Search Results (2)

Recent studies on the influence of the anomalous gravity field in GNSS/INS applications have shown that neglecting the impact of the deflection of vertical in aerial surveys induces horizontal and vertical errors in the measurement of an object that is part of the observed scene; these errors can vary from a few tens of centimetres to over one meter. The works reported in the literature refer to vertical deflection values based on global geopotential model estimates. In this paper we compared this approach with the one based on local gravity data and collocation methods. In particular, denoted by ξ and η, the two mutually-perpendicular components of the deflection of the vertical vector (in the north and east directions, respectively), their values were computed by collocation in the framework of the Remove-Compute-Restore technique, applied to the gravity database used for estimating the ITALGEO05 geoid. Following this approach, these values have been computed at different altitudes that are relevant in aerial surveys. The (ξ, η) values were then also estimated using the high degree EGM2008 global geopotential model and compared with those obtained in the previous computation. The analysis of the differences between the two estimates has shown that the (ξ, η) global geopotential model estimate can be reliably used in aerial navigation applications that require the use of sensors connected to a GNSS/INS system only above a given height (e.g., 3000 m in this paper) that must be defined by simulations. Full article

This paper compares three different methods capable of estimating the deflection of the vertical (DoV): one is based on the joint use of high precision spirit leveling and Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS), a second uses astro-geodetic measurements and the third gravimetric geoid models. The working data sets refer to the geodetic International Terrestrial Reference Frame (ITRF) co-location sites of Medicina (Northern, Italy) and Noto (Sicily), these latter being excellent test beds for our investigations. The measurements were planned and realized to estimate the DoV with a level of precision comparable to the angular accuracy achievable in high precision network measured by modern high-end total stations. The three methods are in excellent agreement, with an operational supremacy of the astro-geodetic method, being faster and more precise than the others. The method that combines leveling and GNSS has slightly larger standard deviations; although well within the 1 arcsec level, which was assumed as threshold. Finally, the geoid model based method, whose 2.5 arcsec standard deviations exceed this threshold, is also statistically consistent with the others and should be used to determine the DoV components where local ad hoc measurements are lacking. Full article