EDITORIAL BOARD

Usec. Peter N. Tiangco, PhD

Chairperson

Deputy Administrator Efren P. Carandang

Deputy Administrator John Santiago F. Fabic
Members

EDITORIAL STAFF

Executive Editor
John Santiago F. Fabic

Editor in Chief
Maria Romina dR. Pe Benito

Managing Editor
Annrou R. Ramos

Branch Representatives
LCdr. Gilbert A. Alviola, LCdr. Aaron Andro V. Ching, and Norelius G.
Baloran (HB); Charisma Victoria D. Cayapan, Leo B. Grafil, and Jane
V. Roque (MGB); Assistant Director Federico D. Macaraeg and Sylvia
L. Esperanza (RDAB); Lorelei E. Peralta and Xenia R. Andres (SSB)

Contributors
Ronaldo C. Gatchalian, Charisma Victoria D. Cayapan, Cesar B.
Buenaobra, Donnie T. Mancera, Ma. Almalyn A. Balladares, Aila
Leana T. Sampana, Hennesey R. Marohom, and Abner A. Belmonte
(MGB); and LCdr. Gilbert A. Alviola (HB)

Graphic Arts Staff

Erwin D. Famatiga
Andy Nicolas G. Adeva

Photography Staff
Erlito P. Saberola
Erwin D. Famatiga
Andy Nicolas G. Adeva

Support Staff
Jois Roueli O. Ferrer

Published by the Geospatial Information Services Division -

Geospatial Information System Management Branch
(GISD-GISMB), under the auspices of OIC-Director Febrina E.
Damaso and Assistant Director Benjamin P. Balais.

National Mapping and Resource Information Authority (NAMRIA)

Office: Lawton Avenue, Fort Andres Bonifacio, Taguig City.
Telephone Number: (632) 8810-4831 to 36, locals 430 & 440.
Readers can email [email protected] or fax letters to
(632) 8884-2855 for their comments and suggestions.

Article Ownership
The Infomapper is a registered publication of NAMRIA. All articles
written herein by NAMRIA personnel are owned by NAMRIA.
Citations are required if using or copying portions of the articles.
The re-publication or re-printing of articles in their entirety requires
a written permission from the Infomapper Editorial Board.

Publication date: September 2021

FOREWORD

T
he National Mapping and Resource Information Authority (NAMRIA) is
pleased to present this issue of Infomapper, NAMRIA’s annual and semi-
technical banner publication.

This year’s issue focuses on the Modernization of the Philippine Geodetic

Reference System (PGRS), pursuant to NAMRIA’s mandate to establish and maintain
the primary geodetic reference frame for all surveying and mapping activities in the
country.

The first geodetic control network in the Philippines was put up from 1901 to
1946 by the Americans through the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey, the
forerunner of the Bureau of Coast and Geodetic Survey (BCGS). The BCGS was one
of the agencies merged into NAMRIA in 1987 under Executive Order number 192.
NAMRIA upgraded the old national geodetic network into the Philippine Reference
System of 1992 (PRS92). This was under the Geodetic Survey Component of the
Philippines-Australia Natural Resources Management and Development Project
implemented by DENR from 1989 to 1992. The year “1992” was the date when the
initial upgrading of the network was finished. In 1993, by virtue of Executive Order
number 45, PRS92 was made the standard reference for all mapping and surveying
activities in the Philippines.

At present, NAMRIA is undertaking the modernization of PRS92, as part of its

vision of building a geospatially empowered Philippines. The endeavor is aligned
with Resolution 266 of the United Nations General Assembly during its 69th Session,
dated 26 February 2015, that recommends the adoption and active participation
of Member States in the definition of a global geodetic reference frame (GGRF) for
sustainable development. The program will upgrade the existing PRS92, from a static
and local system, to a datum consistent with GGRF that is in sync with real world
ground deformations, to be managed and utilized by competent PGRS stakeholders.
This 2021 edition of Infomapper deals with the developments made with the PGRS.

It is our hope that this issue will be a useful information, education, and
communications tool for all stakeholders of the PGRS about the datum change, and
how this will impact on their surveying and mapping activities.

It is time to change, from old to new, from local to global reference system. In
order for us to be at par with other countries, international standards compel us to
have a geodetic reference system that is interoperable and allows exchange of data.

Thank you and always stay safe. 

Usec. PETER N. TIANGCO, PhD, CESO I

Administrator, NAMRIA
39
13 38
CONTENTS

05 Developing the Modern

Philippine Geodetic Reference
System

11 The Philippine Geocentric

Datum of 2020 (PGD2020): A
Dynamic Reference Frame for a 19
Modern Philippines

25 Philippine Geodetic Vertical

Datum 2020 (PGVD2020)

27 Geodetic Level Network of the Philippines

34 Land Gravity Survey in the Philippines

37 Validation of the Philippine Geoid Model

43 Estimating Elevations using the PGM2018 47

50 Applications of PGRS

51 Modern PGRS: What is in it for You?

53 Positioning in Hydrographic Survey and the

Modernization of PGRS
 Developing the Modern Philippine
Geodetic Reference System

T
by: Engr. Charisma Victoria D. Cayapan and Engr. Abner A. Belmonte

he past two decades witnessed the upsurge of geospatial

information and location-based services, with people becoming
increasingly dependent on knowing the "where" of the "what"
to go about their daily lives. For inclusive and sustainable
development of the country’s natural and built resources, an
evidence-based decision making anchored on accurate, up-to-
date, and reliable geospatial information is essential.
As in all types of measurements, defining one’s location (or
position) depends on the frame of reference from which the
measurement is reckoned. Similarly, the quality of the position varies depending on the
method used to arrive at that measurement. When position measurements carry with it About the Photo: Shown
legal rights, geodetic techniques are normally employed to achieve a high level of precision are the velocities of the Asia

and accuracy, and to ensure that results are authoritative, i.e., consistent with other
Pacific Reference Frame
(APREF) from its network
measurements, accurate according to published standards, and repeatable regardless of of participating continuously

who made the measurement.

operating GNSS reference
stations (One of the
distinguishing characteristics

Defining Positions with Geodesy of modern reference frames

is modelling geodynamism
and studying its impact

Geodesy plays a crucial role in accurately determining the locations of objects,

on positioning. NAMRIA
contributes PAGeNet data
people, and events. Formally defined, Geodesy is the science of measuring and mapping to the APREF, which is

the geometry, rotation, and gravity field of the Earth including their variations with time
also closely aligned with
the International Terrestrial
(Plag, et. al., 2010). From the time of Erathosthenes when he attempted to measure the Reference Frame [ITRF]).
5 Infomapper 2021
 circumference of the Earth by looking down a well, the Generally, the terms reference frame and geodetic
work of geodesists continues to be relevant as the Earth datum are used interchangeably. For clarity, the
is constantly changing. Philippine Geodetic Reference System (PGRS) referred
to in this document pertains to both the reference
What makes position measurements more system and the reference frame.
accurate using geodetic techniques is that, unlike plane
surveying, it takes into consideration the curvature A geodetic datum is typically comprised of a
of the Earth, including other factors, i.e., gravity, that horizontal control network (to define geometric
may affect position determination. This is particularly positions) and a vertical control network (to define the
important when surveying or mapping large areas, elevations). Gravity observations are also conducted as
such as an entire continent or the whole world. variations in gravity impact elevation measurements.
Traditionally, horizontal control networks were
In defining positions with geodesy, one needs to established using astronomical observations and
understand reference systems, reference frames, and triangulation methods to compute the positions of
geodetic datums. Drewes (2009) differentiates the control points. The datum origin is normally set at
three terms as follows: a specific location, i.e., an outcrop of a bedrock, on
the surface of the Earth, and the orientation of the
• Reference systems – define the constants, coordinate axes are fixed using a reference azimuth
conventions, models, and parameters, between two control points.
which serve as the necessary basis for the
mathematical representation of geometric and Classical geodesy treats geodetic datums as
physical quantities. static, with its parameters, i.e., origin, the direction of
coordinate axes, and scale, fixed over time. Advances
• Reference frame – the realization of the in space geodetic techniques, that brought about the
reference system either physically, i.e., by a solid increase in the temporal and spatial resolution of
materialization of points, and mathematically, geodetic measurements and products, paved the way
i.e., by the determination of parameters, e.g., for modern reference systems. Modern reference
geometric coordinates. systems are characterized as geocentric, i.e., origin
is at the center of the Earth, global (transnational),
• Geodetic datum – fixes unequivocally the and dynamic (time tagged 3D positioning) that make
relation between a reference frame and a accurate and reliable geospatial information more
reference system by allocating a set of given easily accessible to the public.
parameters, e.g., the coordinates of the origin
of the system (X_0, Y_0, Z_0), the directions of For the Philippines, the geodetic reference primarily
the coordinate axes X, Y, Z, and the scale as a in use today is the Philippine Reference System of 1992
unit of length, e.g., meter. (PRS92) and the World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84,
6 Infomapper 2021
 1987 version) for geometric positioning, and the mean the earthquake monitoring by PHIVOLCS
sea level (MSL) for terrestrial elevation measurements. showed four big earthquakes (>Mw 7.0) in the
The legacy Luzon Datum of 1911 remains in use up to past three decades alone. These geodynamics
this day for land datasets that have yet to be integrated render the PRS92 coordinates obsolete in
into PRS92. areas experiencing significant deformation,
with positions becoming increasingly disparate
Transitioning to a Modern PGRS from their actual locations on the ground.
Lopez (2011) surmises that if the estimated 2-3
Discussions on modernizing the PGRS started as cm/year slip rate of the Philippine Fault Zone
early as the mid-2000s (Abad, 2003). However, the is considered, baselines, particularly those that
country’s geodetic infrastructure, human resource cross active faults, would no longer meet the
capability, and available resources at that time were published accuracy standards for geodetic
limited to realize and sustain a fully functional modern control networks after a certain period has
PGRS. elapsed. Galgana, et. al. (2019) also alludes to
the likely effect of geodynamics on the vertical
The nationwide implementation of the PRS92 controls due to local gravitational anomalies,
Project from 2007-2010 helped address some of and recommends periodic resurveys of controls
these inadequacies. Through the project, the geodetic particularly in highly deforming areas and
infrastructure was strengthened with the densification regions with significant accumulation of strain.
of passive geodetic control points (GCPs), benchmarks,
and gravity stations, as well as the establishment of the • Non-homogeneity of datum
Philippine Active Geodetic Network (PAGeNet) - the
country’s network of continuously operating geodetic Jones (1991) identified regional distortions that
reference stations. Also included in the project is the are inherent in the old triangulation network,
conduct of research and development studies, which which prevented the close alignment of the
include, among others, the recommendations for original Luzon 1911 coordinates to PRS92. The
upgrading of PRS92 (Paringit et. al., 2009). common stations used in deriving the PRS92-
WGS84 (1987) transformation parameters
Working on these gains and recognizing the need likewise did not include the Mindanao area
to upgrade PRS92, NAMRIA convened a Stakeholders' so the integration of cadastral datasets into
Forum on the Modernization of the Philippine Geodetic PRS92 had to be done locally, i.e., per cadastral
Reference System in 2012. The event led to the project/municipality. These hampered the
establishment of an interagency technical working seamless integration and interoperability with
group comprising of representatives from government other geospatial information.
agencies engaged in surveying and mapping, private
practitioners in the geomatics industry, as well as The differing mean sea levels also resulted in a
academic institutions providing courses in geodesy and disjointed vertical datum with benchmarks that
geodetic engineering. Through a series of consultative are not interconnected among the major island
meetings, the following key issues and developments groups. This issue is becoming increasingly
were identified and have necessitated the modernization significant with the massive infrastructure
of the geodetic datum: program currently being implemented by the
government. Bridge and railway constructions
• Degrading integrity of the geodetic control that span across islands or regions require
network because of geodynamics homogenous elevation measurements to ensure
proper alignment of infrastructure projects.
PRS92 was established almost 30 years ago.
Since then, the country has been subjected • Insufficiency of an existing datum to support
to regular, and in some cases, significant transnational applications, such as climate
ground movement that adversely impacted change research and monitoring, aviation,
the geodetic control network. An analysis of navigation, and crustal deformation studies.
repeated geodetic measurements reveals that
the different parts of the archipelago have The Philippines is ranked fourth in countries
varying velocity rates (Hsu et. al., 2016), while that are most susceptible to extreme weather
7 Infomapper 2021
 events in the period 2000-2019, based on Nations General Assembly Resolution 69/266,
Germanwatch’s Global Climate Risk Index. The which calls for Member States to adopt and
adverse impacts of these extreme weather contribute to the development of a GGRF to
events on the economy, and more importantly underpin sustainable development.
on the people, make climate change adaptation
a priority thrust, not just for the government. Most, if not all countries have already aligned,
or are in the process of transitioning from their
A global challenge requires a global approach local and static geodetic reference to a GGRF.
in dealing with climate change. Geodetic The International Terrestrial Reference Frame
observation techniques are organically (the realization of the International Terrestrial
operating in a global and geocentric reference Reference System) is the most accurate GGRF
frame. These techniques, which are considered available today, being realized by a combination
vital tools for studying and monitoring climate of four space geodetic techniques namely GNSS,
variables, include global navigation satellite VLBI, SLR, and DORIS. Throughout the years,
systems and satellite missions monitoring different ITRF realizations have been published,
Earth’s gravity field, such as NASA’s Gravity the latest being ITRF2014. The differences in the
Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) and coordinates between realizations are attributed
Challenging Mini-satellite Payload (CHAMP). mainly to geophysical effects and more data
The dynamic nature of the changing Earth availability. To date, the ITRF is used as the
also requires a geodetic reference that can basis for other global and regional reference
keep track of these changes. A local and static frames such as WGS84 and the Asia Pacific
datum such as PRS92 hampers monitoring and Reference Frame (APREF). It is also used as the
responding to these global events. foundation for a wide array of applications such
as navigation, timing, surveying, and crustal
In addition to climate studies, international deformation studies, to name a few.
standards on civil aviation and navigation also
call for the use of a Global Geodetic Reference • Increasing utilization of global navigation
Frame (GGRF) to ensure the safe passage of satellite systems and other global geospatial
people and goods from one territory to another. information and services
Continuing to adopt a local datum would mean
having to deal with discontinuities between The 2019 GNSS Market Report from the
aeronautical and navigational data, and land European GNSS Agency (GSA) forecasts that
datasets such as topographic maps and land by the end of this decade, GNSS receiver
thematic data. shipments will have grown to 2.8 billion units
from 1.8 billion in 2019, with 90% of these
• Emerging trends in global geodetic reference being used for smartphones and wearables to
frames access location-based services.

