THE GRAVITY SYSTEM: BASE VALUES AND ANOMALY VALUES
LEVELH60-1THE NEW GRAVITY SYSTEM:CHANGES IN INTERNATIONAL GRAVITYBASE VALUES AND ANOMALY VALUES'GEORGE P. WOOLLARD and VALERIE M. GODLEYEOCTOBER 1980Prepared forNATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATIONGrant EAR 77-28552andOFFICE OF NAVAL RESEARCHContract N00014-75C-0209Project NR 083 603HAWAII INSTITUTE OF GEOPHYSICSUNIVERSITY OF HAWAIIHONOLULU, HAWAII 96822&pprovw for pulbue releo;l ed81 22606;
· ·THIS DOCUMENT IS BESTQUALITY AVAILABLE. THE COPYFURNISHED TO DTIC CONTAINEDA SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OFPAGESWHICHDONOTREPRODUCE LEGIBLYo
SECURITY CLASlIFtCATIO.I OFIIPAGI (fh., D00. Entered)REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGPAGEURF AD INSTRUCTIONSccOt.fPXTrrr'v; FOP.AFUAF12. GOVT ACCESSION NO. 3. RE9PI3C*'The New Gravity System: Changes in InternationaL/Gravity Base Values and Anomaly Values.S.George P./Woollard IMValerie M. Godley)RCORGATNME(PERFORMING ORGANIZATIONN6094-75-C#2V9.59-- 79.NAME AND ADDRESS&GephyicsAREAHawaif Istitte-vJRr, TAXWORK UNIT NUMBERSNR 083-603Hawaif GephyicsProjectIstitte2525 Correa RoadHonolulu, Hawaii 96822It-Report 80-1HIG3PERFORMING ORO. REPORT NUMBERCONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESSOffice of Naval ResearchOcean Sciences and Technology Division-VBaySt. Louis, M'S 3952014.MONITORING AGENCY NAMEt a AoDRESS(If dierenlt from Controlling Office)Office of Naval Research Branch Office1030 East Green St.Pasadena, CA 91106IS.DISTRIBUTIONUM@W0AE90IIS SECURITY CLASS. (of tli-rpoH)Unclassifiedas.OCk ASSIVIC ATION/ DOWNGRADINGSTNTEMENT (of this Repot)Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.17. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the obstlaet angered Inletok 20, II dJ1l*,mnt free Report)IS.SUPPLEMENTARY NOTESPublished as HIG Technical Report.IS.reverse aide it necessary end tdengifir by block number)KEY WORDS (Conthiuo oniInternational gravity anomaly valuesGravity corrections20. ADSTRPACT (Coninrue an reverse side It necessary and Identify by block numnber)On reverse.Do'JAR71473EDITION OFI NOV 65I1SOBSOLETE8/11 0102-014-6601 1SECURITYUnclassifiedCLASSiFICATION OF THIS PAGE FoM0u DeB rmid)
UnIclassifiedtSECuq1TY CLASSIFICATION Or THIS PAOSEU.an baenaeeEo)20.ABSTRACTThe effect of the adoption of the Geodetic Reference System 1967(GRS 67) theoretical gravity formula and the International GravityStandardization Net 1971 (IGSN 71) on gravity anomly values is assessed.The gravity standard represented in the IGSN 71 values is shown to notconform to that of modern absolute gravity values as well as one mightexpect although on an overall basis the apparent discrepancy does notappear to be greater than about 0.03 mgalper 1000 mgalchange.Thatthe source of error probably lies in the IGSN 71 adjustiment is broughtout by the close agreement (0.03 mgal ) for pendulum and absolute gravityintervals between Washington and Teddington and Paris and Teddington whichdiffer by approximately 0.1 mgalsites.from the IGSN 71 intervals between theseThe Potsdam datum correction of -14.0 mgalincorporated in theIGSN 71 values is shown to be essentially correct to within 0.03 mgal.An evaluation of 773 international gravity values published by Woollardand Rose (1963), which have been used extensively for gravity control,using the IGSN 71 values as a standard shows the following:(A) there isno detectable difference in gravity standard defined for observations atpendulum sites except in South America and India;(11)the median averagedatum difference relative to the IGSN 71 values is 14.7 mgal;(C) On anareal basis the gravity standard difference defined in South America, whichamounts to 0.2 mgalper 1000 mgal,does characterize the WoolLard andRose values in other areas but is mAsked by compensating tares (datumshifts) when only the data for pendulum sites is considered.A correctiontoble is given which permits anomaly values based on the old (1930) International Gravity Formula and Woollard and Rose (1963) gravity base valueswith an average datum offset of 14.7 mgal(or other datum) to be converteddirectly to the new gravity system. The latter is particularly applicableto the conversion of gravity anomaly maps for which the original datahave been lost.UnclassifiedStCuRI1V CLASSIFICATION OP THIS PAO e'lbuM Doateere
