60152 ARRA-MI_TriCounty_2010_m9132 Data Set Published / External 49401 Lidar - partner (no harvest) Project Completed 2010-09-17 TASK NAME: Michigan Tri-County LiDAR (ARRA Lidar Task Order) LiDAR Data Acquisition and Processing Production Task USGS CONTRACT: G10PC00057 TASK ORDER NUMBER: G10PD00844 CONTRACTOR: Woolpert, Inc. LiDAR data is a remotely sensed high resolution elevation data collected by an airborne platform. The LiDAR sensor uses a combination of laser range finding, GPS positioning, and inertial measurment technologies.The LiDAR systems collect data point clouds that are used to produce highly detailed Digital Elevation Models (DEMs) of the earth's terrain, man-made structures, and vegetation. This data was collected at a resolution of one and one half point point per square meter. The final products include first, last, and at least one intermediate return LAS, a bare earth model, and intensity data in separate files. This task order consisted of LiDAR data acquisition and processing for Clinton, Eaton and Ingham Counties in southeastern Michigan. The task order area of interest encompasses approximately 1,810 square miles. The task required the LiDAR data to be collected at a minimum of one and one half (1.5) point per square meter (1.5 meter GSD). The LiDAR data was collected to meet a vertical accuracy requirement of 15.0 cm (0.49 ft) RMSE, or better, so that when combined with breaklines, the data adequately supports the generation of two (2) foot FEMA compliant contours. The final LiDAR data was delivered as 5,000' x 5,000' tiles, aligned to even 5,000' coordinates. USGS CONTRACT: G10PC00057 TASK ORDER NUMBER: G10PD00844 CONTRACTOR: Woolpert Inc. The reflective surface data represents the DEM created by the laser energy reflected from the first surface encountered by the laser pulse. Some energy may continue beyond this initial surface, to be reflected by a subsequent surface as represented by the last return data. Intensity information is captured from the reflective surface pulse and indicates the relative energy returned to the sensor, as compared to the energy transmitted. The intensity image is not calibrated or normalized but indicates differences in energy absorption due to the the interaction of the surface materials with laser energy, at the wavelength transmitted by the sensor. The bare earth model is created by identifying the returns that fall on the ground surface and by interpolating a surface between these points. In this manner, buildings and vegetation are removed from the bare earth model. This data set does not include bridges and overpasses in the bare earth model as the delineation point for these structures is not reliably discernable in the LiDAR data. Theme Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) Science Keywords EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > TOPOGRAPHY > TERRAIN ELEVATION Theme Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) Science Keywords EARTH SCIENCE > OCEANS > BATHYMETRY/SEAFLOOR TOPOGRAPHY > BATHYMETRY > COASTAL BATHYMETRY Theme Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) Science Keywords EARTH SCIENCE > OCEANS > COASTAL PROCESSES > COASTAL ELEVATION Theme ISO 19115 Topic Category elevation Spatial Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) Location Keywords CONTINENT > NORTH AMERICA > UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Spatial Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) Location Keywords VERTICAL LOCATION > LAND SURFACE Spatial Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) Location Keywords VERTICAL LOCATION > SEA FLOOR Instrument Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) Instrument Keywords LIDAR > Light Detection and Ranging Platform Global Change Master Directory (GCMD) Platform Keywords Airplane > Airplane Theme DEM Theme LiDAR Theme Topography Theme beach Theme digital elevation model Theme erosion Theme laser Spatial Michigan Clinton, Eaton and Ingham Counties Spatial U.S. Coastline Office for Coastal Management Charleston SC Data Set Elevation As Needed Model (digital) Translation of files to formats other than those described here is the sole responsibility of individuals downloading the data. Although these data have been processed successfully on a computer system at the USGS, no warranty expressed or implied is made by the USGS regarding the use of the data on any other system, nor does the act of distribution constitute any such warranty. Data may have been compiled from various outside sources. Spatial information may not meet National Map Accuracy Standards. This information may be updated without notification. The USGS shall not be liable for any activity