As early as 1990, the Fédération Internationale In addition, the emergence of web GIS and
des Géomètres (International Federation of the proliferation of freely available geospatial
Surveyors) recommended the adoption of a products and services like Google Earth have
global geodetic reference, instead of a local reiterated the need to upgrade PRS92. Position
datum like PRS92. The importance of global measurements in the local datum are generally
geodetic reference frames (GGRFs) is further off from a geocentric frame by 150 to 250
highlighted with the passage of the United meters. With the increasing utilization of GNSS

8 Infomapper 2021
 and its derived products, it is but logical to This modern PGRS is programmed to be realized,
adopt a geodetic datum that is compatible with maintained, and utilized by competent stakeholders
the system so that end users can readily access with a good understanding of 4D geodetic reference
geospatial information and services, without frames.
having to go through complex transformation
procedures. Since the formal launching of the PGRS
Modernization in 2017, a significant progress has been
The PGRS Modernization Plan, Progress, made in all its components:
and Way Forward
• Philippine Geocentric Datum 2020
With the drivers in mind, NAMRIA pushed forth the • Densified the PAGeNet to 55 active
proposal to develop a modern PGRS that will provide geodetic stations nationwide
access to an authoritative and globally consistent • Is aligned with the ITRF/Computed
geodetic reference that will be the foundation for PGD2020 reference coordinates
attaining the country’s sustainable development goals. • Completed 1st cycle of passive GCP re-
The strategies drafted primarily aim to: observation to update the coordinates
• Strengthen and upgrade the geodetic • Developed a national deformation
infrastructure through full utilization of model
modern positioning technologies such as GNSS, • Pilot tested the generation of a
• Establish the ICT mechanism to support FAIR distortion grid in NCR and Region III
(findable, accessible, interoperable, reusable) • Philippine Geodetic Vertical Datum 2020
geodetic reference data, and • Ongoing refinement and validation of
• Develop competent and informed PGRS the Philippine Geoid Model
stakeholders. • Interisland benchmarks connected
• Ongoing troubleshooting of the level
In a nutshell, the modern PGRS is envisioned to be: network
• A semi-dynamic geocentric datum (Philippine • Densified land gravity observations
Geocentric Datum of 2020, PGD2020) with
a reference epoch of 16 January 2020 for The modernization of the PGRS is an arduous task,
geometric positioning that is aligned with a fraught with not only technical but also legal issues. To
global geodetic reference frame and realized help address some of these issues, NAMRIA partnered
by a nationwide network of active geodetic with the University of the Philippines Training Center
stations and unified control points. PGD2020 for Applied Geodesy and Photogrammetry (UP-TCAGP)
comes with a national deformation model to explore the most suitable transformation strategy
to account for geodynamics, as well as a for migrating to the new datum and study its impact
distortion grid relating the existing datums in on the cadaster. It also tapped a post-graduate student
use to PGD2020. from the University of New South Wales (Australia) to
work on the methodology for connecting the country’s
• A unified vertical datum (Philippine Geodetic vertical datum to the World Height System.
Vertical Datum of 2020, PGVD2020) that is
consistent throughout the archipelago and The agency continues to invest in capacity-building
connected to the World Height System. It also measures to equip its technical personnel with the
comes with a national geoid model (Philippine needed skills in geodetic reference frame development.
Geoid Model) relating GNSS-derived ellipsoidal It commissioned the services of ThinkSpatial in
heights to orthometric (mean sea level) heights. Australia for training on the use of the scientific

9 Infomapper 2021
 software Bernese GNSS Software, and partnered with References:
Ordnance Survey International for the optimization
Abad S.C. (2003). Technical Aspects in the Upgrading and Implementation
of the PAGeNet. A series of trainings on deformation of PRS92. Conference paper presented at: Policy Forum and Mid-Year
modeling were likewise conducted with experts from Assembly of the Geodetic Engineers of the Philippines, Inc., National
Capital Region (GEP-NCR). 2003 December 13; Quezon City.
Newcastle University (United Kingdom) and Otago
University (New Zealand). Drewes H. (2009). Reference Systems, Reference Frames, and the
Geodetic Datum. In: Sideris M.G. (eds) Observing our Changing Earth.
International Association of Geodesy Symposia, vol 133. Springer, Berlin,
Through its active participation in various Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-85426-5_1

international fora on geodesy, NAMRIA was able to build Eckstein, D., Künzel, V. & Schäfer, L. (2021). Global Climate Risk Index
up its network among the global geodetic community, 2021: Who Suffers Most Extreme Weather Events? (Weather-Related Loss
Events in 2019 and 2000-2019). Bonn: Germanwatch Nord-Süd Initiative
which contributed significantly to its modernization e.V.
initiative. Its participation in the Reference Frame
European GNSS Supervisory Authority (2019). GNSS market report.
in Practice technical seminar series organized by Issue 6, 2019. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.
the United Nations Committee of Experts on Global org/10.2878/031762

Geospatial Information Management (UN-GGIM) led to Galgana G.A., Bacolcol T.C., Klein E.C., Cayapan C.V.D., Reyes R.B.,
the cooperation with Denmark Technical University and Rada W.M. (2019). Crustal Deformation of Luzon and its Implication on the
Stability of the Philippine Survey Network. Science Diliman (January-June
the US National Geospatial Intelligence Agency for the 2020) 32:1, 5-30. Quezon City.
conduct of the nationwide aerial gravity survey and the
Jones A. (1991). The Computation and Adjustment of the Primary Geodetic
development of the Philippine Geoid Model. Network of the Philippines. Internal report prepared for SAGRIC INTL Pty.
Ltd. as part of the NRMDP, Annex 3, Vol. 2. Quezon City.

Much remains to be done. With the transition Lopez E.D. (2011). The impact of tectonic plate motion on PRS92-linked
to the modern PGRS, there is a need to update land cadastral surveys. Felipe F. Cruz Professorial Chair paper presented at:
Professorial Chair Colloquium, College of Engineering, University of the
survey regulations, especially on geodetic control Philippines; 2011 July 4; Diliman, Quezon City.
networks, to make them compliant with international
National Mapping and Resource Information Authority (2016). Modernization
standards. The development of a web portal where the of the Philippine Geodetic Reference System Strategic Plan 2016-2020.
end-user community may access these modern PGRS Internal report. 23 February 2016.

products and services should also be in the pipeline Paringit E.C., Ventura D.A., Isada J.G.P. (2009). Research and Development
to promote user acceptance. The capacity building in Support of the Implementation of the Philippine Reference System of
1992: Results and Recommendations. Conference paper presented at: 7th
in geodesy and modern reference frames, be it within FIG Regional Conference. 2009 October 19-22; Hanoi, Vietnam.
the halls of academic institutions or through localized
Plag H.P., Rizos C., Rothacher M., Neilan R. (2010). The Global Geodetic
IEC campaigns, is a must to encourage advocacy Observing System (GGOS): Detecting the Fingerprints of Global Change
among stakeholders. Working with other government in Geodetic Quantities. In: Chuvieco E., Li J., Yang X. (eds) Advances in
Earth Observation of Global Change. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.
agencies to promote GNSS use and data sharing is also org/10.1007/978-90-481-9085-0_10
recommended to streamline government resources and __________________________________________________________

improve productivity. Engr. Charisma Victoria Dela Cruz-Cayapan is a

Geophysicist from NAMRIA. She obtained her Specializing
Master's degree in Navigation and Related Applications
The country's transition to a modern PGRS is (GNSS) degree from Politecnico di Torino (Italy) and her
inevitable and it is the next logical step for it to take if Bachelor of Science degree in Geodetic Engineering from the
University of the Philippines (UP) Diliman. She specializes
it wants to effectively respond to the needs of changing in GNSS applications in Geodetic Reference Frame
times. As a new decade is ushered in, NAMRIA remains Development.

committed to providing the government and the Engr. Abner A. Belmonte is a Geophysicist from NAMRIA.
public with accurate, reliable, and up-to-date geodetic He obtained his Bachelor of Science degree in Geodetic
Engineering from UP Diliman. He is currently assigned at the
products and services to help achieve the country’s PAGeNet group of NAMRIA as the archivist/record manager
sustainable development goals.  and client/user management focal person.

10
10
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Infomapper 2021
Infomapper 2021
 The Philippine Geocentric Datum of
2020 (PGD2020): A Dynamic Reference
Frame for a Modern Philippines

W
by: Engr. Charisma Victoria D. Cayapan and Engr. Ma. Almalyn A. Balladares

hen the Philippine Reference System of 1992

(PRS92) was developed in the 1990s, the experts
behind its realization recommended the adoption
of a geocentric datum and considered the effect of
geodynamics in the geodetic reference frame. The
emerging global issues in the following decades such
as climate change, advancing geodetic technologies,
and increasing vulnerabilities to natural and man-
made hazards, to name a few, further highlighted
the need for a datum, accurate and dynamic enough,
to meet the requirements of these developments.

Historically, geometric positioning in the country

has been referred to the legacy Luzon 1911 datum
or to PRS92 and its corresponding 1987 version
of the World Geodetic Reference System 1984
(WGS84). PRS92, established based on surveys About the Photo: Using

conducted in 1989-1991 using Global Positioning GNSS in establishing

geodetic controls to help in
System (GPS) technology, is commonly referred the rehabilitation efforts in

to as the modified Luzon datum since it retained Marawi City (Data from the
GNSS survey was used to
most of the old datum parameters (except for the control the unmanned aerial

geoid-spheroid separation) to minimize changes in vehicle [UAV] mapping of the

Most Affected Area [MAA] of
coordinates (see Table 1.) the city.)
11 Infomapper 2021
 Parameter Value
Reference Ellipsoid Clarke Spheroid of 1866
Origin Station Balanacan (Mogpog, Marinduque)
Latitude 13⁰ 33’ 41.000” N
Longitude 121⁰ 52’ 03.000” E
Reference azimuth (from south) 9⁰ 12’ 37.000” (Sta. Balanacan to Sta. Baltasar)
Geoid-spheroid separation 0.34 m (originally set to 0 m)
Table 1. PRS92 datum parameters

A local definition of WGS84 (1987) was used a national deformation model that can be used to
to facilitate the processing of the GPS baselines and incorporate the effects of geodynamics to position
adjustment of the network. The local definition of the measurements, and a distortion grid to facilitate the
WGS84 is estimated to approximate WGS84 (1987) integration of various adjustments of existing datums
to within six meters in latitude, longitude, and height to the new system.
(Jones, 1991). To relate the WGS84 to the modified
Luzon Datum (PRS92), a set of transformation ITRF: The Most Accurate GGRF
parameters was developed using 29 common stations.
The PGD2020 is designed to be constrained to
The Modernization of the Philippine Geodetic the International Terrestrial Reference Frame (ITRF).
Reference System (PGRS) Strategic Plan 2016–2020 The ITRF is the most accurate realization of the
identified the migration to a geocentric and (semi) International Terrestrial Reference System (ITRS), and
dynamic datum as vital towards achieving the country’s it is maintained by the International Earth Rotation
sustainable development goals. Named the Philippine Service (IERS) through a global network of ground
Geocentric Datum of 2020 (PGD2020), this datum is stations. It uses a combination of four space geodetic
envisioned to replace PRS92 as the standard reference techniques namely, VLBI, SLR, DORIS, and GNSS in
for geometric positioning in the country, and will also order to provide terrestrial coordinates to the highest
be aligned with a global geodetic reference frame possible accuracy. Figure 1 shows ground networks
(GGRF) being recommended by the United Nations of the four space geodetic techniques contributing to
General Assembly through Resolution A/Res 69/266 the ITRF2014 realizations. The ITRF has gone through
“A Global Geodetic Reference Frame for Sustainable different realizations throughout the years, with each
Development." PGD2020 is aligned with the newer version providing better accuracies owing to a
International Terrestrial Reference Frame at reference better modeling of geophysical processes and increasing
epoch 16 January 2020 (2020.044). It comes with number of stations contributing to its realization.

Figure 1. Ground networks

of the four space geodetic
techniques contributing
to the ITRF2014 realizations
12 Infomapper 2021
 The latest version, ITRF2014, for
example, includes enhanced modeling
of nonlinear station motions and a
post-seismic deformation model for
stations that have experienced large
earthquakes.

ITRF solutions are provided in

Cartesian ECEF (Earth-Centered, Earth-
Fixed) equatorial coordinates X, Y,
and Z. To transform to geographic
coordinates, the XVII General
Assembly of the International Union
of Geodesy and Geophysics (IUGG)
recommends the use of the Geodetic
Reference System 1980 (GRS80)
ellipsoid with the following parameters:
semi-major axis a=6378137.0 m,
flattening=1/298.257222101.

Connections to the ITRF may

be done through the use of the
International GNSS Service (IGS)
products which are typically referred
to the ITRF. Reference station
data, coordinates and velocities,
as well as precise orbits and clock
synchronization products are all
downloadable from the IGS website
and its associated data centers.

Aligning with the ITRF

PAGeNet: The Link to the World

Figure 2. Locations of PAGeNet stations

The alignment of the country’s

geodetic reference frame to the ITRF The establishment of the network was envisioned to usher in the
is anchored on the Philippine Active modernization of surveying and mapping in the country. With the
Geodetic Network (PAGeNet), the PAGeNet, surveyors get access to highly precise, post-processed, and
network of continuously operating real-time correction services via the internet. The availability of geodetic
reference stations established by reference station data ramps up productivity of surveying operations,
NAMRIA in 2008. To date, PAGeNet thus paving the way for streamlined and smarter organizations. With
is comprised of 55 active geodetic over 11 years of GNSS data available, the PAGeNet provides the most
stations (AGS) installed in strategic stable and accurate means to connect to the ITRF.
locations nationwide (see Figure
2). Three sites (site IDs PTAG, PPPC, Computing the PGD2020 Reference Coordinates
and PGEN) are part of the IGS global
network of tracking stations to improve The PGD2020 reference coordinates are based on the monthly
precise orbit determination and solution of the PAGeNet for January 2020. The daily solutions for
clock synchronization. Each station that month were combined to get the final Cartesian and geodetic
is equipped with high-end geodetic coordinates in ITRF2014 at the mean epoch 2020.044. To constrain
reference station equipment gathering the solution to ITRF2014, 17 IGS sites located around the archipelago
multiconstellation GNSS data. were identified (see Figure 3).
13 Infomapper 2021
 Figure 3. IGS stations around the Philippines

Of the 55 AGS, only 40 stations have data

completeness above 50% for the month of January Apriori Orbits, poles, and Single point
coordinates satellite clocks position
2020. For the 10 stations with below 50% data
completeness, their PGD2020 coordinates were based • Extrapolate IGC • Convert external • Compute using
and PAGeNet files to Bernese smoothed code
on the next best available 2019 monthly data and coordinates from format observation (for
projected to the reference epoch using the station’s reference epoch receiver clock
to epoch of synchronization)
estimated velocities. Two stations (PAPI and PILN) observation
were not included in the computation as they had no
data for January and their coordinate time series is Phase
Float solution Form baselines
not enough to provide a reliable velocity estimate. For pre-processing

PTGY (Tagaytay City) and PSJN (San Juan, Batangas), • Compute apriori • Screen phase • Compute single
tropospheric difference in
only the data after 12 January 2020 were used in the delays, update
observations for
preperation
cycle slips and
computation as the pre- and post-Taal eruption daily station coordinates outliers for ambiguity
and check resolution
solutions were not consistent (PTGY displacement = residuals
0.445 m from 11 to 13 January 2020).

