共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 31 毫秒
1.
《测量评论》2013,45(66):166-174
AbstractThe computation of geographical coordinates in a geodetic triangulation is usually carried out using Puissant's method, in which the assumption is made the sphere radius ν (the radius of curvature of the spheroid perpendicular to the meridian) not only touches the spheroid along the whole small circle of latitude ?,but also, since ρ (the radius of curvature in meridian) is very nearly equal to ν it makes such close contact with the spheroid that the lengths of sides and angles of a geodetic triangle may be considered identical on both sphere and spheroid. 相似文献
2.
Abstract Scale Correction Factor at a Point in Terms of X and Y.—Let dσ be a small line element of the curve ACB on the plane and ds the corresponding line element on the spheroid. 相似文献
3.
《测量评论》2013,45(14):464-472
Abstract The Mythical Spheroid.—The preceding article dealt with the fact that the spheroid of reference is a myth and that, even if it were not, we could not get hold of it at any given place. In order to apply corrections to observed quantities or, more generally, to operate upon them mathematically, we must make some assumption such as that of the spheroidal level surface. Probably a lot of harm has been done by attaching the notion of too concrete a thing to the spheroid. Disputes and misconceptions have arisen. People talk of“putting the spheroid down at a point” and imagine that the obedient thing is still at their feet when they get to another point, perhaps distant, in their system of triangulation or what not. Actually the spheroid may be disobedient not only as regards the direction of the vertical but also because it is above their heads or below their feet. What happens is that at each point afresh the computer treats the observations as if they were made there on the surface of a spheroid. In the same way, but travelling still farther along the road of hypothesis, he may treat observations for astronomical positions as if the compensation for visible elevations were uniformly distributed as a deficiency of density down to a depth of 122·2 kilometres. That was the depth which happened to give the smallest sum of squares of residuals in a certain restricted area, but nobody imagines that it corresponds with a physical reality, especially the ·2! It was a convenient mathematical instrument which, once the theory was to be given a trial, had to be fashioned out of some assumption or another. All this has little to do with geodetic levelling but is meant to try to banish the spheroid out of the reader's mind or at least to the back of his mind. In what follows we shall be compelled to make a certain amount of use of the family of spheroids but always with the above strictures in view. 相似文献
4.
《测量评论》2013,45(12):329-330
AbstractMajor Hotine (E.S.R., No. II, pp. 264–8) still finds the location of a reference spheroid to offer insuperable difficulties. I confess that my difficulty is to see his! In my previous article (E.S.R., No. 8) at the foot of page 76, I used the word “coincidence” in error for “parallelism”. This harmonizes the article and I am glad that Major Hotine has directed attention to the error. 相似文献
5.
《测量评论》2013,45(87):12-17
AbstractThe excuse for yet another paper on the Transverse Mercator projection, which has already received what should be more than its fair share of space in this Review, can only be that there is a fresh viewpoint to offer. It is the purpose of this paper to show that there are, in fact, two “Transverse Mercator” projections of the spheroid, of which one has hitherto almost escaped notice. 相似文献
6.
《测量评论》2013,45(65):131-134
Abstract1. In geodetic work a ‘Laplace Point’ connotes a place where both longitude and azimuth have been observed astronomically. Geodetic surveys emanate from an “origin” O, whose coordinates are derived from astronomical observations: and positions of any other points embraced by the survey can be calculated on the basis of an assumed figure of reference which in practice is a spheroid formed by the revolution of an ellipse about its minor axis. The coordinates (latitude = ?, longitude = λ and azimuth = A) so computed are designated “geodetic”. 相似文献
7.
《测量评论》2013,45(84):268-274
AbstractIn the E.S.R., viii, 59, 191–194 (January 1946), J.H. Cole gives a very simple formula for finding the length of long lines on the spheroid (normal section arcs), given the coordinates of the end points. In the course of the computation the approximate azimuth of one end of the line is found, the error over a 500-mile line being of the order of 3″ or 4″. If the formula is amended so that the azimuth at the other end of the line is used in computing the length of the arc, the error is then less than 0″·1 over such a distance. An extra term is now given which makes this azimuth virtually correct over any distance. Numerical tests show that Cole's formula for length and the new one for azimuth are very accurate and convenient in all azimuths and latitudes. 相似文献
8.
