Www.fugro.com Geospatial Data Accuracy: Metrics and Assessment Qassim A. Abdullah, Ph.D. Fugro EarthData, Inc. PDAD Special Session 39 : Sensor Calibration.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
LiDAR Introduction.
Advertisements

Digital Image Processing
REQUIRING A SPATIAL REFERENCE THE: NEED FOR RECTIFICATION.
Large Scale Topographic Mapping in Indonesia
High Accuracy Helicopter Lidar & Mapping Jeffrey B. Stroub, CP,RLS,PPS,SP Vice President Business Development September 9, 2014 Jeff Stroub CP, RLS, PPS,
S.Kadnichanskiy Digital oblique images and their application. The possibility of aerial survey system A3 in taking oblique aerial photography.
Transition to Digital Acquisition Presented to USDA Imagery Planning Meeting 12/04/08 By: Alistair Stuart.
Errors and Horizontal distance measurement
Geospatial Data Accuracy and the New Mapping Accuracy Standard: New Era Session #35 Dr. Qassim Abdullah, Woolpert, Inc. Pierre Le Roux, Aerometric, Inc.
Leica Photogrammetry Suite
VIIth International Scientific and Technical Conference From Imagery to Map: Digital Photogrammetric Technologies ADS40 imagery processing using PHOTOMOD:
Radiometric and Geometric Errors
Brian S. Keiling Program Head – Forest Management Dabney S.Lancaster Community College.
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Aparajithan Sampath, Don Moe, Jon Christopherson, Greg Strensaas. ASPRS, April Geometric Evaluation.
Navigation Systems for Lunar Landing Ian J. Gravseth Ball Aerospace and Technologies Corp. March 5 th, 2007 Ian J. Gravseth Ball Aerospace and Technologies.
Lineage February 13, 2006 Geog 458: Map Sources and Errors.
Comparison of LIDAR Derived Data to Traditional Photogrammetric Mapping David Veneziano Dr. Reginald Souleyrette Dr. Shauna Hallmark GIS-T 2002 August.
1. LiDAR Mapping Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) mapping provided for the United States International Boundary and Water Commission (USIBWC) – established.
Data Acquisition Lecture 8. Data Sources  Data Transfer  Getting data from the internet and importing  Data Collection  One of the most expensive.
Aerial photography and satellite imagery as data input GEOG 4103, Feb 20th Adina Racoviteanu.
Obtaining LiDAR Data, Contracting Considerations Kenny Legleiter Project Manager Merrick & Company.
Imagery for Supporting FSA Farm Programs Review FSA Requirements for Imagery Identify and Evaluate Possible Alternatives Recommend Plan of Action Objectives.
Accuracy Assessment. 2 Because it is not practical to test every pixel in the classification image, a representative sample of reference points in the.
APPLICATION OF LIDAR IN FLOODPLAIN MAPPING Imane MRINI GIS in Water Resources University of Texas at Austin Source. Optech,Inc.
Airborne LIDAR mapping tools, technology, trends, outlook ASPRS Annual Conference – PDAD Airborne LIDAR Mapping Technology Panel April 30, 2008 Please.
LiDAR Data Collection Status Northwest Florida Water Management District.
1 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey National Center for EROS Remote Sensing Technologies Group The Proposed USGS Plan for Digital.
Uses of Geospatial Soils & Surface Measurement Data in DWR Delta Levee Program Joel Dudas
INTRODUCTION TO MEASUREMENT
Accuracy and Maps Mike Ritchie, PE, PLS, PSM, CP President and CEO Photo Science.
Best Practices for Managing Aerial and UAS Frame Imagery
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Geometric Assessment of Remote Sensed Data Oct Presented By: Michael Choate, SAIC U.S.
Orthorectification using