involving these data, installation, fitness of the data for a particular purpose, its use, or analyses results. Any conclusions drawn from the analysis of this information are not the responsibility of NOAA, the Office for Coastal Management or its partners USGS; Woolpert, Inc. Data Steward 2020 Organization NOAA Office for Coastal Management NOAA/OCM coastal.info@noaa.gov 2234 South Hobson Ave Charleston SC 29405-2413 (843) 740-1202 https://coast.noaa.gov NOAA Office for Coastal Management Home Page Online Resource Distributor 2020 Organization NOAA Office for Coastal Management NOAA/OCM coastal.info@noaa.gov 2234 South Hobson Ave Charleston SC 29405-2413 (843) 740-1202 https://coast.noaa.gov NOAA Office for Coastal Management Home Page Online Resource Metadata Contact 2020 Organization NOAA Office for Coastal Management NOAA/OCM coastal.info@noaa.gov 2234 South Hobson Ave Charleston SC 29405-2413 (843) 740-1202 https://coast.noaa.gov NOAA Office for Coastal Management Home Page Online Resource Point of Contact 2020 Organization NOAA Office for Coastal Management NOAA/OCM coastal.info@noaa.gov 2234 South Hobson Ave Charleston SC 29405-2413 (843) 740-1202 https://coast.noaa.gov NOAA Office for Coastal Management Home Page Online Resource Ground Condition -85.10322794768 -84.11897982348 43.13268688125 42.40315017724 Discrete 2010-04-02 Discrete 2010-04-03 Discrete 2010-04-04 Discrete 2010-04-05 Discrete 2010-04-10 Discrete 2010-04-12 Discrete 2010-04-13 Discrete 2010-04-14 No Yes No No No Unclassified Data is available online for bulk or custom downloads None 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. https://coast.noaa.gov/dataviewer/#/lidar/search/where:ID=9132/details/9132 2020 Organization NOAA Office for Coastal Management Customized Download Create custom data files by choosing data area, product type, map projection, file format, datum, etc. A new metadata will be produced to reflect your request using this record as a base. Change to an orthometric vertical datum is one of the many options. Zip Zip https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usgs-lidar-public/ARRA-MI_TriCounty_2010/ept.json EPT files Data access to the original EPT format dataset. LAZ files underlay the EPT organization. LAZ LAS/LAZ - LASer Zip https://coast.noaa.gov/dataviewer/ NOAA's Office for Coastal Management (OCM) Data Access Viewer (DAV) Online Resource HTML The Data Access Viewer (DAV) allows a user to search for and download elevation, imagery, and land cover data for the coastal U.S. and its territories. The data, hosted by the NOAA Office for Coastal Management, can be customized and requested for free download through a checkout interface. An email provides a link to the customized data, while the original data set is available through a link within the viewer. Microsoft Windows XP Version 5.1 (Build 2600) Service Pack 3; ESRI ArcCatalog 9.3.1.1850 Horizontal accuracy is +/- 3.8-foot at the 95% confidence level using RMSE(r) x 1.9600 as defined by the FGDC Geospatial Positional Accuracy Standards, Part 3: NSSDA. Quantitative value: 3.8, Test that produced the valued: LiDAR system calibration is available in the project report. The LiDAR data vertical accuracy RMSE is 0.28 ft. The data collected under this Task Order meets the National Standard for Spatial Database Accuracy (NSSDA) accuracy standards. The NSSDA standards specify that vertical accuracy be reported at the 95 percent confidence level for data tested by an independent source of higher accuracy. (http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/projects/FGDC-standards-projects/accuracy/part3/index_html). The Fundamental Vertical Accuracy (FVA) of the TIN: 8.65 cm (0.28 ft) at a 95% confidence level, derived according to NSSDA, i.e., based on RMSE of 18.5 cm in the "open terrain" land cover category. This data set tested to 0.28 ft. The Consolidated Vertical Accuracy (CVA): 31.5 cm (1.03 ft) at a 95% confidence level, derived according to ASPRS Guidelines, Vertical Accuracy Reporting for LiDAR Data, i.e., based on the 95th percentile error in all land cover categories combined. This data set tested to 0.53 ft. for all categoires. Quantitative value: 0.28, Test that produced the value: Tested 0.28 feet vertical accuracy at 95 percent confidence level. The LIDAR data is visually inspected for completeness to ensure that are no gaps between flight lines. All formatted data are validated using commercial GIS software to ensure proper formatting and loading prior to delivery. Yes Unknown Yes NCEI-CO Data is backed up to tape and to cloud storage. LiDAR Data Collection Organization USGS Originator 2009-08-31 The LiDAR data collected for this task order. Lidar from USGS Organization USGS Publisher Lidar data published on the Amazon AWS cloud. Lidar in EPT format Organization USGS and Hobu, Inc Publisher https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usgs-lidar-public/ARRA-MI_TriCounty_2010/ept.json Entwine Point Tiles of lidar data Endpoint for data access using Entwine Point Tiles. Data are pulled from this site for processing. 