UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI

DEPARTMENT OF GEOSPATIAL AND SPACE TECHNOLOGY

GEODETIC DATUM AND COMPUTATIONS

The geodetic datum problem can be considered as a result of improper modelling. The
parameters of the GMM need to be chosen so that they are computable from the
observations. For example, it should not be expected that absolute heights would be
computed if only height differences are the only observables. Again, we cannot compute
coordinates if distances and angles are the only observations present.

Nevertheless the unknown parameters in the GMM of geodetic networks are usually
chosen to be heights and coordinates. We do this because
- the observation equations are straight forward and easy to program for
computer calculation
- the covariance matrix of the parameters which contains the accuracy
information about the estimates, is a by-product of the parameter
calculation (Q= (ATWA)-1
- the result is clear and easily visualised, and it is suitable for subsequent
processing and documentation.
The geodetic datum problem presents itself in adjustment problems by making the
normal equation matrix not invertible.

In the past, the condition equation method of adjustment was preferred since it had
fewer unknowns to solve for and it tended to solve the datum problem outside of the
adjustment. Due to wide use of computers nowadays, we prefer the method of
observation equations. We then have to encounter the datum problem.

Let us consider a practical example of levelling. The levelling network (Figure 1) consists
of points P1, P2, P3, and P4 with observations y1, y2, y3, y4, y5, y6 (units are in mm).
P1 y1
P2

y6 y2
y5
y3
P4

y4

P3
Figure: Levelling Network

1
The GMM: L = AX + V; W=I (13)

The observation equations are

y1   H1  H 2  0.H 3  0.H 4  v1
y2  0.H1  H 2  0.H 3  H 4  v2
y3  0.H1  H 2  H 3  0.H 4  v3
(14)
y4  0.H1  0.H 2  H 3  H 4  v4
y5  H1  0.H 3  H 3  0.H 4  v5
y6  H1  0.H 2  0.H 3  H 4  v6

In matrix form we write,

 y1   1 1 0 0   v1  1.2 
y   0 1 0 1  v2  1.6 
 2   
 y3   0 1 1 0   v3  1.7 
   , y    mm (15)
 y4   0 0 1 1  v4  1.2 
 y5   1 0 1 0   v5   2.1
       
 y6   1 0 0 1  v6  1.3 

The normal equation matrix becomes (N = ATWA)

 3  1  1  1
 1 3  1  1
N  (16)
 1  1 3  1
 
 1  1  1 3 

The rank of N = 3 implying a rank (or datum) defect of 1. The eigenvalues of N are {0, 4,
4, 4}. The rank of N is 3. The rank defect of N is therefore 4-3=1. Again there is only one
eigenvalue equal to 0. Thus, the number of eigenvalues that are equal to zero are the same
as the rank defect. The rank defect of (N) =1 implies a datum defect of 1 which in this
case is a translation in height. Remember we have not chosen a benchmark! (Hence
the problem).

The same reasoning applies in two- and three- dimensional geodetic networks. To define
a reference system, some parameters have to be defined. The number of these parameters
constitutes the datum defect when they cannot be obtained from the observations. We
consider a one-, two-, and three- dimensional networks:

2
One- dimensional network
Normally a surface of equal potential is chosen as the reference. Normally the height of
one point is arbitrarily fixed. In case of gravity intensity, the gravity intensity of one point
is arbitrarily fixed. The maximum number of defects is one which is a translation in
height.

Two- dimensional networks

A plane coordinate system is defined by fixing two coordinates (X and Y) and one
bearing. If no distances are measured, we need to include one distance to scale the
network. Thus the maximum number of defects would be four namely two translations,
one rotation, one scale.

Three- dimensional networks

A coordinate system is defined by fixing three coordinates (X, Y, Z), one bearing, two
zenith angles and one distance. Thus a total of seven datum parameters are the
maximum possible. Whatever the observations cannot provide from this set remains as
datum defect.

In national geodetic networks, first order control points provide for the datum for all
subsequent networks. The points that provide for the datum are kept fixed by removing
them from the adjustment (deleting the corresponding columns) i.e. ensuring that their
coordinates change by zero. The classical way of doing this is by deleting all the
columns where the datum points appear. By so doing makes the model to be of full rank
and the normal equation matrix therefore invertible. This trend of keeping some points
fixed (coordinates not changing) has been a subject of debate. With more precise
instruments, all points should be subjected to change once fresh observations are
available.

