Advertisement

Surveys in Geophysics

, Volume 22, Issue 5–6, pp 561–579 | Cite as

Slicer Laser Altimetry In The Eastern Caribbean

  • P. Jansma
  • G. Mattioli
  • A. Matias
Article
  • 58 Downloads

Abstract

Data acquired by the airborne Scanning Lidar Imager of Canopies by EchoRecovery (SLICER) laser altimeter provided high-resolution digital topographicdata over Puerto Rico, the Dominican Republic and several of the Lesser AntillesIslands. The instrument was developed by the NASA-Goddard Space Flight Center.It has the capability of multibeam resolution of ground elevations beneath densecanopy areas. Data, therefore, can be used to generate a more accurate representation of the ground surface by removing the vegetation cover. Although internal precision is high (10 cm to 1 m), absolute accuracy is difficult to evaluate and depends on several factors, including the post-processed kinematic GPS (KGPS) flight path for the aircraft platform and clear identification of ground returns in the SLICER waveform. We compared topographic profiles from USGS 30 m and 1:250K DEMs for Puerto Rico with those generated by SLICER and with spot elevations derived from static and continuous GPS surveys. SLICER and KGPS surveys cross at six points in western Puerto Rico. Agreement between both elevation data sets is excellent and well fit (r = 0.921) by a linear model with a final residual bias of -0.501 m for SLICER ground returns relative to KGPS elevations. The agreement between SLICER and USGS 30 m DEMs is also very good with the largest errors associated with steep slopes and high vegetation cover. Residuals between KGPS and USGS 30 m DEMs are +1 ± 25 m, assuming a fixed uniform offset of +43.23 m between WGS84 and mean sea level.

Caribbean DEM laser altimetry LIDAR SLICER tropics 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adkins, K.F. and Merry, C.J.: 1994, Accuracy assessment of elevation data sets using the global positioning system, Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 60, 195–202.Google Scholar
  2. Beaumont, C., Fullsack, P., and Hamilton, J.: 1990, Erosional control of active compressional orogens, in, K. McClay (ed.), Thrust Tectonics, Chapman & Hall, London, pp. 1–18.Google Scholar
  3. Blair, J.B. and Hofton, M.A.: 1999, "Modeling laser altimeter return waveforms over complex vegetation using high-resolution elevation data, Geophysical Research Letters 26, 2509..Google Scholar
  4. Blair, J.B., Rabine, D.L., and Hofton, M.A.: 1999, The Laser Vegetation Imaging Sensor (LVIS): A medium-altitude, digitization-only, airborne laser altimeter for mapping vegetation and topography, ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing 54, 115–122.Google Scholar
  5. Blair, J., Coyle, D., Bufton, J., and Harding, D.: 1994, Optimization of an airborne laser altimeter for remote sensing of vegetation and tree canopies, Proceedings of IGARSS' 94, 2, 939–941.Google Scholar
  6. Brown, D.G. and Bara, T.J.: 1994,Recognition and reduction of systematic error in elevation and derivative surfaces from 71/2 minute DEMs, Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 60, 189–194.Google Scholar
  7. Clavet, D., Lasserre, M., and Pouliot, J.: 1993, GPS control for 1:50,000 scale topographic mapping from satellite images, Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 59, 107–111.Google Scholar
  8. DeCol, E., Griffiths, S. Thornton, S. Comin, L. Spoering, T. and Irving, R.E.L.: 1997, Digital elevation model (DEM) extraction from stereo Radarsat, Proceedings of the Thematic Conference on Geologic Remote Sensing 12, 485–493.Google Scholar
  9. Defense Mapping Agency.: 1986, Defense Mapping Agency product specifications for digital terrain elevation data (DTED) (2nd ed.), Defense Mapping Agency, Washington, D.C., 105 p.Google Scholar
  10. Dubayah, R., Blair, J.B., Bufton, J.L., Clark, D.B., JaJa, J., Knox, R., Luthcke, S.B., Prince, S., and Weishampel, J.: 1997, The Vegetation Canopy Lidar mission, Proceedings of Land Satellite Information in the Next Decade II: Sources and Applications, American Society of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, Bethesda, Md., pp. 100–112.Google Scholar
  11. Garvin, J.B., Bufton, J., Blair, J., Harding, D., Luthcke, S., Frawley, J., and Rowlands, D.: 1998, Observations of the Earth's topography from the Shuttle Laser Altimeter (SLA): Laser pulse echo-recovery measurements of terrestrial surfaces, Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 23, 1053–1068.Google Scholar
  12. Gens, R. and Vangenderen, J.L.: 1996, SAR interferometry: issues, techniques, applications, International Journal of Remote Sensing 32, 855–865.Google Scholar
  13. Gesch, D.B.: 1994, Topographic data requirements for EOS global change research, U.S. Geol. Survey Open-File Report, 94-626, 60 pp.Google Scholar
  14. Gesch, D.B. and Larson, K.S.: 1996, in Pecora Thirteen, Human Interactions with the Environment – Perspectives from Space, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, August 20–22.Google Scholar
  15. Gesch, D.B., Verdin, K.L., and Greenlee, S.K.: 1999, New land surface digital elevation model covers the Earth, EOS 80, 69–70.Google Scholar
  16. Giles, P.T., Chapman, M.A., and Franklin, S.E.: 1994, Incorporation of digital elevation model derived from stereoscopic satellite imagery in automated terrain analysis, Computers and Geosciences 20, 441–460.Google Scholar
  17. Gugan, D.J. and Dowman, I.J.: 1988, Topographic mapping from SPOT imagery. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 54, 1409–1414.Google Scholar
  18. Harding, D.J., Blair, J.B., Garvin, J.B., and Lawrence, W.T.: 1994, Laser altimetry waveform measurement of vegetation canopy structure, Proceedings of IGARSS'94, II, 1251–1253.Google Scholar
  19. Harding, D.J., Blair, J.B., Rodriguez, E., and Michel, T.: 1995, Airborne laser altimetry and interferometric SAR measurements of canopy structure and sub-canopy topography in the Pacific Northwest, Proceedings of the Second Topical Symposium on Combined Optical-Microwave Earth and Atmosphere Sensing (CO-MEAS'95), 22–24.Google Scholar
  20. Huising, E.J. and Gomes-Pereira, L.M.: 1998, Errors and accuracy estimates of laser data acquired by various laser scanning systems for topographic applications, ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing 53, 245–261.Google Scholar
  21. Irving, R.E., Toth, V., and Mackay, H.: 1998, STAR-3i interferometric airborne radar system; stateof-the-art exploration tool, American Association Petroleum Geologists Bulletin 82, 1925.Google Scholar
  22. Jansma, P., Mattioli, G., Harding, D., and Matias, A.: 1999, Northeastern Caribbean topography gets a digital upgrade from laser altimetry, EOS. Transactions of the American Geophysical Union 80, 511.Google Scholar
  23. Kraus, K. and Pfeifer, N.: 1998, Determination of terrain models in wooded areas with airborne scanner data, ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing 53, 193–203.Google Scholar
  24. Li, Z.: 1994, A comparative study of the accuracy of digital terrain models (DTMs) based on various data models, Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing 49, 2–11.Google Scholar
  25. Matias, A., Mattioli, G., and Jansma, P., 2000, Static and kinematic GPS geodesy for control of ground elevations from airborne laser altimetry: application to western Puerto Rico, GPS World, July, 38–43.Google Scholar
  26. Thorpe, J.: 1996, Aerial photography and satellite imagery: competing or complimentary?, Earth Observation Mag. 5, 35–39.Google Scholar
  27. Torlegård, K., Østman, A., and Lindgren, R.: 1986, A comparative test of photogrammetrically sampled digital elevation models, Photogrammetria 41, 1–16.Google Scholar
  28. Treuhaft, R.N., Madsen, S.N., Moghaddam, M., and Vanzyl, J.J.: 1996, Vegetation characteristics and underlying topography from interferometric radar, Radio Science 31, 1449–1485.Google Scholar
  29. U.S. Geological Survey: 1993, Digital elevation models, data user guide 5, Reston, VA, 50 pp.Google Scholar
  30. Webber, B.B.: 1995, Testing the vertical accuracy of United States Geological Survey 7.5 minute and 1 degree digital elevation models, Thesis, University of Idaho, 73 pp.Google Scholar
  31. Wessel, P. and Smith, W.H.F.: 1998, New, improved version of the GENERIC MAPPING TOOLS, EOS Transactions of the American Geophysical Union 79, 579.Google Scholar
  32. Zebker, H., Rosen, P., and Hensley, S.: 1997, Atmospheric effects in interferometric synthetic aperture radar surface deformation and topographic maps, Journal of Geophysical Research 102, 7547–7563.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. Jansma
    • 1
  • G. Mattioli
    • 2
  • A. Matias
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of GeosciencesUniversity of ArkansasFayettevilleUSA
  2. 2.Department of GeologyUniversity of Puerto RicoMayagüezUSA

Personalised recommendations