and IGLD 85 Hydraulic Correctors

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Tidal and Geodetic Vertical Datums State Geodetic Advisor, NGS National Ocean Service, NOAA Sacramento, CA October, 2005 Workshop.
Advertisements

National Geodetic Survey VSLS Conference Rutland VT
Precise Digital Leveling
New Datums Are Coming in 2022!  Both a new geometric and a new geopotential (vertical) datum will be released in  The realization of the new datums.
Coastal Zone 2011 Conference “Cool Geodetic Resources For Your Project” A National Ocean Service, NOAA, Presentation 1)TOOLS TO OBTAIN GEODETIC CONTROL.
Datums, Heights and Geodesy Central Chapter of the Professional Land Surveyors of Colorado 2007 Annual Meeting Daniel R. Roman National Geodetic Survey.
NOAA’s CENTER for OPERATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC PRODUCTS and SERVICES Updating the International Great Lakes Datum Plan Overview Center for Operational Oceanographic.
Better Positions and Improved Access to the National Spatial Reference System  Multi-Year CORS Solution  National Adjustment of 2011  New NGS Datasheet.
Refinements to the North American Datum of 1983 Multi-Year CORS Solution and the National Adjustment of 2011 Dr. Neil D. Weston Chief, Spatial Reference.
Modernizing the Geopotential Datum: Replacing NAVD 88 Daniel R. Roman, Ph.D.
Map Projections (1/2) Francisco Olivera, Ph.D., P.E. Center for Research in Water Resources University of Texas at Austin.
Geographic Datums Y X Z The National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) and the Defense Mapping School Reviewed by:____________ Date:_________ Objective:
Marc Véronneau Canadian Geodetic Survey, Surveyor General Branch
Vertical Datums and Heights
Juliana Blackwell, Director National Geodetic Survey, NOAA
Texas Spatial Reference Center Gary Jeffress, Ph.D., RPLS Director, Conrad Blucher Institute for Surveying and Science Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi.
International Great Lakes Datum Overview Presented at a Height Modernization Program meeting January 9, 2014 by David Conner Geodetic Advisor to the State.
0/27 Merriam-Webster: a branch of applied mathematics concerned with the determination of the size and shape of the earth and the exact positions of points.
Geodesy, Map Projections and Coordinate Systems
Datum Shifts and Geoid Height Models
Geoid Modeling and GRAV-D: Gravity for the Redefinition of the American Vertical Datum Beaumont, Texas June 8-9, 2009 Renee Shields Height Modernization.
Mapping Projections of Kentucky Bryan W
Modern Navigation Thomas Herring MW 10:30-12:00 Room
A New & Improved National Spatial Reference System Refinements of the North American Datum of 1983 through the Multi-Year CORS Solution and the National.
Lecture 11: Geometry of the Ellipse 25 February 2008 GISC-3325.
Geography 370 Locating Positions on the Earth
New Vertical Datum Implementation Plan FGDC Silver Spring, MD. July 30, 2013 Mark C. Eckl Chief of the Observation and Analysis Division, National Geodetic.
Who Needs New Datums? NGS Says… ftp://ftp.ngs.noaa.gov/pub/marti Marti Ikehara California Geodetic Advisor, Sacramento.
Common Marks. Datasheet Basics The NGS Data Sheet See file dsdata.txt for more information about the datasheet. DATABASE = Sybase,PROGRAM = datasheet,
Geoid Modeling at NOAA Dru A. Smith, Ph.D. National Geodetic Survey National Ocean Service, NOAA November 13, 2000.
NOAA’s National Geodetic Survey Update Michael Dennis, RLS, PE ® Esri Survey Summit July 6-9, 2013 ● San Diego, CA.
Geoid Height Models at NGS Dan Roman Research Geodesist.
Integrated and Collaborative Organizations Create Geospatial Solutions Geospatial Solutions by DBZ Achieving Great Heights: Toward a Better Vertical Reference.
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.
Lecture 7 – More Gravity and GPS Processing GISC February 2009.
Gravity, Geoid and Heights Daniel R. Roman National Geodetic Survey National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Lecture 18: Vertical Datums and a little Linear Regression GISC March 2009 For Geoid96.
Who Needs New Datums? NGS Says… ftp://ftp.ngs.noaa.gov/pub/marti Marti Ikehara California Geodetic Advisor, Sacramento.
Gravity, Geoid and Heights Daniel R. Roman National Geodetic Survey National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
The National Geodetic Survey Gravity Program Benefits and Opportunities Juliana Blackwell, Director National Geodetic Survey (NGS)
Upcoming Changes to the National Spatial Reference System
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.
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.
GPS Derived Heights: A Height Modernization Primer December 1, 2006 Professional Land Surveyors of Colorado 2006 Fall Technical Program Renee Shields National.
OUTLINE:  definition and history  three major models  how are reference shapes used  geodetic systems G EODESY.
MISSISSIPPI HEIGHT MODERNIZATION PROJECT JUNE 11, 2009 By Ronnie L. Taylor Chief, Geodetic Advisor Branch NOAA, National Geodetic Survey.
Why do Millimeters Matter? NOAA Models and Tools Support High Accuracy Positioning for Ecosystem Restoration and Ecological Research Surface too low: too.
Lecture 21 – The Geoid 2 April 2009 GISC-3325.
Revolution in Earth Measurement Traditional Surveying uses benchmarks as reference points Global Positioning uses fixed GPS receivers as reference points.
The Height Modernization Program in the United States and the Future of the National Vertical Reference Frame 1 Renee Shields National Geodetic Survey,
Benefits of the New Reference Frames Dru Smith Joe Evjen 60 minutes April 13, Geospatial Summit1.
The Delta Levees Program
Catherine LeCocq SLAC USPAS, Cornell University Large Scale Metrology of Accelerators June 27 - July 1, 2005 Height Systems 1 Summary of Last Presentation.
Lecture 7 – Gravity and Related Issues GISC February 2008.
Precise Digital Leveling Section 6 Vertical Datum.
VERTICAL DATUMS APRIL 08, 2008 By Ronnie L. Taylor Chief, Geodetic Advisor Branch NOAA, National Geodetic Survey.
Datums and Datum Transformations Geomatics Industry Association of America December 4, 2008 Dave Doyle NGS Chief Geodetic Surveyor
New Datum: Vertical (Geopotential) FGCS Silver Spring, MD. July 24, 2011 Mark C. Eckl NGS Chief of Observation and Analysis Division, New Vertical Datum.
Overview of Datums Commonly Used in Michigan and the National Spatial Reference System Michigan Society of Professional Surveyors 70 th Annual Meeting.
GPS Derived Heights: A Height Modernization Primer May 8 and May 10, 2007 National Geodetic Survey Renee Shields National Geodetic Survey National Oceanic.
Improvements to the Geoid Models
Vertical Control Introductions Purpose for presentation
GISC3325-Geodetic Science 20 January 2009
Difference between GPS ellipsoid and sea level heights (N)
Earth to Globe to Map Map Projection: Map Scale: Scale Factor, k
0/27 Merriam-Webster: a branch of applied mathematics concerned with the determination of the size and shape of the earth and the exact positions of points.
Lecture 17: Geodetic Datums and a little Linear Regression
California Geodetic Advisor,
Geoid Enhancement in the Gulf Coast Region
Fundamentals of Geodesy
Presentation transcript:

