Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 8 – uploaded by Dong-Yong Seo

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Fig. 8. Map of the Differences between NGII Official Heights and 96 GNSS/Geoid Derived Heights

Figure 8 Map of the Differences between NGII Official Heights and 96 GNSS/Geoid Derived Heights

Related Figures (9)

Fig .1. Concept Diagram of GPS/Leveling (Lee et al., 2009)
Fig .1. Concept Diagram of GPS/Leveling (Lee et al., 2009)
Fig. 2. Distribution of 96 GPS/Leveling Stations in South Korea In this study, VRS surveying was conducted from Jan. 20 to Jan. 23, 2014 and each point was observed three times by inputting 12 work teams into 12 route. As shown in Fig. 2, the observation points were arranged throughout the country, including not only bench marks for which the orthometric height information is known but als o unified control points for which the horizontal coordinates and the orthometric height information are known. Considering the densities of points arranged, a total of 96 observation points were selected by dividing each of eight provinces, except for Jeju province, into 12 route and arranging eight points in each route. Network-RTK VRS surveying was conducted at 96 reference points consisting of 47 benchmarks
Fig. 2. Distribution of 96 GPS/Leveling Stations in South Korea In this study, VRS surveying was conducted from Jan. 20 to Jan. 23, 2014 and each point was observed three times by inputting 12 work teams into 12 route. As shown in Fig. 2, the observation points were arranged throughout the country, including not only bench marks for which the orthometric height information is known but als o unified control points for which the horizontal coordinates and the orthometric height information are known. Considering the densities of points arranged, a total of 96 observation points were selected by dividing each of eight provinces, except for Jeju province, into 12 route and arranging eight points in each route. Network-RTK VRS surveying was conducted at 96 reference points consisting of 47 benchmarks
Fig. 3. Map of Geometric Geoidal Heights Utilizing the ellipsoidal heights of the 96 benchmarks and unified control points obtained through Network-RTK V RS surveying, the geometric geoidal heights were calculated through determined using the official heights for control points of National Geographic Information Institute. The accuracy of benchmarks in Korean Leveling Network 2014 (KLN20 Eq. (1). The resultant orthometric heights of the 96 points were he he 4) showed 1.48 cm as the standard error (NGII, 2015). In addition, he geometric geoidal heights calculated as such were interpola ed or the region ranging from longitude 125°E to 130°E and from atitude 34°N to 38.5°N at 3' x 3' grid spacing in the Kriging method using the Surfer program and the results are shown as a contour map in Fig. 3. The geometric geoidal heights calculated through VRS surveying were interpolated for the South Korea region, and the results showed a distribution between 21.071 m at the minimum and 29.782 m at the maximum and a tendency to increase as the region moved from the northwest to the southeast.
Fig. 3. Map of Geometric Geoidal Heights Utilizing the ellipsoidal heights of the 96 benchmarks and unified control points obtained through Network-RTK V RS surveying, the geometric geoidal heights were calculated through determined using the official heights for control points of National Geographic Information Institute. The accuracy of benchmarks in Korean Leveling Network 2014 (KLN20 Eq. (1). The resultant orthometric heights of the 96 points were he he 4) showed 1.48 cm as the standard error (NGII, 2015). In addition, he geometric geoidal heights calculated as such were interpola ed or the region ranging from longitude 125°E to 130°E and from atitude 34°N to 38.5°N at 3' x 3' grid spacing in the Kriging method using the Surfer program and the results are shown as a contour map in Fig. 3. The geometric geoidal heights calculated through VRS surveying were interpolated for the South Korea region, and the results showed a distribution between 21.071 m at the minimum and 29.782 m at the maximum and a tendency to increase as the region moved from the northwest to the southeast.
Fig. 5. Map of the Difference between EIGEN-6C4 Geoidal Heights Fig. 6. Map and Geometric Geoidal Heights in South Korea and
Fig. 5. Map of the Difference between EIGEN-6C4 Geoidal Heights Fig. 6. Map and Geometric Geoidal Heights in South Korea and
Fig. 4. Map of the Difference between EGM2008 Geoidal Heights and Geometric Geoidal Heights in South Korea
Fig. 4. Map of the Difference between EGM2008 Geoidal Heights and Geometric Geoidal Heights in South Korea
ights Fig. 6. Map of the Difference between KNGeoid13 Geoidal Heights and Geometric Geoidal Heights in South Korea
ights Fig. 6. Map of the Difference between KNGeoid13 Geoidal Heights and Geometric Geoidal Heights in South Korea
fable 1. Statistics of the Differences between Geoidal Heights in the four Geoid Models and Geometric Geoidal Heights at 96 GPS/Leveling Stations (unit: cm)
fable 1. Statistics of the Differences between Geoidal Heights in the four Geoid Models and Geometric Geoidal Heights at 96 GPS/Leveling Stations (unit: cm)
Fig. 7. Map of the Difference between KNGeoid14 Geoidal Heights and Geometric Geoidal Heights in South Korea
Fig. 7. Map of the Difference between KNGeoid14 Geoidal Heights and Geometric Geoidal Heights in South Korea
Fig. 9. Regional Average Error and Standard Deviation of the Dif- ferences (Y-axis unit: meter)
Fig. 9. Regional Average Error and Standard Deviation of the Dif- ferences (Y-axis unit: meter)
Related topics:
Civil EngineeringGeodesyGeologyGNSS applications
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved