Acta Geodaetica et Geophysica

, Volume 51, Issue 4, pp 761–772 | Cite as

The effect of instrumental precision on optimisation of displacement monitoring networks

  • Mohammad Amin Alizadeh-Khameneh
  • Mehdi Eshagh
  • Lars E. Sjöberg
Article
  • 159 Downloads

Abstract

In order to detect the geo-hazards, different deformation monitoring networks are usually established. It is of importance to design an optimal monitoring network to fulfil the requested precision and reliability of the network. Generally, the same observation plan is considered during different time intervals (epochs of observation). Here, we investigate the case that instrumental improvements in sense of precision are used in two successive epochs. As a case study, we perform the optimisation procedure on a GPS monitoring network around the Lilla Edet village in the southwest of Sweden. The network was designed for studying possible displacements caused by landslides. The numerical results show that the optimisation procedure yields an observation plan with significantly fewer baselines in the latter epoch, which leads to saving time and cost in the project. The precision improvement in the second epoch is tested in several steps for the Lilla Edet network. For instance, assuming two times better observation precision in the second epoch decreases the number of baselines from 215 in the first epoch to 143 in the second one.

Keywords

Optimal design GPS network Landslide Observation plan 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Formas for its financial support to the project Dnr-245-2012-356. The contribution and cooperation of Maud Wik and Ann Marie Wallin in the Lilla Edet municipality in organising the required data are also very much appreciated.

References

  1. Alizadeh-Khameneh MA, Eshagh M, Sjöberg LE (2015) Optimisation of Lilla Edet landslide GPS monitoring network. J Geodetic Sci 5(1):57–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amiri-Simkooei A (2001) Strategy for designing geodetic network with high reliability and geometrical strength criteria. J Surv Eng 127(3):104–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baarda W (1968) A testing procedure for use in geodetic networks. Netherlands Geodetic Commission, DelftGoogle Scholar
  4. Bagherbandi M, Eshagh M, Sjöberg LE (2009) Multi-objective versus single-objective models in geodetic network optimization. Nordic J Surv Real Estate Res 6(1):7–20Google Scholar
  5. Dare P, Saleh H (2000) GPS network design: logistics solution using optimal and near-optimal methods. J Geodesy 74(6):467–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Eshagh M, Kiamehr R (2007) A strategy for optimum designing of the geodetic networks from the cost, reliability and precision views. Acta Geodaetica et Geophysica Hungarica 42(3):297–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Even-Tzur G (2002) GPS vector configuration design for monitoring deformation networks. J Geodesy 76(8):455–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Even-Tzur G, Papo HB (1996) Optimization of GPS networks by linear programming. Surv Rev 262(33):537–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gerasimenko MD, Shestakov NV, Kato T (2000) On optimal geodetic network design for fault-mechanics studies. Earth Planets Space 52:985–987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Grafarend EW (1974) Optimization of Geodetic Networks. Bollettino di Geodesia e Scienze Affini 33(4):351–406Google Scholar
  11. Grafarend EW, Sanso F (1985) Optimization and design of geodetic networks. Springer-Verlag, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Khatri CG, Rao CR (1968) Solutions to some functional equations and their applications to characterization of probability distributions. Sankhya 30:167–180Google Scholar
  13. Koch KR (1985) First order design: optimization of the configuration of a network by introducing small position changes. In: Grafarend Sanso (ed) Optimization and design of geodetic networks. Springer, New York, pp 56–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kuang S (1992) A new approach to the optimal second-order design of geodetic networks. Surv Rev 243(31):279–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kuang S (1996) Geodetic network analysis and optimal design: concepts and applications. Ann Arbor Press Inc, ChelseaGoogle Scholar
  16. Naito I et al (1998) Global positioning system project to improve japanese weather, earthquake predictions. EOS, Trans Am Geophys Union 79(26):301–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Nordqvist A (2012) Redogörelse för sättningsmätning med GPS teknik. Metria AB, Lilla Edet Kommun, GävleGoogle Scholar
  18. Schmitt G (1982) Optimization of geodetic networks. Rev Geophys 20(4):877–884CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Setan H, Singh R (2001) Deformation analysis of a geodetic monitoring network. Geomatica 55(3):333–346Google Scholar
  20. Shestakov NV, Waithaka HE, Kasahara M (2005) Two examples of optimal design of geodynamic GPS networks. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 538–543Google Scholar
  21. Sjöberg LE, Pan M, Asenjo E (2004) Oskarshamn site investigation—a deformation analysis of the Äspö GPS monitoring network from 2000 to 2004. SKB P -, Stockholm, pp 4–196Google Scholar
  22. Xu P, Grafarend EW (1995) A multi-objective second-order optimal design for deforming networks. Geophys J Int 120(3):577–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohammad Amin Alizadeh-Khameneh
    • 1
  • Mehdi Eshagh
    • 1
    • 2
  • Lars E. Sjöberg
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Geodesy and Satellite PositioningRoyal Institute of Technology (KTH)StockholmSweden
  2. 2.Division of Surveying EngineeringUniversity WestTrollhättanSweden

Personalised recommendations