Welcome and Introductions Calendar Overview Acquisition Status Final Product Specs Final Ortho Status – with Kucera DAT Process – with IntraSearch Feedback.
2012 KYTC Transportation-GIS Conference Kentucky Transportation Cabinet Office Building 200 Mero St., Frankfort, KY Thursday March 29, 2012 Pavement.
Digital Image Processing GSP 216. Digital Image Processing Pre-Processing – Correcting for radiometric and geometric errors in data Image Rectification.
LiDAR Contour Options Randy Mayden, VP Business Development
Surveying for Architectural Engineers Introduction.
Airborne Lidar Calibration Approaches Defining calibration techniques and assessing the results JAMIE YOUNG LIDAR SOLUTIONS SPECIALIST.
Digital Imagery Guideline ASPRS/PDAD Gerald J. Kinn Applanix ISG A Trimble Company 2 Dec 2003.
Uses of Geospatial Soils & Surface Measurement Data in DWR Delta Levee Program Joel Dudas
Wisconsin Aerial Imagery Ted Koch, Wisconsin State Cartographer’s Office WLIA 2005 Annual Conference February 24 th, 2005 Wisconsin Aerial Imagery
Accuracy of Land Cover Products Why is it important and what does it all mean Note: The figures and tables in this presentation were derived from work.
Introduction to Soft Copy Photogrammetry
Measurements and Errors. Definition of a Measurement The application of a device or apparatus for the purpose of ascertaining an unknown quantity. An.
Generation of a Digital Elevation Model using high resolution satellite images By Mr. Yottanut Paluang FoS: RS&GIS.
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Steve Helterbrand, USGS Bryan Christensen, SAIC at USGS EROS Digital Aerial Data Provider Certification.
SWFWMD LiDAR Specifications – 18 April 2008 LiDAR Specifications at the SWFWMD Ekaterina Fitos & Al Karlin.
E-Education Institute Lidar Technology and Applications Proposal for an elective course to be offered by the Dutton e-Education Institute MGIS Capstone.
How to describe Accuracy And why does it matter Jon Proctor, PhotoTopo GIS In The Rockies: October 10, 2013.
SGM as an Affordable Alternative to LiDAR
© 2008, The Sanborn Map Company, Inc. Privileged and confidential information. Distribution or copying prohibited unless approved in writing. 1 The Considerations.
EKT 314/4 WEEK 2 : CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION TO EI ELECTRONIC INSTRUMENTATION.
Integrated spatial data LIDAR Mapping for Coastal Monitoring Dr Alison Matthews Geomatics Manager Environment Agency Geomatics Group.
Integrating LiDAR Intensity and Elevation Data for Terrain Characterization in a Forested Area Cheng Wang and Nancy F. Glenn IEEE GEOSCIENCE AND REMOTE.
National Highway Institute 5-1 REV-2, JAN 2006 EQUIPMENT FACTORS AFFECTING INERTIAL PROFILER MEASUREMENTS BLOCK 5.
Mapping Technology Overview
Sioux Falls Geometric Test Range: Evaluation and Application
ASPRS 2008 Airborne Digital Mapping Camera Systems: A Manufacturers’ Perspective Ruedi Wagner, ADS Product Manager Portland, 1st May 2008.
Fast, Flexible, Accurate & Affordable mapping system
Terrain modelling: the basics
Making a good thematic map – Extracting or collecting geographic data
American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing Annual Meeting
Making a good thematic map – Extracting or collecting geographic data
IGIC Orthophotography Workgroup Update
Science of Crime Scenes
Digital Imagery Guideline ASPRS/PDAD Gerald J
Product self-assessment to CARD4L Normalised Radar Backscatter
Woolpert & New Geospatial Technologies
Michael L. Dennis, RLS, PE G67940_UC15_Tmplt_4x3_4-15
Presentation transcript:

