2012 U.S. Geological Survey Topographic Lidar: Northeast Atlantic Coast Post-Hurricane Sandy

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

Simple download of data files.

Date that the source FGDC record was last modified.

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.

Partial upload of Positional Accuracy fields only.

Partial upload to move data access links to Distribution Info.

Using an Optech Gemini lidar sensor, 11 flight lines of high-density data, at a nominal pulse spacing (NPS) of 1 meter, were collected by

Woolpert along the southern shore of Long Island, New York (approximately 15 square miles). Data Acquisition Height = 3,500 feet Above Ground

Level (AGL) - Aircraft Speed = 125 Knots. Multiple returns were recorded for each laser pulse along with an intensity value for each return.

A total of one mission was flown on November 5th. Two airborne global positioning system (GPS) base stations were used in support of the lidar

data acquisition. Eight ground control points were surveyed through static methods. The GEOID used to reduce satellite-derived elevations to

orthometric heights was GEOID96. Data for the task order is referenced to the UTM Zone 18N, North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83), and North

American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88), in meters. Airborne GPS data was differentially processed and integrated with the post-processed

inertial measurement unit (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. In addition to the LAS deliverables, one layer of coverage was delivered in the ERDAS Imagine (IMG) Format: bare earth.

The lidar calibration and system performance are 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 are 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 are reduced using the

refined misalignment angles.

Once the data acquisition and GPS processing phases are complete, the lidar data were processed immediately by Woolpert to verify the coverage had

no voids. The GPS and IMU data were 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.

The individual flight lines were inspected by Woolpert 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 Default (Class 1), Ground (Class 2), Noise (Class 7), Water (Class 9), Ignored Ground (Class 10), Overlap

Default (Class 17), and Overlap Ground (Class 18) classifications. 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.

Photo Science, Inc. located a total of 29 calibration control points used in the post processing of the lidar data. The points were located on

relatively flat terrain on surfaces that generally consisted of grass, gravel, or bare earth. Applanix software (PosPAC MMS) was used in the post

processing of the airborne GPS and inertial data, which are critical to the positioning and orientation of the sensor during all flights. POSPac

MMS provides the smoothed best estimate of trajectory (SBET) that is necessary for the post processor to develop the point cloud from the lidar

missions. The point cloud is the mathematical three-dimensional collection of all returns from all laser pulses as determined from the aerial

mission. The GEOID used to reduce satellite derived elevations to orthometric heights was GEOID96. Data for the task order is referenced to the

UTM Zone 18N, NAD83, and NAVD88, in meters. At this point the data are ready for analysis, classification, and filtering to generate a bare-earth

surface model in which the above ground features are removed from the data set. The point cloud was manipulated by the Optech or Leica software;

GeoCue, TerraScan, and TerraModeler software were used for the automated data classification, manual cleanup, and bare-earth generation from the

data. Project specific macros were used to classify the ground and to remove the side overlap between parallel flight lines.

All data were manually reviewed and any remaining artifacts removed using functionality provided by TerraScan and TerraModeler.

All ground (ASPRS Class 2) lidar data inside of the Lake Pond and Double Line Drain hydro flattening breaklines were then classified to water

(ASPRS Class 9) using TerraScan macro functionality. All Lake Pond and Double Line Drain Island features were checked to ensure that the ground

(ASPRS Class 2) were reclassified to the correct classification after the automated classification was completed.

All overlap data were processed through automated functionality provided by TerraScan to classify the overlapping flight line data to approved

classes by USGS. The overlap data were classified to Class 17 (USGS Overlap Default) and Class 18 (USGS Overlap Ground). These classes were

created through automated processes only and were not verified for classification accuracy. Data were then run through additional macros to ensure

deliverable classification levels matching the ASPRS LAS Version 1.2 Classification structure. GeoCue functionality was then used to ensure

correct LAS Versioning. In-house software was used as a final QA/QC check to provide LAS Analysis of the delivered tiles. QA/QC checks were

performed on a per tile level to verify final classification metrics and full LAS header information.

All Woolpert, Inc. LAZ files were extracted to LAS and converted to ASCII xyz point files using LASTools las2las.exe. The ASCII point files were

then written to netcdf format using MATLAB 8.0.0.783.

The NOAA Office for Coastal Management (OCM) received topographic files in LAS format. The files contained lidar elevation and intensity measurements.

The data were received in UTM Zone 18N coordinates and were vertically referenced to NAVD88 using the Geoid96 model. The vertical units

of the data were meters. OCM performed the following processing for data storage and Digital Coast provisioning purposes:

1. The topographic las files were horizontally converted from UTM Zone 18N to Geographic Coordinates.

2. The horizontal units of the data were converted from meters to decimal degrees.

3. The topographic las files were vertically converted from orthometric (NAVD88) heights to ellipsoidal (NAD83) heights.

4. Classes 11 (Unknown), 15 (Unknown) and 17 (Default Overlap) were combined to Class 12 (Overlap). Class 11 points were assigned a User Data value of '1',

Class 15 points were assigned a User Data value of '2', and Class 17 points were assigned a User Data value of '3'.

The original data received from USGS had several corrupted tiles. Replacement files were received from USGS in March 2014. These tiles had been processed using GEOID09, but were otherwise the same projection and classes. Files were converted as previously, but using GEOID09 to transform to ellipsoid heights. Replacement tiles were 18SVH486232, 18TXL600015, 18SUD350836, 18SUD358828, and 18SVH494254.