HIG-80-1The New Gravity System:Changes in International GravityBase Values and Anomaly ValuesGeorge P. Woollard and Valerie M. Godley'AOctober 1980Prepared forNational Science FoundationGrant EAR 77-28552andOffice of Naval ResearchContract N00014-75C-0209Project NR 083 603'Charles E. HelsleyDirector, -- AHawil.-ti-ute of Geophysics
jABSTRACTThe effect ofbeadoptivq40 the Geodetic Reference System 1967(GRS 67) theoretical gravity formula and the International GravityStandardization Net 1971 (IGSN 71) on gravity anomaly values is assessed.The gravity standard represented in the IGSN 71 values is shown to notconform to that of modern absolute gravity values as well as one mightexpect althoughkn.an overall, bs-id the apparent discrepancy does notappear to be greater than about 0.03 mgal/ pe' 1000 mgalchange.Thatthe source of error probably lies in the IGSN 71 adjustment is broughtout by the close agreement (0.03 mgal ) for pendulum and absolute gravityintervals between Washington and Teddington and Paris and Teddington whichdiffer by approximately 0.1 rgalsites.from the IGSN 71 intervals between theseThe Potsdam datum correction of -14.0 mgalincorporated in theIGSN 71 values is shown to be essentially correct to within 0.03 mgal.'& evaluation of 773 international gravity values published by WoollardRose (1963), which have been used extensively for gravity control,Eandusing the IGSN 71 values as a standard shows tte-f44kowing:(A) there isno detectable difference in gravity standard defined for observations at.pendulum sites except in South America and India;(B), the median averagedatum difference relative to the IGSN 71 values is 14.7 mgal;(C) On anareal basis the gravity standard difference defined in South America, whichamounts to 0.2 mgal,JI/Roseper ' 1000 mgal,values in other areas but isdoes characterize theaallard,masked by compensating tares (datumshifts) when only the data for pendulum sites is considered.AA correctiontable is given which permits anomaly values based on the old (1930) International Gravity Formula and Woollard and Rose (1963) gravity base valueswith an average datum offset of 14.7 mgal(or other datum) to be convertedf.iii,-S
directly to the new gravity system.The latter isparticularly applicableto the conversion of gravity anomaly maps for which the original datahave been lost.DT-'JU--pistr. iv
TABLE OF CONTENTSPageIntroduction1The GRS 67 Theoretical Gravity Formula3The IGSN 71 Gravity Standard and its reliability4The Potsdam Datum Correction and its reliability24Summary on the IGSN 71 Potsdam Datum Value andGravity Standard31Difference between Woollard and Rose (1963) andIGSN 71 Gravity Values38Comparison of Woollard and Rose gravimeter valuesand IGSN values at pendulum gravitv sitesin North America40Comparison of Woollard and Rose gravimeter valuesand IGSN 71 values at pendulum gravity sitesin South America56Comparison of Woollard and Rose gravimeter valuesand IGSN 71 values at pendulum gravitysites in Europe63Comparison of Woollard and Rose gravimeter valuesand IGSN 71 values at pendulum gravity sitesin Africa69Comparison of Woollard and Rose gravimeter valuesand IGSN 71 values at pendulum gravity sitesin the Pacific-Australian areav75
