Abstract
In geodesy, the geoid and the quasigeoid are used as a reference surface for heights. Despite some similarities between these two concepts, the differences between the geoid and the quasigeoid (i.e. the geoid-to-quasigeoid correction) have to be taken into consideration in some specific applications which require a high accuracy. Over the world’s oceans and marginal seas, the quasigeoid and the geoid are identical. Over the continents, however, the geoid-to-quasigeoid correction could reach up to several metres especially in the mountainous, polar and geologically complex regions. Various methods have been developed and applied to compute this correction regionally in the spatial domain using detailed gravity, terrain and crustal density data. These methods utilize the gravimetric forward modelling of the topographic density structure and the direct/inverse solutions to the boundary-value problems in physical geodesy. In this article, we provide a brief summary of existing theoretical and numerical studies on the geoid-to-quasigeoid correction. We then compare these methods with the newly developed procedure and discuss some numerical and practical aspects of computing this correction. In global applications, the geoid-to-quasigeoid correction can conveniently be computed in the spectral domain. For this purpose, we derive and present also the spectral expressions for computing this correction based on applying methods for a spherical harmonic analysis and synthesis of global gravity, terrain and crustal structure models. We argue that the newly developed procedure for the regional gravity-to-potential conversion, applied for computing the geoid-to-quasigeoid correction in the spatial domain, is numerically more stable than the existing inverse models which utilize the gravity downward continuation. Moreover, compared to existing spectral expressions, our definition in the spectral domain takes not only the terrain geometry but also the mass density heterogeneities within the whole Earth into consideration. In this way, the geoid-to-quasigeoid correction and the respective geoid model could be determined more accurately.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Airy GB (1855) On the computations of the effect of the attraction of the mountain masses as disturbing the apparent astronomical latitude of stations in geodetic surveys. Phil Trans Roy Soc (Lond) B 145:101–104
Allister NA, Featherstone WE (2001) Estimation of Helmert orthometric heights using digital barcode levelling, observed gravity and topographic mass-density data over part of Darling Scarp, Western Australia. Geom Res Aust 75:25–52
Ardalan AA, Grafarend EW (1999) A first test for W0 the time variation of W0 based on three GPS campaigns of the Baltic Sea level project, final results of the Baltic Sea Level 1997 GPS campaign. Rep Finnish Geod Inst 99(4):93–112
Årgen J (2004) The analytical continuation bias in geoid determination using potential coefficients and terrestrial gravity data. J Geod 78:314–332
Artemjev ME, Kaban MK, Kucherinenko VA, Demjanov GV, Taranov VA (1994) Subcrustal density inhomogeneities of the Northern Eurasia as derived from the gravity data and isostatic models of the lithosphere. Tectonoph 240:248–280
Bagherbandi M, Tenzer R (2013) Geoid-to-quasigeoid separation computed using the GRACE/GOCE global geopotential model GOCO02S—a case study of Himalayas, Tibet and central Siberia. Terr Atmo Ocean Sci 24(1):59–68
Bruns H (1878) Die Figur der Erde. Publ Preuss Geod Inst, Berlin
Burke KF, True SA, Burša M, Raděj K (1996) Accuracy estimates of geopotential models and global geoids. In: Rapp RH, Cazenave AA, Nerem RS (eds) Proceedings of symposium no 116 held in Boulder, CO, USA, July 12, 1995. Springer, Berlin, pp 50–60
Burša M, Radej K, Šíma Z, True SA, Vatrt V (1997) Determination of the geopotential scale factor from TOPEX/POSEIDON satellite altimetry. Stud Geoph Geod 41:203–216
Burša M, Kouba J, Kumar M, Müller A, Radej K, True SA, Vatrt V, Vojtíšková M (1999) Geoidal geopotential and world height system. Stud Geoph Geod 43:327–337
