1887
Volume 73, Issue 4
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

Abstract

The gravity force, as a vector, has both magnitude (length) and direction. Previously, with the measurement methods employed, only the magnitude (length) of the vector was measured; there was no possibility in geophysical practice to measure the direction of the vector. Previously, the method of astronomic positioning was used to determine the vertical direction. This was extremely time‐consuming, taking several months, complex and expensive procedure, used in geodesy at some points to determine the values of vertical deflection. Recently, revolutionary changes have been made in this area, with the development of a new, quick and simple method for determining the local vertical direction, which is more accurate than ever before. In contrast to the previous extremely slow process, with the computer‐controlled, fully automated QDaedalus measurement system, a single person can perform multiple high‐precision measurements at various locations overnight, making the appropriate quantity and quality of measurement results suitable for geophysical structural research purposes. In this article, we briefly describe the operation of the QDaedalus system and draw attention to the geophysical applicability of the method in terms of detectable mass anomalies and useful station spacing using astrogeodetic field measurements. To demonstrate this, astrogeodetic measurements were also carried out along a 4 km long section, from which the deflection of the vertical values and geoid heights were determined. Our measurements were compared with the normal values calculated with the global gravity model of high resolution (Global Gravity Model plus). As the deflection of the vertical values calculated with this model includes the effect of the surface topographic masses at the resolution of the model, the difference between the measured and the modelled values is practically a function of subsurface density anomalies. At the same time, we performed model calculations showing how density anomalies of different extents assumed at different depths affect the value of the vertical deflections and the geoid anomalies.

© 2025 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. © 2025 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.70008
2025-04-17
2026-02-13