A method of overcoming the datum defect is by introducing constraints to the adjustment

so that the datum information is passed on to the adjustment procedure.

3
DATUM CONSTRAINTS

The constrained GMM has the form:

y = Axˆ + v
(17)
R T xˆ = c
where c is a constant vector and leads to the normal equations
 A T WA R   xˆ   A T Wy 
 T      (18)
 R 0  k   c 

with k being the vector of Lagrange multipliers. The u×u matrix N=ATWA is singular
with rank deficiency d = u-rank( N). RT consists of d linear independent constraints
 A T WA R 
which are known coefficients. The matrix  T  is of full rank and therefore
 R 0
non- singular or regular. Suppose for a two- dimensional network, we have points Pi
and Pj fixed (i.e. datum points or their coordinates are known).
The constraint equations are:
xi = xio + Δxi , xj = xjo + Δxj ,
yi = yio + Δyi yj = yjo + Δyj

We can construct the constraint (or restriction design) matrix R as follows:

x = (Δx1 Δy1 Δx2 Δy2 . . . . Δxi Δyi . . . . Δxj Δyj . . . Δxu/2 Δy u/2 )

0 0 0 0 .. . .. 1 0 ... 0 0 ... 0 0
0 0 0 0.... 0 1.... 0 0 ... 0 0
RT = 0 0 0 0... 0 0... 1 0 ... 0 0 (19)
0 0 0 0 ... 0 0... 0 1... 0 0

The solution of the parameters is found by

1
 xˆ   A T WA R   A T Wy 
k    T   . (20)
   R 0   c 

For inversion of the block matrix, see the main Appendix.

For the levelling example above, we can set the restriction (or constraint) equation, as
follows:
y = Axˆ + v
R T xˆ = c
RT  1 0 0 0 if point 1 is the fixed point (benchmark: H1 = 0), or (21a)
RT   0 1 0 0 if point 2 is the fixed point etc. (H2 = 0) (21b)

4
The vector x of parameters is of the form
x   H1 H 2 H 3 H 4  T. (21)
Thus, if we use point 1 as the benchmark (or fixed point), we write the restriction as
 H1 
H 
1 0 0 0   H 2   0 (22)
3
 
 H 4 
Equation (16) and (22) built (18) as follows

 3 1 1 1 1
 1 3 1 1  2.2 
 0   4.5 
 1 1 3 1 0 , A Wy  
T , c   0
   2.6 
 1 1 1 3 0  
 1 0 0 0  4.1
0 
so that
1
 H1   3 1 1 1 1   2.2 
 H   1 3 1 1 0   4.5 
 2    
 H 3    1 1 3 1 0   2.6
     
 H 4   1 1 1 3 0   4.1
 k   1 0 0 0 [0]  0 
Thus
xˆ   0 0.575 1.200 1.575 0 or
T

H1 = 0, H2 = 0.575, H3 = -1.200, H4 = -1.575 mm, k = 0

The vector of residuals

v = [0.6250 -0.5500 -0.0750 0.8250 0.9000 -0.2750] mm

The posterior variance of unit weight = 0.7550

The covariance matrix of parameters, Σx

0 0 0 0 
0 0.3737 0.1887 0.1887 
 xxˆ ˆ = 0 0.1887 0.3737 0.1887 
 
0 0.1887 0.1887 0.3737 
Hence
H1= 0 ±0 mm, (remember it is fixed!)
H2= 0.575± 0.6144 mm
H3= -1.200± 0.6144 mm,
H4= -1.575± 0.6144 mm
The same result would be obtained if one deleted the column of A corresponding to H1.

5
 COMPUTATION OF A FREE NETWORK (MINIMUM NORM SOLUTION)

We have seen the inclusion of datum constraints in the GMM as a way of introducing
datum definitions in geodetic networks. We have also noted that meaningful datum
selections are of the form
RT x  0

It was also seen that the introduction of these constraints affects the accuracy of the
estimable parameters. For example, introduction of fixed (control or datum) points in the
adjustments distorts the geometry of the network so that if the set of observations being
adjusted is more precise than the set of observations that established the datum points,
then this good internal consistency is distorted or lost.

In order to preserve the internal geometry of the network and yet use the fixed points to
overcome the datum defects, we result to what is called the free network adjustment.
The free network adjustment considers all coordinates of the network points as
provisional. In addition to the least squares and the Markov principle, an additional
condition, that of minimum norm is applied. The minimum norm condition has the
effect of making the length of the solution vector a minimum.