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)PageComparison of Woollard and Rose Gravimeter valuesand IGSN 71 values at pendulum sitesin India and Iceland83Conclusions regarding the gravitj standard representedin the Woollard and Rose (1963) gravimetervalues relative to the IGSN gravity standard85Coufa:ison of Woollard and Rose (1963) gravimeter valuesand IGSN 71 values on an areal basis87North American area90Comparisons in Alaska90Comparisons in Canada94Comparisons in the United States98Comparisons in Mexico98Comparisons in Central America and the West Indies98Summary on comparisonof Woollard and Rose valueswitn IGSN values in North AmericaComparisonof Woollard and Rose (1963) values with IGSN 71values on an areal basis in South AmericaComparison113of Woollard and Rose (1963) values and IGSN 71values on an areal basis in EuropeComparison110124of Woollard and Rose (1963) values and IGSN 71values on an areal basis in other areas131Uorinarisons in Africa131Comparisons in Southwest Asia and Southern Asia131Comparisons in Southeast Asia and East Asia140vi-irs.--A
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)PageComparisoas in Australia and New Zealand145Comparisons on Oceanic Islands148Comparisons in Antarctica153Conclusions on the Woollard and Rose gravimeter valuesrelative to the IGSN 71 values154The conversion of gravity anomaly values based on the1930 International Gravity Formula and theold Potsdam datum value to Geodetic ReferenceSystem 67 and the International GravityStandardization Net 71 anomaly vii
LIST OF TABLESTable1PageDifference between Theoretical Sea level gravityvalues as determined by the 1930 InternationalGravity Formula and the Geodetic Reference System1967 gravity formula52Observed and adopted absolute gravity values3Comparison of adopted absolute gravity valuesand IGSN 71 values410iiPendulum gravity data, Madison-Washington Teddington - Rome and comparative IGSN 71values516Creep corrected final pendulum values MadisonWashington - Teddington - Rome619Comparison of final pendulum interval valuesand IGSN 71 interval values. Madison - WashingtonTeddington - Rome720Comparison of absolute, relative pendulum andIGSN 71 gravity interval values between Washingtonand Teddington821Comparison of absolute, relative pendulum andIGSN 71 gravity interval values between Parisand Teddington923Evaluation of IGSN 71 Potsdam datum correctionrelative to Teddington28ix
LIST OF TABLES (continued)Table10PagePertinent data for evaluation of the Potsdamdatum correction relative to Washington,Teddington and Paris1129Comparison of Woollard and Rose (1963) and IGSN71 gravity values at pendulum sites and theirexcenters in North America - (A) Western andCentral series1241Comparison of Woollard and Rose (1963) and IGSN71 gravity values at pendulum sites in NorthAmerica. (B) Eastern series and Central Americanextension to Panama1347Comparison of Woollard and Rose (1963) and IGSN71 gravity values at pendulum sites in SouthAmerica. (A)14Andean (West Coast) Series57Comparison of Woollard and Rose (1963) and IGSN71 gravity values at pendulum sites in SouthAmerica. (B) Atlantic (East Coast) Series15Comparison of Woollard and Rose (1963) and IGSN71 gravity values at pendulum sites in Europe165964Comparison of Woollard and Rose (1963) and IGSN71 gravity values at pendulum sites in Africa(A) Mid Continent series1770Comparison of Woollard and Rose (1963) and IGSN71 gravity values at pendulum sites in Africa(B) West Coast series72x
LIST OF TABLES (continued)PageTable18Comparison of Woonlai, and Rose and IGSN 71/ravityvalues at pendulum sites in the76Pacific-Australian area19Comparison of Woollard and Rose and IGSN 71gravity values at pendulum sites in India84and Iceland20Datum differences for Woollard and Rose (1963)values relative to IGSN 71 values on the principal88gravity standardization r:ange21Comparison of Woollard and RoFe (1963) gravimeter91values and IGSN 71 values in Alaska22Comparison of Woollard and Rose (1963) gravimeter95values and IGSN 71 values in Canada23Comparison of Woollard and Rose (1963) gravimetervalues and IGSN 71 values in the United States24Comparison of Woollard and Rose (1963) gravimeter106values and IGSN 71 values in Mexico2599Comparison of Woollard and Rose (1963)gravimetervalues and IGSN 71 values in Central America and108the West Indies26Comparison of Woollard and Rose (1963) gravimetervaluec and IGSN 71 values in South America27114Comparison of Woollard and Rose (1963) gravimetervalues and IGSN 71 values in Europexi125
