Comparing LiDAR and SfM digital surface models for three land cover types

被引:21
作者
Liao, Jianghua [1 ]
Zhou, Jinxing [1 ]
Yang, Wentao [1 ]
机构
[1] Beijing Forestry Univ, Sch Soil & Water Conservat, Beijing 100083, Peoples R China
关键词
DSM sources; combined DSMs; DSMs quanti-fication; land cover types; STRUCTURE-FROM-MOTION; TERRESTRIAL LIDAR; FLIGHT PARAMETERS; POINT CLOUDS; AERIAL LIDAR; PHOTOGRAMMETRY; PERFORMANCE; LANDSLIDE; DENSITY; EROSION;
D O I
10.1515/geo-2020-0257
中图分类号
P [天文学、地球科学];
学科分类号
07 ;
摘要
Airborne light detection and ranging (LiDAR) and unmanned aerial vehicle structure from motion (UAVSfM) are two major methods used to produce digital surface models (DSMs) for geomorphological studies. Previous studies have used both types of DSM datasets interchangeably and ignored their differences, whereas others have attempted to locally compare these differences. However, few studies have quantified these differences for different land cover types. Therefore, we simultaneously compared the two DSMs using airborne LiDAR and UAV-SfM for three land cover types (i.e. forest, wasteland, and bare land) in northeast China. Our results showed that the differences between the DSMs were the greatest for forest areas. Further, the average elevation of the UAV-SfM DSM was 0.4 m lower than that of the LiDAR DSM, with a 95th percentile difference of 3.62 m for the forest areas. Additionally, the average elevations of the SfM DSM for wasteland and bare land were 0.16 and 0.43 m lower, respectively, than those of the airborne LiDAR DSM; the 95th percentile differences were 0.67 and 0.64 m, respectively. The differences between the two DSMs were generally minor over areas with sparse vegetation and more significant for areas covered by tall dense trees. The findings of this research can guide the joint use of different types of DSMs in certain applications, such as land management and soil erosion studies. A comparison of the DSM types in complex terrains should be explored in the future.
引用
收藏
页码:497 / 504
页数:8
相关论文
共 43 条
[1]   Effects of point cloud density, interpolation method and grid size on derived Digital Terrain Model accuracy at micro topography level [J].
Aguera-Vega, F. ;
Aguera-Puntas, M. ;
Martinez-Carricondo, P. ;
Mancini, F. ;
Carvajal, F. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF REMOTE SENSING, 2020, 41 (21) :8281-8299
[2]  
Barnhart KR, 2019, 7 INT C DEBR FLOW HA 7 INT C DEBR FLOW HA
[3]  
Bates CB, 2019, THESIS SAN FRANCISCO THESIS SAN FRANCISCO
[4]  
Bernatek -Jakiel A, GEOMORPHOLOGY, V378, P1
[5]   Comparison of UAV LiDAR and Digital Aerial Photogrammetry Point Clouds for Estimating Forest Structural Attributes in Subtropical Planted Forests [J].
Cao, Lin ;
Liu, Hao ;
Fu, Xiaoyao ;
Zhang, Zhengnan ;
Shen, Xin ;
Ruan, Honghua .
FORESTS, 2019, 10 (02)
[6]   Sensitivity Assessment of Spatial Resolution Difference in DEM for Soil Erosion Estimation Based on UAV Observations: An Experiment on Agriculture Terraces in the Middle Hill of Nepal [J].
Chidi, Chhabi Lal ;
Zhao, Wei ;
Chaudhary, Suresh ;
Xiong, Donghong ;
Wu, Yanhong .
ISPRS INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEO-INFORMATION, 2021, 10 (01)
[7]   An evaluation of the effectiveness of low-cost UAVs and structure from motion for geomorphic change detection [J].
Cook, Kristen L. .
GEOMORPHOLOGY, 2017, 278 :195-208
[8]  
Fan L, 2020, Int Arch Photogramm Remote Sens Spatial Inf Sci, V42, P1225, DOI [10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-3-W10-1225-2020, DOI 10.5194/ISPRS-ARCHIVES-XLII-3-W10-1225-2020]
[9]   Topographic structure from motion: a new development in photogrammetric measurement [J].
Fonstad, Mark A. ;
Dietrich, James T. ;
Courville, Brittany C. ;
Jensen, Jennifer L. ;
Carbonneau, Patrice E. .
EARTH SURFACE PROCESSES AND LANDFORMS, 2013, 38 (04) :421-430
[10]  
Goraj M, 2018, 18 INT MULT SCI GEOC 18 INT MULT SCI GEOC