The processing strategy adopted as depicted in

Ambiguity Final network Datum check
Figure 4 followed the standards set forth in the IERS resolution solution
Conventions (2010). Bernese GNSS Software V5.2, a
• Resolve • Compute final • Verify coordinates
scientific, high-precision, multi-GNSS data processing ambiguities to coordinates and and repeatability
software developed by Astronomical Institute of the their interer tropospheric of daily solutions
values estimates
University of Bern (AIUB), was used in processing.
Table 2 shows the processing parameters for Bernese
GNSS software V5.2. Figure 4. Bernese processing workflow
14 Infomapper 2021
 Processing Parameters
Observables GPS only (30s logging interval at 3° elevation mask)
Reference Frame ITRF2014 at mean epoch of observations (2020.044)
Pre-processing Phase-preprocessing to screen out cycle slips, outliers, and short
observation data
Adjustment Weighted least squares
Antenna phase center calibration IGS14 absolute antenna phase center variation model
Satellite orbits, Earth orientation IGS final products
parameters, and clock
Ocean tide loading model FES2004
Atmospheric tidal loading Ray and Ponte (2003)
Plate motion model NUVEL-1A no-net-rotation (NNR)
Troposphere A priori troposphere model using Dry Global Mapping Function; for wet
component, zenith path delays estimated using wet GMF estimated at 2-hr
intervals and horizontal gradient with CHENHER at 24-hr interval
Ionosphere Iono-free linear combination for 1st order effects, and ionosphere model for
higher-order
Ambiguity resolution Multi-step ambiguity resolution based on baseline length: Melbourne-Wub-
bena (<6,000 km), widelane and narrow lane AR (<200 km), Quasi Iono-
spheric-Free AR (<2,000 km), and Direct L1, L2 AR (<20 km)
Table 2. Processing parameters for Bernese

PRS92 to PGD2020 WGS84(1987) to PGD2020

Translation (X) -124.47672 ± 0.21247 m 3.14301 ± 0.21282 m
Translation (Y) -69.44938 ± 0.17345 m -2.20823 ± 0.17373 m
Adjustment -40.46850 ± 0.13473 m 6.57907 ± 0.13496 m
Rotation (X) 3.137706 ± 0.004687 “ 0.069745 ± 0.004695 “
Rotation (Y) -4.869823 ± 0.003039 “ 0.033146 ± 0.003044 “
Rotation (Z) -1.600408 ± 0.008176 “ -0.022323 ± 0.008189 “
Scale -1.01029 ± 0.01438 ppm 0.04465 ± 0.01440 ppm
RMS 0.03985 m 0.03991 m
Table 3. Preliminary transformation parameters

For comparing individual daily solutions, a Dealing with Geodynamics in the Reference Frame
maximum RMSE of 10 mm (for North and East
components) and 20 mm (for Up component) was A distinguishing characteristic of modern
applied. A 3-parameter Helmert transformation is also reference systems is their capability to handle
computed to check the fit of the daily solution with the geodynamics in the reference frame. The
surrounding IGS reference stations. Philippines is located in a complex boundary
zone with the converging movement of the
The PGD2020 reference coordinates are collectively northwest-bound Philippine Sea Plate on the east
a combination of adjusted and projected coordinates and the Sundaland Plate on the west creating an
using the best available data from the PAGeNet. active tectonic deformation zone. These motions
Results show that the final station coordinates have invariably affect the integrity of the reference
repeatability root mean square of 2.51 mm, 2.94 mm, frame, and one way to account for these is to
and 6.65 mm for N, E, U components, respectively. develop a deformation model that can be used to
To relate the PGD2020 to the existing datums in use, move backward and forward in time and still arrive
preliminary sets of transformation parameters, as at an accurate position.
shown in Table 3 were derived to facilitate the moving
to and from the new datum. The validation of the Using the following site trajectory model
initial set of parameters shows that the transformation determines how dynamic reference frames deal with
has a 2D accuracy of 6.15 cm. transient site motions, as shown in Equation 1.
15 Infomapper 2021
 motions, and the last two terms are the logarithmic
and/or exponential post-seismic motions.

To generate the national deformation model,

velocity measurements were sourced from NAMRIA’s
Equation 1. The site trajectory equation PAGeNet and geodetic control points re-observation
data, published velocity vectors from Hsu, et. al. (2016)
where x_0 and v are the station’s initial position and and Kreemer, et. al. (2014), and from the Philippine
velocity, respectively, δ_i are offsets due to equipment Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (PHIVOLCS)
changes, earthquakes, etc., while the fourth and fifth which also maintains continuous stations and campaign
terms are the annual and semi-annual harmonic sites nationwide for crustal deformation monitoring.

Coordinate Velocity Estimation Alignment of Grindding Validation

Computation • To compute velocity Velocities • To generate gridded • To velidate gridded
• To compute ITRF2014 estimates of sites • To align velocity velocity measurement velocity measurement
coordinates of AGS/ • Matlab PTS script mesurements from for the entire using select PAGeNet
passive GCPs (Otago University) different sources archipelago sites
• Bernese GNSS • Rectify (executable) • Generic Mapping Tools • SNAP or Python script
Software/AusPOS (GMT)

Figure 5. Deformation modeling workflow

Figure 5 provides a summary of the deformation M6.1 Central Luzon earthquakes, were marked on the
modeling workflow. For the latest version of the station’s coordinate time series (see Figure 6), including
deformation model, all available data from PAGeNet other sources of offsets like equipment changes, so that
stations were used, from when they were first established only the site’s secular velocity remains (see Figure 7).
up to 31 December 2019. The site velocities of the
stations were estimated using the daily coordinate Given that velocity measurements came from
solutions from the Bernese processing as input to different sources, each with its own reference frame
the site trajectory equation above. Major earthquake and estimation methodologies, the vectors were first
events, such as the 2017 M6.7 Surigao and the 2019 aligned to ensure that the velocities were all consistently

Figure 6. Coordinate time series showing the secular velocities

16 Infomapper 2021
 Figure 7. Position offsets due to an earthquake

in one frame prior to interpolation and

gridding. External constraints from
Kreemer et. al. (for the east and west
bounds of the archipelago) and Yong
(Sulu Sea region) were also applied to
improve gridding of velocities along the
boundaries where measurements were
sparse.

The secular velocity field generated,

as shown in Figure 8, covered 115°E to
127°E in longitude and 4°N to 21°N
in latitude at 3” interval. Validation of
the 2020 grid is currently ongoing, but
it is expected to be an improvement over
the 2019 version whose RMS are at 4.65
mm/yr and 3.58 mm/yr for the E and N
components, respectively, because of
longer time series used as input to the
velocity estimation of PAGeNet stations.

The deformation model still does

not include patches for large earthquake
events that happened in the past decade.
To incorporate this in the model, one
needs to have published dislocation
models of the earthquakes, or conduct
post-earthquake re-observation of
controls with sufficient density to
generate the deformation grids. Without
these patches, one cannot use the pre-
earthquake measurements for the
national re-adjustment. Figure 8. National deformation model (2020 grid)
17 Infomapper 2021
 Accounting for Distortions in the DENR regional offices. The network now consists of
Existing Datums 64,375 GCPs as of March 2021. There are two PRS92
coordinate sets available to date:
With the introduction of PGD2020, there is a need • the original National Resource Management and
to transform coordinates to and from existing datums Development Project (NRMDP) coordinates, and
(i.e., PRS92 or Luzon 1911), to ensure the successful • the 2010 adjustment when the zero-order
transition and integration of datasets into the new control network was established.
system. A similarity or conformal transformation is
typically employed as this preserves the size and shape A third set of coordinates computed from the first
of objects. Complicating this process, however, is the cycle of GCP re-observation campaigns from 2015-
presence of distortions in the existing control network 2019 is also available, but this is primarily intended
which can degrade the accuracy of the transformation. for the development and refinement of the deformation
model and distortion grids.
Whereas deformation deals more with positional
displacement brought on by secular motion of To deal with these distortions, a localized
crustal blocks, distortion is affected by the effects of transformation is sometimes done in addition to the
geophysical processes on positions. It is also affected datum transformation, since a 7-parameter similarity
by the subsequent changes introduced to the control transformation is, at times, not sufficient particularly
network. This is in the case of distortion, as the new if regional distortions are inherent in the network.
stations are added to the network, as the network is Such was the strategy implemented when Luzon 1911
propagated into the lower order control networks, or cadastral datasets were integrated into PRS92. In some
as new adjustment strategies are adopted. In the case cases, a national grid of distortions is developed, which
of PRS92, from the 332 first-order, 17 second-order is a more consistent and easier alternative compared to
and 11 third-order passive geodetic control points localized transformation.
(GCPs) originally comprising PRS92, the geodetic
control network has been sporadically densified over The process for generating the PGD2020 distortion
the succeeding two decades by NAMRIA and the grids generally follows the workflow provided in Figure 9.

Derivation of trans- Distortion Consistency check Interpolation Accuracy assessment

formation parameters computation • Magnitude and • Inverse distance • Transformed -
• 7-parameter Helmert • N, E components direction of distortion weighting Distortion
transformation vectors

Figure 9. Distortion modeling workflow

For the PRS92-PGD2020 distortion grids, three sets of to filter out non-conforming vectors. The gridded
coordinates are needed to compute the distortions: distortions are generated using an inverse distance
weighting interpolation, since it is assumed that the
• PRS92 official – published coordinates from distortions are spatially auto correlated, meaning the
the geodetic database distortion of a point will be affected by the distortions
of its nearest neighbors, and that the influence reduces
• PGD2020 official – based on the PGD2020 as the distance between the two points increases.
reference coordinates (January 2020 monthly
solution of PAGeNet) The same methodology was adopted in creating
a prototype distortion model for the National Capital
• PGD2020 transformed – transformed Region and Central Luzon, as shown in Figure 10. For
coordinates from a 7-parameter Helmert this pilot test, a total of 281 points comprising PAGeNet
transformation (PRS92-PGD2020) AGS and re-observed GCPs, were used in the distortion
computation. PRS92 and PGD2020 coordinates of 39
The distortion in the northing and easting PAGeNet stations nationwide were used to derive the
components is the difference in meters between the 7 transformation parameters. The PRS92 coordinates
PGD2020 official and transformed coordinates. A of the 281 points were then transformed to PGD2020
consistency check is done on the computed distortions using the derived parameters.
18 Infomapper 2021
 As presented in Table 4, on the average, NCR had Figure 10. Inputs to the distortion
modeling in NCR and Central Luzon
minimal 2D distortion at 6.9 cm (NE, NW direction).
Non-conforming distortion vectors (both in magnitude
and direction) were noticeably present in the province
of Pampanga, which also posted the highest average
distortions in Central Luzon. The distortions computed
per province and their corresponding directions are
shown below:

Province Min Max Ave StDev Dir

NCR 0.006 m 0.132 m 0.069 m 0.031 m NE, NW
Aurora 0.270 m 0.445 m 0.390 m 0.044 m NW
Bataan 0.067 m 0.401 m 0.273 m 0.118 m NE, NW
Bulacan 0.212 m 0.424 m 0.335 m 0.046 m NW
N. Ecija 0.158 m 0.791 m 0.403 m 0.158 m NE
Pampanga 0.345 m 1.160 m 0.611 m 0.284 m NE
Tarlac 0.030 m 0.747 m 0.411 m 0.150 m NE
Zambales 0.239 m 0.680 m 0.330 m 0.113 m NE

Table 4. 2D distortions computed Investigation into the non-conforming vectors

per province
eliminates geophysical causes, and points more to poor
data quality and inconsistent reference coordinates
used in the processing as the primary reasons for the
inconsistent distortions.
19 Infomapper 2021
 Figure 11. Distortions in the northing (top) and easting (bottom) components
20 Infomapper 2021
 The performance of the distortion model was throughout the country was conducted. By the end
assessed using preselected check points scattered over of 2020, the first of the three cycles of re-observation
the pilot area. As shown in Figure 11, on the average, the campaigns targeted for the refinement of the models
model was within 0.03 m (in both northing and easting were completed.
components) from the actual distortions computed on
the check points. The distortions derived from the Of the 50 zero-order GCPs established in 2008-
model were used to correct the PGD2020 transformed 2010, only 35 GCPs were re-observed during the 2015
coordinates of the check points. Results show that the campaign. Comparing the results of the zero-order GCP
residuals improved after the distortions were removed re-observation campaign with the estimated velocities of
from the data from 0.25 m and 0.06 m to 0.03 m in the the PAGeNet stations, it can be seen that the estimated
north and east components, respectively. velocities from the re-observation are generally
consistent with the velocities of the AGS nearest to the
Refining the Models: Passive GCP GCP, with most estimates falling within 1 cm.
Re-observation
The apparent velocity trends can also be observed
A key to the accuracy of the deformation model when the GCPs are clustered based on the major
and distortion grid is the availability of control points tectonic boundaries and active mobile microblocks
evenly distributed throughout the archipelago, with a as defined by Rangin, et. al. GCPs in the Luzon Block,
series of coordinate measurements to extract the site particularly its northern part, and the East Philippine
displacements and velocities. Continuously operating Sliver, largely trend northwest and move at a faster rate
reference stations, like the PAGeNet’s AGS, are ideal for compared to the rest of the archipelago (see Figure 12).
such monitoring. However, the current distribution of Based on Table 5, the GCPs in the Visayas Block showed
these stations is not dense enough for this purpose. the slowest velocities, which is to be expected as they
are caught between the northwest moving EPS and the
To supplement the data from the continuous southeast trending Sunda Plate, which the island of
sites, a re-observation of around 3,000 passive GCPs Palawan is a part of.

Figure 12. Active microblocks in the Philippines (left) and ITRF2014 displacement vectors of zero-order GCPs (right)
21 Infomapper 2021
 Average Veloceties (ITRF14) Difference
Passive GCPs Nearest PAGeNet AGS
Microblocks
Rate Distance Rate Rate
Dir Dir Dir
(mm/yr) (km) (mm/yr) (mm/yr)
Luzon Block
Northeast Luzon 51 NW 1-7 57 NW 6 
Northwest Luzon 49 NW 40 51 NW 2 
Central Luzon 27 SW 5 28 SW 1 
Bicol 43 NW 62-125 41 NW -2 
Visayas Block
Southern Luzon 11 NW/SE 8-66 10 NW -1 
Western Visayas 8 NE/SE/SW 8-66 5 NW NE/SE/SW 
Central Mindanao 17 NW/SW 35-86 18 NW/SW 1 
East Philippine Sliver
Bicol 30 NW 4-48 39 NW 9 
Eastern Visayas 30 NW 27-99 35 NW 5 
Eastern Mindanao 33 NW 68-87 34 NW 1 
Southern Mindanao Block
16 SW 62 18 SW 2 
Western MIndanao Block
16 SE 3-330 17 SE/SW 1 
Palawan/Sundaland
28 SE 3-330 28 SE 0 
Table 5. Computed ITRF2014 velocities of re-observed zero-order GCPs clustered per microblock

A re-observation of lower-order control

GCPs, as reflected in Table 6, showed that
the two PRS92 coordinate sets, i.e., original
NRMDP and the 2010 adjustment, had
different displacement trends (see Figure
13). For the 2010 adjustment (see Figure
14), the displacements tend to increase the
farther the GCPs are from MMA-1 (or PTAG)
in Taguig City. This is because MMA-1 was
the basis for the PRS92 coordinates of PTAG,
which was then held fixed in the succeeding
adjustments of other AGS and the zero-order
control network. This coordinate set became
the basis for the 2010 adjustment of PRS92.

For the original NRMDP coordinate set,

the displacements showed the distortion
introduced by succeeding network adjustments
as more control points are added to the
network. For the GCPs in Central Visayas, for
example, control points established after 2010
had the highest displacements (see yellow
vectors in Figure 14). Investigation must be
conducted to verify the quality of the controls
used and confirm the results of the processing. Figure 13. Re-observed lower-order GCPs
22 Infomapper 2021
 Figure 14. Re-observed lower-order GCPs and displacement vectors for PRS92 (2010) and
PRS92 (original) coordinate sets (left and right, respectively)

Average 2D Displacement (m)

PRS92 (2010 PRS92 (original)

Region
adjustment) <2000 2000-2005 2005-2010 >2010
I 1.063 0.014 0.440 0.181 0.177
II 2.322 0.092 - 0.017 0.021
CAR 1.607 0.204 - 0.260 0.203
III 0.437 0.175 0.210 0.258 0.257
NCR 0.084 0.000 0.139 0.067 0.061
IV-A 0.350 0.091 0.099 0.109 0.126
IV-B 1.484 0.029 0.187 0.411 0.849
V 1.406 0.000 0.000 0.157 0.201
VI 2.078 0.018 0.275 0.110 0.105
VII 2.137 0.273 0.650 0.222 2.239
VIII 1.722 0.325 - 0.333 0.0677
IX 2.446 0.189 - 0.181 0.508
X 2.717 0.031 0.107 0.066 0.398
XI 2.863 0.000 0.000 0.248 0.997
XII 2.976 0.078 - 0.183 1.104
XIII 2.593 0.012 0.226 0.128 0.792
BARMM 3.190 - - 0.000 0.074
Table 6. Computed displacements from re-observation of lower-order GCPs
23 Infomapper 2021
 Strengthening PGD2020 References:
Altamimi, Z., P. Rebischung, L. Métivier,and X. Collilieux (2016).
The foundations for realizing a modern reference ITRF2014: A new release of the International Terrestrial Reference

frame for geometric positioning in the country is Frame modeling nonlinear station motions. J. Geophys. Res. Solid
Earth, 121, 6109–6131, doi:10.1002/2016JB013098.
now in place: a network of active geodetic stations
providing real-time and precise positioning data to Clarke, P. and Edwards, S. (2017). Deformation Modeling and Dynamic
Datums [Training Material]. New Castle University (United Kingdom) and
users, a deformation model with secular velocity NAMRIA (Philippines).

fields to account for geodynamics in positioning, and Collier, P. A. (2002). Development of Australia’s National GDA94
the beginnings of a distortion grid to facilitate the Transformation Grids. Consultant’s Report to the Intergovernmental

integration of existing datasets to PGD2020. Committee on Surveying and Mapping. February 2002.