In the GMM of a free network adjustment, we have

E ( y)  Ax , D( y )   o W 1 , W  Q 1 .
2
(1)
The least squares condition is  W  min imum and in addition, we include the
T

minimum norm condition,


x  min imum (i.e. the length of the solution vector be a minimum).

The requirement of minimum norm solution leads to estimates with a minimum trace of
the cofactor matrix (implying small standard deviations). Thus,
trace(Q x )  min imum (2)

Let us use G to denote the null space (the eigenvectors corresponding to the zero
eigenvalues) of the singular normal equation matrix N. The general minimum norm
solution is characterized by the constraints,

GT x  0 , with AG  NG  0 . (3)

G contains the eigenvectors corresponding to the d-fold eigenvalue zero where d is the
rank defect of N.

For geodetic networks, the various forms of the G- matrix have been normalized (i.e. the
length (norm) of the rows are made equal to unity) and summarized as in Illner (1980).

We here give a summary of these forms.

6
One- dimensional networks
Examples of one- dimensional networks include leveling and gravity networks. The
maximum datum defect for each of these networks is one i.e. a vertical translation. The
G- matrix takes the form,
GT   1 1 1  Vertical shift (4)

Two- dimensional networks

Good examples are the horizontal networks popularly used for mapping surveys. The
maximum possible datum defects are four, as in the case where only angles have been
observed. If the parameter vector Δx is arranged in the form
x   xi yi  (5a)
then, G is of the form
 1 0 
 0 1 
G 
T   (5b)
 Yi  X i 
 
 X i Yi 

X and Y are approximate coordinates of the network. Row 1 and row 2 represent the x-
and the y- shifts (translations) respectively. Row 1 implies that the sum of the coordinate
changes in x is zero (i.e.  xˆ i  0 ). Similarly row 2 implies  yˆ i  0 .

The 3rd row defines the rotation about the vertical axis represented by
 (Yi xˆi  X i yˆi )  0 . (5c)

The 4th row adjusts the scale of the network to that defined by the approximate
coordinates represented by
 ( X i xˆi  Yi yˆi )  0 (5d)

If the datum information can be found in any of the available observations, then the row
representing this type of defect is completely left out. For example, if distances are
observed, then the 4th row is omitted in the restriction matrix altogether.

The datum defined according to (5b) satisfies the minimum norm criterion i.e.
xT x  min . This way, all the points contribute to the definition of the datum.

Three- dimensional networks

The maximum possible datum defects are 7. These are three translations in x, y and z,
three rotations in the respective three axes and a scale. If the parameter vector Δx is
arranged in the form

7
 x   xi yi z i  , then G takes the form
 1 0 0 
 0 1 0 
 
 0 0 1 
 
GT   0 Z i Yi  . (6)
 Zi 0 X i 
 
 Yi  X i 0 
 
 X i Yi Z i 
Rows 1 to 3 dispose of the respective translations in x, y and z while rows four to six
define respective rotations in x, y and z. The 7th row takes care of the scale if distances
are not observed.

Example (for 1- dimensional case):

Recall the leveling example of the previous lesson. We define the datum by setting the
constraint
GT x  0 such that G  1 1 1 1
We build
1
 xˆ   A T WA G   A T Wy 
k    T   
   G 0  c 

 3 1 1 1 1 
 1 3 1 1 1   2.2 
   4.5 
To get  1 1 3 1 1  , A Wy  
T , c   0
   2.6 
  1  1 1 3 1   
 1 1 1 1 [0]  4.1

so that
1
 H1   3 1 1 1 1   2.2 
 H   1 3 1 1 1   4.5 
 2    
 H 3    1 1 3 1 1   2.6
     
 H 4   1 1 1 3 1   4.1
 k   1 1 1 1 [0]  0 

x̂ = [0.5500 1.1250 -0.6500 -1.0250] k̂ = [ 0]

v = [ 0.6250 -0.5500 -0.0750 0.8250 0.9000 -0.2750]

ˆ 0 2 = 0.7550

8
covx =  ˆˆ
xx
=

0.1416 -0.0472 -0.0472 -0.0472

-0.0472 0.1416 -0.0472 -0.0472
-0.0472 -0.0472 0.1416 -0.0472
-0.0472 -0.0472 -0.0472 0.1416

Trace (  xxˆˆ ) = 0.5662 vs 1.1325 (fixed network)

Norm ( x̂ ) = 1.7439 vs 2.0619 (fixed network)