Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Contents
Abbreviations ............................................................................................................. 4
Executive Summary ................................................................................................... 5
Introduction ................................................................................................................ 5
Transformation Parameters .................................................................................... 5
Transformation Models ........................................................................................... 5
Bursa-Wolf Model ................................................................................................ 6
Molodensky-Badekas Model ................................................................................ 6
Accuracy Assessment ............................................................................................. 6
Transformation Data Sets .......................................................................................... 7
Pulkovo 1942 Coordinates ...................................................................................... 8
WGS84 Coordinates ............................................................................................... 8
ITRF2008/IGS08 Coordinates................................................................................. 8
Transformation Parameters between GGD and WGS84.......................................... 13
Application ............................................................................................................ 15
Transformation Parameters between GGD and Pulkovo 1942 ................................ 15
Application ............................................................................................................ 18
Improvement of Transformation Parameters......................................................... 18
Accuracy Testing .................................................................................................. 18
Local Transformations .......................................................................................... 20
Transformation Approach ......................................................................................... 20
Conversion of Pulkovo 1942 Gauss-Krüger to GGD Lambert Coordinates .......... 20
Conversion of WGS84 UTM to GGD Lambert Coordinates .................................. 20
Transformation Software .......................................................................................... 20
References ............................................................................................................... 23
Figures
Figure 1. 3D Bursa-Wolf model. ................................................................................ 6
Figure 2. 3D Molodensky-Badekas model................................................................. 6
Figure 3. GPS data processing.. ............................................................................... 9
Figure 4. Transformation points between GGD and WGS84. ................................. 14
Figure 5. Transformation points between GGD and Pulkovo 1942. ........................ 15
Figure 6. Recommended location of transformation points. .................................... 19
Figure 7. Conversion of Pulkovo 1942 to GGD grid coordinates. ............................ 21
Figure 8. Conversion of UTM to GGD grid coordinates. .......................................... 22
2
Methodology and Parameters for Datum Transformation between the New and Old Reference Systems
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
Tables
Table 1. Observation data for computation of the ITRF2008/IGS08 positions.......................... 8
Table 2. Measured coordinates in GGD. ...................................................................................10
Table 3. Transformation coordinates in GGD. ...........................................................................10
Table 4. Catalogue coordinates in Pulkovo 1942......................................................................11
Table 5. Transformation coordinates in Pulkovo 1942..............................................................11
Table 6. Coordinates in WGS84 datum. ....................................................................................12
Table 7. Parameters of Molodensky-Badekas transformation between GGD and WGS84. 13
Table 8. Parameters of Bursa-Wolf transformation between GGD and WGS84. ..................14
Table 9. Transformation residuals from GGD to WGS84.........................................................15
Table 10. Parameters of Molodensky-Badekas transformation between GGD and Pulkovo 1942. .16
Table 11. Parameters of Bursa-Wolf transformation between GGD and Pulkovo 1942........17
Table 12. Transformation residuals from GGD to Pulkovo 1942. ............................................17
3
Methodology and Parameters for Datum Transformation between the New and Old Reference Systems
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
Abbreviations
2D Two Dimensional
3D Three Dimensional
GGD Georgia Geodetic Datum
IGS International GNSS Service
ITRF International Terrestrial Reference Frame
ITRS International Terrestrial Reference System
RTK Real Time Kinematic
RMS Root Mean Square
UTM Universal Transverse Mercator
WGS84 World Geodetic System 1984
4
Methodology and Parameters for Datum Transformation between the New and Old Reference Systems
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
Executive Summary
Purpose. The purpose of this report is to present methodology and make
recommendations for computation of transformation parameters between the old and
new reference systems.
Overview. Parameters and methodology for transformation from Pulkovo and
WGS84 datums to the new Georgia Geodetic Datum (GGD) are developed.
Instructions for data conversion and recommendations for relevant software are
made.
