Acta Geodaetica et Geophysica

, Volume 51, Issue 2, pp 197–205 | Cite as

Application of extended free net adjustment constraints in two-step analysis of deformation network

Article
  • 118 Downloads

Abstract

Two-step analysis of deformation network enables the extraction of geodynamical quantities from geodetic measurements campaigns in two steps. In the first step the measurements’ mathematical model is realized for each monitoring campaign and in the second step the deformation model is examined. The mathematical model is usually conceived as being absolutely correct, while the validity of the deformation model and its system noise is frequently limited. The deformation model is commonly presented by kinematic model although dynamic model might describes the geophysical reality more accurately. Dynamic model is usually characterized by nonlinearity, which makes difficult the analysis of deformations in relative to a stable datum. Therefore, many of the control networks that are used for deformation monitoring and are measured by geodetic measurements are currently defined by kinematic models. In monitoring networks, global effects can impair the data processing and the deformation analysis and cause the deviation of the network solution. Extended free net adjustment constraints is a mathematical method that effectively coping with global effects. An extended solution of geodetic network for deformation monitoring includes the solution of extended parameters, in addition to those received in a standard solution. Such a solution enables to sterilize the geodetic measurements from their datum definition content in the first step, and extract the deterministic movement in the second step. The paper shows the great potential of using combination of the extended free net adjustment constrains and the two-step analysis of deformation networks.

Keywords

Geodetic monitoring networks Deformation monitoring Datum Dynamic model 

References

  1. Árnadóttir T, Jiang W, Feigl KL, Geirsson H, Sturkell E (2006) Kinematic models of plate boundary deformation in southwest Iceland derived from GPS observations. J Geophys Res 111:B07402. doi:10.1029/2005JB003907 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brockmann E, Ineichen D, Marti U, Schaer S, Schlatter A, Villiger A (2012) Determination of tectonic movements in the Swiss Alps using GNSS and levelling. Int Assoc Geod Symp 136:689–695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cohen SC (1999) Numerical models of crustal deformation in seismic zones. Adv Geophys 41:134–231Google Scholar
  4. Dong D, Herring TA, King RW (1998) Estimating regional deformation from a combination of terrestrial geodetic data. J Geod 72:200–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Even-Tzur G (2004) Variance factor estimation for two-step analysis of deformation networks. J Surv Eng 130(3):113–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Even-Tzur G (2011) Deformation analysis by means of extended free network adjustment constraints. J Surv Eng 137(2):47–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Even-Tzur G, Reinking J (2013) Velocity field across the Carmel fault calculated by extended free network adjustment constraints. J Appl Geod 7(2):75–82Google Scholar
  8. Fu Y, Zhu W, Wang X, Duan W, Wu X, Jiao W (2002) Present-day crustal deformation in China relative to ITRF97 kinematic plate model. J Geod 76:216–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Koch KR (1999) Parameter estimation and hypothesis testing in linear models, 2nd edn. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Koch KR, Papo H (1985) Erweiterte freie Netzausgleichung. ZFV 110(10):451–457Google Scholar
  11. Koch KR, Papo H (2003) The Bayesian approach in two-step modeling of deformations. Allg Vermess Nachr 110(111):365–370Google Scholar
  12. Meissl P (1969) Inner theory of errors of a cluster of points. In: Rinner K (ed) Annex F in systematic investigations of geodetic networks in space, pp 120–131Google Scholar
  13. Papo H (1985) Extended free net adjustment constraints. Bull Géod 59(4):378–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Papo H (1986) Extended free net adjustment constraints. NOAA technical report NOS 119 NGS 37, September 1986Google Scholar
  15. Papo H (1999) Datum accuracy and its dependence on network geometry, Int. Meeting “Quo Vadis Geodesia…?” in honor of Prof. Erik Grafarend’s 60th birthday, Stuttgart 3–4 November 1999Google Scholar
  16. Papo H, Perelmuter A (1991) Dynamical modeling in deformation analysis. Manuscr Geod 18:295–300Google Scholar
  17. Papo H, Perelmuter A (1993) Two-step analysis of dynamical networks. Manuscr Geod 18:422–430Google Scholar
  18. Qu W, Lu Z, Zhang Q, Li Z, Peng J, Wang Q, Drummond J, Zhang M (2014) Kinematic model of crustal deformation of Fenwei basin, China based on GPS observations. J Geodyn 75:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Shahar L, Even-Tzur G (2012) Extraction of the deterministic ingredient of a dynamic geodetic control network. J Geod Sci 2(1):68–75Google Scholar
  20. Shahar L, Even-Tzur G (2014a) Improved analysis of vertical movements in the carmel fault region, Israel, by extended free net adjustment. Zeitschrift fur Geodaesie, Geoinformation und Landmanagement 139(2):115–124Google Scholar
  21. Shahar L, Even-Tzur G (2014b) Definition of dynamic datum for deformation monitoring: carmel fault environs as a case study. J Surv Eng 140(2):04014002CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Mapping and Geo-Information Engineering, Faculty of Civil and Environmental EngineeringTechnion – Israel Institute of TechnologyHaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations