Moving mountains: reevaluating the elevations of Colorado mountain summits using modern geodetic techniques

IF 3.9 2区 地球科学 Q1 GEOCHEMISTRY & GEOPHYSICS
Kevin Ahlgren, Derek van Westrum, Brian Shaw
{"title":"Moving mountains: reevaluating the elevations of Colorado mountain summits using modern geodetic techniques","authors":"Kevin Ahlgren, Derek van Westrum, Brian Shaw","doi":"10.1007/s00190-024-01831-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>One of the most challenging environments for accurate geoid models is in high, rugged mountain areas. Orthometric heights derived from GNSS and a geoid model can easily have errors at the decimeter level. To investigate the effect of geoid model variability on the elevations of peaks in high, rugged mountain areas, this paper is focused on the “Fourteeners” of Colorado, USA (a group of about 60 peaks that are above 14,000 feet = 4267.2 m). Airborne LiDAR data are used to determine geometric (ellipsoidal) heights, which first requires removing a hybrid geoid model, as the LiDAR data is originally provided as orthometric heights. We quantify a significant improvement when using these derived ellipsoidal heights compared with the original orthometric heights: from ± 0.074 to ± 0.054 m (RMSE), an improvement of 28%. Next, a mean geoid model is determined with a relative accuracy of ± 0.06 to 0.08 m and used as a “stand in” realization of the future, official geopotential datum of the USA, NAPGD2022. Using the LiDAR ellipsoidal heights and geoid model, elevations (and uncertainties) for each of the Fourteener summits are determined and found to be, on average, 1.6 m lower than currently published values. This is a much larger change than the 0.5 m decrease expected from the new datum shift alone. The bulk of the difference is due to the original treatments of the vertical angle, triangulation data. A reanalysis of 32 of the 60 peaks shows that the historic data were indeed too high by about 1.0 m or more. Ultimately, no peak falls below the 14,000-foot level nor are any peaks elevated above this level.</p>","PeriodicalId":54822,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Geodesy","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Geodesy","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-024-01831-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOCHEMISTRY & GEOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

One of the most challenging environments for accurate geoid models is in high, rugged mountain areas. Orthometric heights derived from GNSS and a geoid model can easily have errors at the decimeter level. To investigate the effect of geoid model variability on the elevations of peaks in high, rugged mountain areas, this paper is focused on the “Fourteeners” of Colorado, USA (a group of about 60 peaks that are above 14,000 feet = 4267.2 m). Airborne LiDAR data are used to determine geometric (ellipsoidal) heights, which first requires removing a hybrid geoid model, as the LiDAR data is originally provided as orthometric heights. We quantify a significant improvement when using these derived ellipsoidal heights compared with the original orthometric heights: from ± 0.074 to ± 0.054 m (RMSE), an improvement of 28%. Next, a mean geoid model is determined with a relative accuracy of ± 0.06 to 0.08 m and used as a “stand in” realization of the future, official geopotential datum of the USA, NAPGD2022. Using the LiDAR ellipsoidal heights and geoid model, elevations (and uncertainties) for each of the Fourteener summits are determined and found to be, on average, 1.6 m lower than currently published values. This is a much larger change than the 0.5 m decrease expected from the new datum shift alone. The bulk of the difference is due to the original treatments of the vertical angle, triangulation data. A reanalysis of 32 of the 60 peaks shows that the historic data were indeed too high by about 1.0 m or more. Ultimately, no peak falls below the 14,000-foot level nor are any peaks elevated above this level.

Abstract Image

移动山脉:利用现代大地测量技术重新评估科罗拉多州山峰的海拔高度
要建立精确的大地水准面模型,最具挑战性的环境之一就是崎岖的高山地区。由全球导航卫星系统和大地水准面模型得出的正测高度很容易出现十厘米级的误差。为了研究大地水准面模型的变化对高山崎岖地区山峰海拔的影响,本文重点研究了美国科罗拉多州的 "十四峰"(由约 60 座海拔超过 14000 英尺 = 4267.2 米的山峰组成)。机载激光雷达数据用于确定几何(椭球)高度,这首先需要移除混合大地水准面模型,因为激光雷达数据最初是作为正测高度提供的。与原始的正射影高相比,使用这些得出的椭球高有了明显的量化改进:从 ± 0.074 米到 ± 0.054 米(均方根误差),改进了 28%。接下来,确定了一个平均大地水准面模型,其相对精度为± 0.06 至 0.08 米,并将其用作未来美国官方大地水准面 NAPGD2022 的 "替代 "实现。利用激光雷达椭球高和大地水准面模型,确定了每个福尔蒂纳山顶的海拔高度(和不确定性),发现平均比目前公布的数值低 1.6 米。这比仅因新基准面移动而预计的 0.5 米的降幅要大得多。差异的主要原因是对垂直角、三角测量数据的原始处理。对 60 个山峰中 32 个山峰的重新分析表明,历史数据确实过高了约 1.0 米或更多。最终,没有任何山峰低于 14000 英尺的水平,也没有任何山峰高于这一水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Geodesy
Journal of Geodesy 地学-地球化学与地球物理
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
9.10%
发文量
85
审稿时长
9 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Geodesy is an international journal concerned with the study of scientific problems of geodesy and related interdisciplinary sciences. Peer-reviewed papers are published on theoretical or modeling studies, and on results of experiments and interpretations. Besides original research papers, the journal includes commissioned review papers on topical subjects and special issues arising from chosen scientific symposia or workshops. The journal covers the whole range of geodetic science and reports on theoretical and applied studies in research areas such as: -Positioning -Reference frame -Geodetic networks -Modeling and quality control -Space geodesy -Remote sensing -Gravity fields -Geodynamics
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信