Dach R., S. Lutz, P. Walser, and P. Fridez (eds.). Bernese GNSS

Strengthening the geodetic infrastructure remains Software (Version 5.2). Astronomical Institute, University of Bern, Bern,
Switzerland, November 2015. ISBN 978-3-906813-05-9. doi: 10.7892/
critical to maintain the accurate realization of PGD2020, boris.72297.

especially given the geodynamic conditions in the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (2010). DENR
country. The current density of active geodetic stations Memorandum Circular 2010-06: Manual of Procedures on the

is still well below the 70-km spacing (~200 stations Transformation and Integration of Cadastral Data into the Philippine
Reference System of 1992 (PRS92). Retrieved from https://server2.
nationwide) targeted for the PAGeNet. NAMRIA needs denr.gov.ph/files/dmc-2010-06_895.pdf.

to step up the rate at which it installs these stations, or Fuller, S. and Rubinov, E. (2015). Bernese Course [Training Material].
explore other options such as partnerships with other ThinkSpatial (Australia) and NAMRIA (Philippines).

government agencies to fill in the gaps in the network. Gérard Petit and Brian Luzum (eds.). IERS Conventions (2010). (IERS
Technical Note; 36) Frankfurt am Main: Verlag des Bundesamts für

The re-observation campaigns of passive GCPs Kartographie und Geodäsie, 2010. 179 pp., ISBN 3-89888-989-6.

must be continued to complete at least two more cycles. Jones A. (1991). The Computation and Adjustment of the Primary

Developing earthquake patches for large earthquake Geodetic Network of the Philippines. Internal report prepared for
SAGRIC INTL Pty. Ltd. as part of the NRMDP, Annex 3, Vol. 2. Quezon
events must also be prioritized. These, together City.

with data from the PAGeNet and the re-observation Larden, D. R. (1992). Final Report for the Natural Resources
campaigns, will help ensure that the deformation Management and Development Project (NRMDP). Internal report

model is accurate and up-to-date. Likewise, continuing prepared for SAGRIC INTL Pty. Ltd. Quezon City.

the work on distortion modeling to cover the rest of the National Mapping and Resource Information Authority (2016).

country is also vital to ensuring the seamless transition Modernization of the Philippine Geodetic Reference System Strategic
Plan 2016-2020. Internal report. 23 February 2016.
from existing datums to PGD2020.
Pearson, C. (2019). Deformation Modeling [Training Material]. University
of Otago (New Zealand) and NAMRIA (Philippines).
Focus must also be given towards bringing these
modern PGRS products to within reach of stakeholders. Pearson C. (2019). Progress on developing a prototype deformation
model for the Philippines. University of Otago unpublished report.
Having the deformation model and distortion grids
incorporated into network adjustment software, or Rangin, C., Le Pichon, X., Mazzotti, S., Pubellier, M., Chamot-Rooke, N.,
Aurelio, M., Walpersdorf, A., & Quebral, R. (1999). Plate convergence
putting up a web portal for online positioning, will measured by GPS across the Sundaland/Philippine Sea Plate deformed

facilitate connecting to the PGD2020. boundary: the Philippines and eastern Indonesia. Geophysical
Journal International, 139(2), 296–316. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-
246x.1999.00969.x

Computing the PGD2020 reference coordinates __________________________________________________________

and developing the deformation model and distortion Engr. Charisma Victoria Dela Cruz-Cayapan is a

grids are just the beginning. But with the realization of Geophysicist from NAMRIA. She obtained her Specializing
Master's degree in Navigation and Related Applications
the PGD2020, the country is one step closer towards (GNSS) degree from Politecnico di Torino (Italy) and her

an authoritative reference to underpin the country’s Bachelor of Science degree in Geodetic Engineering from the
University of the Philippines (UP) Diliman. She specializes
sustainable development goals.  in GNSS applications in Geodetic Reference Frame
Development.

Engr. Ma. Almalyn A. Balladares is a Geodetic Engineer

currently assigned as the Assistant Head of the PAGeNet
group of NAMRIA. She graduated with a Bachelor of Science
degree in Geodetic Engineering from UP Diliman. Her work
focuses mainly on continuously operating reference station
(CORS) network management and GNSS applications.

24 Infomapper 2021
 Philippine Geodetic Vertical
Datum 2020 (PGVD2020)

V
by: Engr. Ronaldo C. Gatchalian

ertical datum is a coordinate surface to which heights are

referred (Vanicek, 1991). A vertical datum is defined by the
selection of a height system and a reference surface. The
most common type of height system is Orthometric Height
H (with the geoid as its reference surface). It is defined as
the length of the curved plumb line from a point P on the
ground to its intersection with the geoid surface P0, (Amos,
About the Photo: The tide
2010). Physical height systems such as the orthometric station in the City of San

system are based on geopotential numbers C with units of Fernando is collocated with
a continuously operating
m2/s2. Orthometric heights are computed using the formula: GNSS reference station.
Tide gauges (TG) measure
the variations in sea levels
relative to land, while
the GNSS measures the
movement of the land mass
to which the tide gauge is

with the g as the mean value of gravity along the plumb line and attached to. Providing the
tie between ellipsoidal height
C as the difference in potential from a reference equipotential (GNSS) and orthometric

surface W0 at the geoid to the potential at the point of interest heights (TG) is an integral
component of modern height
Wp on the ground surface as illustrated in Figure 1. systems.
25 Infomapper 2021
 Figure 1. The curved plumb line of H and equipotential
surfaces W0 and Wp

Three values need to be determined to accurately retained as the reference equipotential surface W0 to
compute the H: the mean gravity g, the potential at the preserve the existing vertical datum of the topographic
reference surface W0 and the potential at the point of maps. This vertical datum will be called Philippine
interest Wp. With these requirements, it is not feasible Geodetic Vertical Datum 2020 (PGVD2020). The
to compute the true H because: geopotential value of the reference surface W0 will be
computed (Jekeli, 2000) in the future to complete the
• The exact path of the plumb line through the PGVD2020 definition using the formula:
Earth and the gravitational acceleration at all
points along the plumb line need to be known
to compute the mean gravity (i.e., mass-density
distribution through the topography), and
• Geopotentials W0 and Wp cannot be directly Consequently, the alignment of the PGVD2020 to
observed. the GGRF through its International Height Reference
System (IHRS) will be done by computing the
An alternative to this is the use of Helmert- relationship of their potential values, i.e., W0-W(pgvd).
Orthometric Heights wherein the orthometric The standard potential value W0 of the IHRS vertical
correction is applied to precise leveling but requires reference surface is 62,636,853.4 m2/s2 (JWG0.1.1,
surface gravity observations at the points of interest. 2011-2015).
This height system is the most common type of
approximate orthometric height in actual use. The topics in the next pages discuss the components
of the PGVD2020. Geodetic leveling propagates the
The Philippines is currently using a height system vertical control network that is referred to the LMSLs,
of uncorrected spirit-leveled heights from different tide while land gravity survey supplements the computation
gauges of each main Island of the country. At present, of the PGM. There is also a discussion on the making
there are 50 tide gauge stations that determine local and validation of the PGM. 
mean sea level (LMSL) which ultimately becomes the
References:
reference surface of the Local Vertical Datum (LVD) of
the area. Amos, M. (2010). New Zealand Vertical Datum 2009. [Publication]. New
Zealand Surveyor, 300.

Therefore, the country’s vertical datum can be Jekeli, C. (2000). Heights, the Geopotential, and Vertical Datums.

defined as an uncorrected Helmert-Orthometric height Vanicek, P. (1991). Vertical datum and NAVD88. Surveying and Land

system with the LMSL as the reference geopotential Information Systems, 51(2), 83-86.
__________________________________________________________
surface.
Engr. Ronaldo C. Gatchalian is the Chief of the Geodesy
Division of the Mapping and Geodesy Branch of NAMRIA.
With the computation of the Philippine Geoid He holds a master’s degree in Geographic Information

Model, the present height system can be replaced with Technology from the University of Melbourne (Australia). He
specializes in GNSS surveying and data processing, as well
an orthometric (H) one. The LMSLs would have to be as geoid modeling.
26 Infomapper 2021
 Geodetic Level Network of the Philippines
by Engr. Donnie T. Mancera

A
s horizontal networks were first when measuring elevations in small areas. However,
developed, the vertical or level network this method is less accurate than differential leveling.
usually gets secondary importance
when it comes to geodesy. In
Mathematics, to create three-dimensional models, the
two dimensions (x and y) have to be established first
before the third dimension (z), which is the vertical
component. With this, having a reliable vertical
network is as essential as having a well-developed Figure 2. Trigonometric leveling
horizontal network. A geodetic level network, which
is the product of geodetic leveling is integral to many Barometric leveling determines the height
aspects of geodesy. differences in atmospheric pressure at various elevations
(see Figure 3). It is a rapid and economical method of
This article will adopt the following terminology determining relative differences in height between a set
definitions for Leveling, Geodetic Leveling, and the of field stations. Aneroid or mercurial barometers are
Geodetic Level Network. Leveling is the process used to measure atmospheric pressures. Although cost-
of determining the differences in elevation or efficient, barometric leveling is the least precise leveling
height between points on the Earth’s surface. The technique.
measurements are usually referred to as the mean
sea level (MSL). There are three leveling techniques
namely, differential, trigonometric, and barometric.

Among the three, differential leveling is the most

accurate. It is performed using two calibrated staff held
in an upright position, in front, and behind the leveling
instrument (see Figure 1). The difference in the
reading equates to the difference in elevation between
those points. Differential leveling uses a precise optical
instrument called a level. The level has a compensator
Figure 3. Barometric leveling
that automatically renders the line of sight horizontally.
Geodetic leveling employs differential leveling. It
is done with a high degree of accuracy extending over
large areas. Geodetic leveling is performed to establish
vertical controls for surveying and mapping operations.
The Geodetic Level Network is the by-product of
geodetic leveling. It is the level network that usually
runs into hundreds or thousands of kilometers, and can
found next to major thoroughfares such as highways
or national roads (Berry, 1976). Figure 4 shows the
geographic extent of geodetic leveling activities.
Figure 1. Differential leveling

Trigonometric leveling, as shown in Figure 2, uses

vertical angles to measure the differences in elevation.
It is usually done using a theodolite or a total station
that can measure vertical angles between points.
Trigonometric leveling is faster and more economical Figure 4. Geodetic leveling
27 Infomapper 2021
1901-19111911194619922007-2010201220172020

From Luzon 1911 to PRS92 to PGRS:

The History of the Philippine Datum

• Following the
merging of the Bureau
• The continuous of Coast and Geodetic
• These different triangulation led to the Survey (BCGS) into
networks on different development of the NAMRIA, the Global
datums and with Philippine Geodetic Positioning System
different origins were Network (PGN). (GPS) was utilized to
consolidated into the establish a First-Order
Luzon Datum of 1911. • PGN is a network Network.
of Second-Order
• Several triangulation • The Luzon Datum triangulation stations • The series of
networks with different of 1911 is defined by concentrated along new observations
origins were established its origin at Station coastal areas and are was adjusted and
in the Philippines by the Balanacan near used for topographic published as the
United States Coast and San Andres Point on and hydrographic Philippine Reference
Geodetic Survey (USCGS). Marinduque Island. surveys. System of 1992 (PRS92).

1901-1911 1911 1946 1992

2007-2010 2012
• The nationwide • Stakeholders’ Forum
2017 2020
• The PGRS • The Philippine
implementation of the on the Modernization Modernization was Geocentric Datum
PRS92 Program resulted in of the Philippine formally launched. 2020 and the Philippine
the densification of passive Geodetic Reference Geodetic Vertical
GCPs, benchmarks, and System (PGRS) was Datum 2020 were
gravity stations. conducted. developed to realize
a moderm reference
• The Philippine Active • An interagency frame in the country.
Geodetic Network Technical Working
(PAGeNet), the country's Group was established
network of continuously during the event to
operating geodetic discuss key issues and
reference stations, was next steps for the
also established. modernization of the
geodetic datum.
 Brief History of Leveling in the Philippines the capacity of NAMRIA, most of the first-order geodetic
leveling surveys were outsourced to private surveying
Since ancient times, leveling has been employed companies. Only a few level networks were done by the
by great civilizations, e.g., Egyptians during the agency.
construction of the Great Pyramids and Romans
during the construction of aqueducts. Crude leveling How Leveling Surveys are Conducted
instruments were used.
Before the leveling survey, a map of the planned
In 1608, Lippershey, a Dutch glass maker invented route of the survey is prepared. A reconnaissance team
the telescope. This, together with the invention of the shall establish the BMs with their specific markings
reticle and the level vial, gave way to the advances along the route and on feasible locations for them. The
in optical leveling instruments. Henceforth, leveling BMs are usually set up along major roads about one
instruments and techniques were continuously kilometer apart.
developed until they were able to achieve a millimeter
level of accuracy.

In the Philippines, only a few leveling survey

records exist during the Spanish colonization. Before
World War II, when the Philippines was under American
rule, several geodetic leveling surveys were performed
but they were mostly limited to Metro Manila. Most
of these leveling surveys were accomplished by the
Bureau of Coast and Geodetic Survey (BCGS) of the
United States Coast and Geodetic Survey (USCGS).
During the Japanese occupation, a vertical network
system was planned and executed. Unfortunately, the
records and several benchmarks (BMs) were damaged
by the war. The remaining pre-war BMs that survived
are still included in the present level networks after
being releveled.

