澳大利亚现有坐标变换模型和参数的比较

W. E. F. S. Lec
{"title":"澳大利亚现有坐标变换模型和参数的比较","authors":"W. E. F. S. Lec","doi":"10.1080/00050343.1997.10558681","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Four standard procedures to transform curvilinear co-ordinates from the Australian Geodetic Datum 1984 to the World Geodetic System 1984 are compared. These comprise the Bursa-Wolf model with the national set of seven parameters currently used by Federal and State surveying and mapping authorities, the standard Molodensky model with the five parameters used by the United States Defense Mapping Agency, the simple three-parameter model with the origin shifts taken from the Bursa-Wolf and standard Molodensky models, and the multiple regression equations as determined by the Defense Mapping Agency. The differences between the resulting co-ordinates can reach 4.2 metres over continental Australia, which has implications for the final approach adopted to transform to the Geocentric Datum of Australia. The arguments are presented in favour of more suitable transformation strategies using projective transformation models, which are able to simultaneously correct any known errors existing in the Australian Geodetic Datum. These models also allow the direct transformation of both Australian Geodetic Datum 1966 and Australian Geodetic Datum 1984 coordinates in a single procedure, which will be of benefit to those States which rely upon older geodetic datums. INTRODUCTION Australia’s transition to the use of the Geocentric Datum of Australia (GDA) for surveying and mapping by the 1st January, 2000 will require that existing spatial data are transformed to this new co-ordinate datum (Featherstone, 1994 and 1996; Steed, 1995; Inter-governmental Committee on Surveying and Mapping, 1994; Higgins, 1994; Manning and Harvey, 1994). Featherstone (1994 and 1996), among other authors, only presents the seven-parameter conformal transformation model using the Higgins (1987) constants. However, there are several alternative transformation models and parameters currently available for Australia which can also be employed for this purpose. This paper compares four mathematical models and their associated parameters for the transformation of curvilinear co-ordinates from the Australian Geodetic Datum 1984 (AGD84) to the World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84), which can be assumed compatible with the GDA for many practical purposes. These are: 1. A seven-parameter conformal transformation using the Bursa-Wolf model (Bursa, 1962; Wolf, 1963), where the transformation is staged via Cartesian co-ordinates and uses the parameters of Higgins (1987). 2. A five-parameter conformal transformation based on a curvilinear version of the Molodensky-Badekas model (Molodensky et al., 1962; Badekas, 1969) with the Defense Mapping Agency’s (1991) parameters. 3. The multiple regression equation approach of the Defense Mapping Agency (1991), which is a spatially varying or projective transformation. (The latter two approaches are designed to operate directly on the curvilinear co-ordinates, and thus provide a conceptually more direct transformation.)","PeriodicalId":222452,"journal":{"name":"The Australian Surveyor","volume":"70 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparison of Existing Co-ordinate Transformation Models and Parameters in Australia\",\"authors\":\"W. E. F. S. Lec\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00050343.1997.10558681\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Four standard procedures to transform curvilinear co-ordinates from the Australian Geodetic Datum 1984 to the World Geodetic System 1984 are compared. These comprise the Bursa-Wolf model with the national set of seven parameters currently used by Federal and State surveying and mapping authorities, the standard Molodensky model with the five parameters used by the United States Defense Mapping Agency, the simple three-parameter model with the origin shifts taken from the Bursa-Wolf and standard Molodensky models, and the multiple regression equations as determined by the Defense Mapping Agency. The differences between the resulting co-ordinates can reach 4.2 metres over continental Australia, which has implications for the final approach adopted to transform to the Geocentric Datum of Australia. The arguments are presented in favour of more suitable transformation strategies using projective transformation models, which are able to simultaneously correct any known errors existing in the Australian Geodetic Datum. These models also allow the direct transformation of both Australian Geodetic Datum 1966 and Australian Geodetic Datum 1984 coordinates in a single procedure, which will be of benefit to those States which rely upon older geodetic datums. INTRODUCTION Australia’s transition to the use of the Geocentric Datum of Australia (GDA) for surveying and mapping by the 1st January, 2000 will require that existing spatial data are transformed to this new co-ordinate datum (Featherstone, 1994 and 1996; Steed, 1995; Inter-governmental Committee on Surveying and Mapping, 1994; Higgins, 1994; Manning and Harvey, 1994). Featherstone (1994 and 1996), among other authors, only presents the seven-parameter conformal transformation model using the Higgins (1987) constants. However, there are several alternative transformation models and parameters currently available for Australia which can also be employed for this purpose. This paper compares four mathematical models and their associated parameters for the transformation of curvilinear co-ordinates from the Australian Geodetic Datum 1984 (AGD84) to the World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84), which can be assumed compatible with the GDA for many practical purposes. These are: 1. A seven-parameter conformal transformation using the Bursa-Wolf model (Bursa, 1962; Wolf, 1963), where the transformation is staged via Cartesian co-ordinates and uses the parameters of Higgins (1987). 