(LIST OF TABLES (continued)PageTable28Comparison of Woollard and Rose gravimeter valuesand IGSN 71 values in Africa29132Comparison of Woollard and Rose gravimeter valuesand IGSN 71 values in Southwest Asia and Southern136Asia30Comparison of Woollard and Rose gravimeter valuesand IGSN 71 values in Southeast Asia and East Asia31Comparison of Woollard and Rose gravimeter valuesand IGSN 71 values in Australia and New Zealand32149Comparison of Woollard and Rose gravimeter valuesand IGSN 71 values in Antarctica34146Comparison of Woollard and Rose gravimeter valuesand IGSN 71 values on oceanic islands33141i54Conversion table for anomaly values pre 1971 to valuesbased on GRS 1967 theoretical gravity formula withf 1/298.25 and IGSN 71 valuesxii6-164
LIST OF FIGURESPageFigure1Difference between Theoretical Sea level gravityvalues as determined by the 1930 Internationalgravity formula and the Geodetic Reference8System 1967 gravity formula2Difference between IGSN 71 values and adopted12absolute gravity values3A - Plot of pendulum closure values MadisonWashington - Teddington - RomeB - Plot of comparison of pendulum values andIGSN 71 values Madison - Washington - Teddington - Rome4Effect17of improvements in instrumentation and calibrationprocedures on gravimeter results obtained at pendulumsites on Rocky Mt. Front gravity standardization rangePoint Barrow, Alaska to Mexico CityA - Woollard and Rose 1963 values (1948-1962) vs.IGSN 71valuesB - Army Map Service Far East 1964 values (average 4LaCoste-Romberg gravimeters) vs. IGSN 71 valuesC - Air Force 1381st Geodetic Squadron 1965-1966(average 5 LaCoste-Romberg gravimeters) vs. IGSN71 valuesD - Woollard and Longfield (unpublished) 1965 (average3 LaCoste-Romberg gravimeters) calibrated againstpendulum values vs. IGSN 71 valuesxiii33
LIST OF FIGURES (continued)PageFigure5Difference in laboratory calibration of LRG-l basedon 11 and 33 point laboratory calibration and relationof this calibration to pendulum values637Difference between Woollard and Rose (1963) andIGSN 71 gravity values at pendulum sites and theirexcenters in North America as a function of absolute50gravity7Distribution plots of differences in Woollard andRose (1963) and IGSN 71 gravity values at pendulumsites in North America. A - Relative to IGSN 71 valuesof Morelli, et al.(1974) using individual values,B - Using average values for each site. C - Relativeto IGSN 71 values of DMAAC. D - Spread in excenter52connections at each site8Difference between Woollard and Rose (1963) andIGSN 71 gravity values at pendulum sites and theirexcenters in North America on individual gravity rangesA - West Coast SeriesB - Rocky Mt. SeriesC - Mid Continent SeriesD - East Coast Series954Difference between Woollard and Rose (1963) and IGSN71 gravity values at pendulum sites and their excentersin South AmericaA - Combined DataB - Andean SeriesC - Atlantic (East Coast) Seriesxiv61
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)Figure10PageDifference between Woollard and Rose (1963) and IGSN71 gravity values at pendulum sites in EuropeA - As a function of absolute gravityB - Distribution plots of differences1168Difference between Woollard and Rose (1963) and IGSN71 gravity values at pendulum sites in AfricaA - Combined dataB - Mid-continent (East Africa) SeriesC - West Africa Series1273Difference between Woollard and Rose (1963) and IGSN71 gravity values at pendulum sites in the PacificAustralian areaA - Pacific-Eastern Australia andNew Zealand seriesB - Western Australian series138-Distribution plots of differences in Woollard andRose gravimeter values and IGSN 71 values on anareal basis in North AmericaA - AlaskaB - CanadaC - United StatesD - MexicoE - Central America and the West Indies93IAixv.--