Geospatial Data Accuracy: Metrics and Assessment Qassim A. Abdullah, Ph.D. Fugro EarthData, Inc. PDAD Special Session 39 : Sensor Calibration and Data Product Accuracy ASPRS 2012 Annual Convention March 22, 2012 Sacramento, CA

Sensors Technologies Today 1) Silicon Electronics made it possible to build:  Large Format Aerial Mapping Camera  Medium Format Aerial Mapping Camera  Small Format Multi-purpose Camera  Special Application Mapping Sensors –Panoramic and Oblique Camera –Thermal Sensors –Multi-Spectral/Hyper-spectral Sensors  Space-based imaging Sensors 2) LiDAR 3) IFSAR Image courtesy, Microsoft

Push Broom Panoramic Framing Oblique Today’s Geospatial Data Acquisition: Very Complex World LiDAR

Complex mapping processes …  Complex technologies result in complex processes –How Complex are today’s technologies? A laser system generate millions of pulses per second flown at speed of 200 – 300 knots A space-based imaging Radar provide DEM of Earth Terrain with vertical accuracy of 1 meter or better How about a full waveform digitization laser that record object surface every 2 nano second?  Human skills and knowledge may sometimes be lacking the proper understanding of such complex technologies  Proper training is essential to solve such complex puzzle  Not understanding the complex technologies leads to errors in the acquired data

Types of Errors In Geospatial Data FACT: Errors can be minimized but can never be eliminated…  Gross errors or “blunders” They can be of any size or nature, and tend to occur through carelessness.  Random Errors: are the small differences between repeated measurements of the same quantity –often of the order of the finest division in the measuring scale or device –It can be caused by operator skill level –Random errors have very definite statistical behavior and so can be dealt with by statistical methods –It can be minimized but not eliminated  Systematic Errors: are those which we can be modeled mathematically and therefore corrected Examples: GPS problems, camera calibration, earth curvature, atmospheric effects, inaccurate lever arm determination, etc.

Bias versus Random Errors Date Random error Systematic error

Actions Required to Minimize the Occurrence of Errors  Project planning stage: –Follow manufacturers recommendation on operating the sensor –Stay within the limits of the operation parameters of the auxiliary systems such as GPS and IMU  Data Processing stage: –Sensor orientation determination: Do not compromise aerial triangulation or the boresight processes Plan extra check points within the project area Make sure you have the correct calibration for the system –Datum Confirmation: Make sure that you are using the right vertical and horizontal datum Avoid using older datums as they may not be that accurate (i.e. NAD27, NAD83/86, WGS84(transit), etc.)

Bias in Map Coordinates Example of bias caused by confusing NAD83(86) and HARN in Indiana SPC

Mean (Bias) StDEV RMSE0.52 ft0.25 ft An RMSE of 0.52 ft will cause a rejection to ortho delivery mapped at 1”=50’ scale Allowed RMSE according to ASPRS standard = ±0.50’ Mean (Bias)0.00 StDEV RMSE Results after Bias removal Biased observations

What every user want beside pretty pictures? Thermal Imagery GSD = 50 cm Altitude 2,300 ft

User is interested in:  Accurate Data –Discriminator: Check points fit High definition/ high resolution  Clean Data –Discriminator: Matching mosaic lines (Both imagery and LiDAR) Noise free Data (for LiDAR) Decent radiometric quality (if optical imagery)  Manageable Data –Discriminator Common file format Optimized data size (i.e. lossless compression)

How Accuracy Standard should look like? The LiDAR case a) Classification According to LiDAR Point Accuracy: 1. Engineering class-I grade LiDAR data accuracy, for products with: Horizontal accuracy of RMSE X = RMSE Y = 20 cm or better Vertical accuracy of RMSE v = 5 cm or better 2. Engineering class-II grade LiDAR data accuracy, for products with: Horizontal accuracy of RMSE X = RMSE Y = 30 cm or better Vertical accuracy of RMSE v = 10 cm or better 3. Planning class-I grade LiDAR data accuracy, for products with: Horizontal accuracy of RMSE X = RMSE Y = 0.60 m or better Vertical accuracy of RMSE v = 20 cm or better 4. Planning class-II grade LiDAR data accuracy, for products with: Horizontal accuracy of RMSE X = RMSE Y = 0.75 m or better Vertical accuracy of RMSE v = 30 cm or better 5. General purpose grade LiDAR data accuracy, for products with: Horizontal accuracy of RMSE X = RMSE Y = 1.2 m or better Vertical accuracy of RMSE v = 0.50 m or better 6. User defined Accuracy, for products that do not fit into any of the previous five categories. The above accuracy figures should only be guaranteed in open flat and rolling terrains.