1 Using a LH Systems ALS50 Light Detection And Ranging (LiDAR) system, 68 flight lines of high density data, one and one half point per square meter, were collected over Clinton, Eaton and Ingham Counties (approximately 1,810 square miles). Multiple returns were recorded for each laser pulse along with an intensity value for each return. A total of eight missions were flown over a 12 day period: April 02, 2010 through April 14, 2010. A minimum of two airborne global positioning system (GPS) base stations were used in support of the LiDAR data acquisition. The mean baseline length was 28 miles, with a maximum baseline length of 52 miles. In addition, 31 ground control points were surveyed through static methods. The geoid used to reduce satellite derived elevations to orthometric heights was Geoid03. All data for the task order is referenced to Michigan State Plane South Zone (2113), NAD83/2007, NAVD88, in international feet. Airborne GPS data was differentially processed and integrated with the post processed IMU data to derive a smoothed best estimate of trajectory (SBET). The SBET was used to reduce the LiDAR slant range measurements to a raw reflective surface for each flight line. The coverage was classified to extract a bare earth digital elevation model (DEM) and separate last returns. Two layers of coverage were delivered in the ArcINFO ArcGrid binary format: bare-earth and intensity. System Parameters: - Type of Scanner = LH Systems ALS50 - Data Acquisition Height = 7,800-feet AGL - Scanner Field of View = 40 degrees - Scan Frequency = 35.3 Hertz - Pulse Repetition Rate - 99.0 Kilohertz - Aircraft Speed = 130 Knots - Swath Width = 5,200-feet - Number of Returns Per Pulse = Maximum of 4 - Distance Between Flight Lines = 4,200-feet 2010-04-14T00:00:00 2 The ALS50 calibration and system performance is verified on a periodic basis using Woolpert's calibration range. The calibration range consists of a large building and runway. The edges of the building and control points along the runway have been located using conventional survey methods. Inertial measurement unit (IMU) misalignment angles and horizontal accuracy are calculated by comparing the position of the building edges between opposing flight lines. The scanner scale factor and vertical accuracy is calculated through comparison of LiDAR data against control points along the runway. Field calibration is performed on all flight lines to refine the IMU misalignment angles. IMU misalignment angles are calculated from the relative displacement of features within the overlap region of adjacent (and opposing) flight lines. The raw LiDAR data is reduced using the refined misalignment angles. 2010-09-17T00:00:00 3 Once the data acquisition and GPS processing phases are complete, the LiDAR data was processed immediately to verify the coverage had no voids. The GPS and IMU data was post processed using differential and Kalman filter algorithms to derive a best estimate of trajectory. The quality of the solution was verified to be consistent with the accuracy requirements of the project. 2010-09-17T00:00:00 4 The individual flight lines were inspected to ensure the systematic and residual errors have been identified and removed. Then, the flight lines were compared to adjacent flight lines for any mismatches to obtain a homogenous coverage throughout the project area. The point cloud underwent a classification process to determine bare-earth points and non-ground points utilizing "first and only" as well as "last of many" LiDAR returns. This process determined bare-earth points (Class 2), Noise (Class 7), Water (Class 9) Ignored ground (Class 10) and unclassified data (Class 1). The bare-earth (Class 2 - Ground) LiDAR points underwent a manual QA/QC step to verify that artifacts have been removed from the bare-earth surface. The surveyed ground control points are used to perform the accuracy checks and statistical analysis of the LiDAR dataset. 2010-09-17T00:00:00 5 Data were processed by Hobu, Inc to convert to Entwine Point Tiles and web mercator projection. Data were not tagged with vertical georeferencing. 2019-01-01T00:00:00 Lidar from USGS gov.noaa.nmfs.inport:60152 Kirk Waters 2020-06-30T11:00:12 SysAdmin InPortAdmin 2023-10-17T16:12:20 2020-06-30 OCM Partners OCMP 1002 Public No No 2020-06-30 1 Year 2021-06-30