《测量评论》2013,45(58):142-152
AbstractIn January 1940, in a paper entitled “The Transverse Mercator Projection: A Critical Examination” (E.S.R., v, 35, 285), the late Captain G. T. McCaw obtained expressions for the co-ordinates of a point on the Transverse Mercator projection of the spheroid which appeared to cast suspicion on the results originally derived by Gauss. McCaw considered, in fact, that his expressions gave the true measures of the co-ordinates, and that the Gauss method contained some invalidity. He requested readers to report any flaw that might be discovered in his work, but apparently no such flaw had been detected at the time of his death. It can be shown, however, that the invalidities are in McCaw's methods, and there seems no reason for doubting the results derived by the Gauss method. 相似文献
9.
10.
《测量评论》2013,45(7):24-28
AbstractMeasured deviations of the vertical have been used in support, or in destruction, of such pleasant little diversions as the theory of isostasy. They have also been used to adjust a triang~lation for swing, by methods which may fairly be criticized; but they have not, as far as I know, been used for reducing the horizontal measures of a triangulation to the standard conventional level of the spheroid of reference. In most cases such corrections would, of course, be too small to worry about, but it by no means follows that they are always small. In the case of a continental arc of meridian traversing a very disturbed mountainous region exhibiting certain constant tendencies, it should at least be demonstrated that they are small before the question can be considered finally settled. 相似文献
11.
《测量评论》2013,45(43):274-284
AbstractRecently the writer of this article became interested in the conical orthomorphic projection and wanted to see a simple proof of the formula for the modified meridian distance for the projection on the sphere. Owing to the exigencies of the war, however, he has been separated from the bulk of his books, and, consequently, has had to evolve a proof for himself. Later, this proof was shown to a friend who told him that he had some memory of a mistake in the sign of the spheroidal term in m4given in “Survey Computations”, perhaps the first edition. Curiosity therefore suggested an attempt to verify this sign, which meant extending his work to the spheroid. This has now been done, with the result that the formula given in “Survey Computations”, up to the terms of the fourth order at any rate, is found correct after all. 相似文献
12.
《测量评论》2013,45(60):217-219
AbstractMap Projections.—A matter that should have been mentioned in the original article under this title (E.S.R., vii, 51, 190) is the definition of a map projection. In the list of carefully worded “Definitions of Terms used in Surveying and Mapping” prepared by the American Society of Photogrammetry (Photogrammetrie Engineering, vol. 8,1942, pp. 247–283), a map projection is defined as “a systematic drawing of lines on a plane surface to represent the parallels of latitude and the meridians of longitude of the earth or a section of the earth”, and most other published works in which a definition appears employ a somewhat similar wording. This, however, is an unnecessary limitation of the term. Many projections are (and all projections can be) plotted from rectangular grid co-ordinates, and meridians and parallels need not be drawn at all; but a map is still on a projection even when a graticule is not shown. Objection could be raised also to the limitation to “plane surface”, since we may speak of the projection of the spheroid upon a sphere, or of the sphere upon a hemisphere. Hence, it is suggested that “any systematic method of representing the whole or a part of the curved surface of the Earth upon another (usually plane) surface” is an adequate definition of a map projection. 相似文献
13.
《测量评论》2013,45(84):264-268
AbstractIn the last instalment of this article I showed how, by computing the difference in height between the spheroid and the sphere at the mid-point of the line, the third order term could be obtained and a more accurate correction to the spherical length applied. This allows the formula to be used for the determination of distances and azimuths for lines far exceeding 1,000 kilometres in length. 相似文献
14.
J. C. Bhattacharji 《Journal of Geodesy》1980,54(2):225-233
The Everest spheroid, 1830, in general use in the Survey of India, was finally oriented in an arbitrary manner at the Indian
geodetic datum in 1840; while the international spheroid, 1924, in use for scientific purposes; was locally fitted to the
Indian geoid in 1927. An attempt is here made to obtain the initial values for the Indian geodetic datum in absolute terms
on GRS 67 by least-square solution technique, making use of the available astro-geodetic data in India, and the corresponding
generalised gravimetric values at the considered astro-geodetic points, as derived from the mean gravity anomalies over1°×1° squares of latitude and longitude in and around the Indian sub-continent, and over5° equal area blocks covering the rest of the earth’s surface. The values obtained independently by gravimetric method, were
also considered before actual finalization of the results of the present determination. 相似文献
15.