Introduction
To address the changing requirements for positional accuracy State government
agencies responsible for maintaining the geodetic datum and reference frame
continually assess their suitability and when necessary renovate and redefine
outdated components. That was done in Georgia with the definition and realization
of the new Georgia Geodetic Datum (GGD) which is based and aligned with the
International Terrestrial Reference System (ITRS). The relationship between the
new datum and the ITRS is realized through the ITRF2008/IGS08 coordinates for 12
zero-order CORS stations.
In datum redefinition process, the need of many users to work in various datums and
reference frames should be recognized. These users should be provided with
transformation tools between historic and current datums and reference frames.
Transformation Parameters
Transformation parameters are usually computed via common (or identical) points
with known coordinates in both systems. These common points are then used to
determine a transformation model for the other points in the survey network and the
many derived spatial data sets that depend on the local datum but are not directly
connected to the survey network.
The known coordinates are obtained from a large number of observations that are
adjusted together using a lot of assumptions. The observations in the old system are
usually of lower quality and the assumptions are only approximately correct. The
coordinates in the new system are also subject to error. Therefore only approximate
models can ever exist to transform (convert) coordinates from one coordinate system
to another. If the accuracy requirements are low then transforming is simple and
easy. If the accuracy requirements are higher, a more involved transformation
process will be required.
The chosen common points should be a good sample of the true relationship
between the datums. These sites should be chosen to represent the characteristics
of the network, so where the survey network is consistent only a few would be
required, but where it is inconsistent, many more would be required.
Transformation Models
Various 2D and 3D transformation models are available. More advantages are
offered by the 3D models.
5
Methodology and Parameters for Datum Transformation between the New and Old Reference Systems
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
Bursa-Wolf Model
The Bursa-Wolf model (Figure 1) assumes a similarity relationship between the
datums. The identical points are used in a least squares process to solve for 7
parameters which represent the relationship between the two datums:
• origin shifts at the Earth's center of mass (ΔX, ΔY and ΔZ);
• rotations about each of the axes (a, b, q) at the origin of the Cartesian
coordinate system of the destination system;
• scale change between the two systems (s).
Molodensky-Badekas Model
The Molodensky-Badekas model (Figure 2) is based on the same definition of
translation and scale parameters, but assumes the rotation origin is the barycenter of
the common points of the destination system which adds 3 additional parameters.
The advantages of the Bursa-Wolf and Molodensky-Badekas models are that they
maintain the accuracy of the original measurements and may be used over virtually
any area as long as the local coordinates are accurate.
Accuracy Assessment
The degree of error in a geodetic transformation depends on the patterns of errors
present in the transformed terrestrial reference frames. Those patterns are
characteristic of the methods used to establish the terrestrial reference frames, and
also on how carefully the transformation has been designed to take account of those
errors. For example, terrestrial reference frames established by triangulation
generally contain significant errors in the overall size of the network and often, this
6
Methodology and Parameters for Datum Transformation between the New and Old Reference Systems
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
scale error varies in different parts of the network. Therefore, a real transformation is
likely to represent not only the difference between geodetic datums, but also the
difference between the terrestrial reference frames that realize those datums due to
errors in the original observations.
The achievable accuracy of the datum transformation with common points is
determined by the number, distribution and accuracy of these common points and
the transformation technique adopted. It is necessary to obtain far more than the
minimum number of common points. The redundant points will give an idea of the
consistency of the survey network and the derived transformation parameters. A
number of the redundant common points ("check points") should be reserved from
the initial transformation modeling and later should be used as an independent check
of the quality of the transformation process, by comparing actual and transformed
positions. If the difference between the actual and transformed positions (residuals)
is not acceptable, then:
• the derivation of the transformation process should be repeated using a
different selection of common points, or
• more common points should be obtained, or
• a different transformation method should be used, or
• If the residuals show variable pattern in different regions then the transformed
network should be subdivided into homogeneous regions and regional
transformation models should be developed.
The RMS error is most often used as overall indicator for the suitability of the
transformation method. That error may not be an ideal criterion because a
transformation model with a large number of parameters will normally yield a smaller
RMS error. Due to the high correlation between parameters, such models are highly
sensitive to outliers and may incorrectly distort, stretch, or alter the system. High
correlations are related to near singularity in matrix inversion, or to “ill-conditioned”
problem in least squares adjustments. When an adjustment is ill conditioned, small
changes in the data set can produce very different results.
