4.7 Article

The Influence of Bathymetry on Regional Marine Geoid Modeling in Northern Europe

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jmse10060793

关键词

bathymetry; gravity field; quasigeoid; Stokes's formula; BSCD2000; Baltic Sea

资金

  1. Estonian Research Council [PRG330]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study focuses on geoid determination in Northern Europe and finds that considering bathymetry can greatly influence the modeling results, particularly in the rugged coastal areas of Norway. Additionally, the use of shipborne GNSS and airborne laser scanning can effectively validate the modeling results.
Although Northern Europe has been the target area in many regionwide geoid determination studies, the research has been land-focused, neglecting bathymetry information. With new projects, such as the Baltic Sea Chart Datum 2000, the attention is shifting toward the marine geoid. Hence, consideration for bathymetry has become relevant, the influence of which is studied. In the relatively shallow Baltic Sea, accounting for bathymetry-based residual terrain model reduction during gravity data processing induces marine geoid modeling differences (relative to neglecting bathymetry) mainly within 2 cm. However, the models can deviate up to 3-4 cm in some regions. Rugged Norwegian coastal areas, on the other hand, had modeling improvements around a decimeter. Considering bathymetry may thus help improve geoid modeling outcomes in future Northern Europe geoid determination projects. Besides using the conventional precise GNSS-leveling control points, the paper also demonstrates the usefulness of shipborne GNSS and airborne laser scanning-derived geoidal heights in validating geoid modeling results. A total of 70 gravimetric geoid solutions are presented, for instance, by varying the used reference global geopotential models. According to the comparisons, G00005c-based solutions generally perform the best, where modeling agreement with GNSS-leveling control points reached 2.9 cm (standard deviation) from a one-dimensional fit.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据