This article shows how the array of corner reflectors (CRs) in Queensland, Australia, together with highly accurate geodetic synthetic aperture radar (SAR) techniques-also called imaging geodesy-can be used to measure the absolute and relative geometric fidelity of SAR missions. We describe, in detail, the end-to-end methodology and apply it to TerraSAR-X Stripmap (SM) and ScanSAR (SC) data and to Sentinel-1 interferometric wide swath (IW) data. Geometric distortions within images that are caused by commonly used SAR processor approximations are explained, and we show how to correct them during postprocessing. Our results, supported by the analysis of 140 images across the different SAR modes and using the 40 reflectors of the array, confirm our methodology and achieve the limits predicted by theory for both Sentinel-1 and TerraSAR-X. After our corrections, the Sentinel-1 residual errors are 6 cm in range and 26 cm in azimuth, including all error sources. The findings are confirmed by the mutual independent processing carried out at University of Zurich (UZH) and German Aerospace Center (DLR). This represents an improvement of the geolocation accuracy by approximately a factor of four in range and a factor of two in azimuth compared with the standard Sentinel-1 products. The TerraSAR-X results are even better. The achieved geolocation accuracy now approaches that of the global navigation satellite system (GNSS)-based survey of the CRs positions, which highlights the potential of the end-to-end SAR methodology for imaging geodesy.
This study presents a solution of the ‘1 cm Geoid Experiment’ (Colorado Experiment) using spherical radial basis functions (SRBFs). As the only group using SRBFs among the fourteen participated institutions from all over the world, we highlight the methodology of SRBFs in this paper. Detailed explanations are given regarding the settings of the four most important factors that influence the performance of SRBFs in gravity field modeling, namely (1) the choosing bandwidth, (2) the locations of the SRBFs, (3) the type of the SRBFs as well as (4) the extensions of the data zone for reducing the edge effect. Two types of basis functions covering the same spectral range are used for the terrestrial and the airborne measurements, respectively. The non-smoothing Shannon function is applied to the terrestrial data to avoid the loss of spectral information. The cubic polynomial (CuP) function which has smoothing features is applied to the airborne data as a low-pass filter for filtering the high-frequency noise. Although the idea of combining different SRBFs for different observations was proven in theory to be possible, it is applied to real data for the first time, in this study. The RMS error of our height anomaly result along the GSVS17 benchmarks w.r.t the validation data (which is the mean results of the other contributions in the ‘Colorado Experiment’) drops by 5% when combining the Shannon function for the terrestrial data and the CuP function for the airborne data, compared to those obtained by using the Shannon function for both the two data sets. This improvement indicates the validity and benefits of using different SRBFs for different observation types. Global gravity model (GGM), topographic model, the terrestrial gravity data, as well as the airborne gravity data are combined, and the contribution of each data set to the final solution is discussed. By adding the terrestrial data to the GGM and the topographic model, the RMS error of the height anomaly result w.r.t the validation data drops from 4 to 1.8 cm, and it is further reduced to 1 cm by including the airborne data. Comparisons with the mean results of all the contributions show that our height anomaly and geoid height solutions at the GSVS17 benchmarks have an RMS error of 1.0 cm and 1.3 cm, respectively; and our height anomaly results give an RMS value of 1.6 cm in the whole study area, which are all the smallest among the participants.
The signal content and error level of recent GOCE-based high resolution gravity field models is assessed by means of signal degree variances and comparisons to independent GNSS-levelling geoid heights. The signal of the spherical harmonic series of these models is compared to the pre-GOCE EGM2008 model in order to identify the impact of GOCE data, of improved surface and altimetric gravity data and of modelling approaches. Results of the signal analysis show that in a global average roughly 80% of the differences are due to the inclusion of GOCE satellite information, while the remaining 20% are contributed by improved surface data. Comparisons of the global models to GNSS-levelling derived geoid heights demonstrate that a 1 cm geoid from the global model is feasible, if there is a high quality terrestrial gravity data set available. For areas with less good coverage an accuracy of several centimetres to a decimetre is feasible taking into account that GOCE provides now the geoid with a centimetre accuracy at spatial scales of 80 to 100 km. Comparisons with GNSS-levelling geoid heights also are a good tool to investigate possible systematic errors in the global models, in the spirit levelling and in the GNSS height observations. By means of geoid height differences and geoid slope differences one can draw conclusions for each regional data set separately. These conclusions need to be considered for a refined analysis e.g. to eliminate suspicious GNSS-levelling data, to improve the global modelling by using full variance-covariance matrices and by consistently weighting the various data sources used for high resolution gravity field models. The paper describes the applied procedures, shows results for these geoid height and geoid slope differences for some regional data sets and draws conclusions about possible error sources and future work to be done in this context.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.