Skip to main content
Log in

High-resolution geoid modeling using least squares modification of Stokes and Hotine formulas in Colorado

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Geodesy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Colorado geoid experiment was initiated and organized as a joint study by the Joint Working Group (JWG) 2.2.2 (1-cm geoid experiment) of the International Association of Geodesy (IAG) in 2017, and different institutions and research groups contributed to this study. The aim of this experiment was to clarify the repeatability of gravity potential values as International Height Reference System (IHRS) coordinates from different geoid determination approaches carried out with the same input dataset. The dataset included the terrestrial and airborne gravity observations, a digital terrain model, the XGM2016 global geopotential model and GPS/leveling data for model validations belonging to a mountainous area of approximately 550 km × 730 km in Colorado, US. The dataset was provided by National Geodetic Survey (NGS) department. In this frame, this article aims providing a discussion on Colorado geoid modeling through individual experimental results obtained by Istanbul Technical University-Gravity Research Group (ITU-GRG). This contribution mainly focused on modeling the Colorado geoid using the least squares modifications of Stokes and Hotine integral formulas with additive corrections. The computations using each formula were carried out using ITU-GRG software, including the solution variants based on terrestrial-only, airborne-only and combined gravity datasets. Then, the calculated experimental geoid models were validated using historical and recently measured profile-based GPS/leveling datasets, and they were also compared with the official solutions submitted by different institutions for the “1-cm geoid experiment” of IAG JWG 2.2.2. For all validation results, the Hotine and Stokes integral formulas yielded similar performances in terms of geoid accuracy; however, the models computed using the combined data had better accuracy than those using the terrestrial-only and airborne-only solutions. The geoid model solutions using the combined data had an accuracy of 2.69 cm for the Hotine method and 2.87 cm for the Stokes method in the test results using GPS/leveling data of the GSVS17 (Geoid Slope Validation Survey 2017) profile. Airborne data from the Gravity for the Redefinition of the American Vertical Datum (GRAV-D) project contributed significantly towards improving the geoid model, especially in the mountainous parts of the area.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets used in this study are available from the IAG working group '1-cm geoid experiment', and the availability is specified by a summary article of this joint issue (please see Wang et al. (2021) in this issue). The original airborne gravity data from the GRAV-D Team (2018) and the GPS/leveling data of GSVS17 profile are available online. The best performing geoid model calculated in this study is available online from the Geoid Repository of the International Service for the Geoid (ISG 2021).

References

  • Agren J (2004) Regional geoid determination methods for the era of satellite gravimetry synthetic earth gravity model. Ph.D. thesis, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm

  • Ahlgren K, Wang Y, Li X, Youngman M (2018) Towards a more consistent geoid model for North America. The FIG Congress 6–11

  • Alberts B, Klees R (2004) A comparison of methods for the inversion of airborne gravity data. J Geodesy 78(1–2):55–65

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellmann A (2005a) Computation of three stochastic modifications of Stokes’s formula for regional geoid determination. Comput Geosci 31(6):742–755. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2005.01.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellmann A (2005b) Two deterministic and three stochastic modifications of Stokes’s formula: a case study for the Baltic countries. J Geodesy 79(1–3):11–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-005-0438-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans JD, Featherstone WE (2000) Improved convergence rates for the truncation error in gravimetric geoid determination. J Geodesy 74(2):239–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001900050282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forsberg R (1984) A study of terrain reductions, density anomalies and geophysical inversion methods in gravity field modelling. OSU Report No. 355, Department of Geodetic Science and Surveying, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

  • Forsberg R (1987) A new covariance model for inertial gravimetry and gradiometry. J Geophys Res: Solid Earth 92(B2):1305–1310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forsberg R, Tscherning CC (1981) The use of height data in gravity field approximation by collocation. J Geophys Res: Solid Earth 86(B9):7843–7854. https://doi.org/10.1029/JB086iB09p07843

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forsberg R, Tscherning,CC (2008) GRAVSOFT. Geodetic Gravity Field Modelling Programs (Overview Manual)

  • GRAV-D Science Team (2018) Block MS05 (Mountain South 05); GRAV-D Airborne Gravity Data User Manual

  • GRAV-D Team (2018) Gravity for the Redefinition of the American Vertical Datum (GRAV-D) Project, Airborne Gravity Data - Block MS05. https://www.ngs.noaa.gov/GRAV-D/data_products.shtml. Accessed 21 Sept 2020

  • Hofmann-Wellenhof B, Moritz H (2006) Physical geodesy. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Hotine M (1969) Mathematical geodesy, vol 2. US Environmental Science Services Administration, Rockville