and IGLD 85 Hydraulic Correctors The Wonder & Mystery of Dynamic Heights and IGLD 85 Hydraulic Correctors Height Modernization Coordination Meeting January 9, 2014 ● Silver Spring, MD National Geodetic Survey Headquarters Michael Dennis, RLS, PE michael.dennis@noaa.gov

Physical Heights Matter! Heights are not merely fascinating… An example of the need for height modernization. Several states, along with North Carolina, have launched major efforts to update vertical positions with height modernization. On September 15, 1999, Hurricane Floyd dropped 21 inches of rain on North Carolina, damaging more than 67,000 homes and destroying nearly 8,000. Many of the homeowners did not have flood insurance, because their residences were built on land that had not been designated as flood prone on the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs). Physical Heights Matter!

Physical heights: Orthometric and dynamic The NGS Datasheet NC0371 *********************************************************************** NC0371 DESIGNATION - 906 3020 BUFFALO GAGE NC0371 PID - NC0371 NC0371 STATE/COUNTY- NY/ERIE NC0371 COUNTRY - US NC0371 USGS QUAD - BUFFALO NW (1965) NC0371 NC0371 *CURRENT SURVEY CONTROL NC0371 ______________________________________________________________________ NC0371* NAD 83(1986) POSITION- 42 52 37. (N) 078 53 20. (W) SCALED NC0371* NAVD 88 ORTHO HEIGHT - 176.311 (meters) 578.45 (feet) ADJUSTED NC0371 GEOID HEIGHT - -35.15 (meters) GEOID12A NC0371 DYNAMIC HEIGHT - 176.264 (meters) 578.29 (feet) COMP NC0371 MODELED GRAVITY - 980,352.2 (mgal) NAVD 88 NC0371.The orthometric height was determined by differential leveling and NC0371.adjusted by the NATIONAL GEODETIC SURVEY NC0371.in June 1991. NC0371.The dynamic height is computed by dividing the NAVD 88 NC0371.geopotential number by the normal gravity value computed on the NC0371.Geodetic Reference System of 1980 (GRS 80) ellipsoid at 45 NC0371.degrees latitude (g = 980.6199 gals.). NC0371.The modeled gravity was interpolated from observed gravity values. Ortho and dynamic heights not equal H ≠ HD e.g., 176.311 – 176.264 = 0.047 m = H = HD