After the liberation of the Philippines in 1945, the

BCGS personnel were recalled and mandated to recover
Figure 5. BM specifications and usual locations
previous survey works. All recoverable data, including
those of the Manila levels, were compiled. Through
financial and technical assistance from the USCGS, that In the Philippines, BMs are named according to the
ended upon the expiration of the Rehabilitation Act in province where they are located, e.g., CS for Camarines
June 1950, a network of level lines covering the Manila Sur, LU for La Union, and BL for Bulacan. The code for
area and its nearby municipalities was established . The each province can be found in the Manual of Geodetic
network was made up of short level lines in various Leveling created by the Geodesy Division of NAMRIA.
areas and was expressed in the second-order accuracy.
The Leveling Team
When the Philippine Reference System of 1992
(PRS92) was implemented, NAMRIA conducted the The leveling team consists of the following:
first-order geodetic leveling of Metro Manila in 2009. • Instrument Man who plans and executes the
New BMs were also established in the region to expand survey and makes sure that the measurements
the existing first-order level network. The survey was are well within the allowable error or limits of
conducted by the Geodesy Division of the Mapping and the survey;
Geodesy Branch in collaboration with the Hydrography • Observer who regularly checks the values
Branch of NAMRIA. The agency then decided to recorded by the recorder, makes sure that
develop its national vertical network consisting of the planned route is followed correctly, and
interconnected first-order geodetic level lines all over must have a thorough understanding of the
the country. Since leveling of this magnitude is beyond instrument;
30 Infomapper 2021
 • Recorder who records the measurements in a 2. Leveling rod or staff
prescribed notebook or a portable computer; The leveling rod or
• Rodman who ensures that the rods are perfectly staff is usually made of
vertical for precise leveling measurements and wood or materials which
makes sure that the turning plates are not have a low coefficient
disturbed or moved during the observation. of thermal expansion to
At least two rodmen are required in a leveling minimize measurement
team to expedite the leveling survey; errors when the rods
• Pacer who measures and marks the location of are exposed to the sun.
the turning points by pacing and is in charge Modern leveling rods
of the leveling team’s safety by putting up are made of telescoping
markings and warning signs for dangerous aluminum bars with
locations; and barcodes instead of
• Umbrella Holder who holds the umbrella to graduations. This
make sure that the level is not exposed to the barcode is matched
heat of the sun or the rain as this could affect with the barcode
the accuracy of the leveling survey. from the instrument’s
memory when making
The Leveling Equipment and Tools measurements. The rods
must be held vertically
1. Level by centering the level
The level is a piece of optical surveying equipment bubble found inside the
dedicated to leveling. It has a device inside known as rods during observations.
the compensator that automatically sets the line of To expedite the leveling
sight formed by a horizontal line when properly leveled, survey, two rodmen are
i.e., when the leveling bubble is at the center of the employed: one in front
vial. Most modern levels have a digital interface. All and the other one at the
measurements are stored in the instrument’s memory back of the instrument. Figure 7. Modern leveling rods
which can then be downloaded for processing. Digital
levels such as Leica DNA03™ and Trimble DiNi™ are
3. Turning Plates
used by NAMRIA’s leveling team.
Turning plates are temporary supports where the
rods are placed during observations. These plates
must be placed on stable surfaces to prevent them from
moving or sinking which can cause erroneous readings.
Rodmen must be careful not to disturb these plates
during observations. A minute disturbance could result
in data inaccuracies which will require the team to level
the section again.

Figure 6. Leica DNA03 (top) and Trimble Dini (bottom) Figure 8. Example of a turning plate
31 Infomapper 2021
 Geodetic Level Network

Figure 9. The locations of the first-order geodetic network of the Philippines and the tide stations (in red)
32 Infomapper 2021
 The Geodetic Level Network of the The Vertical Section of the Geodesy Division
Philippines in NAMRIA is in charge of the adjustment and
maintenance of the First-Order Geodetic Level Network
The national first-order geodetic level network of of the Philippines. The Section checks if the level lines
the Philippines comprises 19,326 km of level lines with fall within the parameters of the first-order allowed
approximately 32,000 BMs. All major islands have values. The error of closure for each loop and the
at least one geodetic level line. Luzon has the most respective elevations of each BM are computed using
extensive first-order level network with 9,782 km, Star*Net™ Adjustment Software. Once erroneous
followed by Visayas with 4,774 km of level lines and lines are found, they are flagged and then releveled by
Mindanao with 4,770 km. These level lines are tied the Geodesy Leveling team to correct the erroneous
to a specific tide station on each major island. Thus, observations. These BMs provide height references for
all BM elevations are above or below a local mean sea the construction of buildings as well as irrigation lines.
level (MSL). Figure 9 shows the locations of the first-
order geodetic network of the Philippines and the tide The Philippine Geodetic Vertical Datum
stations. The Metonic cycle is adopted to compute for
the MSL, where tide stations record tidal data for a The Philippine Geodetic Vertical Datum (PGVD) is
period of 18.6 years. This length of tidal observation an integral component of the modern reference system
is enough to consider major tidal variations and the being developed by NAMRIA—the Philippine Geodetic
precession and nutation due to lunar and solar motions Reference System (PGRS). With the aim of adopting a
in space. Tide stations with one or more complete unified height system and a reference surface for the
Metonic cycles are called primary tide stations and those Philippines, the PGVD will be the first-ever vertical
with less than one Metonic cycle are called secondary datum of the country.
tide stations.
The geoid model derived from land and aerial
Adjusting the Level Network gravity measurements and the vertical or geodetic
level network are necessary to the development of the
Level lines are connected to form a closed loop. Philippine Geodetic Vertical Datum. 
These loops are also connected to form a level network
and then referenced to a tide station to compute the Refrncs:
elevations of the benchmarks. Each loop is adjusted Mancera, D. (2014). Manual on Geodetic Leveling. (1st edition).
to make sure that the values fall within the allowable
error of closure for the loop. For first-order level lines,
Types of Leveling Methods used in Surveying. (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://theconstructor.org/surveying/types-of-leveling-methods/14679/
the equation used is 4 mm √k , where k is equal to the _

distance in km. There should be no more than 4 mm of Engr. Donnie T. Mancera

a discrepancy between the forward and backward runs
of leveling in one km distance.

33 Infomapper 2021
 Land Gravity Survey in the Philippines
by: Engr. Cesar B. Buenaobra and Engr. Hennesey R. Marohom

G
ravity is the universal force of attraction the Philippines were conducted by visiting scientists.
acting between two bodies. It is by far The first acceptable one was made by Alessio at the old
the weakest known force in nature site of the Manila Observatory, with the adopted value
and plays no role in determining the of 978.36 gals. Another determination on the same site
internal properties of matter (Faller, J. E., et. Al., 2020). was conducted by M. Selga and J. Carmellas in 1922
It controls, however, the trajectories of bodies in the and they obtained the value of 978.371 gals. There
solar system. All bodies on Earth have a weight, and a was a discrepancy in the values obtained by Alessio and
downward force of gravity pulls all objects toward the this can probably be attributed to the difference in the
center of the planet. According to Sir Isaac Newton’s pre-season determinations in Washington, which was
Universal Law of Gravitation, the gravitational 44 in the seventh decimal place in the period of the
attraction between two bodies is stronger when the pendulum.
masses of the objects are greater and closer together.
This rule applies to the Earth’s gravitational field as The first extensive gravity survey was conducted
well. Gravity varies at different locations on the planet by Father Lejay in 1933 and 1934 using a pendulum
because it is affected by the Earth’s rotation as well as apparatus. He occupied 205 gravity stations distributed
the variation of its mass and density in different areas. all over the country. Most of these gravity stations can
The acceleration g varies from about 9.78 m/s2 at the no longer be recovered because they were destroyed
Equator to approximately 9.83 m/s2 at the poles. either by the impacts of World War II or by natural
causes. Father Lejay cited the results of his survey in
The Earth’s gravity plays a major role in determining his Rapport Provisoire.
the mean sea level (MSL). Geodetic Engineers calculate
the elevation of locations on the Earth’s surface based Several gravity surveys were conducted thereafter
on the MSL. Therefore, knowing how gravity changes to establish a network of gravity bases on a common
sea level helps in making more accurate measurements. datum throughout the world. In 1948, Dr. George Prior
In general, the areas of the planet where gravitational Woollard of Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
forces are stronger have higher MSL, and the areas occupied the station at the Old Manila Weather
with weaker gravitational forces have lower MSL. Observatory (see Figure 1) and measured the value
of gravity at 978.3614 gals using Worden Gravity
The Earth’s gravity field is measured in space and Meter No. 10b. In 1951, William E. Bonini occupied
on land. Satellites gather data on gravitational changes
as they pass over points on the Earth’s surface, while
gravimeters are used on land to measure the Earth’s
gravitational pull on a suspended mass. Detailed maps
of gravitational fields are produced using these data
and elevations on existing maps. Gravity measurements
accurately reflect elevation changes on the surface of
the Earth.

Gravity variations are far less than 1 m/s2.

Because of this, the unit gal (named after Galileo)
has been adopted to have a smaller unit for relative
measurements. A gal is 1/100 m/s2 and the most used
unit is milligal, measured at 10-5 m/s2.

History of Ground-based Gravimetry in

the Philippines

From 1906 to 1952, all gravity measurements in Figure 1. Old Site, Manila Observatory
34 Infomapper 2021
 several gravity stations established previously and his gravity surveys conducted by private geophysical
measurements were in substantial agreement with the companies, and for testing and calibrating gravimeters.
measurements of those scientists that came before him.
Establishment of Absolute Gravity
In 1961, the U.S. Army Map Service–Far East Station
(USAMSFE) executed a contract with the Philippine
Bureau of Coast and Geodetic Survey (BCGS) and In 2005, the Tokyo University of Japan, in
a private survey company, F.F. Cruz & Co., Inc., to collaboration with NAMRIA, established the first
establish a total of 460 gravity stations throughout permanent absolute gravity station in the country. The
the Philippines. It was also during that time that BCGS Absolute Gravimeter FG5 #23 (Micro-g La Coste Inc.)
procured their first gravity meter, a La Coste Romberg of Tokyo University was used for the 2-day (18–19
gravimeter. Gravity observations were conducted at November 2005) continuous gravity measurement at
reference stations established by the U.S. Air Force in the main office of NAMRIA in Fort Bonifacio, Taguig
airports all over the Philippines. These base stations City. A total of 5,750 pendulum drops, with a standard
were also used to calibrate the gravimeter employed in deviation of 0.0240 milligal per drop, were completed
the survey. The project was completed in January 1963. and the absolute gravity value gathered on top of the
plate was 978,370.5562 + 0.0003 mGal.
Before the completion of the contract with
USAMSFE, the BCGS realized that the established While waiting for the completion of the absolute
gravity stations and the survey conducted were not gravity measurement in NAMRIA, a simultaneous
sufficient to cover the requirement for a nationwide relative measurement was conducted in five
gravity network. To address this concern, a nationwide locations in Metro Manila. These were: one station
gravity survey project was started in December 1962, each in the University of the Philippines (UP), Manila
with financial assistance from the National Science Observatory in Quezon City, NAMRIA Magnetic
Development Board of the Philippines. A total of 358 Observatory in Muntinlupa City, and two stations in
gravity stations, including 70 base reference stations, NAMRIA’s Hydrography Branch (HB) in the City of
were established under this project to supplement the Manila. The observation was conducted on 18-22
existing stations. The stations were established in all November 2005 using Tokyo University’s G-583 and
existing airports, capital, and principal towns in each G-683 La Coste and Romberg Relative Gravity Meter.
province. The sites were selected to ensure that the The resulting gravity values (in mGal) from the five
stations were made accessible for connecting local stations are presented in Table 1.

Station Latitude Longitude Height Gravity Value

UP 14.6564° N 121.0697° E 50 m 978382.056
Manila Observatory 14.6367° N 121.0767° E 58 m 978390.787
HB 1 14.5981° N 121.9731° E 2m 978345.833
HB 2 14.5981° N 121.9731° E 1.688 m 978346.077
Magnetic Observatory 14.3731° N 120.0189° E 64.9 m 978347.744
Table 1. Resulting gravity value (mGal)

Establishment of First- and Second- gravimeters were acquired in 2009 and 2010. The
Order Gravity Stations survey ended in 2014, with a total of 84 first-order and
1,568 second-order gravity stations established.
In 2008, NAMRIA realized that there was a need
to further develop and augment the country’s gravity Development of a Philippine Geoid
base network. With the newly acquired Scintrex CG-5 Model and Densification of Second-
Gravimeter, the agency set out to establish at least one Order Gravity Stations
first-order gravity station per province and at least
one second-order gravity station per city/municipality. In 2014, through the funding of the National
The measurements began in 2009, and additional two Geospatial Intelligence Agency (NGA), the National
35 Infomapper 2021
 Space Institute–Technical University of Denmark this, NAMRIA was able to release a refined and more
(DTU-Space) collaborated with NAMRIA to create accurate Philippine Geoid Model (PGM2018). This
a preliminary geoid model for the Philippines. The model is available for download from the NAMRIA
geoid, a complex mathematical model of the Earth, is website, together with the geoid interpolation program
used to approximate the mean sea level. The model that can be used to compute the geoid value (N) of any
was developed and computed using data from land point in the country. 
gravity, airborne gravity, marine satellite altimetry,
and satellite gravity data from the Gravity Field and
Steady-State Ocean Circulation Explorer (GOCE) References:
mission (Release 5).
Forsberg R., et. al. (2014). Geoid Model of the Philippines from Airborne
and Surface Gravity. DTU Space (National Space Institute) and NAMRIA.

DTU-Space conducted further analysis on the [Summary Report].

preliminary Philippine Geoid Model (PGM 2014) and Manila Obsevatory. (n.d.) Why the Manila Observatory exists. http://www.

it suggested that additional land gravity measurements observatory.ph/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/7_10.jpg

should be made to further improve the accuracy Faller, J. E., Nordtvedt, Kenneth L. and Cook, Alan H. (2020, November

and address the inconsistencies of the geoid model, 12). gravity. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/science/
gravity-physics
especially along the areas near the bodies of water. __________________________________________________________

Because of this, NAMRIA commenced the establishment

Engr. Cesar B. Buenaobra is the Chief of the Gravimetry
of a denser gravity station network in 2015. The plan Section of the Mapping and Geodesy Branch of NAMRIA.

was to conduct gravity measurements at points two He graduated with a Bachelor of Science degree in Civil
Engineering from the University of Santo Tomas in Legaspi
to three kilometers apart, using the existing NAMRIA City, Albay.

horizontal and vertical control points. The gravity survey

Engr. Hennesey R. Marohom is a Geodetic Engineer
started in Region I (Ilocos Region) and progressed to currently assigned at the Vertical Section, Geodesy Division of

the succeeding regions. The project is still ongoing and the Mapping and Geodesy Branch of NAMRIA. She graduated
with a Bachelor of Science degree in Geodetic Engineering
6,222 points have already been completed. Through from UP Diliman
36 Infomapper 2021
 Validation of the Philippine Geoid Model
by: Engr. Ronaldo C. Gatchalian and Engr. Aila Leana T. Sampana

T
he preliminary Philippine Geoid Model where the project workflow from reconnaissance to
was computed with the help of Professor data analysis.
Rene Forsberg of the Denmark Technical
University in 2014 from satellite,
airborne, and land gravity data. The geoid was NETWORK GNSS
RECONNAISANCE
computed in a global vertical reference system and DESIGN OBSERVATION

then fitted into the Local World Geodetic System 1984

(WGS84) reference system using the Global Navigation COMPUTATION GNSS BASELINE
Satellite System (GNSS)/Leveling data nationwide to DATA ANALYSIS
OF ELEVATION PROCESSING
and NETWORK
preserve the existing vertical datum, i.e., mean sea
DIFFERENCE (PGM
vs LEVELING) ADJUSTMENT
level. It was named the Philippine Geoid Model 2014
(PGM2014). Figure 1. Project Workflow. The PGM validation survey starts
from reconnaissance and recovery of the pre-selected BMs to
determine its suitability for GNSS observation. After which,
Due to a large error in the preliminary model, with the network design was developed according to the number
of receivers and was followed by the GNSS static observation.
a standard deviation (SD) of ±0.30 m and a 0.54 m root The GNSS data were downloaded for baseline processing
mean square (RMS) fit to GNSS/Leveling, PGM2014 and network adjustment. Output BM elevations from the TBC
and their corresponding elevations in STARNet were entered
was recomputed in 2016 (SD=0.022 m; RMS=0.054 into the PGM Validation Evaluation Checklist. Differences
m) and then in 2018 using reprocessed additional land in elevations between the two sources were computed and
analyzed to identify the erroneous dataset.
gravity and new satellite gravity data. The SD of the
latest model (PGM2018) was 0.010 m with an RMS fit
of 0.020 m. Network Design

To validate and confirm the PGM2018 fit to the The approximate locations of the recovered BMs
leveling network, benchmarks (BM) were observed were plotted on a map to design and plan the survey.
through GNSS. The GNSS data were then post-processed The network design considered the distribution of
using Trimble Business Center (TBC) Software with the the points, i.e., BMs while the survey design and
PGM2018 file incorporated into it. With the PGM, TBC schedule were governed by the number of points to
generate the MSL elevation of the BMs. These BM be observed and the number of GNSS receivers to be
elevations (using GNSS+PGM) were be compared to its used. The existing 10 GNSS receivers of NAMRIA and
geodetic leveling adjusted elevations. the Philippine Active Geodetic Network (PAGeNet) were
considered in the design of the network loops.
The resulting elevation differences between the
two methods indicated the accuracy of the PGM in Survey Schedule
determining absolute elevations above MSL. Large
differences may indicate geodynamic effects, GNSS The survey was scheduled into loops of points
observation error, and in most cases, errors in leveling. of simultaneous observations. The first set of loops
occupied 10 BMs and then seven to eight of the
Data Acquisition receivers were transfered to the next loop, leaving two
to three common points as connections to the first loop.
Survey Planning Each loop was occupied for two observation sessions
for an average of one to four hours per session using
Benchmarks were pre-selected from the static technique (the receiver stayed on one point and
adjusted level network based on their distribution. logs GNSS data for at least 30 minutes) depending
Reconnaissance was done in the field to recover and on the baseline length. Figure 2 shows a sample
assess the condition of the marks and to check whether GNSS observation network in Metro Manila. Only six
they were still intact and suitable (at least 50% clear receivers were used in this loop (PTAG is a permanent
view of the sky) for GNSS observation. Figure 1 shows GNSS station).
37 Infomapper 2021
 PGM Validation - Metro Manila Batch 2

Figure 2. BM network occupied by GNSS in Metro Manila

38 Infomapper 2021
 GNSS Observation

In GNSS observations, the instrument was

carefully centered on the mark within 2 mm
and antenna heights were measured within
3 mm (see Figure 3). The elevation mask of
the receivers was set to 3 degrees to get the
ellipsoidal heights as accurately as possible.