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsiao Y-S, Hwang C (2010) Topography-Assisted downward continuation of airborne gravity: an application for geoid determination in Taiwan. Terr Atmos Ocean Sci 21(4):627–637. https://doi.org/10.3319/TAO.2009.07.09.01(T)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang J, Sideris MG, Vaníček P, Tziavos IN (2003) Numerical investigation of downward continuation techniques for gravity anomalies. Bollettino Di Geodesia e Scienze Affini 62(1):33–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Hwang C, Hsiao Y-S, Shih H-C (2006) Data reduction in scalar airborne gravimetry: Theory, software and case study in Taiwan. Comput Geosci 32(10):1573–1584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang C, Hsiao YS, Shih HC, Yang M, Chen KH, Forsberg R, Olesen AV (2007) Geodetic and geophysical results from a Taiwan airborne gravity survey: Data reduction and accuracy assessment. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 112:B04407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ISG (2021) International Service for the Geoid - Geoid Repository. http://www.isgeoid.polimi.it/Geoid/geoid_rep.html. Accessed 23 Sept 2020

  • Jarvis, A., Reuter, H. I., Nelson, A., Guevara, E., & others. (2008). Hole-filled SRTM for the globe Version 4. Available from the CGIAR-CSI SRTM 90m Database (http://Srtm.Csi.Cgiar.Org), 15, 25–54

  • Jekeli C (1979) Global accuracy estimates of point and mean undulation differences obtained from gravity disturbances, gravity anomalies and potential coefficients

  • Jekeli C (1980) Comparison of undulation difference accuracies using gravity anomalies and gravity disturbances. Bulletin Géodésique 54(2):137–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02521243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiamehr R (2006) Precise Gravimetric Geoid Model for {Iran} Based on {GRACE} and {SRTM} Data and the Least-Squares Modification of {Stokes’} Formula: with Some Geodynamic Interpretations. KTH

  • LAPACK--Linear Algebra Package (2000) version 3.0. Web Site: http://www.Netlib.Org/Lapack

  • Li X, Ahlgren K, Hardy R, Krcmaric J, Wang YM (2019) The Development and Evaluation of the Experimental Gravimetric Geoid Model 2019. https://beta.ngs.noaa.gov/GEOID/xGEOID19/xGeoid19_tech_details.v10.pdf

  • Märdla S (2017) Regional geoid modelling by the least squares modified Hotine formula using gridded gravity disturbances. Ph.D. thesis, Tallinn University of Technology, Tallinn

  • Märdla S, Ellmann A, Ågren J, Sjöberg LE (2018) Regional geoid computation by least squares modified Hotine’s formula with additive corrections. J Geodesy 92(3):253–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meissl P (1971) Preparations for the Numerical Evaluation of Second Order Molodensky Type Formulas. Dept of Geodetic Science and Surveying, Ohio State Univ., Columbus.

  • Molodensky MS, Eremeev VF, Yurkina MI (1962) Methods for study of the external gravitational eld and gure of the earth. Translated from Russian by Israel Program for Scientific Translations for the Ofce of Technical Services, Department of Commerce, Washington, DC, USA

  • Moritz H (1980) Advanced physical geodesy. Advances in Planetary Geology

  • Moritz H (2000) Geodetic reference system 1980. J Geodesy 78(2000):128–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001900050278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Novák P, Heck B (2002) Downward continuation and geoid determination based on band-limited airborne gravity data. J Geodesy 76(2002):269–278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-002-0252-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pail R, Fecher T, Barnes D, Factor, JK, Holmes SA, Gruber T, Zingerle P (2016) The experimental gravity field model XGM2016. In: International symposium on gravity, geoid and height system 2016-1st joint commission 2 and IGFS meeting

  • Pail R, Fecher T, Barnes D, Factor JF, Holmes SA, Gruber T, Zingerle P (2018) Short note: the experimental geopotential model XGM2016. J Geodesy 92(4):443–451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-017-1070-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paul MK (1973) A method of evaluating the truncation error coefficients for geoidal height. Bulletin Géodésique 110(1):413–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02521951

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavlis NK, Holmes SA, Kenyon SC, Factor JK (2012) The development and evaluation of the Earth Gravitational Model 2008 (EGM2008). J Geophys Res: Solid Earth 117(B4):B04406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapp RH, Nerem RS, Shum CK, Klosko SM, Williamson RG (1991) Consideration of permanent tidal deformation in the orbit determination and data analysis for the Topex. Poseidon Mission, NASA TM, 100775

  • Sakil FF (2018) Geoid Modeling by the Least Squares Modified Hotine Formula Using Voronoi Cell Structures. M.Sc. thesis, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul

  • Sánchez L, Čunderlík R, Dayoub N, Mikula K, Minarechová Z, Šíma Z, Vatrt V, Vojtíšková M (2016) A conventional value for the geoid reference potential W0. J Geodesy 90(9):815–835. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-016-0913-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sánchez L, Sideris MG (2017) Vertical datum unification for the international height reference system (IHRS). Geophys J Int 209(2):570–586

    Google Scholar 

  • Sjöberg LE (1980) Least squares combination of satellite harmonics and integral formulas in physical geodesy. Gerlands Beiträge Zur Geophysik 89:371–377