Burša M, Kouba J, Müller A, Raděj K, True SA, Vatrt V, Vojtíšková M (2001) Determination of geopotential differences between local vertical datums and realization of a World Height System. Stud Geoph Geod 45:127–132
Burša M, Kenyon S, Kouba J, Šíma Z, Vatrt V, Vítek V, Vojtíšková M (2007) The geopotential value W0 for specifying the relativistic atomic time scale and a global vertical reference system. J Geod 81(2):103–110
Dayoub N, Edwards SJ, Moore P (2012) The Gauss-Listing geopotential value W0 and its rate from altimetric mean sea level and GRACE. J Geod 86(9):681–694
Dennis ML, Featherstone WE (2003) Evaluation of orthometric and related height systems using a simulated mountain gravity field. In: Tziavos IN (ed) Gravity and geoid 2002. Aristotle Univ Thessaloniki, Dept Surv Geod, Thessaloniki, pp 389–394
Drewes H, Dodson AH, Fortes LP, Sanchez L, Sandoval P (eds) (2002) Vertical reference systems. IAG symposia 24. Springer, Berlin, p 353
Featherstone WE (2013) Deterministic, stochastic, hybrid and band-limited modifications of Hotine’s integral. J Geod 87(5):487–500
Featherstone WE, Kuhn M (2006) Height systems and vertical datums: a review in the Australian context. J Spatial Sci 51(1):21–42
Filmer MS, Featherstone WE, Kuhn M (2010) The effect of EGM2008-based normal, normal-orthometric and Helmert orthometric height systems on the Australian levelling network. J Geod 84(8):501–513
Flury J, Rummel R (2009) On the geoid-quasigeoid separation in mountain areas. J Geod 83:829–847
Goiginger H, Rieser D, Mayer-Guerr T, Pail R, Schuh W.-D., Jäggi A, Maier A (2011) GOCO, consortium: the combined satellite-only global gravity field model GOCO02S. European Geosciences Union General Assembly 2011, Vienna
Grafarend EW, Ardalan AA (1997) W0: an estimate of the Finnish Height Datum N60, epoch 1993.4 from twenty-five GPS points of the Baltic Sea level project. J Geod 71(11):673–679
Heiskanen WH, Moritz H (1967) Physical geodesy. WH Freeman and Co, San Francisco
Helmert FR (1884) Die mathematischen und physikalischen Theorien der höheren Geodäsie, vol 2. Teubner, Leipzig
Helmert FR (1890) Die Schwerkraft im Hochgebirge, insbesondere in den Tyroler Alpen. Veröff Königl Preuss Geod Inst, no 1
Hinze WJ (2003) Bouguer reduction density, why 2.67? Geophysics 68(5):1559–1560
Hirt C (2012) Efficient and accurate high-degree spherical harmonic synthesis of gravity field functionals at the Earth’s surface using the gradient approach. J Geod 86(9):729–744
Hofmann-Wellenhof B, Moritz H (2005) Physical geodesy, 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin
Huang J, Vaníček P, Pagiatakis SD, Brink W (2001) Effect of topographical density on the geoid in the Rocky Mountains. J Geod 74:805–815
Hwang C, Hsiao YS (2003) Orthometric height corrections from leveling, gravity, density and elevation data: a case study in Taiwan. J Geod 77(5–6):292–302
Kao SP, Rongshin H, Ning FS (2000) Results of field test for computing orthometric correction based on measured gravity. Geom Res Aust 72:43–60
Kingdon R, Vaníček P, Santos M (2009) Modeling topographical density for geoid determination. Can J Earth Sci 46(8):571–585
Krakiwsky EJ (1965) Heights, MS thesis. Dept Geod Sci Surv, Ohio State Univ, Columbus, p 157
Ledersteger K (1955) Der Schwereverlauf in den Lotlinien und die Berechnung der wahren Geoidschwere. Publication dedicated to Heiskanen WA, Publ Finn Geod Inst, No 46, pp 109-124
Ledersteger K (1968) Astronomische und Physikalische Geodäsie (Erdmessung). In: Jordan W, Eggert E, Kneissl M (eds) Handbuch der Vermessungskunde, vol V. Metzler, Stuttgart
Mader K (1954) Die orthometrische Schwerekorrektion des Präzisions-Nivellements in den Hohen Tauern. Österreichische Zeitschrift für Vermessungswesen, Sonderheft 15
Marti U (2005) Comparison of high precision geoid models in Switzerland. In: Tregonig P, Rizos C (eds) Dynamic planet. Springer, Berlin
Martinec Z (1998) Boundary value problems for gravimetric determination of a precise geoid. Lecture notes in earth sciences, vol 73. Springer, Berlin
Meyer TH, Roman DR, Zilkoski DB (2007) What does height really mean? Part IV: GPS orthometric heighting. Department of Natural Resources and the Environment Articles, paper 5
Molodensky MS (1945) Fundamental Problems of Geodetic Gravimetry (in Russian). TRUDY Ts NIIGAIK, 42, Geodezizdat, Moscow
Molodensky MS (1948) External gravity field and the shape of the Earth surface (in Russian). Izv CCCP, Moscow
Molodensky MS, Yeremeev VF, Yurkina MI (1960) Methods for study of the external gravitational field and figure of the earth. TRUDY Ts NIIGAiK, vol 131. Geodezizdat, Moscow. English translation: Israel Program for Scientific Translation, Jerusalem 1962
Moritz H (1990) Advanced physical geodesy. Abacus Press, Tunbridge Wells
Moritz H (2000) Geodetic reference system 1980. J Geod 74:128–162
Niethammer T (1932) Nivellement und Schwere als Mittel zur Berechnung wahrer Meereshöhen. Schweizerische Geodätische Kommission
Niethammer T (1939) Das astronomische Nivellement im Meridian des St Gotthard, Part II, Die berechneten Geoiderhebungen und der Verlauf des Geoidschnittes. Astronomisch-Geodätische Arbeiten in der Schweiz, vol 20. Swiss Geodetic Commission
Novák P (2003) Geoid determination using one-step integration. J Geod 77:193–206
Pavlis NK, Holmes SA, Kenyon SC, Factor JK (2012) The development and evaluation of the Earth Gravitational Model 2008 (EGM2008). J Geophys Res 117:B04406
Pizzetti P (1911) Sopra il calcolo teorico delle deviazioni del geoide dall` ellissoide. Atti R Accad Sci Torino 46:331–350
Pratt JH (1855) On the attraction of the Himalaya Mountains and of the elevated regions beyond upon the plumb-line in India, Trans Roy Soc (Lond). B 145:53–100
Rapp RH (1961) The orthometric height. M.S. Thesis, Dept Geod Sci, Ohio State Univ, Columbus, USA, p 117
Rapp RH (1997) Use of potential coefficient models for geoid undulation determinations using a spherical harmonic representation of the height anomaly/geoid undulation difference. J Geod 71(5):282–289
Sanchez L (2007) Definition and realisation of the SIRGAS vertical reference system within a globally unified height system. In: Tregoing P, Rizos C (eds) Dynamic planet: monitoring and understanding a dynamic planet with geodetic and oceanographic tools, IAG Symposia, vol 130, pp 638–645
Santos MC, Vaníček P, Featherstone WE, Kingdon R, Ellmann A, Martin B-A, Kuhn M, Tenzer R (2006) The relation between rigorous and Helmert’s definitions of orthometric heights. J Geod 80:691–704
Sjöberg LE (1995) On the quasigeoid to geoid separation. Manuscr Geod 20(3):182–192
Sjöberg LE (2006) A refined conversion from normal height to orthometric height. Stud Geophys Geod 50:595–606
Sjöberg LE (2007) The topographical bias by analytical continuation in physical geodesy. J Geod 81:345–350
Sjöberg LE (2010) A strict formula for geoid-to-quasigeoid separation. J Geod 84:699–702
Sjöberg LE (2012) The geoid-to-quasigeoid difference using an arbitrary gravity reduction model. Stud Geophys Geod 56:929–933
Sjöberg LE, Bagherbandi M (2012) Quasigeoid-to-geoid determination by EGM08. Earth Sci Inform 5:87–91
Somigliana C (1929) Teoria Generale del Campo Gravitazionale dell’Ellisoide di Rotazione. Milano, Memoire della Societa Astronomica Italiana, p 425
Strange WE (1982) An evaluation of orthometric height accuracy using borehole gravimetry. Bull Géod 56:300–311
Sünkel H (1986) Digital height and density model and its use for the orthometric height and gravity field determination for Austria. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on the definition of the geoid, Florence, Italy, May, pp 599–604
Sünkel H, Bartelme N, Fuchs H, Hanafy M, Schuh WD, Wieser M (1987) The gravity field in Austria. In: Austrian Geodetic Commission (ed) The gravity field in Austria. Geodätische Arbeiten Österreichs für die Intenationale Erdmessung, Neue Folge, vol IV, pp 47–75
Tenzer R (2004) Discussion of mean gravity along the plumbline. Stud Geoph Geod 48:309–330
Tenzer R, Novák P (2008) Conditionality of inverse solutions to discretized integral equations in geoid modelling from local gravity data. Stud Geoph Geod 52:53–70
