[Proj] datum conversion, estimating parameters
ndzinn at houston.rr.com
Wed Mar 23 18:53:50 EST 2005
Given ECEF coordinates in both datums, solving for the 7 parameters is just
a least-squares problem. Unfortunately, the 7 geocentric parameters are
highly correlated in a small area. For example, at a single point it's
possible to solve for the 3 translations or for 2 rotations (any two if your
area of interest is Germany) and the scale factor and get the same results.
That's due to the correlations among the parameters. It takes a large area
to reduce those correlations geometrically. The area of Germany is less
than 0.1% of that of the world. Consequently, the dillution of precision
(DOP) in solving for all 7 parameters in Germany with, say, 40 uniformly
distributed points is about 15. If you're familiar with the DOP concept
from GPS, that's a big number. Fewer points, more DOP. In a country the
size of Australia 40 well distributed points yields a DOP of 3. That's
something to work with. And the Australians have done it!
In Europe NATO has been less cautious about about ill-conditioned
least-squares problems and has published 7-parameter shifts for a number of
countries. This link => ftp://126.96.36.199/pub/gig/datums/NATO_DT.pdf once
got one to their published list, but I see it's broken at the moment. Maybe
it will pop back up, and maybe you'll find your unknown datum among them.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Jaeschke" <robert-j at gmx.de>
To: "PROJ.4 and general Projections Discussions" <proj at xserve.flids.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2005 2:32 PM
Subject: Re: [Proj] datum conversion, estimating parameters
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 08:22:04PM -0600, Noel wrote:
>> To accomplish what you intend you need the ECEF (geocentric Cartesian)
>> coordinates for at least one point in both datums.
> Thank you. If i would have read the docs more carefully ... :-(
>> Differencing those ECEF
>> coordinates will give the the three translations (the first 3 of the 7
>> parameters, the rest of the parameters being zero), which is all you can
>> hope for with one point. Solving for the other parameters requires many
>> more points over (and this is very important) a LARGE area in order to
>> achieve any statistical significance. The problem is ill-conditioned
>> a small area.
> That's clear and makes the problem not easier: I have only data of
> Germany ...
>> This problem is NOT solved in projected space.
> My first thought was: Why not convert all values to geocent and then
> repeat my steps? Of course, I tried it. And of course it does not work.
> For conversion to geocent, level above sea is important and I don't have
> these values. And there are probably more reasons for that it's
> what I want. :-(
> Regards, Robert
> "I don't even have an e-mail address. I have reached an age where my main
> purpose is not to receive messages."
> --- Umberto Eco, quoted in the New Yorker
> Proj mailing list
> Proj at xserve.flids.com
More information about the Proj