LIST OF FIGURES (continued)Filture14PaleDifference in Woollard and Rose values and IGSN 71values as a function of absolute gravity on anareal basisA - AlaskaB - MexicoC - United States112D - Canada15Distribution plots of the differences in Woollardand Rose values and IGSN 71 values on an arealbasis in South America16A - ColombiaE - ChileB - EcuadorF - VenezuelaC - PeruG - BrazilD - BoliviaH - Argentina121Difference in Woollard and Rose values and IGSN71 vilues as a function of absolute gravity inSouth AmericaA - Combined data for Colombia, Ecuador,Peru, Bolivia and ChileB - Combined data for Venezuela, theGuianas, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguayand ArgentinaIxvi122
LIST OF FIGURES (continued)PageFigure17Distribution plots of differences in Woollard andRose (1963) gravimeter values and IGSN 71 valueson an areal basis18A - EuropeD - SE Asia and E AsiaB - AfricaE - Australia and New ZealandC - SW Asia and S AsiaF - Oceanic Islands129Differences between Woollard and Rose and IGSN 71values on an areal basis as a function of absolutegravity in A - Europe and B - Africa19130Differences between Woollard and Rose and IGSN 71values on an areal basis as a function of absolutegravity inA - Southwest and South AsiaB - Southeast and East AsiaC - Australia and New Zealand20139Differences between Woollard and Rose and IGSN 71values on oceanic islandsA - North and South Atlantic OceansB - Pacific and Indian Oceans21Distribution plot of differences in Woollard and Rosevalues and IGSN 71 values on a worldwide basis22152Distribution plot of differences in Woollard and Rosevalues and IGSN 71 values in terms of the three principalgroupings of differences in valuesA - North Americaxvii156
LIST OF FIGURES (continued)PagefigureB - Europe, Africa, Australia, Asia andOceanic IslandsC - South America23157Differences in IGSN 71 values as determined byDMAAC and Morelli, et al (1974) as a function of159absolute gravity24Correction in mgalfor each 10 of latitude inconverting anomaly values based on the 1930International Gravity formula and old Potsdamdatum to GRS 67 gravity formula and IGSN 71gravity values assuming -14.7 mgalaverage datumcorrection for Woollard and Rose (1963) International Gravity Measurementsxviii165
INTRODUCT IONThere were two actions taken by the International Associatio& ofGeodesy at the 1971 Moscow meeting of the International Union ofGeodesy and Geophysics which have worldwidesignificance in the use ofgravity for geodetic, geological and geophysical investigations. One wasthe adoption of a new geodetic reference system which resulted in a significant modification of the International Gravity Formula that had beenin use since 1930 for defining the theoretical sea level va)e ofgravity.The other, having two related parts, was the adoption of a newvalue for the Potsdam international gravity datum and an internationalgravity standard based in large measure on ten modern absolute gravitydeterminations. In combination, these actions made all former gravityanomaly values obsolete and incompatible in varying amounts, dependingprimarily on latitude and to a lesser degree on gravitational attraction,with anomaly values computed under the old (1930) reference system, theold Potsdam datum value and the various gravity standards that had beenin use.The purpose of this paper isfourfold:(1) to present the changein theoretical gravity values occasioned by the adoption of the newreference ellipsoid(Geodetic Reference System, 1967), which will bereferred to as GRS 67; (2) to evaluate the reliability of the gravitystandard and Potsdam datum correction incorporated in the values of theInternational Gravity Standardization Net (IGSN 71) prepared by Morelliet al.(1974) and now being adopted by most countries for gravity controland the calibration of gravimeters; (3) to establish the difference!4;-9
