Infrared and Laser Engineering, Volume. 52, Issue 10, 20230231(2023)
Comparison and analysis of high precision DEM production and quality in typical glacier regions of domestic stereometric mapping satellites
Figures & Tables(24)
Fig. 1. Stereoscopic images and laser footprint images of the same area. (a), (b) Stereoscopic images; (c) Laser footprint image
Fig. 2. Distribution of ICESat-2/ATL08 data points used for validation in Gangqin area
Fig. 3. Distribution of ICESat-2/ATL08 data points used for validation in the Purogangri area
Fig. 4. Relationship between GF-7, ZY-3 DEM and other source DEM RMSE and terrain
Fig. 5. Distribution of verification points at the intersection of HMA DEM and GF-7 DEM
Fig. 6. Distribution of verification points at the intersection of HMA DEM and ZY-3 DEM
Fig. 7. Shadow map of six DEM mountains in Gangqin research area. (a) TanDEM of Gangqin research area; (b) SRTM of Gangqin research area; (c) AW3D of Gangqin research area; (d) HMA of Gangqin research area; (e) ZY-3 DEM of Gangqin research area; (f) GF-7 DEM of Gangqin research area
Fig. 8. Six types of DEM mountain shadows in the Purogangri research area. (a) TanDEM of Purogangri research area; (b) SRTM of Purogangri research area; (c) AW3D of Purogangri research area; (d) HMA of Purogangri research area; (e) ZY-3 DEM of Purogangri research area; (f) GF-7 DEM of Purogangri research area
Fig. 9. Topographic characteristics of six DEM glacier ends in the Gangqin research area. (a) Topographic characteristics of TanDEM glacier ends in Gangqin research area; (b) Topographic characteristics of SRTM glacier ends in Gangqin research area; (c) Topographic characteristics of AW3D glacier ends in Gangqin research area; (d) Topographic characteristics of HMA glacier ends in Gangqin research area; (e) Topographic characteristics of ZY-3 DEM glacier ends in Gangqin research area; (f) Topographic characteristics of GF-7 DEM glacier ends in Gangqin research area
Fig. 10. Topographic characteristics of six DEM glacier ends in the Purogangri research area. (a) Topographic characteristics of TanDEM glacier ends in Purogangri research area; (b) Topographic characteristics of SRTM glacier ends in Purogangri research area; (c) Topographic characteristics of AW3D glacier ends in Purogangri research area; (d) Topographic characteristics of HMA glacier ends in Purogangri research area; (e) Topographic characteristics of ZY-3 DEM glacier ends in Purogangri research area; (f) Topographic characteristics of GF-7 DEM glacier ends in Purogangri research area
Fig. 11. Error distribution of six types of DEM in the Gangqin area
Fig. 12. Error distribution of six types of DEM in the Purogangri area
Fig. 13. Distribution of ATL06 in GF-7 Gangqin glacier DEM validation
Fig. 14. Distribution of ATL06 verified by DEM of ZY-3 Gangqin glacier
Fig. 15. Distribution of ATL06 points for DEM verification of GF-7 Purogangri glacier
Fig. 16. Distribution of ATL06 verified by DEM of Puruogangri glacier ZY-3
Table 1. Basic parameters of open-source digital elevation model products on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau
View tableView in ArticleTable 1. Basic parameters of open-source digital elevation model products on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau
Product name Release year Coverage of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau Grid size/m Height datum Elevation accuracy/m SRTM 2003 Void-free 30 EGM96 16 AW3D30 2016 Void-free 30 EGM96 5 TanDEM 2016 Void-free 90 WGS84 10 HMA 2017 Covering sparse 8 WGS84 5
Table 2. Precision requirements for digital elevation model
View tableView in ArticleTable 2. Precision requirements for digital elevation model
