nord Nord Alert Eureka DC3 aircraft Joint with NRCan LCR S99 and SL1 Magnetometers 256 flight-hr in 6 weeks (down to -40 C) 1.7 mgal rms error [210 x-ings]

LOMGRAV09 – Denmark/Canada UNCLOS project Gravity anomalies on top of Arc GP NP Greenland Comparison to GOCE as a function of max degree N (R5 direct) Unit: mGal – atm.corr. applied NMeanStddev Data

SE-Asia Comparison to GOCE as a function of max degree N (R5 direct) Unit: mGal NMeanStddev Data R.m.s. error mGal Philippines Malaysia Indonesia

East Africa Comparison to GOCE as a function of max degree N (R5 direct) Unit: mGal NMeanStddev Data Ethiopia Tanzania

Surface data GOCE data Surface – GOCE data Direct Time-wise Zoom-In Spectral analysis - Indonesia region Method: - Fill-in by EGM08 (mainly marine) - 2D PSD estimation with FFT - Isotropic averaging of PSD - Conversion to degree variance 

Zoom-In Spectral analysis - Mongolia Surface data GOCE data

Nepal survey Dec 2010 – LCR S-38 and Chekan DTU Airborne gravity survey of Nepal 2010 – Beech King Air 200 Geoid project – Nepal Department of Survey + NGA Base GPS and gravity ties at Kathmandu Airport LaCoste and Romberg gravimeter, Chekan-AM Auxillary: Honeywell IMU, numerous GPS’s Flight elevations

Nepal SRTM terrain model meter Kathmandu Everest Annapurna

Nepal airborne and GOCE

Difference between EGM2008 and EGM2008/GOCE model Geoid domain

Terrain- and GOCE- reduced airborne and surface gravity Reduced gravity data showing contribution from airborne + surface data (and errors) Many errors in terrestrial gravity data … airborne have advantage of uniform quality DataMeanStd. dev. Airborne data Airborne – GOCE (360) Reduced airborne data Surface data Surface – GOCE Reduced surface data Statistics of data reductions

Geoid determination (final classical geoid) Geoid model MeanR.m.s. (m) Geoid model GOCE EGM Fit to GPS levelling Kathmandu Valley (offset due to Nepal datum)

Other geoids … Philippines Geoid 5 m contours + GOCE + DTU10 + SRTM DEM GPS user software

Other geoids … Philippines, validation Difference to GPS/Lev Difference MDT = MSS - N

Conclusions: Succesful airborne gravity surveys of challenging regions mGal accuracy Airborne data nearly bias-free relative to GOCE when tied and processed properly (no cross-over adjustment needed) Geoid models of 5-10 cm accuracy Complements and improve GOCE and EGM08.. basis for new vertical datums GOCE/airborne geoid accuracy many places not possible to validate … errors in levelling networks and geodynamics GOCE data contain information to degree 260, but R5 information decays from around degree 210. Aerogravity flight, Mt Everest Dec 2010 Aerogravity flight, Aconcagua, Feb 2010

Thanks for your attention Raja Ampat, Papua Indonesia, 2011