Tenzer R, Vaníček P (2003) Correction to Helmert’s orthometric height due to actual lateral variation of topographical density. Rev Brasil Cartogr 55(02):44–47
Tenzer R, Vaníček P, Santos M, Featherstone WE, Kuhn M (2005) The rigorous determination of orthometric heights. J Geod 79(1–3):82–92
Tenzer R, Moore P, Novák P, Kuhn M, Vaníček P (2006) Explicit formula for the geoid-to-quasigeoid separation. Stud Geoph Geod 50:607–618
Tenzer R, Vatrt V, Abdalla A, Dayoub N (2011a) Assessment of the LVD offsets for the normal-orthometric heights and different permanent tide systems—a case study of New Zealand. Appl Geomat 3(1):1–8
Tenzer R, Vatrt V, Luzi G, Abdalla A, Dayoub N (2011b) Combined approach for the unification of levelling networks in New Zealand. J Geod Sci 1(4):324–332
Tenzer R, Sirguey P, Rattenbury M, Nicolson J (2011c) A digital bedrock density map of New Zealand. Comput Geosci 37(8):1181–1191
Tenzer R, Novák P, Vajda P, Gladkikh V, Hamayun (2012a) Spectral harmonic analysis and synthesis of Earth’s crust gravity field. Comput Geosci 16(1):193–207
Tenzer R, Gladkikh V, Vajda P, Novák P (2012b) Spatial and spectral analysis of refined gravity data for modelling the crust-mantle interface and mantle-lithosphere structure. Surv Geophys 33(5):817–839
Tziavos IN, Featherstone WE (2001) First results of using digital density data in gravimetric geoid computation in Australia. In: Sideris MG (ed) Gravity, geoid and geodynamics 2000. Springer, Berlin, pp 335–340
Vaníček P, Kingdon (2012) Geoid versus quasigeoid: A case of physics vs geometry. Contrib Geophys Geod 42(1):101–118
Vaníček P, Kleusberg A, Martinec Z, Sun W, Ong P, Najafi M, Vajda P, Harrie L, Tomášek P, Horst B (1995) Compilation of a precise regional geoid. Final report on research done for the Geodetic Survey Division, Fredericton
Vaníček P, Tenzer R, Sjöberg LE, Martinec Z, Featherstone WE (2005) New views of the spherical Bouguer gravity anomaly. Geophys J Int 159:460–472
Vermeer M (2008) Comment on Sjöberg (2006) “The topographic bias by analytical continuation in physical geodesy”. J Geod 81(5):345–350. J Geod 82:445–450
Wirth B (1990) Höhensysteme, Schwerepotentiale und Niveauflächen. Geodätisch-Geophysikalische Arbeiten in der Schweiz, vol 42. Swiss Geodetic Commission
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by the National Program of Sustainability, Project No.: LO1506, Czech Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendices
Appendix 1: Potential (of Reference Topographic Density) for External Convergence Domain
To find the spectral representation of the Newton volumetric integral in Eq. (17) for the external convergence domain, we define the fundamental harmonic function \(\ell^{ - 1}\) by (e.g., Heiskanen and Moritz 1967, Eqs. 1–81)
where \({\text{P}}_{\text{n}}\) is the Legendre polynomial of degree n, and t = cos ψ. Inserting Eq. (54) in Eq. (17), the topographic potential \(V_{\text{e}}^{{{\text{T}},\bar{\rho }^{\text{T}} }}\) for the external convergence domain r ≥ r′ becomes
The radial integral in Eq. (55) is further rearranged into the form
where \(\eta = \left( {r^{\prime} - R} \right)/R.\) Applying a binomial theorem to (1 + η)n+2, we get
Substituting Eq. (57) in Eq. (56) yields
Solving the radial integral in Eq. (58) and inserting for the integral limits, we arrive at
where \(H^{\prime} = r^{\prime} - R\). Substituting Eq. (59) in Eq. (55), the spectral form of \(V_{\text{e}}^{{{{{\rm T},\rho }}^{\text{T}} }}\) becomes
Since the expansion of \(V_{\text{e}}^{{{\text{T}},\bar{\rho }^{\text{T}} }}\) into a series of spherical functions converges uniformly for the external convergence domain \(r \ge R\), the interchange of summation and integration in Eq. (60) was permitted (cf. Moritz 1990). We note here that the same spectral form of Newton’s integral for the external convergence domain as derived in Eq. (61) can be found by changing the order of applying the radial integration and binomial theorem (cf. Årgen 2004; Vermeer 2008).
