How to handle topography in practical geoid determination: three examples |
| |
Authors: | O. C. D. Omang R. Forsberg |
| |
Affiliation: | Department of Mapping Sciences, P.O. Box 5034 NLH, Agricultural University of Norway, 1432 ?s, Norway e-mail: ove.dahl@ikf.nlh.no, NO Geodynamic Department, National Survey and Cadastre, Rentemestervej 8, 2400 Copenhagen NV, Denmark e-mail: rf@kms.dk, DK
|
| |
Abstract: | Three different methods of handling topography in geoid determination were investigated. The first two methods employ the residual terrain model (RTM) remove–restore technique, yielding the quasigeoid, whereas the third method uses the classical Helmert condensation method, yielding the geoid. All three methods were used with the geopotential model Earth Gravity Model (1996) (EGM96) as a reference, and the results were compared to precise global positioning system (GPS) levelling networks in Scandinavia. An investigation of the Helmert method, focusing on the different types of indirect effects and their effects on the geoid, was also carried out. The three different methods used produce almost identical results at the 5-cm level, when compared to the GPS levelling networks. However, small systematic differences existed. Received: 18 March 1999 / Accepted: 21 March 2000 |
| |
Keywords: | : Terrain effects – Indirect effects – RTM – Helmert – Gravity – Geoid – GPS/levelling |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|