Advertisement

TERRA: A feasibility study on local geoid determination in Bolivia with strapdown inertial airborne gravimetry

  • M. Giménez
  • I. Colomina
  • J. J. Rosales
  • M. Wis
  • C. C. Tscherning
  • E. Vásquez
Conference paper
Part of the International Association of Geodesy Symposia book series (IAG SYMPOSIA, volume 129)

Abstract

Strapdown inertial airborne gravimetry as a practical and feasible tool for local and regional geoid determination is under research at the Institute of Geomatics (IG). Within the framework of the Spanish-Bolivian cooperation project TERRA, between the Instituto Geográfico Militar of Bolivia (IGM) and the IG, a feasibility analysis on geoid determination in Bolivia by means of INS/GNSS integration is being carried out. TERRA includes, among other goals, the specification of the geoid model that best fits the needs of Bolivia from a global point of view. Simulations in the spatial and spectral domain for GNSS and INS data will allow for an assessment of the performance of the technology. In addition, an empirical covariance model of the gravity anomalies has been derived from CHAMP-data, so that realistic simulations will be carried out. The contribution of other new satellite gravity missions, such as —GOCE—, will be evaluated as well. Actual gravity data will be obtained from a test flight over various topographic conditions to analyze the system response to a highly variable gravity signal. The data will be also processed to empirically verify the simulation results. The aim of this paper is to introduce the project and present some preliminary results.

Keywords

Strapdown inertial airborne gravimetry INS/GNSS integration geoid specification simulation CHAMP GOCE 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Brozena, J.M., Peters, M.F., Childers, V.A., 1997. The NRL airborne gravimetry program. In: Cannon, M.E. and Lachapelle, G. (eds.), Proceedings of the International Symposium on Kinematic Systems in Geodesy, Geomatics and Navigation, pp. Banff, Canada, pp. 553–556.Google Scholar
  2. Bruton, A.M., Hammada, Y., Ferguson, S., Schwarz, K.P., Wei, M., Halpenny, J., 2001. A Comparison of Inertial Platform, Damped 2-axis Plat-form and Strapdown Airborne Gravimetry. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Kinematic Systems in Geodesy, Geomatics and Navigation, Banff, Canada, pp. 542–550.Google Scholar
  3. Colomina, I. and Blázquez, M., 2004. A unified approach to static and dynamic modeling in photogrammetry and remote sensing. In: Altan, O. (ed.), Proceedings of the XXth ISPRS Congress, Istanbul, Turkey, pp. 178–183.Google Scholar
  4. ESA, 1999. Gravity Field and Steady-State Ocean Circulation Mission. ESA SP-1233 (1) — The Four Candidate Earth Explorer Core Missions. ESA Publications Division, Noordwijk, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  5. Forsberg, R., Hehl, K., Meyer, U., Gidskehaug, A., Bastos L., 1996. Development of an airborne geoid mapping system for coastal oceanography —AGMASCO. In: Geoid and Marine Geodesy, Vol. 117, IAG Symp. Series. 163–170.Google Scholar
  6. García, R., 2002. Local Geoid Determination from GRACE Mission. Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Geodetic Science. The Ohio State University. Report 460.Google Scholar
  7. Glennie, C. L., Schwarz, K. P., Bruton, A. M., Forsberg, R., Olesen, A. V., Keller, K., 2000. A comparison of stable platform and strapdown airborne gravity, Journal of Geodesy, Vol. 74, pp. 383–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Howe, E., Tscherning, C. C., 2004. Gravity field model UCPH2004 from one year of CHAMP data using energy conservation. Presented at the IAG GGSM2004 conference, August 30–Sept. 3, 2004, Porto, Portugal.Google Scholar
  9. Klingelé, E. E., Bagnaschi, L., Halliday, M., Cocard, M., Kahle, H.G., 1994. Airborne Gravimetric Survey of Switzerland. Final Results. Institut fuer Geodaesie und Photogrammetrie, E.T.H. Zuerich. Report 239.Google Scholar
  10. Li, Y.C. and Schwarz, K.P., 2000. Accuracy and resolution of the local geoid determination from airborne gravity data. In: Gravity, geoid and geodynamics 2000, IAG Vol. 123, pp. 241–246.Google Scholar
  11. Moritz, H., 1980. Advanced Physical Geodesy. H.Wichmann Verlag, Karlsruhe.Google Scholar
  12. Reigber, C., Balmino, G., Schwintzer, P., Biancale, R., Bode, A., Lemoine, J. M., Knig, R., Loyer, S., Neumayer, H., Marty, J. C., Barthelmes, F., Perosanz, F., Zhu, S. Y., 2003. New Global Gravity Field Models from Selected CHAMP Data Sets. In: First CHAMP Mission Results for Gravity, Magnetic and Atmospheric Studies. Ed. Springer, pp. 120–127.Google Scholar
  13. Schwarz, K.P. and Wei, M., 1998. Flight test results from a strapdown airborne gravity system. Journal of Geodesy, Vol. 72, pp. 323–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Saleh, J. and Pavlis, N.K., 2002. The Development and Evaluation of the Global Digital Terrain Model DTM2002. In: Tziavos, I.N. (Ed. ZITI), Proceedings of the 3rd Meeting of the International Gravity and Geoid Comission. Thessaloniki, Greece, pp. 207–212.Google Scholar
  15. Suenkel, H., 2002. From Eötvös to Milligal. Final Report. ESA Contract No. 14287/00/NL/DC. Graz, Austria.Google Scholar
  16. Térmens, A., Colomina, I., 2004. Network Approach versus State-Space Approach for Strapdown Inertial Kinematics Gravimetry. Presented at the IAG GGSM2004 conference, August 30 — Sept. 3, 2004, Porto, Portugal.Google Scholar
  17. Tscherning, C. C., Forsberg, R., Knudsen, P., 1992. The GRAVSOFT package for geoid determination. Proc. 1. Continental Workshop on the Geoid in Europe, Prague, May 1992, pp. 327–334. Research Institute of Geodesy, Topography and Cartography, Prague.Google Scholar
  18. Wis, M., Samsó, L., Aigner, E., Colomina, I., 2004. Present Achievements of The experimental navigation system TAG. In: Altan, O. (ed.), Proceedings of the XXth ISPRS Congress in Istanbul, Turkey, pp. 136–141Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Giménez
    • 1
  • I. Colomina
    • 1
  • J. J. Rosales
    • 1
  • M. Wis
    • 1
  • C. C. Tscherning
    • 2
  • E. Vásquez
    • 3
  1. 1.Institute of GeomaticsGeneralitat de Catalunya & Universitat Politècnica de CatalunyaCastelldefelsSpain
  2. 2.Department of GeophysicsUniversity of CopenhagenCopenhagenDenmark
  3. 3.Instituto Geográfico MilitarLa PazBolivia

Personalised recommendations