There may be a high correlation between the parameters of the Bursa-Wolf
transformation when applied to areas which are not large enough. The reason is
that the rotations and scale in that transformation are applied at the geocenter. Most
correlations can be reduced if we use instead Molodensky-Badekas where the
rotations and scale are applied at the barycenter (centroid) of the common points.
A decision for selection of any particular transformation model should be taken on
the basis of comparative analysis of the results with different models or set of
parameters. The chosen model should produce minimal transformation errors and
low correlations between the parameters.
7
Methodology and Parameters for Datum Transformation between the New and Old Reference Systems
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
WGS84 Coordinates
The WGS84 coordinates were computed at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology in the frame of a geodynamic project for studying plate kinematics and
dynamics in the eastern Mediterranean and Caucasus [Прилепин et al., 1997]. The
coordinates are taken from an additional table to the cited paper.
The accepted name of the datum “WGS84” is misleading because the reference
frame in the MIT solutions for the eastern Mediterranean and Caucasus was defined
by estimation of transformation parameters to a set of IGS core stations in the ITRF.
By that reason the datum is rather ITRF93 than WGS84.
The geocentric accuracy of the WGS84 coordinates is estimated at 3-5 mm.
The coordinates for station INGU were received from the Head of the Topo-Geodetic
Administration at the Department of Geodesy and Cartography of Georgia.
ITRF2008/IGS08 Coordinates
The coordinates of stations ARMU, CHAC, FUND, ILMA, KIZI, NORI were computed
through static baseline processing from the closest stations of the CORS network.
Used observation data are summarized in Table 1. The coordinates of the new
stations were obtained from a constrained least squares adjustment in which the
coordinates of the CORS stations were fixed to their ITRF2008/IGS08 values.
The coordinates for stations GLDA, KODA are obtained by RTK measurements.
1
Table 1. Observation data for computation of the ITRF2008/IGS08 positions.
Station Start Date and Time End Date and Time Duration
1
Hereafter “GGD”.
8
Methodology and Parameters for Datum Transformation between the New and Old Reference Systems
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
9
Methodology and Parameters for Datum Transformation between the New and Old Reference Systems
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
10
Methodology and Parameters for Datum Transformation between the New and Old Reference Systems
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
11
Methodology and Parameters for Datum Transformation between the New and Old Reference Systems
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
2
See the map sheet 1:200 000 number in Table 4.
12
Methodology and Parameters for Datum Transformation between the New and Old Reference Systems
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
Molodensky-Badeks:
XR 1 -q b X S − X P X P ΔX
Y = (1 + s) q 1 -a YS − YP + YP + ΔY
R
Z R -b a 1 Z S − Z P Z P ΔZ
where:
n n n
X P = ∑ X Si ,YP = ∑YSi , Z P = ∑ Z Si .
i=1 i=1 i=1
Points 5 5
13
Methodology and Parameters for Datum Transformation between the New and Old Reference Systems
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
Bursa-Wolf:
XR 1 -q b X S ΔX
Y = (1 + s) q 1 -a Y + ΔY .
R S
Z R -b a 1 Z S ΔZ
Points 5 5
14
Methodology and Parameters for Datum Transformation between the New and Old Reference Systems
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
Application
The computed transformation parameters can be applied countrywide.
15
Methodology and Parameters for Datum Transformation between the New and Old Reference Systems
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
Table 10. Parameters of Molodensky-Badekas transformation between GGD and Pulkovo 1942.
Molodensky-Badeks:
XR 1 -q b X S − X P X P ΔX
Y = (1 + s) q 1 -a YS − YP + YP + ΔY
R
Z R -b a 1 Z S − Z P Z P ΔZ
where:
n n n
X P = ∑ X Si ,YP = ∑YSi , Z P = ∑ Z Si .
i=1 i=1 i=1
Points 9 9
16
Methodology and Parameters for Datum Transformation between the New and Old Reference Systems
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
Table 11. Parameters of Bursa-Wolf transformation between GGD and Pulkovo 1942.