Terrain category Slope/ （°） RMSE/m 5 m grid 10 m grid Flatland S<2 5 6 Hilly terrain 2≤S<6 5 6 Mountainous region 6≤S<25 8 10 Alpine land S≥25 10 13
Table 3. Screening of ATL08 validation data in experimental area
View tableView in ArticleTable 3. Screening of ATL08 validation data in experimental area
Study area Longitude and latitude range Laser collection time Number of laser points after screening Gangqin 90.57°-90.88°E, 33.74°-34.18°N 2018.11.19-2022.3.22 1178 Puruogangri 88.78°-89.56°E, 33.62°-34.09°N 2018.12.26-2021.11.21 4605
Table 4. Verification of five DEM elevation accuracy in Gangqin research area
View tableView in ArticleTable 4. Verification of five DEM elevation accuracy in Gangqin research area
Different DEMs Resolution ratio/m Evaluation parameters Slope （Verify points） All points 0°-2° 2°-6° 6°-25° >25° 168 528 473 9 1178 SRTM 30 Mean/m 2.13 2.17 2.27 −0.81 2.18 RMSE/m 2.55 2.65 3.54 6.22 3.06 AW3D30 DEM 30 Mean/m 3.43 3.18 2.94 1.51 3.1 RMSE/m 3.96 3.52 3.42 6.19 3.57 TanDEM 90 Mean/m 0.03 0.1 0.14 −3.53 0.08 RMSE/m 0.65 0.94 2.36 6.34 1.72 GF-7 DEM 2 Mean/m −0.21 −0.33 −0.31 0.83 −0.30 RMSE/m 0.58 0.73 0.84 2.35 0.77 ZY-3 DEM 5 Mean/m 0.03 0.05 0.34 1.58 0.13 RMSE/m 1.14 1.15 1.39 2.87 1.24
Table 5. Verification of the accuracy of five DEM elevations in the Purogangri research area
View tableView in ArticleTable 5. Verification of the accuracy of five DEM elevations in the Purogangri research area
Different DEMs Resolution ratio/m Evaluation parameters Slope （Verify points） All points 0°-2° 2°-6° 6°-25° >25° 2254 1348 992 11 4605 SRTM 30 Mean/m 3.06 3.02 3.06 7.27 3.04 RMSE/m 3.93 3.54 4.26 11.87 3.65 AW3D DEM 30 Mean/m 2.98 2.97 2.98 4.01 3.04 RMSE/m 3.3 3.22 3.38 5.76 3.33 TanDEM 90 Mean/m −0.48 −0.17 −0.83 −7.62 −0.35 RMSE/m 6.69 4.84 8.30 23.12 5.16 GF-7 DEM 2 Mean/m −0.27 −0.26 0.01 1.79 −0.19 RMSE/m 0.76 0.92 2.43 2.54 1.20 ZY-3 DEM 5 Mean/m −1.32 −1.28 −1.37 −0.84 −1.27 RMSE/m 2.43 2.27 2.59 5.46 2.25
Table 6. Validation results of HMA DEM and GF-7, ZY-3 DEM
View tableView in ArticleTable 6. Validation results of HMA DEM and GF-7, ZY-3 DEM
Area Verification points/piece Different DEMs DEM grid/m Elevation accuracy/m Gangqin 470 HMA 8 Mean 1.68 RMSE 1.78 GF-7 DEM 2 Mean −0.54 RMSE 0.94 Puruogangri 1298 HMA 8 Mean 1.16 RMSE 1.39 ZY-3 DEM 5 Mean −2.24 RMSE 2.79
Table 7. DEM laser verification results of Gangqin glacier
View tableView in ArticleTable 7. DEM laser verification results of Gangqin glacier
Data source Evaluation parameters Slope/(°) All point 0°-2° 2°-6° 6°-25° >25° GF-7 DEM Points 177 1120 4049 664 6018 Mean/m 0.05 0.01 0.03 0.08 0.03 RMSE/m 0.63 0.67 0.83 1.62 0.92 ZY-3 DEM Points 378 2671 7799 1643 12491 Mean/m 1.43 1.27 0.96 0.70 1.00 RMSE/m 1.62 1.71 1.89 4.74 2.43
Table 8. DEM laser verification results of Purogangri glacier
View tableView in ArticleTable 8. DEM laser verification results of Purogangri glacier
Data source Evaluation parameters Slope/(°) All point 0°-2° 2°-6° 6°-25° >25° GF-7 DEM Points 331 2994 7857 1205 12416 Mean/m −0.05 0.25 0.52 1.11 0.51 RMSE/m 0.98 1.37 2.68 5.30 2.80 ZY-3 DEM Points 785 1780 6040 1542 12147 Mean/m −2.65 −2.61 −1.69 −0.58 −1.90 RMSE/m 3.47 3.52 3.53 5.66 3.86
Tools
Get Citation
Copy Citation Text
Siao Zhu, Guoyuan Li, Jinquan Guo, Kun Zhang, Shuaitai Zhang, Liang Pei. Comparison and analysis of high precision DEM production and quality in typical glacier regions of domestic stereometric mapping satellites[J]. Infrared and Laser Engineering, 2023, 52(10): 20230231
Paper Information
Category: Image processing
Received: Apr. 18, 2023
Accepted: --
Published Online: Nov. 21, 2023
The Author Email: Li Guoyuan (ligy@lasac.cn)
© Copyright 2018-2021 | Chinese Laser Press.
All Rights Reserved 沪ICP备15018463号-20