2. A five-parameter conformal transformation based on a curvilinear version of the Molodensky-Badekas model (Molodensky et al., 1962; Badekas, 1969) with the Defense Mapping Agency’s (1991) parameters. 3. The multiple regression equation approach of the Defense Mapping Agency (1991), which is a spatially varying or projective transformation. (The latter two approaches are designed to operate directly on the curvilinear co-ordinates, and thus provide a conceptually more direct transformation.)\",\"PeriodicalId\":222452,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Australian Surveyor\",\"volume\":\"70 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1997-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Australian Surveyor\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00050343.1997.10558681\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Australian Surveyor","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00050343.1997.10558681","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

比较了从1984年澳大利亚大地基准面到1984年世界大地测量系统的曲线坐标转换的四种标准程序。这些模型包括布尔萨-沃尔夫模型,其中包含联邦和州测绘当局目前使用的7个国家参数集;标准莫洛登斯基模型,其中包含美国国防测绘局使用的5个参数;简单的三参数模型,其原点偏移取自布尔萨-沃尔夫模型和标准莫洛登斯基模型;以及由国防测绘局确定的多元回归方程。所得到的坐标之间的差异在澳大利亚大陆上空可以达到4.2米,这对最终采用的转换为澳大利亚地心基准面的方法有影响。提出了使用投影变换模型的更合适的变换策略的论点,该模型能够同时纠正澳大利亚大地基准面中存在的任何已知误差。这些模式还允许在单一程序中直接转换1966年澳大利亚大地基准面和1984年澳大利亚大地基准面坐标,这将有利于那些依赖旧大地基准面的国家。澳大利亚将于2000年1月1日过渡到使用澳大利亚地心基准面(GDA)进行测绘,这将要求将现有的空间数据转换为这种新的坐标基准面(Featherstone, 1994年和1996年;骏马,1995;政府间测绘委员会,1994年;希金斯,1994;Manning and Harvey, 1994)。Featherstone(1994和1996)和其他作者只提出了使用Higgins(1987)常数的七参数共形变换模型。然而,澳大利亚目前有几个可供选择的转换模型和参数也可用于此目的。本文比较了从1984年澳大利亚大地基准面(AGD84)到1984年世界大地测量系统(WGS84)的曲线坐标转换的四种数学模型及其相关参数,这些模型在许多实际应用中可以假定与GDA兼容。它们是:1;使用Bursa- wolf模型的七参数保角变换(Bursa, 1962;Wolf, 1963),其中转换是通过笛卡尔坐标进行的,并使用Higgins(1987)的参数。2. 基于Molodensky- badekas模型曲线版本的五参数共形变换(Molodensky et al., 1962;Badekas, 1969)与国防测绘局(1991)的参数。3.美国国防测绘局(1991)的多元回归方程方法,是一种空间变化或投影变换。(后两种方法被设计为直接在曲线坐标上操作,因此提供了概念上更直接的转换。)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Comparison of Existing Co-ordinate Transformation Models and Parameters in Australia
Four standard procedures to transform curvilinear co-ordinates from the Australian Geodetic Datum 1984 to the World Geodetic System 1984 are compared. These comprise the Bursa-Wolf model with the national set of seven parameters currently used by Federal and State surveying and mapping authorities, the standard Molodensky model with the five parameters used by the United States Defense Mapping Agency, the simple three-parameter model with the origin shifts taken from the Bursa-Wolf and standard Molodensky models, and the multiple regression equations as determined by the Defense Mapping Agency. The differences between the resulting co-ordinates can reach 4.2 metres over continental Australia, which has implications for the final approach adopted to transform to the Geocentric Datum of Australia. The arguments are presented in favour of more suitable transformation strategies using projective transformation models, which are able to simultaneously correct any known errors existing in the Australian Geodetic Datum. These models also allow the direct transformation of both Australian Geodetic Datum 1966 and Australian Geodetic Datum 1984 coordinates in a single procedure, which will be of benefit to those States which rely upon older geodetic datums. INTRODUCTION Australia’s transition to the use of the Geocentric Datum of Australia (GDA) for surveying and mapping by the 1st January, 2000 will require that existing spatial data are transformed to this new co-ordinate datum (Featherstone, 1994 and 1996; Steed, 1995; Inter-governmental Committee on Surveying and Mapping, 1994; Higgins, 1994; Manning and Harvey, 1994). Featherstone (1994 and 1996), among other authors, only presents the seven-parameter conformal transformation model using the Higgins (1987) constants. However, there are several alternative transformation models and parameters currently available for Australia which can also be employed for this purpose. This paper compares four mathematical models and their associated parameters for the transformation of curvilinear co-ordinates from the Australian Geodetic Datum 1984 (AGD84) to the World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84), which can be assumed compatible with the GDA for many practical purposes. These are: 1. A seven-parameter conformal transformation using the Bursa-Wolf model (Bursa, 1962; Wolf, 1963), where the transformation is staged via Cartesian co-ordinates and uses the parameters of Higgins (1987). 2. A five-parameter conformal transformation based on a curvilinear version of the Molodensky-Badekas model (Molodensky et al., 1962; Badekas, 1969) with the Defense Mapping Agency’s (1991) parameters. 3. The multiple regression equation approach of the Defense Mapping Agency (1991), which is a spatially varying or projective transformation. (The latter two approaches are designed to operate directly on the curvilinear co-ordinates, and thus provide a conceptually more direct transformation.)
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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