Skip to main content

A practical software package for computing gravimetric geoid by the least squares modification of Hotine’s formula

Abstract

Today’s geodetic community starts to model an accurate gravimetric geoid within a 5 mm level, which entirely meets the demands of all technical and geoscientific studies. In this context, a wide range of geoid modelling methods have been published through the years, each of them has its own philosophy. Recently, a new geoid modelling technique has been developed by using the least squares modification of Hotine’s formula (LSMH), which gives more reasonable results than other methods. However, a practical and compact software package is not publicly accessible for researchers in this method. Thus, a scientific software package named “LSMHSOFT” is developed by C programming language and made available for public use in this study. Subsequently, the software is employed for the composition of gravimetric geoid in the Auvergne test-bed, verifying it by GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite Systems)-levelling data. Numerical results indicate that LSMHSOFT is a powerful tool for modelling gravimetric geoid by the least squares modification of Hotine’s formula and its additive corrections.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Code Availability

The present software is developed in C programming language, which is freely available under the license of GNU public. Interested readers can find the software together with experimental data from github/aabbak/LSMHSOFT. Inquiries and bug reports about the software are cordially welcome to the authors.

References

  1. Abbak RA (2014) Effect of ASTER DEM on the prediction of mean gravity anomalies: a case study over the Auvergne test region. Acta Geodeatica Geophysica 49:491–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Abbak RA (2020) Effect of a high-resolution global crustal model on gravimetric geoid determination: a case study in a mountainous region. Stud Geophys Geod 64:436–451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Abbak RA, Erol B, Ustun A (2012a) Comparison of the KTH and remove-compute-restore techniques to geoid modelling in a mountainous area. Computers & Geosciences 48:31–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Abbak RA, Sjoberg LE, Ellmann A, Ustun A (2012b) A precise gravimetric geoid model in mountainous areas with scarce gravity data – A case study in central Turkey. Stud Geophys Geod 56(4):909–927

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Abbak RA, Ustun A (2015) A software package for computing a regional gravimetric geoid model by the KTH method. Earth Science Informatics 8:255–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Akyilmaz O, Ustun A, Aydin C, Arslan N, Doganalp S, Guney C, Mercan H, Uygur SO, Uz M, Yagci O (2016) High resolution gravity field modelling and tracking regional mass by means of low Earth orbit satellites. Technical report, Technical University of Istanbul. Project number: 113Y155

  7. Bildirici IO, Ustun A, Ulugtekin NN, Selvi HZ, Abbak RA, Bugdayci I, Dogru AO (2008) Comparison Of SRTM And 25K topographic maps in Turkey. In: Second International Conference on Cartography and GIS. Borovets, Bulgaria, pp 1–9

  8. Duquenne H (2007) A data set to geoid computations methods. Harita Dergisi. Special Issue: 61–65

  9. Ellmann A (2005) Computation of three stochastic modifications of Stokes’ formula for regional geoid determination. Computers and Geoscience 31(/6):742–755

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ellmann A, Sjöberg LE (2004) Ellipsoidal correction for the modified Stokes’ formula. Boll Geod Sci Aff 63:3

    Google Scholar 

  11. Farr TG, Rosen PA, Caro E, Crippen R, Duren R, Hensley S, Kobrick M, Paller M, Rodriguez E, Roth L, Seal D, Shaffer S, Shimada J, Jeffrey J, Werner M, Oskin M, Burbank D, Alsdorf D (2007) The shuttle radar topography mission. Rev Geophys: 45(2)

  12. Goyal R, Agren J, Featherstone W, Sjoberg L, Dikshit O, Balasubramanian N (2021) Empirical comparison between stochastic and deterministic modifiers over the French Auvergne geoid computation test-bed. Surv Rev 0(0):1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hofmann-Wellenhof B, Moritz H (2005) Physical geodesy. Springer, Wien

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hotine M (1969) Mathematical geodesy. US Environmental Science Services Administration, Rockville

  15. Huang J, Vaníček P, Novak P (2000) An alternative algorithm to FFT for the numerical evaluation of Stokes’s integral. Stud Geophys Geod 44:374–380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. ICGEM (2021) International centre for global Earth models. http://icgem.gfz-potsdam.de/home, Accessed date: 20.05.2021