Setup of Leveling, Δn = B – F and S = SB + SF Leveling is simple… right? Rod 1 Setup of Leveling, Δn = B – F and S = SB + SF Rod 2 Backsight Foresight F B Leveling; a very simple form of surveying. Transferring elevation through the use of an observing instrument and calibrated rods with a backsight and a foresight measurement. Δn SB SF S

Leveled Height Differences B Topography A C Leveling is a very “simple” survey practice - determining elevation differences through use of conventional leveling procedures – through backsight minus foresight measurements between points A to B and B to C. Differential leveling surveys, being a “piecewise” metric measurement technique, accumulate local height differences (dh). But, being a piecewise metric measurement system, we must also be aware and account for factors affecting our understanding and use of height interpretations. Traditionally, orthometric heights can be considered as a distance (elevation difference) above a reference surface or datum.

…but heights are complicated Heights to suit your every need (and mood)! Physical heights Orthometric heights Helmert (NAVD 88), Niethammer, Mader, New Brunswick, etc. Dynamic heights Normal heights Normal orthometric heights (e.g., NGVD 29) Leveled heights Geoid heights Gravimetric? “Hybrid”? Quasi-geoid? Ellipsoid heights Referenced to different datums and datum realizations

Physical heights related to gravity C is the geopotential number [m2/s2] Gravity potential energy relative to a reference potential Reference gravity potential is usually the geoid H* is some type of physical height [m] Type depends on type of gravity value used for g* [m/s2] Why? To get unique and meaningful heights

Geopotential and physical heights The NGS Datasheet NC0371 *********************************************************************** NC0371 DESIGNATION - 906 3020 BUFFALO GAGE NC0371 PID - NC0371 NC0371 STATE/COUNTY- NY/ERIE NC0371 COUNTRY - US NC0371 USGS QUAD - BUFFALO NW (1965) NC0371 NC0371 *CURRENT SURVEY CONTROL NC0371 ______________________________________________________________________ NC0371* NAD 83(1986) POSITION- 42 52 37. (N) 078 53 20. (W) SCALED NC0371* NAVD 88 ORTHO HEIGHT - 176.311 (meters) 578.45 (feet) ADJUSTED NC0371 GEOID HEIGHT - -35.15 (meters) GEOID12A NC0371 DYNAMIC HEIGHT - 176.264 (meters) 578.29 (feet) COMP NC0371 MODELED GRAVITY - 980,352.2 (mgal) NAVD 88 NC0371.The orthometric height was determined by differential leveling and NC0371.adjusted by the NATIONAL GEODETIC SURVEY NC0371.in June 1991. NC0371.The dynamic height is computed by dividing the NAVD 88 NC0371.geopotential number by the normal gravity value computed on the NC0371.Geodetic Reference System of 1980 (GRS 80) ellipsoid at 45 NC0371.degrees latitude (g = 980.6199 gals.). NC0371.The modeled gravity was interpolated from observed gravity values. Geopotential number C = × H = γ45 × HD = H = HD = g Mean gravity on plumbline: = g + 4.24 × 10-7 s-2 × H0 = γ45

Image credit: University of Texas Center for Space Research and NASA GRACE Gravity Model 01 - Released July 2003 To fully appreciate the reasoning for many of strict requirements for geodetic leveling we must begin with understanding what are orthometric heights. A realistic “view” of our very irregular shaped Earth as depicted in this gravity model determined from space borne gravity measurements by GRACE, gravity recovery and climate experiment. Every time we set up and plumb our level equipment we are then determining our horizon through the optics of the instrument perpendicular to the attraction of gravity at that point. Now, envision about 26 setups per mile and hundreds and thousands of setups over distances covering a County, each perpendicular to the attraction at that point on our irregular shaped, curved Earth and you can begin to get the feeling that leveling must be much more than a “simple” routine of backsights minus foresights. Image credit: University of Texas Center for Space Research and NASA

