IGFS 2014 pp 123-129 | Cite as

A New Gravimetric Geoid Model for the Area of Sudan Using the Least Squares Collocation and a GOCE-Based GGM

  • Walyeldeen GodahEmail author
  • Jan Krynski
Part of the International Association of Geodesy Symposia book series (IAG SYMPOSIA, volume 144)


The determination of an accurate geoid model remains an important challenge for geodetic research in Sudan. The presented contribution concerns the determination of a new gravimetric geoid model (SUD-GM2014) for the area of Sudan using recent released GOCE-based Global Geopotential Models (GGMs), available terrestrial mean free-air gravity anomalies and the high-resolution SRTM30_PLUS global digital elevation model. The computations of the SUD-GM2014 were performed using remove-compute-restore (RCR) procedure and the least squares collocation method. The residual terrain modelling (RTM) reduction method was applied to estimate the topography effect on the geoid. The resulting gravimetric geoid model has been evaluated using geoid heights at 19 GNSS/levelling points distributed over the country. The evaluation results and the expected quality of the SUD-GM2014 geoid model were discussed considering the quality of GNSS/levelling data in Sudan. The SUD-GM2014 or the geoid model computed from GOCE-based GGMs only has been recommended as reference for GNSS heighting in Sudan.


Geoid Global geopotential model GNSS/levelling GOCE Least squares collocation 



The authors would like to thank Prof. Derek Fairhead from GETECH, Leeds University for providing terrestrial gravity data for the area of Sudan. This study is a part of the first author PhD research. The University of Khartoum, Sudan, as well as the Institute of Geodesy and Cartography (IGiK), Warsaw, Poland, are kindly acknowledged for their partial financial support. The discussions concerning the research and the preparation of the manuscript with the team of the Centre of Geodesy and Geodynamics of the IGiK are kindly acknowledged.


  1. Abdalla A (2009) Determination of a gravimetric geoid model of Sudan using the KTH Method. MSc Thesis in Geodesy No 3109, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), StockholmGoogle Scholar
  2. Abdalla A, Fairhead D (2011) A new Geoid model for Sudan using the KTH method. J African Earth Sci 60(4):213–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abd-Elmotaal A, Seitz K, Kühtreiber N, Heck B (2014) Establishment of the gravity database for the African Geoid. In: 3rd Int Gravity Field Service (IGFS) Gen Ass, 30 June–6 July 2014, Shanghai, ChinaGoogle Scholar
  4. Adam MO (1967) A geodetic datum for the Sudan. Master Thesis, Cornell Univ., USAGoogle Scholar
  5. Balmino G, Lambeck K, Kaula WM (1973) A spherical harmonic analysis of Earth’s topography. J Geoph Res 78(2):478–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Becker J, Sandwell DT, Smith WHF, Braud J et al (2009) Global bathymetry and elevation data at 30 arc seconds resolution: SRTM30_PLUS. Mar Geod 32(4):355–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fairhead JD, Watts AB, Chevalier P et al (1988) African Gravity Project. Tech Rep, Univ. of Leeds Industrial Services Ltd., Leeds, UKGoogle Scholar
  8. Fashir HH (1991) The gravimetric geoid of Sudan. J Geodyn 14(1–4):19–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fashir HH, Majid A, Kadir A (1997) The Sudanese gravimetric geoid 1998. Int Geoid Service Bull 10:59–77Google Scholar
  10. Floberghagen R, Fehringer M, Lamarre D et al (2011) Mission design, operation and exploitation of the gravity field and steady-state ocean circulation explorer mission. J Geod 85(11):749–758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Forsberg R (1984) A study of terrain reductions, density anomalies and geophysical inversion methods in gravity field modelling. Report No 355, Department of Geodetic Science and Surveying, OSU, Columbus, USAGoogle Scholar
  12. Forsberg R, Tscherning CC (1981) The use of heights data in gravity field approximation. J Geophys Res 86:7843–7854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fotopoulos G (2003) An analysis on the optimal combination of geoid, orthometric and ellipsoidal height data. Dissertation No 20185, Department of Geomatics Engineering, Univ. of Calgary, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  14. Godah W, Krynski J (2015) Comparison of GGMs based on one year GOCE observations with the EGM08 and terrestrial data over the area of Sudan. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinform 35:128–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Godah W, Szelachowska M, Krynski J (2014) Accuracy assessment of GOCE-based geopotential models and their use for modelling the gravimetric quasigeoid – a case study for Poland. Geod Cartogr Walter de Gruyter 63(1):3–24Google Scholar
  16. Gruber T, Rummel R (2013) The 4th release of GOCE gravity field models-overview and performance analysis. In: ESA living planet symposium, Edinburgh, 9 Sept 2013Google Scholar
  17. Heiskanen WA, Moritz H (1967) Physical geodesy. W.H. Freeman and Company, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  18. Kotsakis C, Sideris MG (1999) On the adjustment of combined GPS/levelling/geoid networks. J Geod 73(8):412–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Moritz H (1980) Advanced physical geodesy. Wichmann, KarlsruheGoogle Scholar
  20. Pail R, Bruinsma S, Migliaccio F et al (2011) First GOCE gravity field models derived by three different approaches. J Geod 85(11):819–843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 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):1–38Google Scholar
  22. Reigber C, Luhr H, Schwintzer P (2002) CHAMP mission status. Adv Space Res 30:129–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rexer M, Hirt C, Pail R, Claessens S (2014) Evaluation of the third- and fourth-generation GOCE Earth gravity field models with Australian terrestrial gravity data in spherical harmonics. J Geod 88(4):319–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rummel R, Rapp RH, Sünkel H, Tscherning CC (1988) Comparisons of global topographic/isostatic models to the Earth’s observed gravity field. Report No 388, Department of Geod. Sci. and Surv., Ohio State Uni., Columbus, USAGoogle Scholar
  25. Sjöberg LE (2003) A general model of modifying Stokes' formula and its least squares solution. J Geod 77(7–8):459–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tapley BD, Bettadpur S, Watkins M, Reigber C (2004) The gravity recovery and climate experiment: mission overview and early results. Geophys Res Lett 31, L09607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Torge W, Müller J (2012) Geodesy, 4th edn. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin-BostonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Tscherning CC (2013) Geoid determination by 3D least-squares collocation. In: Sanso F, Sideris MG (eds) Geoid determination; theory and methods, lecture notes in Earth system sciences 110. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg pp 311–329Google Scholar
  29. Tscherning CC, Rapp RH (1974) Closed covariance expressions for gravity anomalies geoid undulations, and the deflections of the vertical implied by anomaly degree-variance models. Reports No 208, Dept. of Geodetic Science, OSU, Columbus, USAGoogle Scholar
  30. Tscherning CC, Forsberg R, Knudsen P (1992) The GRAVSOFT package for geoid determination. In: Proceedings of the 1st continental workshop on the Geoid in Europe, Prague, May 1992, Research Institute of Geodesy, Topography and Cartography, Prague, pp 327–334Google Scholar
  31. Yi W, Rummel R (2014) A comparison of GOCE gravitational models with EGM2008. J Geodyn 73:14–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre of Geodesy and Geodynamics, Institute of Geodesy and CartographyWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations