1 / 16

A Comparison of Continuation Models for Optimal Transformation of Gravimetric Data

A Comparison of Continuation Models for Optimal Transformation of Gravimetric Data. By: Joanelle Baptiste Elizabeth City State University, NC Supervisor: Dr. Daniel Roman 8/6/04. Line Office (Overview). NOAA Ocean Service (NOS) National Geodetic Survey (NGS)

kale
Download Presentation

A Comparison of Continuation Models for Optimal Transformation of Gravimetric Data

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A Comparison of Continuation Models for Optimal Transformation of Gravimetric Data By: Joanelle Baptiste Elizabeth City State University, NC Supervisor: Dr. Daniel Roman 8/6/04

  2. Line Office (Overview) • NOAA Ocean Service (NOS) • National Geodetic Survey (NGS) • Geosciences Research Division (GRD)

  3. Terms to be familiar with • Ellipsoid • Geoid • Gravimetric • Gravity anomaly: Δg = gobs-γ • Mean Sea Level

  4. Models of the Earth

  5. Figure of the Earth

  6. P 0 Ellipsoid height, h = distance along ellipsoid normal (Q to P) Orthometric height, H = distance along plumb line (P0 to P) Geoid height, N = distance along ellipsoid normal (Q to P0) plumb line P H h ∟ “Ellipsoid” ∟ Q Geopotential Surface N GeopotentialSurface Earth’s Surface “Geoid” P, Q and P0 all have the same lat, lon values. Geopotential Surface Geoid height N = h – H Gravity anomaly Δg = gP0– γQ OCEAN

  7. Planar Approach flat plane of the model space Earth’s curvedsurface

  8. Findings: predicted less actual

  9. Residual Values 1 km 8 km

  10. Conclusion • The planar method can be used to upward (or downward) continue data with some controls • Because of systematic effects (ringing), a region for continuation larger than actually desired should be used (add about 0.5 degrees to latitude/longitude limits) • Systematic average must also be accounted for and may be data dependent (i.e., a bias is introduced)

  11. Importance of this Research • Supervisor/field assignment • Operational applications • Engineering • Navigational aid • Storm surge • Coastal flooding

  12. Accomplishments via EPP Contributions: • Participant • NOAA

  13. Acknowledgements • NOAA EPP staff • Dr. Daniel Roman • Mr. Edward Allen • Mr. Eric Linzey • Ms. Sonita Tiwari • Ms. Lucy Hall • Ms. Laura Cutrer • Class of 2004 (all my love)

  14. Questions?

  15. The End

More Related