Gravity vector (aka “plumbline”), pointing “up” Geoid Geopotential surfaces Ellipsoid surface Looking at a side view of the irregular shaped Earth and the relationships between surfaces of equal potential (equipotential or geopotential surfaces), perpendicular to the attraction of gravity at that point. Note these geopotential surfaces are not geometrically parallel due to the variations in the earth’s irregular gravity field. Also, the geopotential surfaces converge (become closer together) at the poles due in large part to Earth’s rotation. As you run levels across theses surfaces the equipment is plumbed per the attraction of gravity at that point. Our assumption is that our horizontal field of view can be corrected for a nice consistent Earth curvature when in fact a correction for conditions affecting us at a particular point must be accounted for. Running levels north and south require more correction for the convergence of the geopotential surfaces than when running levels east and west. The red oval illustrates the reference ellipsoid for our space based coordinate system and, though a close approximation of the size and shape of the Earth, is an entire, unrelated reference surface when determining GPS-derived ellipsoid heights. Gravity vector (aka “plumbline”), pointing “up” The relationships between the ellipsoid surface (solid red), various geopotential surfaces (dashed blue), and the geoid (solid blue). The geoid exists approximately at mean sea level (MSL).

The ellipsoid, the geoid, and you Deflection of the vertical You are here Earth surface Ellipsoid height, h Orthometric height, H Mean sea level Geoid height, NG Ellipsoid Geoid h ≈ H + NG h = H + NG Note: Geoid height is negative everywhere in the coterminous US

The trouble with leveling… What is the “elevation” here? HC = ? Level surface ΔnAC ≠ ΔnBC Level surface Leveled height differences, Δn Level surface HC Level surface Level surface Level surface at geoid (“mean sea level”) HA = 0 HB = 0

…and with orthometric heights HD ≠ HE HC Level surface …even though they are on the same level surface Level surface Level surface HE HD Level surface Level surface Level surface at geoid (“mean sea level”) HA = 0 HB = 0

Imagine Lake Powell as an equipotential surface (i. e Imagine Lake Powell as an equipotential surface (i.e., it has zero hydraulic slope, so water will not flow)

Water surface profile from Glen Canyon Dam to Hite HD = 3700.00 ft ΔHD = 0.00 ft HD = 3700.00 ft 3710 3705 Water surface 3700 3695 3690 3685 3680 3675 3670 3665 3660

Water surface profile from Glen Canyon Dam to Hite HD = 3700.00 ft ΔHD = 0.00 ft HD = 3700.00 ft h = 3626.92 ft Δh = +7.49 ft h = 3634.41 ft 3710 3705 Water surface 3700 3695 3635 Water surface 3630 3625 3620 3615 3610 3605

Water surface profile from Glen Canyon Dam to Hite H = 3703.88 ft ΔH = −0.30 ft H = 3703.58 ft HD = 3700.00 ft ΔHD = 0.00 ft HD = 3700.00 ft h = 3626.92 ft Δh = +7.49 ft h = 3634.41 ft 3710 Water surface 3705 Water surface 3700 ΔH = +2.24 ft (@ 45 miles) 3695 3635 Water surface 3630 3625 3620 3615 3610 3605

Water surface profile from Glen Canyon Dam to Hite H = 3703.88 ft ΔH = −0.30 ft H = 3703.58 ft HD = 3700.00 ft ΔHD = 0.00 ft HD = 3700.00 ft h = 3626.92 ft Δh = +7.49 ft h = 3634.41 ft 3710 Water surface 3705 Water surface 3700 ΔH = +2.24 ft (@ 45 miles) 3695 3635 Water surface 3630 3625 3620 Geoid surface −70 ΔNG = +7.79 ft −75 −80

No gravity, no height. Know gravity, know height.

LVL_DH (leveled height differences)

NAVD 88 Modeled Surface Gravity

International Great Lakes Datum of 1985 IGLD 85 uses dynamic heights Because these heights give true hydraulic head Important that heights be related to actual water levels Problem: NAVD 88 dynamic heights don’t match lake water levels But NAVD 88 dynamic heights on NGS datasheets Solution: Hydraulic Correctors (HCs) Difference between NAVD 88 and water level at gauges Subtract from NAVD 88 dynamic to get IGLD 85 heights Each lake has its own “set” of HCs By definition is zero at primary gauge for each lake Only applied on and adjacent to Great Lakes Away from lakes NAVD 88 = IGLD 85 dynamic heights Challenge: Determining dynamic heights with GNSS Requires knowing mean gravity on the plumbline

IGLD 85 Hydraulic Correctors