Comparison and validation of recent freely-available ASTER-GDEM ver1, SRTM ver4.1 and GEODATA DEM-9S ver3 digital elevation models over Australia

This study investigates the quality (in terms of elevation accuracy and systematic errors) of three recent publicly available elevation model datasets over Australia: (i) the 9 arc second national GEODATA DEM-9S ver3 from Geoscience Australia and the Australian National University; (ii) the 3 arc se...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Hirt, Christian, Filmer, Michael, Featherstone, Will
Format: Journal Article
Published: Taylor & Francis Co Ltd 2010
Subjects:
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/43846
_version_ 1848756825637257216
author Hirt, Christian
Filmer, Michael
Featherstone, Will
author_facet Hirt, Christian
Filmer, Michael
Featherstone, Will
author_sort Hirt, Christian
building Curtin Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description This study investigates the quality (in terms of elevation accuracy and systematic errors) of three recent publicly available elevation model datasets over Australia: (i) the 9 arc second national GEODATA DEM-9S ver3 from Geoscience Australia and the Australian National University; (ii) the 3 arc second SRTM ver4.1 from CGIAR-CSI; and (iii) the 1 arc second ASTER-GDEM ver1 from NASA/METI. The main features of these datasets are reported from a geodetic point of view. Comparison at about 1 billion locations identifies artefacts (e.g. residual cloud patterns and stripe effects) in ASTER. For DEM-9S, the comparisons against the space-collected SRTM and ASTER models demonstrate that signal omission (due to the ~270 m spacing) may cause errors of the order of 100-200 m in some rugged areas of Australia. Based on a set of geodetic ground control points over Western Australia, the vertical accuracy of DEM-9S is ~9 m, SRTM ~6 m and ASTER ~15 m. However, these values vary as a function of the terrain type and shape. Thus, CGIAR-CSI SRTM ver4.1 may represent a viable alternative to DEM-9S for some applications. While ASTER GDEM has an unprecedented horizontal resolution of ~30 m, systematic errors present in this research-grade version of the ASTER GDEM ver1 will impede its immediate use for some applications.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T09:18:21Z
format Journal Article
id curtin-20.500.11937-43846
institution Curtin University Malaysia
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T09:18:21Z
publishDate 2010
publisher Taylor & Francis Co Ltd
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling curtin-20.500.11937-438462017-09-13T16:00:43Z Comparison and validation of recent freely-available ASTER-GDEM ver1, SRTM ver4.1 and GEODATA DEM-9S ver3 digital elevation models over Australia Hirt, Christian Filmer, Michael Featherstone, Will ASTER-GDEM ver1 digital elevation models GEODATA DEM-9S ver3 Australia geodesy SRTM ver4.1 This study investigates the quality (in terms of elevation accuracy and systematic errors) of three recent publicly available elevation model datasets over Australia: (i) the 9 arc second national GEODATA DEM-9S ver3 from Geoscience Australia and the Australian National University; (ii) the 3 arc second SRTM ver4.1 from CGIAR-CSI; and (iii) the 1 arc second ASTER-GDEM ver1 from NASA/METI. The main features of these datasets are reported from a geodetic point of view. Comparison at about 1 billion locations identifies artefacts (e.g. residual cloud patterns and stripe effects) in ASTER. For DEM-9S, the comparisons against the space-collected SRTM and ASTER models demonstrate that signal omission (due to the ~270 m spacing) may cause errors of the order of 100-200 m in some rugged areas of Australia. Based on a set of geodetic ground control points over Western Australia, the vertical accuracy of DEM-9S is ~9 m, SRTM ~6 m and ASTER ~15 m. However, these values vary as a function of the terrain type and shape. Thus, CGIAR-CSI SRTM ver4.1 may represent a viable alternative to DEM-9S for some applications. While ASTER GDEM has an unprecedented horizontal resolution of ~30 m, systematic errors present in this research-grade version of the ASTER GDEM ver1 will impede its immediate use for some applications. 2010 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/43846 10.1080/08120091003677553 Taylor & Francis Co Ltd fulltext
spellingShingle ASTER-GDEM ver1
digital elevation models
GEODATA DEM-9S ver3
Australia
geodesy
SRTM ver4.1
Hirt, Christian
Filmer, Michael
Featherstone, Will
Comparison and validation of recent freely-available ASTER-GDEM ver1, SRTM ver4.1 and GEODATA DEM-9S ver3 digital elevation models over Australia
title Comparison and validation of recent freely-available ASTER-GDEM ver1, SRTM ver4.1 and GEODATA DEM-9S ver3 digital elevation models over Australia
title_full Comparison and validation of recent freely-available ASTER-GDEM ver1, SRTM ver4.1 and GEODATA DEM-9S ver3 digital elevation models over Australia
title_fullStr Comparison and validation of recent freely-available ASTER-GDEM ver1, SRTM ver4.1 and GEODATA DEM-9S ver3 digital elevation models over Australia
title_full_unstemmed Comparison and validation of recent freely-available ASTER-GDEM ver1, SRTM ver4.1 and GEODATA DEM-9S ver3 digital elevation models over Australia
title_short Comparison and validation of recent freely-available ASTER-GDEM ver1, SRTM ver4.1 and GEODATA DEM-9S ver3 digital elevation models over Australia
title_sort comparison and validation of recent freely-available aster-gdem ver1, srtm ver4.1 and geodata dem-9s ver3 digital elevation models over australia
topic ASTER-GDEM ver1
digital elevation models
GEODATA DEM-9S ver3
Australia
geodesy
SRTM ver4.1
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/43846