Slide Menu
Search Help Show/Hide Menu
Short Citation:
Office for Coastal Management, 2023: 2016 NOAA Topobathy Lidar DEM: Upper Lake Michigan Islands, https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/inport/item/48379.

Item Identification

Title: 2016 NOAA Topobathy Lidar DEM: Upper Lake Michigan Islands
Short Name: mi2016_noaa_topobathy_upper_lake_mi_islands_dem_m6195_metadata
Status: Completed
Publication Date: 2017-01-11
Abstract:

This digital elevation model (DEM) was created from data collected by Leading Edge Geomatics using a Leica Chiroptera II Bathymetric & Topographic Sensor. The project consists of approximately 205 square miles of data along the shores of the Beaver Island Archipelago and South Manitou Islands in Upper Lake Michigan. The data were acquired between November 16, 2015 through December 5, 2015 for Beaver Island, North Fox Island, Gull Island, High Island, Garden Island, and Isle Aux Galets. The data for South Manitou Island, South Fox Island and several smaller islands that needed to be re-acquired on Beaver Island due to data gaps, were acquired on June 2, 2016 and June 3, 2016. The data includes topobathy data classified as: created, never classified (0), unclassified (1), ground (2), submerged topography (40), water surface (41), derived water surface (42), no bottom found (45) in accordance with project specifications. Data that was classed as ground (2) and submerged topography (40), were used to create the 2 meter DEMs. This dataset contains 3,361 500 m x 500 m lidar tiles. In addition to the DEM data, the classified lidar point data that these DEMs were created from are also available. The data are available from the NOAA Digital Coast at: https://coast.noaa.gov/dataviewer/#/lidar/search/where:ID=5182

Original contact information:

Contact Org: NOAA Office for Coastal Management (OCM)

Phone: 843-740-1202

Purpose:

The Beaver Islands Archipelago and South Manitou Islands have been identified as having critical topographic and bathymetric data gaps by NOAA. This lidar data will fill those critical gaps.

Notes:

11397

Supplemental Information:

Data include all lidar returns. An automated grounding classification algorithm was used to determine bare earth and submerged topography point classification. The automated grounding was followed with manual editing. Classes 2 (ground) and 40 (submerged topography) were used to create the final DEMs. The full workflow used for this project is found in the final project report submitted to NOAA. The final report for this data set may be viewed at: https://noaa-nos-coastal-lidar-pds.s3.amazonaws.com/laz/geoid12b/5182/supplemental/mi2016_noaa_topobathy_upper_lake_mi_islands_m5182_lidarreport.pdf

Keywords

Theme Keywords

Thesaurus Keyword
Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) Science Keywords
EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > TOPOGRAPHY > TERRAIN ELEVATION > TOPOGRAPHICAL RELIEF MAPS
Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) Science Keywords
EARTH SCIENCE > OCEANS > BATHYMETRY/SEAFLOOR TOPOGRAPHY > BATHYMETRY
Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) Science Keywords
EARTH SCIENCE > OCEANS > COASTAL PROCESSES > COASTAL ELEVATION
ISO 19115 Topic Category
elevation
UNCONTROLLED
None DEM

Temporal Keywords

Thesaurus Keyword
UNCONTROLLED
None 20151116
None 20151117
None 20151129
None 20151130
None 20151204
None 20151205
None 20160602
None 20160603

Spatial Keywords

Thesaurus Keyword
Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) Location Keywords
CONTINENT > NORTH AMERICA > UNITED STATES OF AMERICA > MICHIGAN

Physical Location

Organization: Office for Coastal Management
City: Charleston
State/Province: SC

Data Set Information

Data Set Scope Code: Data Set
Maintenance Frequency: None Planned
Distribution Liability:

Any conclusions drawn from the analysis of this information are not the responsibility of NOAA, the National Geodetic Survey, the Office for Coastal Management, or its partners. This data can be obtained online at the following URL: https://coast.noaa.gov/dataviewer/#/lidar/search/where:ID=6195

Data Set Credit: We request that you credit the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) when you use these data in a report, publication, or presentation.

