Dynamic Planet 2005 Cairns, Australia August 2005

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

From TOPEX-POSEIDON to JASON Science Working Team Meeting GRACE Mission Status Arles, France November 18-21, 2003 Byron D. Tapley (Principal Investigator)
ACCURACY ASSESSMENT OF EARTH GRAVITY FIELD MODELS BY MEANS OF INDEPENDENT SATELLITE CROSSOVER ALTIMETRY J. Klokočník, J. Kostelecký, C.A. Wagner Presented.
The Four Candidate Earth Explorer Core Missions Consultative Workshop October 1999, Granada, Spain, Revised by CCT GOCE S 43 Science and.
The Four Candidate Earth Explorer Core Missions Consultative Workshop October 1999, Granada, Spain, Revised by CCT GOCE S 59 Performance.
CHAMP Satellite Gravity Field Determination Satellite geodesy Eva Howe January
The Four Candidate Earth Explorer Core Missions consultative Workshop October 1999, Granada, Spain, Revised by CCT GOCE S 23 The gravity.
Geoid: the actual equipotential surface at sea level.
The Four Candidate Earth Explorer Core Missions Consultative Workshop October 1999, Granada, Spain, Revised by CCT GOCE S 1 Gravity Field.
Know the Earth…Show the Way NATIONAL GEOSPATIAL-INTELLIGENCE AGENCY Approved for Public Release NGA Case # NGA’s Role in GPS Barbara Wiley.
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.
Geoid Surfaces and Theory Session B of Datums, Heights and Geodesy Presented by Daniel R. Roman, Ph.D. Of the National Geodetic Survey.
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.
Geoid improvement over Alaska/Yukon area by GRACE and GOCE models X Li 1, JL Huang 2, YM Wang 3, M Véronneau 2, D Roman 3 1 ERT Inc USA 2 Geodetic Survey.
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,
Figure and Gravity Figure of a planet (Earth) Geoid Gravity field
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,
GRAV-D Project Update Vicki Childers, Ph.D. GRAV-D Project Manager.
Geography 370 Locating Positions on the Earth
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)
Mr.Samniang Suttara B.Eng. (Civil), M.Eng. (Survey) Topcon Instruments (Thailand) Co.,Ltd. Tel Satellite Surveying.
Geoid Height Models at NGS Dan Roman Research Geodesist.
Last Time: Ground Penetrating Radar Radar reflections image variations in Dielectric constant  r ( = relative permittivity )  3-40 for most Earth materials;
1 Geoid and Geoid Change: Discussion Topics Roger Haagmans, Boulder, 21October 2009.
Integration of Future Geoid Models Dan Roman and Yan M. Wang NOAA/NGS Silver Spring, MD USA December 3-4, 2008.
The National Geodetic Survey Gravity Program Benefits and Opportunities Juliana Blackwell, Director National Geodetic Survey (NGS)
GRAV-D Part II : Examining airborne gravity processing assumptions with an aim towards producing a better gravimetric geoid Theresa Diehl*, Sandra Preaux,
Data Requirements for a 1-cm Accurate Geoid
Shape of the Earth, Geoid, Global Positioning System, Map Coordinate Systems, and Datums Or how you can impress your friend on a hike D. Ravat University.
Numerical aspects of the omission errors due to limited grid size in geoid computations Yan Ming Wang National Geodetic Survey, USA VII Hotine-Marussi.
Gravity Summary For a point source or for a homogeneous sphere the solution is easy to compute and are given by the Newton’s law. Gravity Force for the.
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.
Progress in Geoid Modeling from Satellite Missions
Case study on heterogeneous geoid/ quasigeoid based on space borne and terrestrial data combination with special consideration of GOCE mission data impact.
OSTST Meeting, Hobart, Australia, March 12-15, 2007 EIGEN-5 activities in GFZ and GRGS R. Biancale, J.-M. Lemoine, S. Bruinsma, S. Loyer* CNES/GRGS Toulouse,
GRACE Science Team Meeting October 15-17, 2007 Potsdam Germany Alternative Gravity Field Representations: Solutions, Characteristics, and Issues Michael.
International Symposium on Gravity, Geoid and Height Systems GGHS 2012, Venice, Italy 1 GOCE data for local geoid enhancement Matija Herceg Per Knudsen.
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.
Lecture 7 – Gravity and Related Issues GISC February 2008.
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.
Improved Marine Gravity from CryoSat and Jason-1 David T. Sandwell, Emmanuel Garcia, and Walter H. F. Smith (April 25, 2012) gravity anomalies from 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.
Orbit Determination Dynamics of Satellite Motion.
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.
ESA Living Planet Symposium 28 June - 2 July 2010, Bergen, Norway A. Albertella, R. Rummel, R. Savcenko, W. Bosch, T. Janjic, J.Schroeter, T. Gruber, J.
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.
Rene Forsberg, Arne V. Olesen Dept of Geodynamics DTU-Space, Technical University of Denmark GOCE and airborne gravimetry - A perfect match.
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.
Integration of Gravity Data Into a Seamless Transnational Height Model for North America Daniel Roman, Marc Véronneau, David Avalos, Xiaopeng Li, Simon.
How Do we Estimate Gravity Field? Terrestrial data –Measurements of surface gravity –Fit spherical harmonic coefficients Satellite data –Integrate equations.
GOCE geoids and derived Mean Dynamic Topography in the Arctic Ocean Ole B. Andersen & Per Knudsen. DTU Space – Copenhagen, Denmark.
ESA Living Planet Symposium, 29 June 2010, Bergen (Norway) GOCE data analysis: the space-wise approach and the space-wise approach and the first space-wise.
Dynamic Planet 2005 Cairns, Australia August 2005
Geodesy & Crustal Deformation
Chairs: H. Sünkel, P. Visser
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:

Dynamic Planet 2005 Cairns, Australia 22-26 August 2005 Towards the Next Earth Gravitational Model to Degree 2160: Status and Progress Dynamic Planet 2005 Cairns, Australia 22-26 August 2005 Steve Kenyon, John Factor, NGA Nikolaos Pavlis, Jarir Saleh, Simon Holmes, Raytheon IS

Earth Gravitational Model 2006 CHAMP and GRACE satellite gravity missions 100x improvement in the accuracy with which large regional features of the gravitational field can be modeled • Need for higher-resolution model of the gravitational field and geoid 5’ x 5’ resolution n=m=2160 15 cm global RMS accuracy goal for geoid Joint Navigation Conference Yes_____ No_____ CHAMP (Challenging Mini-Satellite Program) is a… GRACE (Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment) is a joint NASA/TBD program to measure the Earth’s gravitational field at wavelengths of TBD and larger with unprecedented accuracy. The improvements to the long wavelength promise improvements in determining the orbits of LEO satellites. GOCE (?) is a 24 Aug 05

Progression of EGMs EGM96 EGM06 30’x30’ resolution 5’x5’ resolution 50 cm RMS accuracy 70 x 70 error propagation 40 satellites used for long ’s 30 M surface gravity values 29 elevation codes 130 K coefficients EGM06 5’x5’ resolution 15 cm RMS accuracy 2160 x 2160 error propagation CHAMP and GRACE used for long ’s 52 M surface gravity values SRTM, ICESAT 4.7 M coefficients 24 Aug 05

24 Aug 05

EGM06 Geoid Goals EGM06 Geoid Error Goal - 15 cm Global RMS 5 cm commission error from GRACE out to n=m=100 3 cm omission error beyond 2160 following Kaula's Rule NGA’s detailed gravity data are expected to meet an ~14 cm geoid commission error requirement for degrees 101-2160 24 Aug 05

EGM06 Geographic Accuracy Breakdown Ocean areas with good altimetric data: from +/- 5 cm to +/- 10 cm Land areas with good surface gravity data: from +/- 10 cm to +/- 15 cm Land areas with poor surface gravity data: from +/- 15 cm to +/- 50 cm Land areas with no surface gravity data: from +/- 50 cm to +/- 120 cm 24 Aug 05

Data Collection Methods UNCLASSIFIED Data Collection Methods To satisfy the geodetic and geophysical (G&G) requirements of our DoD and IC customers, we have developed a broad range of data collection sources. Some data can be acquired from orbital sensors, for example Global Positioning System, Shuttle Radar Topographic Mission and Satellite Altimetry ocean data. For surface data, surveys are required. NGA is the depository of all DoD surveyed gravity data. In addition, much of our information is obtained through informal data exchange with other organizations that have conducted surveys (oil and geophysical companies, universities and foreign agencies). We do have some external assistance funds to support data acquisition in void areas. These funds are used to support field surveys or the cost of providing existing data to NGA. We also partner with other organizations in the scientific community (like the International Association of Geodesy or Society of Exploration Geophysicists) to acquire data. 24 Aug 05

