1 / 40

# Vertical Datums and Heights - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Vertical Datums and Heights. Daniel J. Martin National Geodetic Survey VT Geodetic Advisor VTrans Monthly Survey Meeting October 06, 2008. Can You Answer These Questions?. What is the current official vertical datum of the United States?

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.

## PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Vertical Datums and Heights' - martha

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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

### Vertical Datums and Heights

Daniel J. Martin

National Geodetic Survey

VTrans Monthly Survey Meeting

October 06, 2008

• What is the current official vertical datum of the United States?

• What’s the difference between ellipsoid, orthometric and geoid and dynamic heights?

• The difference between NGVD 29 and NAVD 88 in most of Vermont is?

• A point with a geoid height of -28.86 m means what?

• A set of constants specifying the coordinate system used for geodetic control, i.e., for calculating coordinates of points on the Earth. Specific geodetic datums are usually given distinctive names. (e.g., North American Datum of 1983, European Datum 1950, National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)

Characterized by:

A set of physical monuments, related by survey measurements and resulting coordinates (horizontal and/or vertical) for those monuments

CLASSICAL

• Horizontal – 2 D (Latitude and Longitude) (e.g. NAD 27, NAD 83 (1986))

• Vertical – 1 D (Orthometric Height) (e.g. NGVD 29, NAVD 88)

Contemporary

PRACTICAL – 3 D (Latitude, Longitude and Ellipsoid Height) Fixed and Stable – Coordinates seldom change (e.g. NAD 83 (1992) or NAD 83 (NSRS 2007))

SCIENTIFIC – 4 D (Latitude, Longitude, Ellipsoid Height, Velocity) – Coordinates change with time (e.g. ITRF00, ITRF05)

• A set of fundamental elevations to which other elevations are referred.

• Datum Types

• Tidal– Defined by observation of tidal variations over some period of time

• (MSL, MLLW, MLW, MHW, MHHW etc.)

• Geodetic– Either directly or loosely based on Mean Sea Level at one or more points at some epoch

• (NGVD 29, NAVD 88, IGLD85 etc.)

ORTHOMETRIC

The distance between the geoid and a point on the Earth’s surface measured along the plumb line.

GEOID

The distance along a perpendicular from the ellipsoid of reference to the geoid

ELLIPSOID

The distance along a perpendicular from the ellipsoid to a point on the Earth’s surface.

DYNAMIC

The distance between the geoid and a point on Earth’s sruface measured along the plumb line at a latitude of 45 degrees

B

Topography

A

C

• Adjusted to Vertical Datum using existing control

• Achieve 3-10 mm relative accuracy

Orthometric Heights

(a.k.a. – Sandy Hook Datum)

Mean Sea Level 1929

National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD 29)

North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88)

Orthometric HeightsComparison of Vertical Datum Elements

• NGVD 29NAVD 88

DATUM DEFINITION 26 TIDE GAUGES FATHER’SPOINT/RIMOUSKI

TIDAL EPOCH Varies from point-to-point 1970-1988

BENCH MARKS 100,000 450,000

LEVELING (Km) 106,724 1,001,500

GEOID FITTING Distorted to Fit MSL Gauges Best Continental Model

A

A

hA

A

A

HA

3-D Coordinates derived from GNSS

X1

Y1

Z1

X2

Y2

Z2

X3

Y3

Z3

X4

Y4

Z4

Z

XA

YA

ZA

NA

EA

hA

A

Greenwich

Meridian

Earth

Mass Center

+ZA

+ GEOID03 +

- Y

NA

EA

HA

YA

- X

XA

Y

X

Equator

- Z

• “The equipotential surface of the Earth’s gravity field which best fits, in the least squares sense, mean sea level.”*

• Can’t see the surface or measure it directly.

• Modeled from gravity data.

*Definition from the Geodetic Glossary, September 1986

Average height of ocean globally

Where it would be without any disturbing forces (wind, currents, etc.).

Local MSL is where the average ocean surface is with the all the disturbing forces (i.e., what is seen at tide gauges).

