Canadian gravimetric geoid model 2010

Huang, Jianliang; Véronneau, M.

doi:10.1007/s00190-013-0645-0

Cited by 47 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…12b). To gauge whether our error estimates are realistic, we compare our values to those reported for Canada by Huang and Véronneau (2013). The maximum AHD elevation is ∼2230 m and the formally propagated quasigeoid error is ∼100 mm in the vicinity of this mountainous region (south-eastern Australia).…”

Section: External Validations Of the Error Gridmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The first Australian gravimetric quasigeoid model with location-specific uncertainty estimates

Featherstone

McCubbine

Brown

et al. 2017

J Geod

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We describe the computation of the first Australian quasigeoid model to include error estimates as a function of location that have been propagated from uncertainties in the EGM2008 global model, land and altimeterderived gravity anomalies and terrain corrections. The model has been extended to include Australia's offshore territories and maritime boundaries using newer datasets comprising an additional ∼280,000 land gravity observations, a newer altimeter-derived marine gravity anomaly grid, and terrain corrections at 1 × 1 resolution. The error propagation uses a remove-restore approach, where the EGM2008 quasigeoid and gravity anomaly error grids are augmented by errors propagated through a modified Stokes integral from the errors in the altimeter gravity anomalies, land gravity observations and terrain corrections. The gravimetric quasigeoid errors (one sigma) are 50-60 mm across most of the Australian landmass, increasing to ∼100 mm in regions of steep horizontal gravity gradients or the mountains, and are commensurate with external estimates.

show abstract

Section: External Validations Of the Error Gridmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, we have estimated quasigeoid (height anomaly) errors as a function of location (cf. Pavlis and Saleh 2005;Huang and Véronneau 2013) by propagating uncertainties from EGM2008, land and altimeter-derived gravity anomalies, and terrain corrections in a remove-compute-restore (RCR) approach (Sect. 3).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The first Australian gravimetric quasigeoid model with location-specific uncertainty estimates

Featherstone

McCubbine

Brown

et al. 2017

J Geod

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first step towards the modernization of the North American vertical datums was the release (in November 2013) of the new Canadian vertical datum CGVD2013 realized by the new gravimetric geoid model of 2013, CGG2013 (Huang and Véronneau 2013) and defined by the equipotential surface W 0 = 62,636,856.0 m 2 /s 2 . NGS is planning on establishing a geoid-based vertical datum in the USA by 2022 (Roman and Weston 2012).…”

Section: The North American Casementioning

confidence: 99%

The GBVP approach for vertical datum unification: recent results in North America

Amjadiparvar

Rangelova

Sideris

2015

J Geod

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two levelling-based vertical datums have been used in North America, namely CGVD28 in Canada and NAVD88 in the USA and Mexico. Although the two datums will be replaced by a common and continent-wide vertical datum in a few years, their connection and unification are of great interest to the scientific and user communities. In this paper, the geodetic boundary value problem (GBVP) approach is studied as a rigorous method for connecting two or more vertical datums through computed datum offsets from a global equipotential surface defined by a GOCEbased geoid. The so-called indirect bias term, the effect of the GOCE geoid omission error, the effect of the systematic levelling datum errors and distortions, and the effect of the geodetic data errors on the datum unification are four important factors affecting the practical implementation of this approach. These factors are investigated numerically using the GNSS-levelling and tide gauge stations in Canada, the USA, Alaska, and Mexico. The results show that the indirect bias term can be omitted if a GOCE-based global geopotential model is used in gravimetric geoid computations. The omission of the indirect bias term simplifies the linear system of equations for the estimation of the datum offset(s). Because of the existing systematic levelling errors and distortions in the Canadian and US levelling networks, the datum offsets are investigated in eight smaller regions along the Canadian and US coastal areas. Using GNSSlevelling stations in the US coastal regions, the mean datum offset can be estimated with a 1 cm standard deviation if the GOCE geoid omission error is taken into account by means of the local gravity and topographic information. In the Cana-B B. Amjadiparvar

show abstract

“…Indeed, both Canada in 2013 and the United States (within a decade) plan to replace their vertical height data with a geoid determined strictly from a geopotential model (Huang and Véronneau, 2013;NGS, 2012). Improvements in gravitational models are motivated in geodesy primarily for rapid determination of traditional heights with respect to a level surface (the geoid).…”

Section: Historical Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Potential Theory and the Static Gravity Field of the Earth

Jekeli

2015

Treatise on Geophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Canadian gravimetric geoid model 2010

Cited by 47 publications

References 26 publications

The first Australian gravimetric quasigeoid model with location-specific uncertainty estimates

The first Australian gravimetric quasigeoid model with location-specific uncertainty estimates

The GBVP approach for vertical datum unification: recent results in North America

Potential Theory and the Static Gravity Field of the Earth

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About