3between the IGSN 71 values and those published by the Society of Explor-ation Geophysicists (Woollard and Rose, 1963) which have been usedextensively for gravity control throughout the world5 (4) to present acorrection scheme that will permit gravity anomaly values based on theold International Gravity Formula and the Woollard and Rose (1963) orother base values to be converted to those that would be obtained usingthe new GRS 67 theoretical gravi
Do 'JAR7 1473 EDITION OFI NOV 65I1SOBSOLETE . in the Pacific-Australian area 75 v. TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) . and Rose Gravimeter values and IGSN 71 values at pendulum sites in India and Iceland 83 Conclusions regarding the gravitj standard represented in the Woollard and Rose (1963) gravimeter values relative to the IGSN gravity .
May 02, 2018 · D. Program Evaluation ͟The organization has provided a description of the framework for how each program will be evaluated. The framework should include all the elements below: ͟The evaluation methods are cost-effective for the organization ͟Quantitative and qualitative data is being collected (at Basics tier, data collection must have begun)
Silat is a combative art of self-defense and survival rooted from Matay archipelago. It was traced at thé early of Langkasuka Kingdom (2nd century CE) till thé reign of Melaka (Malaysia) Sultanate era (13th century). Silat has now evolved to become part of social culture and tradition with thé appearance of a fine physical and spiritual .
Dr. Sunita Bharatwal** Dr. Pawan Garga*** Abstract Customer satisfaction is derived from thè functionalities and values, a product or Service can provide. The current study aims to segregate thè dimensions of ordine Service quality and gather insights on its impact on web shopping. The trends of purchases have
On an exceptional basis, Member States may request UNESCO to provide thé candidates with access to thé platform so they can complète thé form by themselves. Thèse requests must be addressed to esd rize unesco. or by 15 A ril 2021 UNESCO will provide thé nomineewith accessto thé platform via their émail address.
̶The leading indicator of employee engagement is based on the quality of the relationship between employee and supervisor Empower your managers! ̶Help them understand the impact on the organization ̶Share important changes, plan options, tasks, and deadlines ̶Provide key messages and talking points ̶Prepare them to answer employee questions
Chính Văn.- Còn đức Thế tôn thì tuệ giác cực kỳ trong sạch 8: hiện hành bất nhị 9, đạt đến vô tướng 10, đứng vào chỗ đứng của các đức Thế tôn 11, thể hiện tính bình đẳng của các Ngài, đến chỗ không còn chướng ngại 12, giáo pháp không thể khuynh đảo, tâm thức không bị cản trở, cái được
MARCH 1973/FIFTY CENTS o 1 u ar CC,, tonics INCLUDING Electronics World UNDERSTANDING NEW FM TUNER SPECS CRYSTALS FOR CB BUILD: 1;: .Á Low Cóst Digital Clock ','Thé Light.Probé *Stage Lighting for thé Amateur s. Po ROCK\ MUSIC AND NOISE POLLUTION HOW WE HEAR THE WAY WE DO TEST REPORTS: - Dynacó FM -51 . ti Whárfedale W60E Speaker System' .
Le genou de Lucy. Odile Jacob. 1999. Coppens Y. Pré-textes. L’homme préhistorique en morceaux. Eds Odile Jacob. 2011. Costentin J., Delaveau P. Café, thé, chocolat, les bons effets sur le cerveau et pour le corps. Editions Odile Jacob. 2010. Crawford M., Marsh D. The driving force : food in human evolution and the future.