Dynamic ocean topography (DOT) is the difference between MSL and LMSL:

LMSL = MSL + DOT

Ellipsoid

N

Tide gauge height

LMSL

DOT

Geoid

Relationships

H = Orthometric Height(NAVD 88)

h = Ellipsoidal Height (NAD 83)

H = h - N

N = Geoid Height (GEOID 03)

H

TOPOGRAPHIC SURFACE

h

N

GEOID 03

Geoid

Ellipsoid

GRS80

Earth’s

Surface

WP

Level Surfaces

P

Plumb

Line

Mean

“Geoid”

Sea

Level

WO

PO

Level Surface = Equipotential Surface (W)

Ocean

Geopotential Number (CP) = WP -WO

H (Orthometric Height) = Distance along plumb line (PO to P)

 h = local leveled differences

H = relative orthometric heights

Equipotential Surfaces

B

Topography

 hAB

=  hBC

A

C

HA

HC

HAChAB + hBC

Reference Surface (Geoid)

Observed difference in orthometric height, H, depends on the leveling route.

PRELIMENARYVertical Velocities: CORS w/ <2.5 yrs data

PRELIMENARY North American Vertical Velocities

High Resolution Geoid ModelsGEOID03 (vs. Geoid99)

• Begin with USGG2003 model

• 14,185 NAD83 GPS heights on NAVD88 leveled benchmarks (vs 6169)

• Determine national bias and trend relative to GPS/BMs

• Create grid to model local (state-wide) remaining differences

• Compute and remove conversion surface from G99SSS

High Resolution Geoid ModelsGEOID03 (vs. Geoid99)

• Relative to non-geocentric GRS-80 ellipsoid

• 2.4 cm RMS nationally when compared to BM data (vs. 4.6 cm)

• RMS  50% improvement over GEOID99 (Geoid96 to 99 was 16%)

• GEOID06 ~ By end of FY07

h

N

H = h - N

131.448 m = - 102.456 m - (- 29.01 m)

131.448 m ≠ 131.466 m

(0.18 m/0.06 ft)

Published = 330.894 m

Difference = 0.002 m / 0.005 ft

the NGS Web Site:

www.ngs.noaa.gov

• Using the difference eliminates bias

• Assumes the geoidal slopes “shape” is well modeled in the area.

• “Valid” Orthometric constraints along with “valid” transformation parameters removes additional un-modeled changes in slope or bias (fitted plane)

-10.254

-10.251

> -10.253

Difference = 0.3 cm

“Truth” = -10.276

Difference = 2.3 cm

Two Days/

Different Times

-10.254

> -10.275

-10.295

Difference = 4.1 cm

“Truth” = -10.276

Difference = 0.1 cm

What is OPUS?

• On-Line Positioning User Service

• Processes Dual-Frequency GPS data

• 3 goals:

• Simplicity

• Consistency

• Reliability

NGS-PAGES software used

3 “best” CORS selected3 separate baselines computed3 separate positions averaged

Position differences also include any errors in CORS coordinates

Broadcast Orbits ~ 5 m (real time)

Ultrarapid Orbits ~ 0.02- 0. 04 m (12 hours)

Rapid Orbits ~ 0.01 – 0.02 m (24 hours)

Precise Orbits ~ 0.005 – 0.01 m (two weeks)

PUBLISHED

32 05 24.91710 - .00029 (0.009 m)

87 23 30.50447 - .00019 (0.005 m)

10.443 m - .035

HOW GOOD ARE OPUS ORTHOMETRIC HEIGHTS?

IT DEPENDS!

ORTHOMETRIC HEIGHT ~ 0.02 – 0.04 m

GEOID03 ~ 0.048 m (2 sigma – 95% confidence)

Error ~ 0.03 + 0.05

~ 0.08 m

156.308

Absolute gravimeter: 24 hoursExample: Micro-g Solutions FG5

• Ballistic (free-fall) of retro- reflector in vacuum chamber, tracked by laser beam

• Instrument accuracy and precision: ± 1.1 mGals

• Used for temporal change of g

7

Spring-based relative gravimeters 24 hoursExample: LaCoste & Romberg land meter

• A mass at end of a moment arm is suspended by spring

• Number of screw turns necessary to null position of mass gives change in g from reference sta.

• Accuracy: ± 3 to 50 mGals

5

Changes for the Better 24 hoursImprove Gravity Field Modeling

• NGS will compute a pole-to-equator, Alaska-to-Newfoundland geoid model, preferably in conjunction with Mexico and Canada as well as other interested governments, with an accuracy of 1 cm in as many locations as possible

• NGS redefines the vertical datum based on GNSS and a gravimetric geoid

• NGS redefines the national horizontal datum to remove gross disagreements with the ITRF