gov.noaa.nmfs.inport:49824
eng
UTF8
dataset
OCM Partners
resourceProvider
NOAA Office for Coastal Management
(843) 740-1202
2234 South Hobson Ave
Charleston
SC
29405-2413
coastal.info@noaa.gov
https://coast.noaa.gov
WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link
NOAA Office for Coastal Management Website
NOAA Office for Coastal Management Home Page
information
pointOfContact
2024-02-29T00:00:00
ISO 19115-2 Geographic Information - Metadata Part 2 Extensions for imagery and gridded data
ISO 19115-2:2009(E)
2013 MDEQ-FEMA Rankin-Simpson Co. Lidar Survey
ms2013_mdeq_fema_rankinsimpson_m2595_metadata
2013-11-23
publication
NOAA/NMFS/EDM
49824
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/inport/item/49824
WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link
Full Metadata Record
View the complete metadata record on InPort for more information about this dataset.
information
https://coast.noaa.gov/dataviewer
WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link
Citation URL
Online Resource
download
https://coast.noaa.gov
WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link
Citation URL
Online Resource
download
Fugro as a subconsultant to MGI was authorized to undertake this project, as a part of Work Order No. 112,
dated November 1, 2012, issued to MGI in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Professional
Services Agreement between MGI and the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ), dated
February 17, 2004. This Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) dataset is a survey of the Middle Pearl-Strong
River Basin in Rankin and Simpson Counties, Mississippi. The project area consists of approximately 973
square miles.
The acquisition, processing, and delivery of classified point cloud data, LiDAR intensity data, hydro-flattened
breaklines, and bare earth DEM covering Middle Pearl-Strong River Basin, MS was a coordinated effort
between Fugro and MGI to support MDEQ's Mississippi Digital Earth Model (MDEM) program. The mission of
MDEQ is to safeguard the health, safety, and welfare of present and future generations of Mississippians by
conserving and improving our environment and fostering wise economic growth through focused research and
responsible regulation.
completed
NOAA Office for Coastal Management
(843) 740-1202
2234 South Hobson Ave
Charleston
SC
29405-2413
coastal.info@noaa.gov
https://coast.noaa.gov
WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link
NOAA Office for Coastal Management Website
NOAA Office for Coastal Management Home Page
information
pointOfContact
NOAA Office for Coastal Management
(843) 740-1202
2234 South Hobson Ave
Charleston
SC
29405-2413
coastal.info@noaa.gov
https://coast.noaa.gov
WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link
NOAA Office for Coastal Management Website
NOAA Office for Coastal Management Home Page
information
custodian
asNeeded
https://noaa-nos-coastal-lidar-pds.s3.amazonaws.com/laz/geoid18/2595/supplemental/ms2013_mdeq_fema_rankinsimpson.kmz
This graphic shows the extent of the Rankin-Simpson County area survey.
kmz
Bare Earth
Ground Control
Land Surface
Light Detection and Ranging
Point Cloud
theme
Winter
lead off
temporal
Lidar - partner (no harvest)
project
InPort
otherRestrictions
Cite As: OCM Partners, [Date of Access]: 2013 MDEQ-FEMA Rankin-Simpson Co. Lidar Survey [Data Date Range], https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/inport/item/49824.
NOAA provides no warranty, nor accepts any liability occurring from any incomplete, incorrect, or misleading data, or from any incorrect, incomplete, or misleading use of the data. It is the responsibility of the user to determine whether or not the data is suitable for the intended purpose.
otherRestrictions
Access Constraints: None
otherRestrictions
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. These data depict the heights at the time of the survey and are only accurate for that time.
otherRestrictions
Distribution Liability: Any conclusions drawn from the analysis of this information are not the responsibility of the following:
MDEQ, Fugro, NOAA, the Office for Coastal Management, or its partners.
unclassified
NOAA Data Management Plan (DMP)
NOAA/NMFS/EDM
49824
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/inportserve/waf/noaa/nos/ocmp/dmp/pdf/49824.pdf
WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link
NOAA Data Management Plan (DMP)
NOAA Data Management Plan for this record on InPort.
information
crossReference
vector
eng; US
elevation
-90.2566139
-89.7281777
31.9160127
32.5947464
| Currentness: Ground Condition
2013-01-06
| Currentness: Ground Condition
2013-01-07
| Currentness: Ground Condition
2013-01-31
| Currentness: Ground Condition
2013-02-01
A footprint of this data set may be viewed in Google Earth at:
https://noaa-nos-coastal-lidar-pds.s3.amazonaws.com/laz/geoid18/2595/supplemental/ms2013_mdeq_fema_rankinsimpson.kmz
The Fugro Earthdata reports for Rankin-Simpson County lidar collection are available at:
https://noaa-nos-coastal-lidar-pds.s3.amazonaws.com/laz/geoid18/2595/supplemental/ms2013_mdeq_fema_rankinsimpson.pdf
& https://noaa-nos-coastal-lidar-pds.s3.amazonaws.com/laz/geoid18/2595/supplemental/ms2013_mdeq_fema_rankinsimpson_accuracy.pdf
NOAA Office for Coastal Management
(843) 740-1202
2234 South Hobson Ave
Charleston
SC
29405-2413
coastal.info@noaa.gov
https://coast.noaa.gov
WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link
NOAA Office for Coastal Management Website
NOAA Office for Coastal Management Home Page
information
distributor
https://coast.noaa.gov/dataviewer/#/lidar/search/where:ID=2595
WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link
Customized Download
Create custom data files by choosing data area, product type, map projection, file format, datum, etc.
download
https://noaa-nos-coastal-lidar-pds.s3.amazonaws.com/laz/geoid18/2595/index.html
WWW:LINK-1.0-http--link
Bulk Download
Simple download of data files.
download
dataset
Horizontal Positional Accuracy
LiDAR data horizontal accuracy is met as contracted.; Quantitative Value: 1.0 meters, Test that produced the value: Horizontal Accuracy was not reported as tested.
