P. Odera, O. I. Apeh, L. Yap, Matthews Siphiwe Mphuthi
{"title":"验证用于喀麦隆和南非选定地点精确准大地水准面建模的定制重力场模型","authors":"P. Odera, O. I. Apeh, L. Yap, Matthews Siphiwe Mphuthi","doi":"10.1515/jag-2023-0095","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In this study, a tailored gravity-field model is developed to fit and recover local terrestrial gravity data by integrating gravity from global gravity-field models, residual gravity derived from topographic data and observed terrestrial gravity over two study sites in Africa (Cameroon and South Africa). During the modelling phase, two-thirds of the terrestrial gravity data is utilised, reserving the remaining one-third for validation purposes. Additionally, an independent validation is conducted by comparing computed quasigeoid models (derived from tailored gravity data) with height anomalies from GPS/levelling data over the two study sites. The accuracy of the tailored gravity model in reproducing observed gravity data is noteworthy, with a ±8.9 mGal accuracy for the study site in South Africa at 2867 test points and a ±10.4 mGal accuracy for the study site in Cameroon at 637 test points. Comparing height anomalies from GPS/levelling with the SATGQG quasigeoid model (developed from tailored gravity data) and the recent CDSM09A quasigeoid model at 11 GPS/levelling data points reveals comparable accuracies of ±0.10 m and ±0.05 m, for SATGQG and CDSM09A, respectively for the site in South Africa. For the Cameroon site, the differences between height anomalies from GPS/levelling and the CTGQG quasigeoid model (developed from tailored gravity data), along with the recent CGM20 quasigeoid model at 38 GPS/levelling data points, show practically equal accuracies of ±0.15 m for CTGQG and ±0.11 m for CGM20. These findings underscore the potential of tailored gravity-field model in developing accurate quasigeoid models, particularly in regions with limited gravity data coverage. This approach holds promise for gravity recovery and precise geoid modelling in developing countries and regions with insufficient coverage of terrestrial gravity data.","PeriodicalId":45494,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Geodesy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of a tailored gravity field model for precise quasigeoid modelling over selected sites in Cameroon and South Africa\",\"authors\":\"P. Odera, O. I. Apeh, L. Yap, Matthews Siphiwe Mphuthi\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/jag-2023-0095\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n In this study, a tailored gravity-field model is developed to fit and recover local terrestrial gravity data by integrating gravity from global gravity-field models, residual gravity derived from topographic data and observed terrestrial gravity over two study sites in Africa (Cameroon and South Africa). During the modelling phase, two-thirds of the terrestrial gravity data is utilised, reserving the remaining one-third for validation purposes. Additionally, an independent validation is conducted by comparing computed quasigeoid models (derived from tailored gravity data) with height anomalies from GPS/levelling data over the two study sites. The accuracy of the tailored gravity model in reproducing observed gravity data is noteworthy, with a ±8.9 mGal accuracy for the study site in South Africa at 2867 test points and a ±10.4 mGal accuracy for the study site in Cameroon at 637 test points. Comparing height anomalies from GPS/levelling with the SATGQG quasigeoid model (developed from tailored gravity data) and the recent CDSM09A quasigeoid model at 11 GPS/levelling data points reveals comparable accuracies of ±0.10 m and ±0.05 m, for SATGQG and CDSM09A, respectively for the site in South Africa. For the Cameroon site, the differences between height anomalies from GPS/levelling and the CTGQG quasigeoid model (developed from tailored gravity data), along with the recent CGM20 quasigeoid model at 38 GPS/levelling data points, show practically equal accuracies of ±0.15 m for CTGQG and ±0.11 m for CGM20. These findings underscore the potential of tailored gravity-field model in developing accurate quasigeoid models, particularly in regions with limited gravity data coverage. This approach holds promise for gravity recovery and precise geoid modelling in developing countries and regions with insufficient coverage of terrestrial gravity data.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45494,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Applied Geodesy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Applied Geodesy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/jag-2023-0095\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"REMOTE SENSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Geodesy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jag-2023-0095","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"REMOTE SENSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Validation of a tailored gravity field model for precise quasigeoid modelling over selected sites in Cameroon and South Africa
In this study, a tailored gravity-field model is developed to fit and recover local terrestrial gravity data by integrating gravity from global gravity-field models, residual gravity derived from topographic data and observed terrestrial gravity over two study sites in Africa (Cameroon and South Africa). During the modelling phase, two-thirds of the terrestrial gravity data is utilised, reserving the remaining one-third for validation purposes. Additionally, an independent validation is conducted by comparing computed quasigeoid models (derived from tailored gravity data) with height anomalies from GPS/levelling data over the two study sites. The accuracy of the tailored gravity model in reproducing observed gravity data is noteworthy, with a ±8.9 mGal accuracy for the study site in South Africa at 2867 test points and a ±10.4 mGal accuracy for the study site in Cameroon at 637 test points. Comparing height anomalies from GPS/levelling with the SATGQG quasigeoid model (developed from tailored gravity data) and the recent CDSM09A quasigeoid model at 11 GPS/levelling data points reveals comparable accuracies of ±0.10 m and ±0.05 m, for SATGQG and CDSM09A, respectively for the site in South Africa. For the Cameroon site, the differences between height anomalies from GPS/levelling and the CTGQG quasigeoid model (developed from tailored gravity data), along with the recent CGM20 quasigeoid model at 38 GPS/levelling data points, show practically equal accuracies of ±0.15 m for CTGQG and ±0.11 m for CGM20. These findings underscore the potential of tailored gravity-field model in developing accurate quasigeoid models, particularly in regions with limited gravity data coverage. This approach holds promise for gravity recovery and precise geoid modelling in developing countries and regions with insufficient coverage of terrestrial gravity data.