Bursa-Wolf:
XR 1 -q b X S ΔX
Y = (1 + s) q 1 -a Y + ΔY .
R S
Z R -b a 1 Z S ΔZ
Points 9 9
17
Methodology and Parameters for Datum Transformation between the New and Old Reference Systems
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
Application
The computed transformation parameters can be applied countrywide.
The transformations should be applied to Cartesian coordinates ( X ,Y , Z ) computed
from geodetic coordinates ( φ, λ ) and ellipsoidal height is set to zero ( h = 0 ). When
necessary, heights should be set to their real values after the transformation.
Accuracy Testing
The transformation accuracy for any specific project should be tested by comparing
actual and transformed positions of check points (see above). The actual positions
should come from an independent source of higher accuracy e.g. GNSS
measurements. The aerial extent of the check points should approximate that of the
transformed dataset. The test should involve only horizontal accuracy.
Once the coordinate values have been determined, the residual-distance for each
check point should be computed using the formula:
ΔR = ΔE + ΔN ,
where ΔE and ΔN are the residuals (actual minus transformed) in easting and
northing.
Then three values should be computed: (1) the sum of squared residual-distances,
(2) the average of the sum by dividing the sum by the number of check points, and
(3) the root mean square (RMS) error which is the square root of the average.
The transformation is accepted if the root mean square error is less than 0.1 meters
for WGS84 data and 0.5 m for Pulkovo 1942 data. These threshold values are
based on the estimated transformation post-fit (Table 11 and Table 14). The data
used for calculation of the root mean square error should be clean of outliers.
It the accuracy test is not passed the transformation model should be refined using
transformation points within the region.
18
Methodology and Parameters for Datum Transformation between the New and Old Reference Systems
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
19
Technical Specifications for Establishment of a New Geodetic Reference System,
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
Local Transformations
If a large number of common points are available in a small area and a more
accurate approximation between GGD and Pulkovo 1942 is required, affine
transformation can be applied. The affine model relates two 2D Cartesian
coordinate systems through a rotation, a scale change in easting and northing
direction, followed by translation. That method can compromise the accuracy of the
GNSS coordinates because it squeezes or stretches them to fit the Pulkovo 1942
grid. The affine transformation should not be applied for regions larger than 15x15
km.
Transformation Approach
The conversion of coordinates from one map projection to another when the source
projection is based upon a different horizontal datum than the target projection
should be combined with a datum transformation.
Transformation Software
Recommended software for computation of transformation parameters and data
conversion is TransLT (http://www.topolt.com/en/products/translt.html) with the
following capabilities:
• calculation of transformation parameters and conversion of coordinates using
various 2D and 3D models;
• conversion between geodetic and Cartesian coordinates;
• conversion between geodetic and grid coordinates;
• support of a large number of map projections;
• transformations using own formula;
• user defined step by step transformations.
The per-user cost of this software is approximately USD100.
User manual and numerical examples for conversion of coordinates between the
new and old reference system using TransLT are given in [Kotzev, 2013].
20
Technical Specifications for Establishment of a New Geodetic Reference System,
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
21
Technical Specifications for Establishment of a New Geodetic Reference System,
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
22
Technical Specifications for Establishment of a New Geodetic Reference System,
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
References
IGN (2011): Georgia Continuously Operating Reference Stations Coordinates
Computation Report Version 1.0, Institut Géographique National, May 25,
2011.
K1 (1982): Каталог координат геодезических пунктов на лист карты масштаба
1:200 000 К-38-VII (Местиа), Военно-топографическое управление
Генерального штаба, Москва.
K2 (1987): Каталог координат геодезических пунктов на лист карты масштаба
1:200 000 К-38-XIX (Ахалцихе), Военно-топографическое управление
Генерального штаба, Москва.
K3 (1987): Каталог координат геодезических пунктов на лист карты масштаба
1:200 000 К-38-XX (Хашури), Военно-топографическое управление
Генерального штаба, Москва.
