Skip to main content

Analysis of the accuracy of Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) height models using International Global Navigation Satellite System Service (IGS) Network

Abstract

The Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) carried out in February 2000 has provided near global topographic data that has been widely used in many fields of earth sciences. The mission goal of an absolute vertical accuracy within 16 m (with 90% confidence)/RMSE ∼10 m was achieved based on ground validation of SRTM data through various studies using global positioning system (GPS). We present a new and independent assessment of the vertical accuracy of both the X- and C-band SRTM datasets using data from the International GNSS Service (IGS) network of high-precision static GPS stations. These stations exist worldwide, have better spatial distribution than previous studies, have a vertical accuracy of 6 mm and constitute the most accurate ground control points (GCPs) possible on earth; these stations are used as fiducial stations to define the International Terrestrial Reference Frame (ITRF). Globally, for outlier-filtered data (135 X-band stations and 290 C-band stations), the error or difference between IGS and SRTM heights exhibits a non-normal distribution with a mean and standard error of 8.2 ± 0.7 and 6.9 ± 0.5 m for X- and C-band data, respectively. Continent-wise, Africa, Australia and North America comply with the SRTM mission absolute vertical accuracy of 16 m (with 90% confidence)/RMSE ∼10 m. However, Asia, Europe and South America have vertical errors higher than the SRTM mission goal. At stations where both the X- and C-band SRTM data were present, the root mean square error (RMSE) of both the X- and C-bands was identical at 11.5 m, indicating similar quality of both the X- and C-band SRTM data.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9

References

  • Agrawal R, Mahtab A, Jayaprasad P, Pathan S K and Ajai 2006 Validating SRTM DEM with differential GPS Measurements – A case study with different terrains; Proceedings of the Symposium of International Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, Goa, India, September 25–30.

  • Altamimi Z, Collilieux X, Legrand J, Garayt B and Boucher C 2007 ITRF2005: A new release of the International Terrestrial Reference Frame based on time series of station positions and Earth Orientation Parameters; J. Geophys. Res.: Solid Earth 112 (9). doi: 10.1029/2007JB004949.

  • Bamler R 1999 The SRTM mission: A world-wide 30 m resolution DEM from SAR interferometry in 11 days; In: Photogrammetric week (eds) Fritsch R and Spiller R, pp. 145–154.

  • Blumberg D, Bach D, Weissel J, Gorokhovich Y, Small C and Balk D 2005 The 2004 Sumatra Tsunami event: Contribution of SRTM data to the analysis of devastation; The Shuttle Radar Topography Mission – Data Validation and Applications Workshop, June 14–16, Reston, Virginia.

  • Ciampalini R, Martin M P, Saby N P A, Richer De Forges A C, Arrouays D, Nehlig P and Martelet G 2013 Modelling soil particle-size distribution in the region centre (France); Proceedings of 1st Global Soil Map Conference: Basis of the Global Spatial Soil Information System, Orleans, France, October 7–9, Code 102494.

  • Dow J M, Neilan R E and Rizos C 2009 The International GNSS service in a changing landscape of global navigation satellite; J. Geodesy 83 191–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • El-Rabbany A 2002 Introduction to GPS, The Global Positioning System; Artech House, Mobile Communication Series.

  • Falorni G, Teles V, Vivoni E R, Bras R L and Amaratunga K S 2005 Analysis and characterization of the vertical accuracy of digital elevation models from the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission; J. Geophys. Res. 110 Article No. F02005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farr T G and Kobrick M 2000 Shuttle radar topography mission produces a wealth of data; T. Am. Geophys. Union 81 583–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farr T G, Rosen P A, Caro E, Crippen R, Duren R, Hensley S, Kobrick M, Paller M, Rodriguez E, Roth L, Seal D, Shaffer S, Shimada J, Umland J, Werner M, Oskin M, Burbank M and Alsdorf D 2007 The Shuttle Radar Topography Mission; Rev. Geophys. 45 RG2004, doi: 10.1029/2005RG000183.

  • FGDC 1998 Geospatial Positioning Accuracy Standards. Part 3: National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy; Federal Geographic Data Committee, USA. http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/standards_publications/.

  • Gesch D B 2007 The National Elevation Dataset; In: Digital elevation model technologies and applications; The DEM users manual (ed.) Maune D, 2nd edn, Bethesda, Maryland, American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, pp. 99–118.

  • Gorokhovich Y and Voustianiouk A 2006 Accuracy assessment of the processed SRTM-based elevation data by CGIAR using field data from USA and Thailand and its relation to the terrain characteristics; Rem. Sens. Environ. 104 409–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grohman G, Kroenung G and Strebeck J 2006 Filling SRTM voids: The delta surface fill method; Photogramm. Eng. Rem. Sens. 72 213–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanssen R F 2001 Radar Interferometry: Data interpretation and analysis; Springer, New York.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann J and Walter D 2006 How complementary are SRTM X- and C-band digital elevation models? Photogramm. Eng. Rem. Sens. 72 261–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaber WA, Floricioiu D, Rott H and Eineder M 2013 Surface elevation changes of glaciers derived from SRTM and TanDEM-X DEM differences; Proceedings of the 33rd IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS) 2013, Melbourne, VIC, Australia, July 21–26, Article No. 6723173, pp. 1893–1896.