  17. Isik MS, Erol B, Erol S, Sakil FF (2021) High-resolution geoid modeling using least squares modification of Stokes and Hotine formulas in Colorado. J Geod 95(49):1–19

    Google Scholar 

  18. Janak J, Vanicek P, Foroughi I, Kingdon R, Sheng MB, Santos MC (2017) Computation of precise geoid model of Auvergne using current UNB Stokes-Helmert’s approach. Contributions to Geophysics and Geodesy 47(3):201–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Jekeli C (1979) Global accuracy estimates of point and mean undulation differences, gravity anomalies, and potential coefficients. Technical report, Nr. 288, The Ohio State University

  20. Kiamehr R, Eshagh M (2008) EGMlab, a scientific software for determining the gravity and gradient components from global geopotential models. Earth Science Informatics 1(2):93–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Mardla S, Ellmann A, Agren J, Sjöberg LE (2018) Regional geoid computation by least squares modified Hotine’s formula with additive corrections. J Geod 92:253–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Molodensky M, Yeremeev V, Yurkina M (1962) Methods for study of the external gravitation field and figure of the earth. English Translation: Israel Program for Scientific Translations, Jerusalem

  23. Paul MK (1973) A method of evaluating the truncation error coefficients for geoidal height. Bulletin Geodesique 110:413–425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Sakil FF, Erol S, Ellmann A, Erol B (2021) Geoid modeling by the least squares modification of Hotine’s and Stokes’ formulae using non-gridded gravity data. Computers and geosciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2021.104909

  25. Sjöberg LE (1984) Least Squares modification of Stokes and Vening-Meinesz formulas by accounting for errors of truncation, potential coefficients and gravity data. Technical report, Technical report Department of Geodesy, Institute of Geophysics, University of Uppsala

  26. Sjöberg LE (1991) Refined least squares modification of Stokes’ formula. Manuscr Geodaet 16:367–375

    Google Scholar 

  27. Sjöberg L. E. (1999) The IAG approach to the atmospheric geoid correction in Stokes’ formula and a new strategy. J Geod 73:362–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Sjöberg L. E. (2003) A general model of modifying Stokes’ formula and its least squares solution. J Geod 77:790–804

    Google Scholar 

  29. Sjöberg L. E. (2007) The topographic bias by analytical continuation in physical geodesy. J Geod 87:345–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Sjöberg L. E., Eshagh M (2009) A geoid solution for airborne gravity data. Studia Geophyisica Geodetica 53(3):359–374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Sjöberg LE, Eshagh M (2012) A theory on geoid modelling by spectral combination of data from satellite gravity gradiometry, terrestrial gravity and an earth gravitational model. Acta Geodeatica Geophysica Hungarica 47(1):13–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. SRTM (2021) Shuttle radar topography mission. http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/srtm, Access date: 20.05.2021

  33. Ustun A, Abbak RA (2010) On global and regional spectral evaluation of global geopotential models. J Geophys Eng 7:369–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Yildiz H, Forsberg R, Ågren J, Tscherning CC, Sjöberg LE (2012) Comparison of remove-compute-restore and least squares modification of Stokes’ formula techniques to quasi-geoid determination over the Auvergne test area. J Geodetic Sci 2(1):53–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Zeray-Öztürk E, Abbak RA (2020) PHCSOFT: A Software package for computing physical height changes from GRACE based global geopotential models. Earth Science Informatics 13:1499–1505

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Zhang C (1998) Estimation of dynamic ocean topography in the Gulf Stream area using the Hotine formula and altimetry data. J Geod 72(9):499–510

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank to Prof. Dr. Lars E. Sjöberg at Geodesy Division of Royal Institute of Technology in Sweden for his beneficial discussion during the compilation of the manuscript. The second author is partly supported by the Estonian Research Council Grant PRG330. Two anonymous reviewers are cordially acknowledged for their constructive suggestions on the manuscript.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ramazan Alpay Abbak.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Communicated by: H. Babaie

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Abbak, R.A., Ellmann, A. & Ustun, A. A practical software package for computing gravimetric geoid by the least squares modification of Hotine’s formula. Earth Sci Inform (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12145-021-00713-3

Download citation

Keywords

  • Auvergne test-bed
  • Hotine’s integral
  • LSMHSOFT
  • Rugged topography
  • Point-wise integration