K4 (1988): Каталог координат геодезических пунктов на лист карты масштаба
1:200 000 К-38-XXI (Тбилиси), Военно-топографическое управление
Генерального штаба, Москва.
K5 (1984) Каталог координат геодезических пунктов на лист карты масштаба
1:200 000 К-38-XXII (Рустави), Военно-топографическое управление
Генерального штаба, Москва.
K6 (1984) Каталог координат геодезических пунктов на лист карты масштаба
1:200 000 К-38-XXVII (Кировакан), Военно-топографическое управление
Генерального штаба, Москва.
K7 (1982): Каталог координат геодезических пунктов на лист карты масштаба
1:200 000 К-38-XXVIII (Казах), Военно-топографическое управление
Генерального штаба, Москва.
Kotzev, V. (2013): Manual for Datum transformation between the New and Old
Reference Systems, EU-Georgia E-Governance Facility project document.
O1 (1997): Объeкт 04.01.04.1393 Астромомо-геодезический полигон, Грузинское
аэрогеодезическое предприятие.
O2 (1989): Объeкт 04.03.0959 линия Гореловка-Квемо Орзомани, Грузинское
аэрогеодезическое предприятие.
O3 (1980): Объект „Иорский“ 04.03.0040, Грузинское аэрогеодезическое
предприятие.
S1 (1982): Сводный каталог высот пунктов нивелирования на лист карты
масштаба 1:200 000 К-38-VII (Местиа), Предприятие № 4 Главного
управления геодезии и картографии при Совете министров СССР,
Тбилиси.
S2 (1987): Сводный каталог высот пунктов нивелирования на лист карты
масштаба 1:200 000 К-38-XIX (Ахалцихе), Предприятие № 4 Главного
управления геодезии и картографии при Совете министров СССР,
Тбилиси.
S3 (1987): Сводный каталог высот пунктов нивелирования на лист карты
масштаба 1:200 000 К-38-XX (Хашури), Предприятие № 4 Главного
23
Technical Specifications for Establishment of a New Geodetic Reference System,
November 14 / 2013, Tbilisi, Georgia
24
The European Union’s ENPI Programme for Georgia
Contents
Abbreviations ............................................................................................................. 3
Executive Summary ................................................................................................... 4
Updated Transformation Parameters between GGD and Pulkovo 1942 .................... 4
Tables
Table 1. Updated Parameters of Molodensky-Badekas transformation between
GGD and Pulkovo 1942. ............................................................................................ 4
Table 2. Updated Parameters of Bursa-Wolf transformation between GGD and
Pulkovo 1942. ............................................................................................................ 5
Table 3. Transformation residuals from GGD to Pulkovo 1942. ................................ 5
2
Addendum to Methodology and Parameters for Datum Transformation between the New and Old
Reference Systems – April 04 / 2014, Tbilisi, Georgia
Abbreviations
GGD Georgia Geodetic Datum
3
Addendum to Methodology and Parameters for Datum Transformation between the New and Old
Reference Systems – April 04 / 2014, Tbilisi, Georgia
Executive Summary
Purpose. The document contains updated parameters for transformation between
GGD and Pulkovo 1942 computed from additional identical points measured since
submission of the original report.
Overview. The new parameters show insignificant differences with the original
computed ones, better accuracy and slightly improved post transformation fit.
Molodensky-Badeks:
XR 1 -q b X S − X P X P ΔX
Y = (1 + s) q 1 -a YS − YP + YP + ΔY
R
Z R -b a 1 Z S − Z P Z P ΔZ
where:
n n n
X P = ∑ X Si ,YP = ∑YSi , Z P = ∑ Z Si .
i=1 i=1 i=1
Points 9 16
Post Fit [m] 0.1347 0.1089
4
Addendum to Methodology and Parameters for Datum Transformation between the New and Old
Reference Systems – April 04 / 2014, Tbilisi, Georgia
Bursa-Wolf:
XR 1 -q b X S ΔX
Y = (1 + s) q 1 -a Y + ΔY .
R S
Z R -b a 1 Z S ΔZ
Originally Computed New Computed
Points 9 16
Post Fit [m] 0.1347 0.1089