The Laplace harmonics \(H_{n}\) of the topographic heights in Eq. (61) are defined by the following integral convolution
where \(H_{n,m}\) are the topographic height coefficients. The corresponding higher-order harmonics \(\{ H_{n}^{\left( k \right)} :k = 2,3, \ldots \}\) read
Substituting Eqs. (61) and (62) in Eq. (60), the topographic potential \(V_{\text{e}}^{{{\text{T}},\bar{\rho }^{\text{T}} }}\) is obtained in the following spectral form
Appendix 2: Potential (of Anomalous Mass Density Contrast Layer) for External Convergence Domain
To find the spectral expression of the gravitational potential \(V_{\text{e}}^{\delta \rho }\) (of anomalous mass density contrast layer) for the external convergence domain, we first substitute the density contrast model from Eq. (46) to Newton’s integral in Eq. (18). After limiting the integration domain to the volumetric mass layer, the gravitational potential V δρ becomes
We note that the parameters H U , H L and ρ(H U , Ω) become \(H_{U}^{\prime } ,H_{L}^{\prime }\) and \(\rho \left( {H_{U}^{\prime } ,\varOmega^{\prime } } \right)\) when used for volumetric integration on the right-hand side of Eq. (64), because the position of integration point is described by the coordinates (r′, Ω′).
We further define the spectral form of \(V_{\text{e}}^{\delta \rho }\) in Eq. (64) for the external convergence domain. Inserting from Eq. (54) to Eq. (64), we get
The solution of the radial integral in the first constituent on the right-hand side of Eq. (65) yields
Similarly, the solution of the radial integral in the second constituent on the right-hand side of Eq. (65) is found to be
Inserting from Eqs. (66) and (67) to Eq. (65), we get
Tenzer et al. (2012a, b) defined the spherical lower-bound and upper-bound functions \({{L}}_{{n}}\) and \({{U}}_{{n}}\) of a volumetric mass density contrast layer and their higher-order terms in the following form
and
Substituting Eqs. (69) and (70) in Eq. (68) and considering the series expansion up to the maximum degree of \(\bar{n}\), we arrive at
where the potential coefficients \({\text{e}}V_{n,m}^{\delta \rho }\) read
The numerical coefficients { \({}_{\text{e}}{\text{Fl}}_{n,m}^{(i)} ,{}_{\text{e}}{\text{Fu}}_{n,m}^{(i)} :i = 0,1, \ldots ,I\) } in Eq. (65) are given by
and
Appendix 3: Potential (of Anomalous Mass Density Contrast Layer) for Internal Convergence Domain
We apply a similar procedure as used in “Appendix 2” to derive the spectral expression of the potential \(V_{i}^{\delta \rho }\) (of anomalous mass density contrast layer) for the internal convergence domain. For this purpose, we define the fundamental harmonic function \(\ell^{ - 1}\) in Eq. (54) for the internal convergence domain r < r′ as follows
The substitution from Eq. (75) to Eq. (64) yields
We further rearrange the radial integral in the first constituent on the right-hand side of Eq. (76) into the following form
and apply a binomial theorem to (1 + η)1−n. Hence
Inserting from Eq. (78) to Eq. (77), we get
The solution of the radial integral in Eq. (79) reads
By analogy with Eq. (79), we rewrite the radial integral in the second term on the right-hand side of Eq. (76) as follows
The substitution for (1 + η)1−n from Eq. (78) to Eq. (81) yields
The solution of the radial integral in Eq. (82) is then found to be
Substituting from Eqs. (80) and (83) to Eq. (76) and limiting the series expansion up to the maximum degree \(\bar{n}\), we arrive at
where the potential coefficients \({}_{\text{i}}V_{n,m}^{\delta \rho }\) are given by
The numerical coefficients { \({}_{\text{i}}{\text{Fl}}_{n,m}^{(i)} ,{}_{i}Fu_{n,m}^{(i)} :i = 0,1, \ldots ,I\) } in Eq. (86) read
and
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tenzer, R., Hirt, C., Claessens, S. et al. Spatial and Spectral Representations of the Geoid-to-Quasigeoid Correction. Surv Geophys 36, 627–658 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10712-015-9337-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10712-015-9337-z