How Accuracy Standard should look like? The LiDAR case b) Classification According to LiDAR Surface Definitions (quality): 1. Engineering class-I grade LiDAR data quality, for a LiDAR surface with: a) Nominal post spacing of 0.30 m or less 2. Engineering class-II grade LiDAR data quality, for a LiDAR surface with: a) Nominal post spacing of 0.70 m or less b) To have optional break lines 3. Planning class-I grade LiDAR data quality, for a LiDAR surface with: a) Nominal post spacing of 1.0 m or less b) To have optional break lines 4. Planning class-II grade LiDAR data quality, for a LiDAR surface with: a) Nominal post spacing of 1.5 m or less b) To have optional break lines 5. General purpose grade LiDAR data quality, for a LiDAR surface with: a) Nominal post spacing of 2.0 m or less b) To have optional break lines 6. User defined quality, for products that do not fit into any of the previous five

Class I quality: To serve applications that requires very fine details or high resolution. The standard can specify the ground resolution for this class of maps to be one of the following subclasses: IA: GSD= 2.5cm (1.0in.) IB: GSD= 5.0cm (2.0in.) IC: GSD= 7.5cm (3.0in.) Class II quality: To serve applications that requires good details or high resolution. The standard can specify the ground resolution for this class of maps to be one of the following subclasses: IIA: GSD= 10cm (4in) IIB: GSD= 12.5cm (5.0in.) IIC: GSD= 15cm (6in.). Class III quality: To serve applications that requires acceptable details or medium resolution. The standard can specify the ground resolution for this class of maps to be one of the following subclasses: IIIA: GSD= 20cm (8in.) IIIB: GSD= 25cm (10.0in.) IIIC: GSD= 30cm (12in.) How Accuracy Standard should look like? The Imagery case

While geometrical quality classes for imagery-based map could look like this regardless of the resolution of the products: Class-I Accuracy: To serve applications that require a high horizontal and vertical accuracy as specified in the following subclasses: IA: RMSEx = RMSEy = RMSEv = 3.8 cm (1.5in.) IB: RMSEx = RMSEy = RMSEv = 7.6cm (3in.) IC: RMSEx = RMSEy = RMSEv = 11.4cm (4.5in.) Class-II Accuracy: To serve applications that require a medium range of horizontal and vertical accuracy as specified in the following subclasses: IIA: RMSEx = RMSEy = RMSEv = 15 cm (6in.) IIB: RMSEx = RMSEy = RMSEv = 19cm (7.5in.) IIC: RMSEx = RMSEy = RMSEv = 22.8cm (9in.) Class-III Accuracy: To serve applications that require a horizontal and vertical accuracy range as specified in the following subclasses: IIIA: RMSEx = RMSEy = RMSEv = 23 cm (9in.) IIIB: RMSEx = RMSEy = RMSEv = 38cm (15in.) IIIC: RMSEx = RMSEy = RMSEv = 46cm (18in.) Class-IV Accuracy: To serve all other products with resolution not included in the three quality classes. Such products should meet horizontal and vertical accuracy according to the following formula: RMSEx = RMSEy = RMSEv = 1.5 Ground Sampling Distance of the final product How Accuracy Standard should look like? The Imagery case

Other Quality Indicators Beside 20 Check Points  Horizontal shift in seam lines in ortho photo: –How much should be acceptable?  Smear in ortho photo –How much should be acceptable?  Wavy roads in ortho photo: –How much should be acceptable?  Vertical shift between flight lines in LiDAR data –How much should be acceptable?  Noise and unfiltered data in LiDAR data: –How much should be acceptable?

Thank You