  • JPL Shuttle Radar Topography Mission 2009 Technical Fact Sheet; http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/srtm/index.html.

  • Karwel A K and Ewiak I 2008 Estimation of the accuracy of the SRTM terrain model on the area of Poland; International Archives of the Photogrammetry; Rem. S. Spatial Inform. Sci. 37 B7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellndorfer J, Walker W, Pierce L, Dobson C, Fites J A and Hunsaker C 2004 Vegetation height estimation from shuttle radar topography mission and national elevation datasets; Rem. Sens. Environ. 93 339–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolecka N and Kozak J 2013 Assessment of the accuracy of SRTM C- and X-band high mountain elevation data: A case study of the Polish Tatra mountains; Pure Appl. Geophys. doi: 10.1007/s00024-013-0695-5.

  • Lemoine F G, Kenyon S C, Factor J K, Trimmer R G, Pavlis N K, Chinn D S, Cox C M, Klosko S M, Luthcke S B, Torrence M H, Wang Y M, Williamson R G, Pavlis E C, Rapp R H and Olson T R 1998 The development of the joint NASA GSFC and National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) Geopotential Model EGM96; Technical Paper NASA/TP-1998-206861.

  • Mahammad S and Ramakrishnan R 2010 GeoTiff – A standard image file format for GIS applications; Space Application Centre, ISRO, Ahmedabad.

  • Miliaresis G C H and Paraschou C V E 2005 Vertical accuracy of the SRTM DTED level 1 of Crete; Int. J. Appl. Earth Observ. Geoinform. 7 49–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mouratidis A, Briole P and Katsambalos K 2010 SRTM 3 arc DEM (versions 1, 2, 3, 4) validation by means of extensive kinematic GPS measurements: A case study from North Greece; Int. J. Rem. Sens. 31 6205–6222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rabus B, Eineder M, Roth A. and Bamler R 2004 The shuttle radar topography mission – a new class of digital elevation models acquired by space borne radar ; J. Photogramm. Rem. Sens. 57 241–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapp R H 1997 Use of potential coefficient models for geoid undulation determinations using a spherical harmonic representation of the height anomaly/geoid undulation difference; J. Geodesy 71 282–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Razali N M and Wah Y B 2011 Power comparisons of Shapiro–Wilk, Kolmogorov–Smirnov, Lilliefors and Anderson–Darling test; J. Stat. Model. Analytics 2 21–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rexer M and Hirt C 2014 Comparison of free high resolution digital elevation data sets (ASTER GDEM2, SRTM v2.1/v4.1) and validation against accurate heights from the Australian National Gravity Database; Aust. J. Earth Sci. 61 213–226.

  • Rodriguez E, Morris C S and Belz J E 2006 A global assessment of the SRTM performance; Photogramm. Eng. Rem. Sens. 72 249–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez E, Morris C S, Belz J E, Chapin E C, Martin J M and Daffer W 2005 An assessment of the SRTM topographic products; Technical Report JPLD-31639, Pasadena, California: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, 2005, 143p.

  • Sefercik U G and Alkan M 2009 Advanced analysis of differences between C and X bands using SRTM data for mountainous topography; J. Indian Soc. Rem. Sens. 37 335–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro S S and Wilk M B 1965 An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples); Biometrika 52 591–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sleszynski P 2013 A geomorphometric analysis of Poland basedon the SRTM-3 data; Geographia Polonica 85 45–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toutin T 2002 Impact of terrain slope and aspect on radargrammetric DEM accuracy ISPRS; J. Photogramm. Rem. Sens. 57 228–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USGS 2005 Shuttle radar topography mission; http://srtm.usgs.gov.

  • Van Zyl J J 2001 The shuttle radar topography mission (SRTM): A breakthrough in remote sensing of topography; Acta Astronautica 48 559–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werner M 2001 Shuttle radar topography mission (SRTM), mission overview; J. Telecommun. (Frequenz) 55 75–79.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This is an IITBESCDL/001/2014 publication. The work was funded by the Ministry of Earth Sciences India, Grant No. MoES/16/01/09-RDEAS and Department of Science and Technology India, Grant No. SR/S4/ES-415/2009 to Malay. VS acknowledges IITB for the Teaching Assistantship in the Department of Earth Sciences. Critical reviews by two anonymous reviewers and comments of the JESS handling editor helped to significantly improve the quality of this paper. We are grateful to the editorial staff of JESS for painstakingly putting this paper together. We benefited from discussions with Sridevi Jade, D Ramakrishnan and Rishikesh Bharti.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to MALAY MUKUL.

Additional information

Supplementary data pertaining to this article are available on the Journal of Earth System Science Website at http://www.ias.ac.in/jess/aug2015/supp/Mukul.pdf

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

(PDF 167 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

MUKUL, M., SRIVASTAVA, V. & MUKUL, M. Analysis of the accuracy of Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) height models using International Global Navigation Satellite System Service (IGS) Network. J Earth Syst Sci 124, 1343–1357 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-015-0597-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-015-0597-2

Keywords

  • Geodesy
  • error
  • accuracy
  • georeferencing
  • GPS/GNSS
  • radar
  • DEM/DTM
  • SRTM.