Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T04:16:16.049Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Long-Term GNSS Analysis for Local Geodetic Datum After 2011 Tohoku Earthquake

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 October 2017

Su-Kyung Kim
Affiliation:
(Department of. Geoinformation Engineering, Sejong University, Seoul 05006, Korea)
Tae-Suk Bae*
Affiliation:
(Department of. Geoinformation Engineering, Sejong University, Seoul 05006, Korea)
*
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The current Korean national geodetic reference frame, KGD2002, refers to the fixed epoch at 2002·0 under the assumption that there is no crustal movement of the Korean peninsula. A discontinuity in the coordinates of the reference stations may occur due to the relocation of the stations, antenna replacement, or earthquakes. The static reference frame has difficulty in covering continuous and/or discontinuous crustal movements at the same time. A new dynamic local geodetic reference frame has been calculated based on eight years (2007–2014) of Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) data. The final geodetic coordinates and velocities were calculated on the basis of the IGb08 reference frame. The discontinuity caused by the 2011 Tohoku earthquake can be addressed using the newly proposed model in this study, which ensures the consistency and continuity of the local geodetic datum.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Navigation 2017 
Figure 0

Figure 1. Location of the domestic GNSS CORS used in this research. The stations were categorised by the historic transition.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Location of IGS stations used in this study. Four selection criteria were applied.

Figure 2

Figure 3. Schematic diagram of typical data processing using Bernese GNSS Software.

Figure 3

Figure 4. Time series plot by fixing IGS stations (Scenario 1): (a) SUWN; (b) CHJU. The grey dots represent the outliers of the daily solutions.

Figure 4

Figure 5. Time series plot of domestic GNSS permanent stations used in this research (Scenario 2). The grey dots represent the outliers of the daily solutions.

Figure 5

Table 1. Displacement of each station before and after the earthquake [unit: cm].

Figure 6

Figure 6. Displacement of the stations in Korea by the earthquake: (a) Scenario 1 (IGS fixed); (b) Scenario 2 (SUWN fixed). The arrows represent the magnitude and direction of the displacement.

Figure 7

Figure 7. Correlation coefficient between the magnitude of the displacement and the distance from the epicentre in NEU frame: (a) Scenario 1 (IGS fixed); (b) Scenario 2 (SUWN fixed). The resulting RMSE of the residuals for the exponential model was denoted in the east component.

Figure 8

Table 2. Residuals of Helmert transformation. Five stations were eliminated due to large residuals (flagged “R”).

Figure 9

Figure 8. Average velocity of Korean peninsula interpolated by Kriging (IGS constrained, Scenario 1).

Figure 10

Figure 9. Average velocity of the Korean peninsula interpolated by Kriging (SUWN constrained, Scenario 2).

Figure 11

Table 3. Estimated final velocity for two scenarios before and after the earthquake [unit: cm/yr].

Figure 12

Figure 10. Schematic diagram of datum transformation. Red and green arrows indicate transformation from KGD2015A/B to KGD2002: ① calculate coordinates at 2002·0 with velocities ② apply the offset ③ transform coordinates with 14 parameters. Blue arrows indicate transformation from KGD2015A to KGD2015B: ① calculate coordinates at 2011·2 (t1) with velocities ② transform coordinates with seven Helmert parameters.

Figure 13

Table 4. The final transformation parameters. The units are [cm], [cm/y] for translation, [ppb], [ppb/y] for scale, and [mas], [mas/y] for rotation.

Figure 14

Table 5. RMSE of the residuals of the transformed coordinates.

Figure 15

Figure 11. Residuals between transformed coordinates and the published KGD2002 after removing the trend.