Support Roles

Data Steward

CC ID: 632422
Date Effective From: 2017-01-11
Date Effective To:
Contact (Organization): NOAA Office for Coastal Management (NOAA/OCM)
Address: 2234 South Hobson Ave
Charleston, SC 29405-2413
Email Address: coastal.info@noaa.gov
Phone: (843) 740-1202
URL: https://coast.noaa.gov

Distributor

CC ID: 632424
Date Effective From: 2017-01-11
Date Effective To:
Contact (Organization): NOAA Office for Coastal Management (NOAA/OCM)
Address: 2234 South Hobson Ave
Charleston, SC 29405-2413
Email Address: coastal.info@noaa.gov
Phone: (843) 740-1202
URL: https://coast.noaa.gov

Metadata Contact

CC ID: 632425
Date Effective From: 2017-01-11
Date Effective To:
Contact (Organization): NOAA Office for Coastal Management (NOAA/OCM)
Address: 2234 South Hobson Ave
Charleston, SC 29405-2413
Email Address: coastal.info@noaa.gov
Phone: (843) 740-1202
URL: https://coast.noaa.gov

Point of Contact

CC ID: 632423
Date Effective From: 2017-01-11
Date Effective To:
Contact (Organization): NOAA Office for Coastal Management (NOAA/OCM)
Address: 2234 South Hobson Ave
Charleston, SC 29405-2413
Email Address: coastal.info@noaa.gov
Phone: (843) 740-1202
URL: https://coast.noaa.gov

Extents

Currentness Reference: Ground Condition

Extent Group 1

Extent Group 1 / Geographic Area 1

CC ID: 1150230
W° Bound: -86.184026
E° Bound: -85.129054
N° Bound: 45.870399
S° Bound: 44.962511

Extent Group 1 / Time Frame 1

CC ID: 1150229
Time Frame Type: Range
Start: 2015-11-16
End: 2016-06-03

Spatial Information

Spatial Representation

Representations Used

Grid: Yes

Access Information

Security Class: Unclassified
Data Access Constraints:

None

Data Use Constraints:

Users should be aware that temporal changes may have occurred since this data set was collected and some parts of this data may no longer represent actual surface conditions. Users should not use this data for critical applications without a full awareness of its limitations.

Distribution Information

Distribution 1

CC ID: 746531
Download URL: https://coast.noaa.gov/dataviewer/#/lidar/search/where:ID=6195
Distributor:
File Name: Customized Download
Description:

Create custom data files by choosing data area, product type, map projection, file format, datum, etc.

Distribution 2

CC ID: 746532
Download URL: https://coast.noaa.gov/htdata/raster2/elevation/MI_Upper_Lake_MI_Islands_Topobathy_DEM_2016_6195
Distributor:
File Name: Bulk Download
Description:

Simple download of data files.

URLs

URL 1

CC ID: 746534
URL: https://coast.noaa.gov/dataregistry
URL Type:
Online Resource

URL 2

CC ID: 746535
URL: https://coast.noaa.gov
URL Type:
Online Resource

URL 3

CC ID: 746536
URL: https://coast.noaa.gov/dataviewer
URL Type:
Online Resource

URL 4

CC ID: 746537
URL: https://noaa-nos-coastal-lidar-pds.s3.amazonaws.com/laz/geoid12b/5182/supplemental/mi2016_noaa_topobathy_upper_lake_mi_islands_m5182.kmz
Name: Browse Graphic
URL Type:
Browse Graphic
File Resource Format: kmz
Description:

This graphic shows the lidar coverage for the 2015 - 2016 topobathy lidar acquisition for the islands in Upper Lake Michigan.

Activity Log

Activity Log 1

CC ID: 632460
Activity Date/Time: 2017-02-03
Description:

Date that the source FGDC record was last modified.

Activity Log 2

CC ID: 632459
Activity Date/Time: 2017-11-14
Description:

Converted from FGDC Content Standards for Digital Geospatial Metadata (version FGDC-STD-001-1998) using 'fgdc_to_inport_xml.pl' script. Contact Tyler Christensen (NOS) for details.