Ten GNSS survey teams comprising of

team leaders who oversaw the instrument,
and assistants were formed for the project.
The instruments used include Trimble R10
GNSS receivers (see Figure 4) and aluminum
tripods. NAMRIA GNSS field sheets were used
to record observation information. Figure 3. NAMRIA Geodesy Division personnel measuring
the antenna height of the GNSS setup in Isabela

Data Processing

GNSS Data Processing

The GNSS data were processed and

adjusted one province or region at a time using
the TBC Software. The Geoid Grid Format (ggf)
of the PGM2018 was used and incorporated
into the TBC to generate the MSL elevation
of the BMs using the equation H=h-N, where,
H is the MSL elevation, h is ellipsoidal height
and N is the geoid height (extracted from the
geoid model by the program). The datum used
Figure 4. TRIMBLE R10 GNSS receivers
is the epoch 1987 of WGS84 (Local WGS84) tested before the fieldwork
and the geoid model used is pgmwgs2018.98
(from the NAMRIA Website). Only Active
Geodetic Stations (AGS) were used as reference
in processing the GNSS data since their epoch
of observations was consistent with that of the
GNSS/Leveling.

GNSS Data Network Adjustment

After processing, the network of BMs

(see Figure 5) was adjusted, with allowable
setup errors of 3 mm and 2 mm in antenna
heights and centering, respectively. The first
adjustment was unconstrained, allowing for
outlier detection and disabling baselines that
exceeded the critical Tau error estimates
(95% upper and 5% lower limits). In the
final adjustment, the active station was
constrained, and most residual error values
were near zero (none beyond 1.96 sigma or
95% Confidence Level). The list of adjusted
Figure 5. Network of points with their
geodetic coordinates of points included the corresponding error ellipses
39 Infomapper 2021
 Height Height Error
Point ID Latitude Longitude Constraint
(Meter) (Meter)
GM6E N14⁰ 37' 19.78596" E120⁰ 58' 19.71607" 46.9616 0.013
GPS1 N14⁰ 39' 26.31635" E120⁰ 59' 02.57359" 61.55764 0.012
ML3 N14⁰ 37' 18.63727" E121⁰ 04' 23.57747" 103.68939 0.024
MM86 N14⁰ 42' 32.86143" E120⁰ 57' 35.86834" 45.53595 0.018
MMA115 N14⁰ 34' 51.70557" E120⁰ 58' 32.40288" 48.96314 0.011
PTAG N14⁰ 32' 07.43281" E121⁰ 02' 26.78149" 88.05700 ? LLh
W2A N14⁰ 39' 15.22590" E121⁰ 03' 15.91183" 93.65926 0.011
Table 1. Adjusted Geodetic Coordinates with PTAG fixed in Lat/Long/Ht (LLh)

height errors ranging from 0.011 m to 0.024 m as with their difference in elevations using the PGM
shown on the samples listed in Table 1. Horizontal Validation Evaluation Checklist.
accuracies were reported in the Network Adjustment
Report as error ellipse components defined by their The result of the final network adjustment, with
semi-major and semi-minor axis. A list of points (in Metro Manila as a case example, was encoded into the
WGS84 grid coordinates) with elevation was also PGM Validation Evaluation Checklist (see Table 2). The
reported as one output of the TBC Software. elevations from the adjusted geodetic leveling data
were compared with that of the elevations estimated
Computation of Elevation Difference using the PGM.

The corresponding list of BMs with elevation from Discussion and Analysis
the leveling surveys was gathered from the output of
the StarNet Adjustment Software. These data came Accuracy of GNSS Surveys
from the densification of PRS92 vertical controls in
2007 and the various releveling and readjustment of The computed elevations using the PGM depend
the national vertical network from 2018-2020. on the accuracy of the GNSS surveys and the geoid
model. The error ellipses and height errors from the
The BM points, together with their corresponding final adjustment results indicate the precision of the
elevations by GNSS+PGM and Leveling were tabulated GNSS data. These errors were also included in the

Table 2. Comparison of elevations from geodetic leveling and the geoid model
40 Infomapper 2021
 PGM validation evaluation checklists to ensure that to the uncertainty of the adjustment results. Table 4
the results of the GNSS survey are within a centimeter- shows the variation of the BM’s standard deviation
level of accuracy. Table 3 provides a summary of the (0.003 m to 0.163 m) of the adjusted elevations using
accuracy of the GNSS survey per province/region. the StarNet software.

The millimeter error ellipses of the GNSS surveys SD (m)

met the accuracy standards for 1-centimeter control, Region I 0.020 - 0.083
which is the required accuracy classification control Region II 0.033 - 0.083
positioning prescribed in the Federal Geographic Data
CAR 0.024 - 0.163
Committee (FGDC) for Geodetic Networks (Committee,
NCR 0.003 - 0.039
1998).
Region IVA 0.030 - 0.122

Particular attention was given to the accuracy of Region V 0.012 - 0.068

ellipsoidal heights because an accurate ellipsoidal Cebu Province 0.021 - 0.058
height provided accurate elevation. A one to three- Region IX 0.040 - 0.087
centimeters error in height in the final adjustment was Region X 0.013 - 0.075
deemed acceptable for a target 10 cm geoid. Table 3 Table 4. Leveling Data Accuracy
shows the summary of height errors of the GNSS survey
ranging from 0.003 m to 0.059 m.
Accuracy of the Philippine Geoid Model
Error Ellipse (m) Height Error (m)
The PGM2018 is computed in a global vertical
Region I 0.002 - 0.006 0.008 - 0.026
reference system using new satellite gravity data and
Region II 0.001 - 0.007 0.006 - 0.059
then fitted to the local WGS84 GNSS/Leveling. The
CAR 0.002 - 0.005 0.006 - 0.034 satellite data, together with the densified gravity (7,533
NCR 0.001 - 0.005 0.006 - 0.026 points) and additional GNSS/Leveling points (286 BMs)
Region IVA 0.001 - 0.005 0.005 - 0.020 were used in the PGM2018 computation. The geoid has
Region V 0.002 - 0.006 0.003 - 0.020 a standard deviation of 1 cm and the RMS fit to GNSS/
Cebu Leveling is 2 cm. From these results, we can infer that
0.003 - 0.006 0.012 - 0.035 the accuracy is the combination of 1 cm and 2 cm, or
Province
Region IX 0.003 - 0.006 0.014 - 0.023 to be a little conservative, the nominal accuracy of the
Region X 0.003 - 0.006 0.010 - 0.020 PGM could be less than 10 centimeters.

Table 3. GNSS Survey Accuracy, where error ellipse is for

horizontal and height error is for vertical Result of PGM Validation

Accuracy of Geodetic Leveling Data The preceding paragraphs discussed the accuracies
of the GNSS, leveling, and the PGM. From the table
The precision of the geodetic leveling survey of data accuracies (Tables 3 and 4) in this campaign,
depends on the distance between two benchmarks, e.g., GNSS has incurred a maximum height error of 5.9 cm;
4 mm√k where k is the separation of the two BMs. This leveling error accounted for 16.3 cm in the Cordillera
precision is relative to two BMs only and not on the Administrative Region (CAR) and 12.2 cm in Calabarzon
elevation itself. This means that the accuracy of the (Region IVA), while the PGM has a combined error of
elevation is only as good as its reference BMs, e.g., the about 3 cm.
Tide Gauge BMs (TGBMs). The elevation error of the
TGBM/s will propagate to the leveling network/s and From the formula H=h–N, we can say that the
will only be checked when the leveling survey reaches highest accuracy attainable by GNSS+PGM for H is only
another TGBM of a different province. about 8.9 cm with the ellipsoidal heights contributing
about 5.9 cm and the PGM 3 cm. Depending on the
Also, there is a problem with the integrity of the GNSS survey data, these combined errors can be as
level data which may be altered by the survey crew. This good as 3.3 cm with the GNSS error being only 3 mm.
alteration of data may cause the forward and backward
runs to close. Additionally, the absence of orthometric The estimated elevations from the GNSS+PGM
corrections (applying gravity measurements) may add from each of the provinces surveyed were compared
41 Infomapper 2021
 with the adjusted elevations from leveling. Bearing While the CAR leveling has the highest SD in Table
in mind that the GNSS+PGM elevation errors can only 4, Batangas province having the highest PGM-leveling
range from 3.3 cm to 8.9 cm, the acceptable differences difference, is rather unexpected. With the combined
should only result in this range for an assumed 8.9 cm error of the PGM and 12.2 cm leveling error in
errorless leveling, which means that the leveling has Batangas province, the difference should only be 21.1
high accuracy. The 286 validation points showed a cm and not 94.6 cm. With this result, alterations on the
wide range of differences relative to the GNSS+PGM level data of Batangas province can be inferred, from
extending from ±0.000 m to ±0.946 m (see Table 5), which made the forward and backward run to pass the
with large outliers in Batangas province. first-order criteria.

Province △Elevation (m) Province △Elevation (m) Province △Elevation (m)

CAR. Mountain Prov-
RI. Ilocos Norte 0.000 - 0.139 0.038 - 0.123 RV. Camarines Sur 0.005 - 0.106
ince
RI. Ilocos Sur 0.011 - 0.221 NCR. Metro Manila 0.017 - 0.380 RV. Sorsogon 0.042 - 0.086
RI. La Union 0.001 - 0.042 RIII. Bulacan 0.027 - 0.742 Cebu Province 0.044 - 0.381
RIX.
RI. Pangasinan 0.004 - 0.527 RIVA. Batangas 0.054 - 0.946 0.074 - 0.151
Zamboanga del Norte
RIX.
RII. Cagayan 0.003 - 0.119 RIVA. Cavite 0.041 - 0.406 0.130 - 208
Zamboanga del Sur
RIX.
RIII. Isabela 0.007 0.345 RIVA. Laguna 0.030 - 0.373 0.064 - 0.165
Zamboanga Sibugay
CAR. Abra 0.052 - 0.184 RIVA. Quezon 0.001 - 0.818 RX. Bukidnon 0.017 - 0.145
CAR. Apayao 0.002 - 0.088 RIVA. Rizal 0.002 - 0.099 RX. Lanao del Norte 0.051 - 0.496
RX.
CAR. Ifugao 0.095 - 0.179 RV. Albay 0.027 - 0.130 0.148 - 0.168
Misamis Occidental
CAR. Kalinga 0.059 - 0.291 RV. Camarines Norte 0.015 - 0.435 RX. Misamis Oriental 0.078 - 0.809
Table 5. Differences in Elevation between PGM-derived elevation and Leveling

Conclusions and Recommendations leveling data resulted in an accuracy of approximately

10 cm for the PGM.
Benchmark networks in 30 provinces have been
observed by GNSS to validate and confirm the accuracy NAMRIA recommended that the validation of the
of the Philippine Geoid Model. The uncertainty of the PGM be continued, i.e., verifying its output elevation, to
GNSS survey in this campaign was found to be from cover the remaining provinces nationwide, as well as to
0.003 meters to 0.059 meters, while the standard continue the densification of land gravity nationwide.
deviations of the adjusted leveling data range from To address the large PGM-leveling differences, an
0.003 meters to 0.163 meters and the uncertainty of investigation of survey malpractices by contractors and
the PGM was found to be 3 cm nationwide. Based on the releveling followed by re-adjustment of the national
analysis, the result of the leveling network adjustment level network applying orthometric corrections are
is not guaranteed due to survey malpractices that suggested to reduce the errors in leveling. 
compromise the adjustment results. With this
discovery, we can conclude that the GNSS and PGM are
more reliable than the leveling surveys. Reference:
Committee, F. G. D. (1998). Geospatial Positioning Accuracy Standards
PGM-Leveling differences in Northern Luzon give (Part 2: Standards for Geodetic Networks).

an average of ±7 cm, while BMs from Southern Luzon,

__________________________________________________________

Cebu Province, and Mindanao have an average of ±14 Engr. Ronaldo C. Gatchalian is the Chief of the Geodesy

cm, ±12 cm, and ±50 cm, respectively. Small PGM-

Division of the Mapping and Geodesy Branch of NAMRIA.
He holds a master’s degree in Geographic Information
Leveling differences suggest that the adjusted BM Technology from the University of Melbourne (Australia). He

Network in these areas conforms to the geoid model.

specializes in GNSS surveying and data processing, as well
as geoid modeling.
Large differences are mainly attributed to geodynamic
effects, and/or leveling survey errors or survey
Engr. Aila Leana T. Sampana is a Geophysicist from
NAMRIA. She graduated with a Bachelor of Science Degree
malpractices. The 286 PGM-leveling differences show in Geodetic Engineering from UP Diliman. She is currently

that there exist some large leveling errors in parts of

the Assistant Section Chief of the Horizontal Section of the
Geodesy Division and her work focuses mainly on GNSS
Southern Luzon. The rest of the country with good surveying and data processing.