《测量评论》2013,45(15):16-23
AbstractTHE formula for the projection is based upon the spherical assumption. To calculate it for the spheroid might be very complicated and would not be worth while. The projection is suitable for very large areas as a compromise between the Zenithal Equal-area projection on the one hand and the Zenithal Equidistant or Zenithal Orthomorphic on the other. Its application to an area as small as the British Isles would not serve any useful purpose. An analysis of its errors in the general case reveals some unexpected simplicities. This analysis is given below, followed by its application to the particular case of the British Isles on the ten-mile scale. This is done merely to find out what changes would have occurred if the supposed drawing of that map on Airy's projection had been real. 相似文献
16.
《测量评论》2013,45(65):112-123
AbstractWe now turn to a question which has received much attention of recent years; the possibility of transforming angular and linear field measures to an orthomorphic projection so that the results of a survey may be computed directly in plane Co-ordinates without having to go through the spheroid at all. Initially, orthomorphic projections were introduced into surveying practice for this very object. Over short lines they import so little distortion of angles that minor surveys, whose error of angular measurement is comparable with such distortion, may be reduced in the rectangular co-ordinate system of an orthomorphic projection just as if the earth were flat. But the present application goes far beyond that. We no longer ignore distortions of angles and lengths, but systematically introduce them into the field measures so that work of higher precision and of considerable extent may also be computed and adjusted in plane co-ordinates. 相似文献
17.
《测量评论》2013,45(32):85-89
AbstractThe necessity of transforming rectangular co-ordinates from one system of projection to another may arise from, various causes, One case, for example, with which the present writer is concerned involves the transformation, to the standard belt now in use, of the co-ordinates of some hundreds of points of a long existing triangulation projected a quarter of a, century ago on a, belt of Transverse Mercator projection, In this case conversion is complicated by the fact that the spheroid used in the original computation differs from that now adopted, and, also, the geodetic datums are not the same, The case in fact approaches the most general that can occur in practice, One step in one solution of this problem, however, is of perhaps wider Interest: that is, the transformation from one belt of Transverse Mercator projection to another when the spheroids and datums are identical. It is this special case which will be discussed here. 相似文献
18.
Summary Within potential theory of Poisson-Laplace equation the boundary value problem of physical geodesy is classified asfree andnonlinear. For solving this typical nonlinear boundary value problem four different types of nonlinear integral equations corresponding
to singular density distributions within single and double layer are presented. The characteristic problem of free boundaries,
theproblem of free surface integrals, is exactly solved bymetric continuation. Even in thelinear approximation of fundamental relations of physical geodesy the basic integral equations becomenonlinear because of the special features of free surface integrals. 相似文献
19.
《测量评论》2013,45(47):30-35
AbstractIn the Empire Survey Review for October 1938 (iv, 30, 480) a simple demonstration of the condition to be satisfied for conformal representation was given. This condition may be expressed by the equation w = f(z), where w and z are complex variables representing corresponding points in the w-plane and z-plane respectively, and f(z) is an analytic function of z. 相似文献
20.
《测量评论》2013,45(49):107-116
AbstractThat man is to be envied who can devote many of the best years of his life to the study of a special branch of science and make some advances in it. Such a man will usually receive recognition of the value of his labours from his fellows in the world of science, and this was certainly the case with Colonel Clarke. The excellence of his many years' work on geodetical subjects, such as thereduction of observations, formulre for the spheroid, figures of the earth, standards of length, and similar matters, was fully appreciated by scientific men during his lifetime, in this country as well as abroad. Curiously enough, his name does not appear in the “Dictionary of National Biography”, though he is, perhaps, the best known of British geodesists. A paragraph is devoted to him in recent issues of the “Encyclopredia Britannica”, but this paragraph is, in one respect, inaccurate. One may say that geodesy makes little appeal to the ordinary citizen, who usually would not know what it is all about. 相似文献