Vertical Positional Accuracy
See accuracy assessment report at:
https://noaa-nos-coastal-lidar-pds.s3.amazonaws.com/laz/geoid18/2595/supplemental/ms2013_mdeq_fema_rankinsimpson_accuracy.pdf
; Quantitative Value: 0.08 meters, Test that produced the value:
Accuracy assessed on 20130613. Based on the vertical accuracy testing
conducted by Fugro Earthdata were able to determine vertical accuracy RMSE of 18.5 cm. Vertical accuracy tested
at 95% confidence interval to be 0.27 survey ft. (8.2 cm) under NSSDA calculation standards.
Completeness Measure
Cloud Cover: 0
Completeness Report
All data is complete to standards as specified. LIDAR raster data is visually inspected for completeness
to ensure that any gaps between flight lines of required collection area. LIDAR is self-illuminating and has minimal cloud
penetration capability. Water vapor in steam plumes or particulates in smoke may cause reflection of LIDAR signals and loss
of elevation information beneath these plumes. Glass structures and roofs may appear transparent to the LIDAR signal and
therefore may not register on the reflective surface.
Conceptual Consistency
LiDAR flight lines have been examined to ensure that there was at least 50% sidelap, there are no gaps between
flightlines, and overlapping flightlines have consistent elevation values.
The technician processed the raw data to LAS format flight lines using the final GPS/IMU solution.
This LAS data set was used as source data for boresight. The technician used commercial software
to calculate initial boresight adjustment angles based on sample areas selected in the lift- mini
project. These areas cover calibration flight lines collected in the lift, cross tie, and
production flight lines. These areas are well distributed in the lift coverage and cover
multiple terrain types that are necessary for boresight angle calculation. The technician
then analyzed the result and made any necessary additional adjustment until it is acceptable
for the mini project. Once the boresight angle calculation is complete for the mini project,
the adjusted settings were applied to all of the flight lines of the lift and checked for
consistency. The technician utilized commercial and proprietary software packages to analyze
the matching between flight line overlaps for the entire lift to ensure that systematic errors
are minimized for the lift and the results meet project requirements.
Once all lifts are completed with boresight adjustment individually, the technician checked and
corrected the vertical misalignment of all flight lines and also the matching between data and
ground truth. The technician ran a final vertical accuracy check of the boresighted flight lines
against the surveyed ground control points after the z correction to ensure the accuracy
requirement of 18.5cm RMSE was met; see Attachment B: Accuracy Assessment Report for results.
Pre-processing.
Once boresighting is complete for the project, the project was set up for automatic
classification first. The LiDAR data was cut to production tiles. The flight line
overlap points, Noise points and Ground points were classified automatically in this process.
2013-06-13T00:00:00
Post-processing.
Fugro has developed a unique method for processing LiDAR data to identify and re-classify
elevation points falling on vegetation, building, and other above ground structures into
separate data layers. The steps are as follows:
Fugro utilized commercial software as well as proprietary software for automatic filtering.
The parameters used in the process were customized for each terrain type to obtain optimum
results. Once the automated filtering was completed, the files were run through a visual
inspection to ensure that the filtering was not too aggressive or not aggressive enough.
In cases where the filtering was too aggressive and important terrain features were
filtered out, the data was either run through a different filter within local area
or was corrected during the manual filtering process.
Interactive editing was completed in visualization software which provides manual
and automatic point classification tools. Fugro utilized commercial and proprietary
software for this process. Vegetation and artifacts remaining after automatic data
post-processing were reclassified manually through interactive editing. The hard
edges of ground features that were automatically filtered out during the automatic
filtering process were brought back into ground class during manual editing. The
technician reviewed the LiDAR points with color shaded TINs for anomalies in ground
class during interactive filtering.
All LAS tiles went through peer review after the first round of interactive editing
was finished. This helps to catch misclassification that may have been missed by the
interactive editing. After the manual editing and peer review, and finalization of
bare earth filtering, all tiles went through another final automated classification
routine. This process ensures only the required classifications are used in the
final product (all points classified into any temporary classes during manual editing
were then re-classified into the project specified classifications).
The classified LiDAR point cloud work tiles went through a water classification routine
based on the collected water polygons. Also, during this process, the points originally
classified as flight line overlap went through an automated classification to filter
ground points and low points inside overlap areas.
2013-06-13T00:00:00
The NOAA Office for Coastal Management (OCM) received topographic files in .laz format from the Mississippi
Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ). The files contained lidar elevation measurements. The data
were received in Mississippi State Plane West 2302, NAD83 coordinates and were vertically referenced to
NAVD88 using the Geoid12a model. The vertical units of the data were feet. OCM performed the following
processing for data storage and Digital Coast provisioning purposes:
1. The topographic laz files were converted from a Projected Coordinate System (Mississippi State Plane West 2302)
to a Geographic Coordinate system (NAD83).
2. The topographic laz files' horizontal units were converted from feet to decimal degrees.
3. The topographic laz files were cleaned of erroneous bad elevations.
4. The topographic laz files' were converted from NAVD88 elevations to NAD83 ellipsoidal elevations using Geoid12a
5. Classification 11 was moved to classification 12 due to OCM system requirements (OCM class 11 is reserved for
bathymetric points, though these points are truly overlap points, Class 12).
2013-11-23T00:00:00