24 Aug 05

24 Aug 05

Statistics of 5’x5’ g (v081005) Source  Area Min. Max. RMS  ArcGP 4.0 186.0 235.6 31.3 8.1 Altimetry 67.0 -360.4 377.9 29.2 3.1 Terr. 15’ 18.0 -284.5 443.8 42.3 6.1 Fill-in 3.2 -196.9 256.4 32.3 24.6 Actual 5’ 78.8 -360.4 669.8 29.6 3.6 All 100.0 -360.4 669.8 32.3 6.0 (, ) 19.5, 293.5 19.5, 204.5 The Fill-in anomalies for v081005 have decreased from 16.7 to 3.2  of the world compared to PGM2004A 24 Aug 05

Mongolian Aerogravity Project 24 Aug 05

JGP95E 5’x 5’ Global Elevation Source Codes 24 Aug 05

SRTM World Coverage Map Coverage between latitudes 60 N - 54 S 80% of the Earth’s landmass 24 Aug 05

KINEMATIC GPS GROUND CONTROL POINT COMPARISON WITH SRTM CONTINENT MEAN DIFF. (M) STD DEV. (M) 90% ABSOLUTE ERROR (M) AFRICA 1.3 3.8 6.0 AUSTRALIA 1.8 3.5 EURASIA -0.7 3.7 6.6 N. AMERICA 0.1 4.0 6.5 S. AMERICA 1.7 4.1 7.5 NEW ZEALAND 1.4 5.9 10.0 24 Aug 05

RMS = 2.9 mgal in comparison with NGA’s “Best” Marine 5’x5’ File KMS 2002 2’x2’g KMS 2002 Dgs. Comparisons with these Dgs and NGA’s survey data with accuracies < 10 milligals were used to estimate these RMS = 2.9 mgal in comparison with NGA’s “Best” Marine 5’x5’ File 24 Aug 05

GPS/Leveling Comparisons (±2 m edit threshold) Weighted Mean Std. Deviation (cm) Model (Nmax) All (10767) NGS (4649) EGM96 (360) PGM2004A (2159) G99SSS (1’→10800) PGM2005A (2159) 29.3 15.5 - 15.6 21.4 9.7 9.1 25.8 12.6 12.5 18.1 7.3 5.7 Linear Trend Removal Before After 24 Aug 05

GPS Leveling Comparisons over Some Areas with New g Statistics before bias removal. 2 m edit applied. Area (Npts) PGM2004A PGM2005A Mean Diff. (cm) Std. Dev. (cm) Tasmania (46) Greece (36) Japan (826) Switzerland (115) -25.2 -69.2 -22.0 -59.8 60.1 22.6 18.7 13.4 -20.2 -73.1 -21.1 -53.6 12.6  17.5  17.0  28.5 ? 24 Aug 05

Comparisons With Astronomic Deflections over CONUS 3561 stations compared. Units (arc-seconds) Model (Nmax) RMS ∆ ∆ EGM96 (360) PGM2004A (2159) DEFLEC99 (1’→10800) PGM2005A (2159) 2.80 1.22 0.91 1.24 3.22 1.28 0.92 1.29 24 Aug 05

Upcoming EGM06 Activities Spherical harmonic synthesis software will be made available at end of 2005 Official EGM06 project software Provides ability to efficiently compute geodetic quantities to n=m=2160 Test sets to be provided Available thru http://earth-info.nga.mil/GandG/ Validation of new EGM06 GPS/leveling, orbits, DOVs, etc. International participation is welcome Spring 2005 timeframe leading to final EGM06 selection 24 Aug 05

Summary EGM06 is planned for June 2006 New surface and airborne gravity collected until Jan 06 Goal of EGM06 is 15 cm n=m=2160 5’x5’ resolution Latest GRACE model, Surface Gravity, Satellite Altimetry, SRTM and ICESAT data will be utilized Error Propagation to n=m=2160 5’x5’ gravity data from unsurveyed areas is welcome 24 Aug 05