Evaluation of the Topographic Effect using the Various Gravity Reduction Methods for Precise Geoid Model in Korea
- 2k Downloads
The topographic effect is a most important component in the solution of the geodetic boundary value problem (geodetic BVP) and should be considered properly for developing a precise geoid model. It is necessary to select a proper gravity reduction method in order to calculate the topographic effect precisely, especially in mountainous area. The selection of the gravity reduction method in context of precise geoid determination depends on the magnitude of its indirect effect, the smoothness and magnitude of the reduced gravity anomalies, and their related geophysical interpretation. In this paper, we studied gravimetric geoid solutions using various gravity reduction methods such as Helmert’s second method of condensation, RTM method and Airy topographic-isostatic method and evaluated the usefulness of each method. In Korea, the gravimetric geoid model was determined by restoring the gravity anomalies (included TC) and the indirect effects was computed from various reduction methods on the EIGEN-CG03C reference field and the results were compared to geoid undulations at 503 GPS/levelling points after LSC fitting. According to the results, the RTM method is the most suitable for calculating topographic effect in the precise geoid determination in Korea.
KeywordsGravity Anomaly Topographic Effect Geoidal Height Geoid Undulation Gravimetric Geoid
This research was supported by a grant(code 07KLSGC02) from Cutting-edge Urban Development – Korean Land Spatialization Research Project funded by Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs of Korean government.
- Bajracharya, S. (2003). Terrain effects on geoid determination, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Calgary, Canada.Google Scholar
- Forsberg, R. (1984). Terrain corrections for gravity measurements, M.Sc. Thesis, Department of Surveying Engineering, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.Google Scholar
- Forsberg, R. and M.G. Sideris (1993). Geoid computation by the multi-band spherical FFT approach. Manuscr. Geod., 18, 82–90.Google Scholar
- Forsberg, R., C.C. Tscherning, and P. Kundsen (2003). An overview manual of the Gravsoft, Kort & Matrikelstyrelse.Google Scholar
- Förste, C., F. Flechtner, R. Schmidt, U. Meyer, R. Stubenvoll, F. Barthelmes, R. König, K.H. Neumayer, M. Rothacher, C.H. Reigber, R. Biancale, S. Bruinsma, J.M.. Lemoine, and J.C. Raimondo (2005). A new high resolution global gravity field model derived from combination of GRACE and CHAMP mission and altimetry/gravimetry surface gravity data, EGU general assembly 2005, Vienna, Austria, pp. 24–29.Google Scholar
- Heiskanen, W.A. and H. Moritz (1967). Physical geodesy. W.H. Freeman and Co., San Fransisco.Google Scholar
- Omang, O.C.D. and R. Forsberg (2000). How to handle topography in practical geoid determination: three examples. Bull. Geod., 74, 458–466.Google Scholar
- Tscherning, C.C., P. Knudsen, and R. Forsberg (1994). Description of the GRAVSOFT package, Technical Report. Geophysical Institute, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.Google Scholar
- Yun, H.S. (1999). Precision geoid determination by spherical FFT in and around the Korean peninsula. Earth Planets Space, 51, 13–18.Google Scholar