42 Infomapper 2021
 Estimating Elevations using the PGM2018
by: Engr. Ronaldo C. Gatchalian

V
ertical datum is a coordinate surface (BMs) is through the conduct of geodetic leveling,
to which heights are referred. The which refers to a high-accuracy determination of the
universal choice of a vertical datum difference in elevation (DE) of points. It is considered
is the geoid, which is the reference a tedious process that hinders the densification of BMs
surface for orthometric (elevation) and dynamic in the country (Mancera, 2014).
heights (Vanicek, 1991). The geoid is an equipotential
level surface of the oceans at equilibrium; introduced With the advent of Global Navigation Satellite
by C.F. Gauss as the “mathematical figure of the earth” Systems (GNSS), it has become much easier to estimate
(Dr. Bernhard Hofmann-Wellenhof, 2005). MSL elevations using a geoid model. The application of
a geoid model in GNSS surveys can compute the H and
Since the ocean is not actually at equilibrium, the will eliminate the conduct of leveling in inaccessible
geoid differs from mean sea level (MSL) to about 0.70 areas. This could be an alternative method when
m to 2.20 m globally, because of wind, salinity changes, millimeter accuracy of H is not a strict requirement.
temperature, and pressure (Sadatipour, Kiamehr,
Abrehdary, and Sharifi, 2012). In the Philippines, the A geoid model is a surface (N) that describes
geoid-MSL differs from about -0.18 m to -1.40 m in the theoretical height of the ocean and the zero-
the International Terrestrial Reference Frame system, level surface on land. In a modern vertical reference
where the MSL is above the geoid surface as illustrated system, the geoid is required to obtain H from GNSS by
in Figure 1. H=hGNSS–N, where hGNSS is the GNSS ellipsoidal height,
and H is the leveled elevation.
The topographic maps of NAMRIA and most of the
maps of the world use the MSL as a reference datum Elevation of points can be estimated using the
for all heights. Grid Interpolation Program provided by the Denmark
Technical University (DTU) or using the geoid model
The conventional way of determining elevation that is incorporated into the Trimble Business Center
H (height above sea level) of points and benchmarks (TBC) Software.

Figure 1. Relationships between ground,

MSL, geoid, and ellipsoid surfaces

43 Infomapper 2021
 The First Philippine Geoid

The first attempt at computing a gravimetric

geoid for the Philippines was through the Natural
Resources Management Development Project
(NRMDP) in 1991. A gravimetric geoid (or simply
geoid) as used by “classical geodesists,” is a specific
equipotential surface that can be computed from
gravity measurements (land, air, and satellites) via
Stokes’s integral (Featherstone, 1998). Land gravity
data and altimetrically-derived anomalies at sea and
the OSU89A Global Geoid Model to degree and order
360 were used. Large biases between the gravimetric
geoid N and GNSS/leveling were found, ranging from
two to six meters nationwide (Kearsley, 1991). This
geoid model was never used.

Modeling the Geoid: The Making of

PGM2018

On 28 October 2014, with technical assistance

from the National Space Institute of the Denmark
Technical University (DTU-Space) and funding from
the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency (NGA), a
preliminary geoid model, Philippine Geoid Model 2014 Figure 2. Flight track elevations of the airborne gravity survey
(PGM2014), was computed for the country. PGM
2014 used datasets from 1,261 land gravity surveys,
nationwide airborne gravity surveys, marine satellite
altimetry (DTU-10), and the newest satellite gravity
data from the Gravity Field and Steady-State Ocean
Circulation Explorer (GOCE) mission release 5.

Land gravity surveys in the Philippines started

in 2007 with 8,180 stations in 2021. The airborne
gravity survey was conducted from March to May 2014
(Gatchalian, 2016) using a Cessna Caravan aircraft. This
is part of the project to improve the global gravity field
model - Earth Gravitational Model EGM2008, based on
the Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement (BECA)
between NGA and the Danish Geodata Agency. Figure 3. The Preliminary Philippine Geoid Model 2014
(PGM2014).The contour interval is set at 5 m

The mean altitude for all flights was 3,185 m with a

terrain clearance of 545 m above mountains and 3,760 geopotential model (EGM/GOCE combination) was
m in lowlands. Figure 2 shows the color-coded flight used as a base (Pahlevi, Pangastuti, Sofia, Kasenda,
track elevations. and Prijatna, 2015). The geoid is divided into three
parts, namely: the global contribution Negm, a local
The PGM2014 (see Figure 3) was computed gravity- derived component N2, and a terrain part N3,
using the GRAVSOFT system, a set of Fortran routines and is expressed using the formula Ngrav=Negm+N2+N3 .
developed by DTU-Space and Niels Bohr Institute,
University of Copenhagen (Forsberg R, 2008). The geoid is computed on a grid of 0.025⁰ x 0.025⁰
resolution (corresponding to roughly 2.7 x 2.5 km
The “remove-restore” technique was used in grid). The area of computation is 04⁰ to 22⁰ N and 112⁰
computing the geoid, where a spherical harmonic earth to 128⁰ E, covering the Kalayaan Island Group in West
44 Infomapper 2021
 Unit: meters Mean Std.dev. Std.dev. Max.
Reduced geoid (after spherical FFT) 0.00 0.25 -1.61 2.88
RTM restore effects (computed by FFT) 0.00 0.04 -0.23 0.74
Final gravimetric geoid statistics 39.06 18.36 -9.02 76.43
Table 1. Computed geoid statistics and standard deviation

Philippine Sea. Computations were based on least- • Erroneous points (geoid outliers) must be
squares collocation and Fast Fourier Transformation resurveyed by leveling (elevation) and GNSS
methods, which involved 1440 x 1280 grid points (position).
corresponding to 100% zero paddings. The data were • New GNSS-fitted version of the geoid must be
gridded and downward continued by least-squares computed as new batches of GNSS-leveling
collocation using the planar logarithmic model with data, additional gravity surveys in major cities,
the computed geoid statistics and standard deviation and GNSS user’s height problem reports come
shown in Table 1. in.

The final gravimetric geoid solution was computed In 2016, NAMRIA started the recomputation of
using the following steps: the PGM2014. The gravity data were reviewed and
reprocessed. The densification of land gravity stations
1. Subtract the EGM08GOCE spatial reference was also conducted in some major cities of the country.
field (in a 3-D “sandwich model”) The leveling data were reanalyzed, readjusted, and
2. Reduce the RTM terrain of surface gravimetry corrected, while the outliers were deleted. The GNSS
3. Reduce the RTM terrain of airborne gravimetry data were reprocessed and readjusted. The points with
4. Reduct the DTU-10 satellite altimetry in ocean large error ellipses were deleted.
areas away from airborne data
5. Proceed to downward continuation to the Land Gravity Data 2014, 2016, and 2018
terrain level and gridding of all data by least-
squares collocation using a 1⁰ x 1⁰ moving- In the 2016 recomputation, the original airborne
block scheme with 0.6⁰ overlap borders and satellite data processing results were used. Only
6. Conduct Spherical Fourier Transformation the land gravity data were reprocessed, densified to
from gravity to geoid 2,214 points, and quality controlled.
7. Restore RTM and EGM08GOCE effects on the
geoid In the 2018 recomputation, new satellite data, i.e.,
8. Correct the difference between quasigeoid and Primary Geopotential Model 2017 (PGM17) (Dawod,
geoid (using a Bouguer anomaly grid) Mohamed, and Al-Krargy, 2019), the original airborne
9. Shift the computed geoid by +80 cm to and additional land gravity data up to 5,779 points
approximately fit to Manila tide gauge datum were used in the computation.

The PGM2014 has an accuracy of 0.30 m with One quality check for the land gravity data is the
minimum and maximum errors of -1.61 m and 2.88 m, comparison of its anomalies with that of the airborne.
respectively. This is due to the errors in gravity data Figure 4 shows the plots of 2014 land gravity against
(position and gravity value), as depicted in Figure 4. airborne data and presents outliers as high as 60 milli
gals (mGals) (depicted by red and blue dots). Figure 5
Recomputation of PGM2014 shows the new plots of the 2016 land and airborne
gravity data. Significant improvements are observed
To improve a geoid model, Professor Forsberg in in the land data (depicted by thicker dots). Most dots
his paper “Towards a cm-geoid in Malaysia” (Forsberg, are in green, and some in yellow and light blue (25-50
2003) recommends: mGals difference in mountainous areas only). Figures
• Leveling networks must be carefully analyzed 6 and 7 show the 2018 land and airborne Bouguer
for adjustment errors. differences in Luzon and Visayas-Mindanao regions.
• Connections and antenna height errors of GNSS Most land gravity data (depicted by colored dots)
data on benchmarks must be revisited and re- conform with that of the airborne data (depicted by
analyzed. colored track lines).
45 Infomapper 2021
 Figure 4. Plot of the comparison between 1,261 land and Figure 6. PGM2018 Air- Land (5,779 points)
airborne gravity points in PGM 2014 (with visible outliers) Bouguer differences in Luzon

Figure 7. PGM2018 Air-Land (5,779 points) Bouguer

differences in Visayas-Mindanao region

The recomputed Philippine Geoid Model

2016 and 2018

The PGM2014 was recomputed to PGM2016 with

Figure 5. PGM2016 land gravity data after reprocessing and an accuracy of 0.022 m using additional land gravity
densification (2,214 points), and plotted with the airborne data
stations combined with the same airborne and satellite
(Most differences are below 25 mGals, although some points
exceed 35 mGals in mountainous regions.) gravity data.
46 Infomapper 2021
 Unit: meters Mean Std.dev. Std.dev. Max.
Reduced geoid (after spherical FFT) 0.00 0.25 -1.61 2.88
RTM restore effects (computed by FFT) 0.00 0.04 -0.23 0.74
Final gravimetric geoid statistics 39.06 18.36 -9.02 76.43
Table 2. The table summarizes the statistics of PGM2018 and its standard deviation.
The range of N is from 38.95 m in Batanes up to 76.32 m in Davao.

In 2018, the most recent PGM

was recomputed using new satellite
data (PGM17), original airborne,
and additional land gravity data
with an accuracy of 0.01 m as
shown in Table 2.

More land gravity data (up to

41,000 points) will be added until
2030 to recompute a new version
and further refine the Philippine
geoid. Figure 8 shows the new
PGM2018. This geoid model
is available for download at the
NAMRIA website (www.namria.gov.
ph).

GNSS/Leveling Data for

2014, 2016, and 2018

The computed geoid was

reduced to the ML-3 reference level
surface to roughly fit the geoid in
the Metro Manila area. To close the
gap between the MSL and the geoid
and fit the latter to the different
Figure 8. The new PGM2018 with contour interval set at 1 m
MSL reference level surfaces of
(a surveyor can use this map to estimate elevation on a specified location by
the islands in the country (which subtracting the contour value N from ellipsoidal height h)
in effect unifies them into an
equipotential surface), tide gauge
benchmarks (TGBMs) and BMs For PGM2016, the GNSS/leveling data were readjusted while the
nationwide were surveyed by GNSS outliers were removed. A total of 101 out of 190 BMs were used for the
in 2010. computations. After fitting the new GNSS/leveling, the RMS fit is 0.054
m, with minimum and maximum offset values of -0.124 m and 0.169 m,
For PGM2014, a set of 190 respectively. This improvement is attributed to the removal of erroneous
GNSS/leveling data in local WGS84 leveling and GNSS points. Figures 9-11 show the offset values and the new
was used in fitting the geoid. These geoid correction surface of PGM2016.
data showed large errors relative
to the geoid, with large outliers For PGM2018, 286 sets of GNSS/leveling data were used in fitting the
in some regions, likely from a geoid. The RMS fit is 0.020 m with minimum and maximum offset values
combination of leveling and GNSS of -0.061 m and 0.066 m, respectively.
errors. The RMS fit is 0.50 m.
Figure 8 shows the offset values of More points will be added to the GNSS/leveling data as the PGM
up to 1.35 m. Validation Survey progresses.
47 Infomapper 2021
 Figure 11. This shows the PGM2018 GNSS/leveling offset
Figure 9. Location of GNSS/leveling data in PGM2014
values. Majority of the points are in green and yellow, indicating
(Colors show the offset values for the fitted geoid.)
a better fit of the geoid to the BMs

Using the PGM

The PGM2018 can be used in two ways. The first

method is by using the Grid Interpolation Program
(see Figure 12) developed by Denmark Technical
University (DTU). The steps are:
1. Select the grid format (.gri) of the PGM in local
WGS84 or ITRF.
2. Enter the post-processed local WGS84 or ITRF
latitude and longitude (input from keyboard)
of the point desired. The geoid height will
automatically pop up in the geoid value box.
3. Take the ellipsoidal height of the point and
subtract it from the geoid value (use the
formula H=hGNSS–N) to get MSL elevation.
4. You can also compute the geoid heights in
batch (listed in MS Excel file). The file format
should be ID, latitude, and longitude.
5. Save the MS Excel file as .csv, open in Notepad,
replace the comma with spaces then save the
csv as .dat file.
6. Select the xxxxx.dat file (select point file) and
name the output as xxxxx.out (output to file).
Figure 10. New offset values of the fitted geoid of PGM2016 The output file will have the geoid height (N)
48 Infomapper 2021
 The resulting H can only be
as accurate as the geoid model
and the GNSS surveys, thus, the
following observations should
be noted:

• 3D
coordinates of
GCPs change with time
because of advancement
in GNSS technology and
crustal deformation.
• Ellipsoidal heights
must be accurate and
Figure 12. Geoid Grid Interpolation Program computed in about
the same epoch as the
GNSS/leveling (2010
at the fourth column (i.e., ID, lat, long, N). or later); if not, vertical deformation model is
Use the formula H=hGNSS–N again to compute applied.
for the elevations. This program can be • If there is no deformation model, obtain the
downloaded from the NAMRIA website. updated coordinates by connecting to an
updated (reobserved) geodetic control. 
The second method is through Trimble Business
Center (TBC) Software. The steps are: References:
1. Select the .ggf format of the PGM in local
Dawod, G. M., Mohamed, H. F., and& Al-Krargy, E. M. (2019). Accuracy
WGS84. assessment of the PGM17 global geopotential model: a case study of
2. Copy the geoid2018.98_wgsfit.ggf to program Egypt and Northeast Africa. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 12(7), 246.
doi: 10.1007/s12517-019-4418-9
data > trimble > geodata.
3. Open TBC > coordinate system manager > geoid Dr. Bernhard Hofmann-Wellenhof, D. H. M. (2005). Physical Geodesy (pp.
46).
model > add + > type name of PGM (for instance,
pgmwgs2018.98) > filename > select the .ggf file Featherstone, W. (1998). Do we need a gravimetric geoid or a model of the
Australian Height datum to transform GPS Heights in Australia? Australian
you copied to geodata > ok > save > save. surveyor, 43(4), 273-280.
4. Click change coordinate system > coordinate
Forsberg, R. (2003). Towards a cm-geoid for Malaysia. Paper presented at
system and zone > worldwide/UTM > Zone the geoid computation workshop in Kuala Lumpur.
51North > next > WGS84 none > next > at
Forsberg R, C. C. T. (2008). Overview manual for the GRAVSOFT Geodetic
predefined geoid model, select your recently Gravity Field Modeling Programs (Technical Report, 2nd ed.): DTU-Space.
added geoid model > survey quality > type
Gatchalian, R., Forsberg, R., Olesen, .A. (2016). PGM2016- A new geoid
MSL at the vertical datum name > finish. After model for the Philippines. [Geodesy]. Coordinates, XIII(8), 31-39.
adjustment, the WGS84 grid point list will
Kearsley, A. H. W. (1991). Evaluation of the geoid of the Philippines (Vol. 1):
include the MSL elevation of the points. SAGRIC International.

Mancera, D. (2014). Manual on Geodetic Leveling. (1st edition).

Conclusions and Recommendations
Pahlevi, A., Pangastuti, D., Sofia, N., Kasenda, A., & Prijatna, K. (2015).
Determination of Gravimetric Geoid Model in Sulawesi–Indonesia. Paper
The computation and recomputation of the presented at the FIG Working Week.
Philippine Geoid Model were discussed in this article.
Sadatipour, S., Kiamehr, R., Abrehdary, M., & Sharifi, A. (2012). The
The nominal accuracy of the geoid (PGM2018) is evaluation of sea surface topography models based on the combination of
about 1 cm. To preserve the existing vertical reference the satellite altimetry and the global geoid models in the Persian Gulf.

datum of the topographic maps, the geoid was made Vanicek, P. (1991). Vertical datum and NAVD88. Surveying and Land
to fit the network of BMs in the country, thereby Information Systems, 51(2), 83-86.
__________________________________________________________
unifying the different vertical datum of the islands
and regions. The standard deviation of the fit is about Engr. Ronaldo C. Gatchalian is the Chief of the Geodesy
Division of the Mapping and Geodesy Branch of NAMRIA.
2 cm. For GNSS survey projects requiring elevation He holds a master’s degree in Geographic Information
accuracies of about 3 to 30 cm, the geoid model is a Technology from the University of Melbourne (Australia). He
specializes in GNSS surveying and data processing, as well
good alternative to geodetic leveling. as geoid modeling.
49 Infomapper 2021
 Applications of PGRS

R
by: Engr. Charisma Victoria D. Cayapan

egardless of one’s awareness, everyone is affected by a change in

the geodetic reference, either directly or indirectly. All position
measurements emanate from the reference frame, so altering this
foundation would naturally impact all geospatial information tied
to it.

The modernization of the Philippine Geodetic Reference System

(PGRS) is intended to address the limitations of an outdated
datum and at the same time, take full advantage of the latest
geodetic technologies to propel the attainment of the country’s
sustainable development goals. The work is by no means an easy
task, fraught with technical, legal, and other issues that need to
be carefully studied and sufficiently addressed. But the end goal
of the modernization, that of accurate, up-to-date, and globally
consistent geodetic reference data and services within reach of
every Filipino, remains to be the driving force behind NAMRIA’s
geodetic reference system development activities.

A modern PGRS is expected to improve on how position

measurements are collected and pave the way for the development
and adoption of new applications utilizing geospatial information.
The gains to be derived from the modernization cut across all
sectors, from surveying and mapping, intelligent transport
systems and unmanned navigation, climate adaptation and
About the Photo: The
modern PGRS supports the
disaster mitigation, infrastructure development, and precision mainstreaming of GNSS

agriculture, to name a few.

in surveying and mapping
operations. By transitioning
to a modern PGRS, data from

The topics in the next pages discuss the benefits and ways
GNSS may be directly used
without having to go through
forward of the PGRS Modenization Program in NAMRIA. The the complex transformation

application of a modern PGRS for positioning in hydrographic

procedure that is needed
when using a local geodetic
survey are also in the succeding articles.  datum.
50 Infomapper 2021
 Modern PGRS: What Is in It for You?
by: Engr. Ronaldo C. Gatchalian and Engr. Charisma Victoria D. Cayapan

A
s the frontliners to development tasked Radio Technical Commission for Maritime Services via
to define the “where” of the “what”, the Internet Protocol (NTRIP).
surveying and mapping community is
one of, if not the foremost stakeholder With the development of the Philippine Geoid
in the PGRS modernization. Transitioning to a geodetic Model (PGM), GNSS heighting has also become feasible
reference frame that is in sync with the constantly so users have an easier alternative for deriving elevation
changing world has both its upsides and challenges measurements compared to the conventional geodetic
that geodetic engineers and geomatics practitioners leveling. Users need only to input the geographic
need to be aware of. coordinates of the point of interest, and the geoid
value will automatically be released which can then be
Here is a rundown of the benefits: used to compute the elevation above mean sea level
(AMSL). Alternatively, users may upload the PGM grid
Accurate (and up-to-date) positions. Coordinated file directly into their GNSS devices so that elevations
monitoring of geodetic controls, both passive and AMSL will be automatically computed as they conduct
active stations, means that end users have access to their survey. The current version of the PGM app
updated positions that are consistent with what is (2018.98) is available for download from the NAMRIA
happening on the ground. The periodic refinement website (https://www.namria.gov.ph/projects.aspx).
of the national deformation model provides a way to
move backward and forward in time and still arrive Globally consistent data (and professionals). By
at position measurements with geodynamic effects connecting to a GGRF, position measurements have
already accounted for. now become interoperable with other geospatial
information from across the globe. Users can now take
Available 4D geodetic reference data. The geodetic advantage of freely available global datasets and web-
infrastructure that has been established to support a based platforms like Google Earth, without having to
geocentric and dynamic datum provides time-tagged carry out (and understand) datum transformations.
geodetic reference data as in the case of the PAGeNet
where precise GNSS data are gathered round-the-clock It is not just the datum that has become interoperable
and in all-weather conditions. Once completed, users with the rest of the world. Geomatics practitioners in
will also have access to unified control points that have the country are also capacitated to practice surveying
all the geodetic reference data (geometric position, and mapping on a global and dynamic stage. This is
elevation, and gravity) in one monument. particularly important since the Philippines has taken
part in mutual recognition agreements/treaties with
Easier (and streamlined) survey operations. The its neighboring countries for the practice of geodetic
availability of permanent and continuously operating engineering and geomatics.
reference stations result in faster and more cost-
effective ground surveys with users no longer having The road to a modern PGRS is not an easy task.
to set up their reference or base stations to achieve Changing the geodetic datum means having to deal
more accurate results. Multiconstellation GNSS data with the change in positions. Users should expect the
from the active geodetic stations are available for shift to be larger with the move to a geocentric datum,
download at different logging intervals and file lengths compared to when Luzon 1911 datum was upgraded
from the PAGeNet website (http://pagenet.namria.gov. to PRS92. In a research conducted by the University
ph/AGN/Home.aspx). Real-time correction services of the Philippines Training Center for Applied Geodesy
from a single base (real-time kinematic) or an array of and Photogrammetry (UP-TCAGP) for NAMRIA on the
reference stations (network-based real-time kinematic) implications of migrating to a geocentric datum on lot
are also available using industry-standard formats parcels, it was found that in the study area, positions
and transmitted using the Networked Transport of were shifted by around 160 m southeast when cadastral
51 Infomapper 2021
 data were transformed from PRS92 (or Luzon1911) Transitioning to a modern PGRS requires a major
to PGD2020 (or ITRF2014). Other notable findings shift on how the geodetic reference frame is realized
include: and how users can connect to it. Communicating
• No significant change (>1 minute) was observed this change to stakeholders is paramount to ensure
for bearings (or directions). the successful transition into the new system.
• Significant changes in distances (>1cm) and Academic institutions offering surveying and mapping
areas (>1 sqm) were detected. The changes courses play an important role in capacitating future
depend on either theoretical (based on records) geomatics practitioners on dynamic GRFs. Professional
and actual (based on observed coordinates), organizations also need to step up and upgrade the
Luzon 1911 (PTM) transformation, or PRS92 skills set within their ranks.
coordinates to PGD2020.
• Theoretical coordinates are not always Understanding the hows and the whys of the PGRS
consistent with observed coordinates. Effects modernization is one thing, ensuring that stakeholders
of parameters on parcellary data are also can readily access modern PGRS data and products is
significantly different depending on whether another. NAMRIA is working on developing geodetic
the parameters were derived using theoretical toolkits and putting up the platform to facilitate user
or observed PTM coordinates. access to modern PGRS data and products.
• PRS92 tends to have no significant change
in technical descriptions because it is more NAMRIA continues to work towards strengthening
homogeneous compared to the old Luzon the geodetic infrastructure and bringing these modern
1911 (PTM). PGRS products and services closer to the surveying and
mapping stakeholders. 
The research team recommended the conduct of an
actual ground survey of reference monuments/control
points to verify the theoretical coordinates before Reference:
using them to transform parcellary data to PGD2020. Balicanta, L.P., Francisco R.R.T., Carcella, B. III., and Pagdonsolan, Y.F.

The actual ground survey will also allow for the (2018). Evaluation and Assessment on the Effects of Shifting the Existing
Cadastre to Geocentric Datum. Internal report prepared for NAMRIA
establishment of a common point and cross-validation as part of the Research and Development in Support of the PGRS

analyses to ensure the best combination of control Modernization.

__________________________________________________________
points in deriving the transformation parameters.
Engr. Charisma Victoria Dela Cruz-Cayapan is a
Geophysicist from NAMRIA. She obtained her Specializing
Moreover, existing land survey regulations such as Master's degree in Navigation and Related Applications

DENR Memorandum Circular 2010-13, on “Adopting (GNSS) degree from Politecnico di Torino (Italy) and her
Bachelor of Science degree in Geodetic Engineering from the
the Manual on Land Survey Procedures,” still have no University of the Philippines (UP) Diliman. She specializes

mention on the use of modern PGRS data and products in GNSS applications in Geodetic Reference Frame
Development.
in land surveying workflows. The current standards
of accuracy of geodetic control networks also need Engr. Ronaldo C. Gatchalian is the Chief of the Geodesy
Division of the Mapping and Geodesy Branch of NAMRIA.
to be updated to include the zero-order controls He holds a master’s degree in Geographic Information

and to include other metrics in assessing positional Technology from the University of Melbourne (Australia). He
specializes in GNSS surveying and data processing, as well
uncertainty. as geoid modeling.
52 Infomapper 2021
 Positioning in Hydrographic Surveys
and the Modernization of PGRS
by: LCdr. Gilbert A. Alviola

H
ydrographic surveying is one of the primarily uses a single ping of a sound wave to measure
core functions of NAMRIA. This task the depth of water at a particular position, whereas the
involves the mapping of seas and more sophisticated multibeam echosounder system
oceans to produce nautical charts uses a swath or a fan of sound waves, sending multiple
which are used by mariners primarily for the safety signals to the seafloor so that a larger extent of the
of navigation. Hydrographic surveying is typically seabed is surveyed at one passing.
concerned with the measurement of depths, as well
as the description of the physical features of bodies of What is a sounding?
water (IHO, 2005).
The fundamental element of a hydrographic survey
The application of this field of science is not only is sounding. A sounding is a point on the surface of the
limited to maritime safety. The survey data can be water, much like a point on the ground described by its
used in support of other marine activities, especially in position in three dimensions. Whereas a point on the
economic development and scientific research. Earth is defined by latitude, longitude, and elevation, a
sounding is typically defined by latitude, longitude, and
With the rapid advancement of technology in the depth. The depth here is the vertical distance from the
past decades, hydrographic surveying has also evolved seafloor to the chart datum being used.
in the digital age, especially with the utilization of the
Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) in positioning. What is a chart datum? One cannot just say that
the depth of water is from the seafloor to the surface.
Most hydrographic surveys are conducted using Why? This is because the sea surface is rising and
two kinds of sonar equipment. Sonar (sound navigation falling owing to the effect of the tide. Tide is the rising
and ranging) is a technology that uses sound waves or and falling of the surface of a body of water caused
acoustic signals to detect objects and their location primarily by to the gravitational forces of the moon and
in the ocean. The single-beam echosounder system the sun.

Figure 1. Single-beam and multibeam survey boats of NAMRIA in Abra de Ilog, Occidental Mindoro
53 Infomapper 2021
 Horizontal and Vertical Positioning of Standards of positioning in hydrographic survey
Soundings in Hydrographic Survey
The current standards of positioning in NAMRIA’s
Importance of positioning in hydrographic survey hydrographic surveys are set by the NAMRIA
Standards for Hydrographic Surveys (NSHS), which is
Positioning is an important aspect of hydrographic mostly based on the IHO (International Hydrographic
surveying. The first two elements of a sounding are the Organization) S-44 publication (IHO Standards for
X and Y position and are referred to as the horizontal Hydrographic Surveys). This NSHS also contains the
aspect of positioning. It is important for the positions manual or guidelines in conducting hydrographic
of soundings to be acquired accurately for safety of surveys.
navigation.
Essentially, the standards of positioning are
As an example, the US minesweeper ship USS determined by Total Propagated Uncertainty (TPU).
Guardian ran aground on the country’s Tubbataha Reef TPU has two components in hydrographic surveys:
in 2013 causing colossal damage to the coral reefs. The Total Horizontal Uncertainty (THU) and Total Vertical
ship had to be dismantled to be removed from the area Uncertainty (TVU).
and the United States had to pay 87 million pesos to the
Philippine government. Upon investigation, the leading THU and TVU are not determined by just one factor
cause of the accident was an erroneous chart produced such as the accuracy of the GNSS equipment; rather,
by the US National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, these are the collective propagated uncertainties
where it was found that the position of soundings was caused by variable factors in the sonar system
highly inaccurate (Philippine Daily Inquirer, 2014). (multibeam or single-beam echosounder system).
Some of the parameters that need to be factored in are
instrument error, sound speed error, tide measurement
error, vessel motion, and time synchronization, among
others.

Use of GCPs in RTK Positioning of

Soundings

Horizontal positioning using RTK

Real-Time Kinematic (RTK) positioning is one of

the primary positioning methods used by NAMRIA in
the conduct of hydrographic surveys. In this GNSS
technique, a base station is set up in a known location
on land while the survey vessel is equipped with a GNSS
rover receiver as part of its echosounder system. The
GNSS base station will broadcast satellite corrections
that will be received by the rover receivers in real
time, which will dramatically increase the accuracy of
the measured position of soundings. Figure 3 shows
Figure 2. USS Guardian shown aground on Tubbataha Reef
with an assisting Malaysian tugboat a diagram of hydrographic surveying using RTK
positioning.
Horizontal positioning in hydrographic surveys is
now mainly achieved through the technology of GNSS, Vertical Positioning of Soundings in
or more commonly known as Global Positioning System Hydrographic Surveys
(GPS). The term GNSS is more appropriate to use
because GPS is the satellite system of the United States. The vertical positioning of soundings in traditional
The GNSS devices in NAMRIA’s survey equipment not NAMRIA hydrographic surveys is highly dependent
only utilize the satellites from GPS, but also those from on the tidal data as processed by its Hydrography
GLONASS (Russia), and sometimes GALILEO (European Branch. The vertical distance from the seafloor to the
Union) and Beidou (China). water surface is subjected to the application of tidal
54 Infomapper 2021
 corrections, or the corrective vertical distance from the
surface to the chart datum. In hydrographic surveys,
NAMRIA’s chart datum is referred to the Mean Lower
Low Water (MLLW). The MLLW is the average of the
lower low water levels in a particular area in a given
epoch, which is usually over 19 years.

The role of the modernization of PGRS

The modernization of the Philippine Geodetic

Reference System (PGRS) is critical to the improvement
Figure 3. Diagram of hydrographic surveying
of sounding positioning in hydrographic surveys. The using RTK positioning
updating of the base stations to the current realization
of the World Geographic System (WGS84) datum would References:
imply that the resulting soundings from the surveys will International Hydrographic Organization. (2005). Manual on Hydrography.
also be referenced to the current realization of WGS84. Monaco, Monaco: International Hydrographic Bureau.

With this, the nautical charts that will be produced NAMRIA Hydrography Branch. (2019). NAMRIA Standards for
with these surveys will now be consistent with the Hydrographic Surveys. NAMRIA.

widely used Google Maps and Google Earth interface, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2013, January 07)
providing increased convenience for the mariners and Ships Aground on Coral Reefs, Then and Now: The USS Guardian vs.
NOAA Ship Fathomer. https://response.restoration.noaa.gov/about/
the general public. media/ships-aground-coral-reefs-then-and-now-uss-guardian-vs-noaa-
ship-fathomer.html
__________________________________________________________
The modernization of the PGRS will improve the
accuracy and integrity of the base stations used in LCdr. Gilbert A. Alviola is the Chief of the Hydrographic and
Geomagnetic Data Management Section of the Hydrography
hydrographic surveys. This will aid the hydrographic Branch of NAMRIA. He holds a Master of Science degree
and bathymetric products of NAMRIA to be at par with in Hydrographic Science from the University of Southern
Mississippi (USA) and a Bachelor of Science degree in
global standards.  Geodetic Engineering from UP Diliman.
55 Infomapper 2021