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.70008
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Albayrak, M., Hirt, C., Guillaume, S., Halicioglu, K., Özlüdemir, M.T. & Shum, C.K. (2020) Quality assessment of global gravity field models in coastal zones: A case study using astrogeodetic vertical deflections in Istanbul, Turkey. Studia Geophysica et Geodaetica, 64(4), 306–329. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11200‐019‐0591‐2
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Albayrak, M., Willi, D. & Guillaume, S. (2023) Field comparison of the total station‐based QDaedalus and the zenith telescope‐based CODIAC astrogeodetic systems for measurements of the deflection of the vertical. Survey Review, 55(390), 247–259. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/00396265.2022.2054108
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Biró, P., Ádám, J., Völgyesi, L. & Tóth, G. (2013) Geodesy, theory and practice. HM Publishing, Budapest. (In Hungarian).
  4. Bondarescu, R., Bondarescu, M., Hetényi, G., Boschi, L., Jetzer, P. & Balakrishna, J. (2012) Geophysical applicability of atomic clocks: direct continental geoid mapping. Geophysical Journal International, 191(1), 78–82. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐246X.2012.05636.x
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Bondarescu, R., Scharer, A., Lundgren, A., HetényiG., Houlié, N., Jetzer, P. & Bondarescu, M. (2015) Ground‐based optical atomic clocks as a tool to monitor vertical surface motion. Geophysical Journal International, 202(3), 1770–1774. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggv246
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Erickson, B.T. (2022) Astrogeodetic investigations of the gravity field in Central Ohio with a robotic total station. MSc thesis. Graduate School of the Ohio State University.
  7. Guillaume, S., Bürki, B., Sorber, P. & Oesch, H.P. (2012) DAEDALUS: A versatile usable digital clip‐on measuring system for total stations. Personal communication by PowerPoint presentation.
  8. Hauk, M., Hirt, C. & Ackermann, C. (2016) Experiences with the QDaedalus system for astrogeodetic determination of deflections of the vertical. Survey Review, 49(355), 294–301. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/00396265.2016.1171960
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Hirt, C. (2006) Monitoring and analysis of anomalous refraction using a digital zenith camera system. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 459(1), 283–290.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Hirt, C. & Bürki, B. (2006) Status of geodetic astronomy at the beginning of the 21st century. Wisenschaftliche Arbeiten der Fachrichtung Geodasie und Geoinformatik der Universitat Hannover. No. 258. University of Hannover, pp. 81–99.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Hirt, C., Bürki, B., Somieski, A. & Seeber, G. (2010) Modern determination of vertical deflections using digital zenith cameras. Journal of Surveying Engineering, 136(1), 1–12. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1061/_ASCE_SU.1943‐5428.0000009
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Hirt, C., Claessens, S., Fecher, T., Kuhn, M., Pail, R. & Rexer, M. (2013) New ultrahigh‐resolution picture of Earth's gravity field. Geophysical Research Letters, 40(16), 4279–4283. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50838
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Krarup, T. & Kubik, K. (1983) The Danish method, experience and philosophy. Seminar Mathematical models of geodetic photogrammetric point determination with regard to outliers and systematic errors. In Ackermann, F.E. (Ed.) Deutsche Geodätische Kommission Reihe A, 98. München: Verlag der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, pp. 131–134.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Macák, M., Minarechová, Z., Čunderlík, R. & Mikula, K. (2023) Gravity field modelling in mountainous areas by solving the nonlinear satellite‐fixed geodetic boundary value problem with the finite element method. Acta Geodaetica et Geophysica, 58, 305–320. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40328‐023‐00418‐7
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Pratt, J.H. (1855) On the attraction of the Himalaya Mountains, and of the elevated regions beyond them, upon the plumb‐line in India. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 145, 53–100. Available from: http://doi.org/10.1098/rstl.1855.0002
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Tóth, G. & Völgyesi, L. (2016) Data processing of QDaedalus measurements. Geosciences and Engineering, 5(8), 149–166.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Tóth, G. & Völgyesi, L. (2018) Experiences of QDaedalus measurements. Geosciences and Engineering, 6(9), 75–86.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Varna, I., Willi, D., Guillaume, S., Albayrak, M., Zarins, A. & Ozen, M. (2023) Comparative measurements of astrogeodetic deflection of the vertical by Latvian and Swiss digital zenith cameras. Remote Sensing, 15(8), 2166. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15082166
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Völgyesi, L. (2015) Renaissance of the torsion balance measurements in Hungary. Periodica Polytechnica Civil Engineering, 59(4), 459–464. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3311/Ppci.7990.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Völgyesi, L. & Tóth, G. (2015) Possibilities of determination of the vertical deflections. Geomatikai Közlemények, XVIII(2), 75–83 (In Hungarian).
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Völgyesi, L. & Tóth, G. (2016) Possibilities of geodetic application of the QDaedalus system. Geodézia és Kartográfia, 68(9–10), 11–17 (In Hungarian).
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Völgyesi, L. & Tóth, G. (2018) Calibration of the QDaedalus system. Geodézia és Kartográfia, 70(6), 9–15 (In Hungarian).
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Völgyesi, L. & Tóth, G. (2020) Calibration of CCD sensors mounted on geodetic measuring systems. Survey Review, 52, 1–10. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/00396265.2019.1703506
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Völgyesi, L. & Tóth, G. (2021) Improvement of QDaedalus measurements with continuous detection of environmental parameters. Acta Geodaetica et Geophysica, 56, 607–622. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40328‐021‐00359‐z
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Web1: GGMplus 200m-resolution map of Earth's gravity field. Accessed: 27. February 2025. Available from: https://www.asg.ed.tum.de/en/iapg/forschung/schwerefeld/ggmplus/.
  26. Web2: Index of models GGMplus. Accessed 27 February 2025. Available from: https://ddfe.curtin.edu.au/models/GGMplus/.
  27. Web3: Datasheet Search Site. Accessed 27 February 2025. Available from: https://www.datasheetq.com/en/ICX204‐Sony.
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.70008
Loading
The potential of a novel gravity research method in geophysics
Geophysical Prospecting 73, 1255 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.70008
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.70008
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.70008
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): deflection of the vertical; astrogeodesy; GGMplus model; gravity; QDaedalus

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error