Activity Log 3

CC ID: 717902
Activity Date/Time: 2018-02-08
Description:

Partial upload of Positional Accuracy fields only.

Activity Log 4

CC ID: 746533
Activity Date/Time: 2018-03-13
Description:

Partial upload to move data access links to Distribution Info.

Technical Environment

Description:

OS Independent

Data Quality

Horizontal Positional Accuracy:

Project specifications require horizontal positions to meet 1.0m RMSE.; Quantitative Value: 1 meters, Test that produced the value: Independent horizontal accuracy testing requires photo-identifiable survey checkpoints, which is not always possible with elevation data. No photo-identifiable areas could be found in the lidar intensity imagery and horizontal accuracy could not be computed for the lidar data. The lidar data is compiled to meet the 1.0 m RMSE horizontal accuracy specification through rigorous processing of airborne GPS and IMU, use of control, and calibration procedures.

The DEMs are derived from the source lidar and inherit the accuracy of the source data. The DEMs are created using controlled and tested methods to limit the amount of error introduced during DEM production.

Vertical Positional Accuracy:

The DEMs are derived from the source lidar and inherit the accuracy of the source data. The DEMs are created using controlled and tested methods to limit the amount of error introduced during DEM production so that any differences identified between the source lidar and final DEMs can be attributed to interpolation differences. DEMs are created by averaging several lidar points within each pixel which may result in slightly different elevation values at a given location when compared to the source LAS, which does not average several lidar points together but may interpolate (linearly) between two or three points to derive an elevation value.

The vertical accuracy of the DEMs was verified by Dewberry with 21 non-vegetated survey checkpoints and 12 vegetated survey checkpoints.

The vertical accuracy is tested by comparing control points to the final topobathymetric DEM surface and extracting the elevation of the DEM pixel that contains the xy location of each control point.

Non-vegetated survey checkpoints will be used to compute the Non-Vegetated Vertical Accuracy (NVA). Project specifications require a NVA of 19.6 cm at the 95% confidence level based on RMSEz (10 cm) x 1.9600.

All vegetated survey checkpoints will be used to compute the Vegetated Vertical Accuracy (VVA). Project specifications require a VVA of 29.4 cm based on the 95th percentile.; Quantitative Value: 0.156 meters, Test that produced the value: This DEM dataset was tested to meet ASPRS Positional Accuracy Standards for Digital Geospatial Data (2014) for a 10 cm RMSEz Vertical Accuracy Class. Actual NVA accuracy was found to be RMSEz = 8.00 cm, equating to +/- 15.6 cm at 95% confidence level.; Quantitative Value: 0.244 meters, Test that produced the value: This DEM dataset was tested to meet ASPRS Positional Accuracy Standards for Digital Geospatial Data (2014) for a 10 cm RMSEz Vertical Accuracy Class. Actual VVA accuracy was found to be +/- 24.4 cm at the 95th percentile.

The 5% outliers consisted of 1 checkpoint that is larger than the 95th percentile. This checkpoint has a DZ value of 0.268 m.

Completeness Report:

Data covers the 3,361 tiles (500m x 500m tiles).

Conceptual Consistency:

Not applicable

Lineage

Process Steps

Process Step 1

CC ID: 1150225
Description:

Data for the Beaver Island Archipelago and South Manitou Island project was acquired by Leading Edge Geomatics using a Leica Chiroptera II Bathymetric and Topographic lidar sensor. All delivered lidar data is referenced to:

Horizontal Datum-NAD83 (2011) epoch: 2010

Projection-UTM Zone 16 North

Horizontal Units-meters

Vertical Datum-NAVD88, GEOID12B

Vertical Units-meters

This dataset encompasses 3,361 500m x 500m tiles. Both green lidar data and NIR lidar data was acquired.

Leading Edge Geomatics acquired, calibrated and performed the refraction correction to the lidar data.