    Google Scholar 

  • Sjöberg LE (2003a) A computational scheme to model the geoid by the modified Stokes formula without gravity reductions. J Geodesy 77(7–8):423–432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-003-0338-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sjöberg LE (2003b) A general model for modifying Stokes’ formula and its least-squares solution. J Geodesy 77(7–8):459–464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-003-0346-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sjöberg LE (2003c) A solution to the downward continuation effect on the geoid determined by Stokes’ formula. J Geodesy 77(1–2):94–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-002-0306-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sjöberg LE (2004) A spherical harmonic representation of the ellipsoidal correction to the modified Stokes formula. J Geodesy 78(3):180–186. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-004-0378-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sneeuw N (1994) Global spherical harmonic analysis by least-squares and numerical quadrature methods in historical perspective. Geophys J Int 118(3):707–716. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.1994.tb03995.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stokes GG (1849) On the variation of gravity on the surface of the Earth. Trans Camb Phil Soc 8:672–695

    Google Scholar 

  • Tscherning CC, Rubek F, Forsberg R (1998) Combining airborne and ground gravity using collocation. In: Forsberg R, Feissel M, Dietrich R (eds) Geodesy on the move. International Association of Geodesy Symposia, vol 119. Springer, Berlin. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-72245-5_3

  • Vaníček P, Sun W, Ong P, Martinec Z, Najafi M, Vajda P, ter Horst B (1996) Downward continuation of Helmert’s gravity. J Geodesy 71(1):21–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001900050072

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Westrum D, Ahlgren K, Hirt C, Guillaume S (2021) A Geoid Slope Validation Survey (2017) in the rugged terrain of Colorado, USA. J Geodesy 95(9):2–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-020-01463-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang YM (1988) Downward continuation of the free-air gravity anomalies to the ellipsoid using the gradient solution, Poisson’s integral and terrain correction-numerical comparison and computations

  • Wang YM et al (2021 this issue) Colorado geoid computation experiment—overview and summary. submitted to J Geodesy (under review)

  • Wenzel H-G (1982) Geoid computation by least squares spectral combination using integral kernels. Proceed. IAG General Meet., pp 438–453

  • Wenzel H-G (1985) Hochauflösende Kugelfunktionsmodelle für das Gravitationspotential der Erde. Wissenschaftliche Arbeiten Der Fachrichtung Vermessungswesen Der Universität Hannover 137:1–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Wong L, Gore R (1969) Accuracy of geoid heights from modified stokes kernels. Geophys J Roy Astron Soc 18(1):81–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.1969.tb00264.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu Y, Abulaitijiang A, Featherstone WE, McCubbine JC, Andersen OB (2019) Coastal gravity field refinement by combining airborne and ground-based data. J Geodesy 93(12):2569–2584. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-019-01320-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zelin G, Yecai L (1991) The determination of oceanic geoid using modified Hotine integral. In: Determination of the geoid, pp 86–94. Springer, Berlin

  • Zhao Q, Xu X, Forsberg R, Strykowski G (2018) Improvement of downward continuation values of airborne gravity data in Taiwan. Remote Sensing 10(12):1951

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research presented in this article constitutes a part of the first author’s PhD thesis study at the Graduate School of Istanbul Technical University. The authors would like to thank Dr. Yan Ming Wang from the National Geodetic Survey and Dr. Laura Sánchez from the Technical University of Munich for their valuable efforts in coordinating the Colorado geoid experiment of the IAG Joint Working Group 2.2.2. and preparing and documenting the summary statistics of the official solutions from the contributing research groups. The terrestrial and airborne gravity data, historical and GSVS17 GPS/leveling data, used in the study, were provided by the US National Geodetic Survey. Dr. Artu Ellmann of the Tallinn University of Technology is acknowledged for the general discussions on the Stokes and Hotine geoid modeling methods. Most of the figures presented in this paper were generated using Generic Mapping Tools (GMT) software. The valuable efforts and contributions of the editors and four anonymous reviewers during the review process for this article are highly appreciated.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

M.S.I., B.E. and S.E. contributed to conceptualization; M.S.I. and F.F.S. contributed to methodology; M.S.I. and F.F.S. provided the software; M.S.I., F.F.S. and S.E. were involved in validation; M.S.I., F.F.S. and S.E. contributed to formal analysis and investigation; M.S.I. contributed to data curation; M.S.I. and F.F.S. provided the resources; M.S.I. and F.F.S. contributed to writing—original draft preparation; B.E., M.S.I. and S.E. contributed to writing—review editing; B.E. and S.E contributed to supervision.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mustafa Serkan Işık.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Işık, M.S., Erol, B., Erol, S. et al. High-resolution geoid modeling using least squares modification of Stokes and Hotine formulas in Colorado. J Geod 95, 49 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-021-01501-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-021-01501-z

Keywords

Navigation