Dewberry received the calibrated green and NIR data and verified complete coverage. Relative accuracy of the green swaths compared to overlapping and adjacent green swaths as well as the relative accuracy of green swaths compared to overlapping and adjacent NIR swaths was verified through the use of Delta-Z (DZ) orthos created in GeoCue software. Intraswath or within a swath relative accuracy was verified using Quick Terrain Modeler. Profiles of elevated planar features, such as roofs, were used to verify horizontal alignment between overlapping swaths. Dewberry then verified absolute vertical accuracy of the swath data prior to full-scale production.

Dewberry used ArcGIS to create 2-D breaklines. The bathymetric points exported by the Leica processing software were aggregated into polygons. These 2D breaklines representing the bathy areas were manually reviewed and adjusted where necessary to ensure all well-defined hydrographic features (at 1:1200-scale) were captured with breaklines.

Dewberry used algorithms in TerraScan to create the initial ground/submerged topography surface.

Dewberry used the 2-D breaklines to classify the bathymetric bottom and ground points properly in TerraScan.

Dewberry filtered out an issue with artifacts caused by scanner noise for one mission in the project. The issue cause a single scan rotation of pulses to be much noisier and have a higher spatial distribution of bathymetric points. Dewberry used the neighboring less noisy points to help select the actual bathymetric points in these areas helping to remove the artifacts and create a smooth consistent transition from low noise to high noise areas.

All lidar data was peer-reviewed. Dewberry's QAQC also included creating void polygons for use during review. All necessary edits were applied to the dataset. GeoCue software was used to update LAS header information, including all projection and coordinate reference system information. The final lidar data are in LAS format 1.4 and point data record format 6.

The final classification scheme is as follows:

0-Created, never classified

1-Unclassified

2-Ground

40-Bathymetric bottom

41-Water surface

42-Derived water surface

43-Submerged object, not otherwise specified

44-International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) S-57 objects

45-No bottom found

All data is then verified by an Independent QC department within Dewberry. The independent QC is performed by separate analysts who do not perform manual classification or editing. The independent QC involves quantitative and qualitative reviews.

Process Date/Time: 2016-07-01 00:00:00

Process Step 2

CC ID: 1150226
Description:

Lidar data classified as ground (2) and submerged topography (40) were then converted to ESRI multipoint format. These multipoints were then used to generate a terrain and the terrain was converted to a raster in IMG format with 2 meter pixel resolution. The terrain and output raster were created over the full project area to reduce edge-matching issues and improve seamlessness. The raster was clipped to the tile grid and named according to project specifications to result in tiled topobathymetric DEMs.

All tiled DEMs incorporate the use of the void polygons. The void polygons represent bathymetric areas with no bathymetric bottom returns and are set as NoData in the DEMs. Void polygon creation is described in the final project report and the void polygon metadata. Since some of the lidar tiles contain no bathy data those empty DEMs were removed to prevent confusion only 3,356 DEM tiles with surface data were created.

Process Date/Time: 2016-07-01 00:00:00

Process Step 3

CC ID: 1150227
Description:

The NOAA Office for Coastal Management (OCM) received the DEM files in img format. OCM ingested the files into the Digital Coast Access Viewer (DAV) system without any changes to projections or datums.

All tiled DEMs incorporate the use of the void polygons. The void polygons represent bathymetric areas with no bathymetric bottom returns and are set as NoData in the DEMs. Void polygon creation is described in the final project report and the void polygon metadata. Since some of the lidar tiles contain no bathy data those empty DEMs were removed to prevent confusion only 3,356 DEM tiles with surface data were created.

Process Date/Time: 2017-01-03 00:00:00

Catalog Details

Catalog Item ID: 48379
GUID: gov.noaa.nmfs.inport:48379
Metadata Record Created By: Anne Ball
Metadata Record Created: 2017-11-14 14:43+0000
Metadata Record Last Modified By: SysAdmin InPortAdmin
Metadata Record Last Modified: 2022-08-09 17:11+0000
Metadata Record Published: 2022-03-16
Owner Org: OCM
Metadata Publication Status: Published Externally
Do Not Publish?: N
Metadata Last Review Date: 2022-03-16
Metadata Review Frequency: 1 Year
Metadata Next Review Date: 2023-03-16