Evaluation of TanDEM-X 90 m Digital Elevation Model

Altunel, Arif Oguz

doi:10.1080/01431161.2019.1585593

Cited by 19 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A similar trend was also observable for the SRTM 90 m DEM but the decrease in accuracy is even higher for the 90 m TanDEM-X. This is in accordance with findings of Altunel [47], who already noticed some overestimations of 90 m TanDEM-X for cliffy terrain and a high accuracy in flat areas. Generally, a comparison of the two 90 m elevation datasets leads to the conclusion that TanDEM-X is significantly more accurate in flat landscapes, but the SRTM 90 m still seems advantageous in steeper relief.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…However, they indicate that the accuracy is even higher than originally assumed. For the 90 m DEM only few studies are available yet, which investigated its accuracy, but they suppose a higher accuracy than the SRTM 90 m DEM [47,78].…”

Section: Tandem-x World Dem ™mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the SRTM1 DEM the results show an average error of 3-4 m in flat landscapes up to 7-8 m in mountainous areas. Additionally, the accuracy of the newer ALOS World 3D [45] and the TanDEM-X World DEM ™ [46][47][48] was assessed by comparing them with various reference datasets. Several studies directly compared the performance of different global elevation models in various geographical settings.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Relief Dependent Evaluation of Digital Elevation Models on Different Scales for Northern Chile

Kramm

Hoffmeister

2019

IJGI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many geoscientific computations are directly influenced by the resolution and accuracy of digital elevation models (DEMs). Therefore, knowledge about the accuracy of DEMs is essential to avoid misleading results. In this study, a comprehensive evaluation of the vertical accuracy of globally available DEMs from Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER), Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM), Advanced Land Observing Satellite (ALOS) World 3D and TanDEM-X WorldDEM™ was conducted for a large region in Northern Chile. Additionally, several very high-resolution DEM datasets were derived from Satellite Pour l’Observation de la Terre (SPOT) 6/7 and Pléiades stereo satellite imagery for smaller areas. All datasets were evaluated with three reference datasets, namely elevation points from both Ice, Cloud, and land Elevation (ICESat) satellites, as well as very accurate high-resolution elevation data derived by unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)-based photogrammetry and terrestrial laser scanning (TLS). The accuracy was also evaluated with regard to the existing relief by relating the accuracy results to slope, terrain ruggedness index (TRI) and topographic position index (TPI). For all datasets with global availability, the highest overall accuracies are reached by TanDEM-X WorldDEM™ and the lowest by ASTER Global DEM (GDEM). On the local scale, Pléiades DEMs showed a slightly higher accuracy as SPOT imagery. Generally, accuracy highly depends on topography and the error is rising up to four times for high resolution DEMs and up to eight times for low-resolution DEMs in steeply sloped terrain compared to flat landscapes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Tandem-x World Dem ™mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Relief Dependent Evaluation of Digital Elevation Models on Different Scales for Northern Chile

Kramm

Hoffmeister

2019

IJGI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…AW3D30 was found to be the most promising while investigating the performances of seven public freely-accessed DEM datasets (ASTER GDEM V2, SRTM-3 V4.1 DEM, SRTM-1 DEM, AW3D30 DEM, VFP-DEM, MERIT DEM, Seamless SRTM-1 DEM) over the HMA region (Hengduan Mountains and Himalayas) by referring to high-accuracy elevation data from ICESat altimetry [12]. TanDEM-X was assessed in four regions revealing that it is accurate in flat to slightly undulating terrains, but overestimated in treacherous terrain [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Vertical Accuracy for TanDEM-X 90 m DEMs in Plain, Moderate, and Rugged Terrain

Bhardwaj¹

2019

The 2nd International Electronic Conference on Geosciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) interferometry technique generates digital elevation models (DEMs) and is used by various agencies widely. The recently released TanDEM-X DEM by DLR at 90 m spatial resolution is available for free download to users. This paper examines the accuracy of TanDEM-X DEM at different experimental sites with different topographic characteristics. Three sites were chosen, namely Kendrapara (Odisha), Jaipur (Rajasthan), and Dehradun (Uttarakhand) with plain, moderate, and highly undulating terrain conditions. The root mean square error (RMSE) were calculated using ground control points (GCPs) collected by differential GPS method for experimental sites at Dehradun, Jaipur, and Kendrapara. The accuracy of TanDEM-X 90 m datasets is compared with other openly accessible optically-derived DEMs (ASTER GDEM V2, CartoDEM V3 R1, AW3D30) and InSAR-derived DEMs (SRTM, ALOS PALSAR RTC HR). The RMSEs reveal that at Jaipur site with moderate terrain with urban and agriculture as major land use land cover (LULC) classes, the results of TanDEM-X 90 m DEM have higher accuracy than ALOS PALSAR RTC HR DEM. However, it is observed that in a predominantly plain region with agriculture practice (Kendrapara site, Odisha) and rugged region (Dehradun site, Uttarakhand) with mixed land use land cover (LULC) (e.g., forest, urban, streams, and agriculture) the results of ALOS PALSAR RTC HR data have higher accuracy than TanDEM-X 90 m DEM. Further, the study indicates that for a relatively plain site at Kendrapara (Orissa), CartoDEM V3 R1 DEM has the best performance with an RMSE of 1.96 m, which is the lowest among all DEMs utilized in the study.

show abstract

“…Bearing these issues in mind, and considering the limitations of optics sensors in rugged terrain and the glacier accumulation area , it is clear that a further assessment of the performance of AW3D30 is required. Recently, TanDEM-X (released in 2017) and NASADEM (released in 2020) have been reported to have large improvements in accuracy relative to previous DEM products for various land-cover types (Wessel et al 2018), floodplain sites (Hawker et al 2019), slightly undulating terrain (Altunel 2019), and mountain environments (Gdulová et al 2020). Nonetheless, their performance over the rugged and glacierized TP remains unclear.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards ice thickness inversion: an evaluation of global DEMs by ICESat-2 in the glacierized Tibetan Plateau

Chen

Zhang

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Accurate estimates of regional ice thickness, which are generally produced by ice-thickness inversion models, are crucial for assessments of available freshwater resources and sea level rise. Digital elevation model (DEM) derived surface topography of glaciers is a primary data source for such models. However, the scarce in-situ measurements of glacier surface elevation limit the evaluation of DEM uncertainty, and hence its influence on ice-thickness modelling over the glacierized area of the Tibetan Plateau (TP). Here, we examine the performance over the glacierized TP of six widely used and mainly global-scale DEMs: AW3D30 (30 m), SRTM-GL1 (30 m), NASADEM (30 m), TanDEM-X (90 m), SRTM v4.1 (90 m) and MERIT (90 m) by using ICESat-2 laser altimetry data while considering the effects of glacier dynamics, terrain, and DEM misregistration. The results reveal NASADEM as the best performer, with a small mean error (ME) of −1.0 and a root mean squared error (RMSE) of 12.6 m. A systematic vertical offset existed in AW3D30 (−35.3 ME and 34.9 m RMSE), although it had a similar relative accuracy to NASADEM (~ 13 m STD). TanDEM-X also performs well (−0.1 ME and 15.1 m RMSE), but suffers from serious errors and outliers on steep slopes. SRTM-based DEMs (SRTM-GL1, SRTM v4.1, and MERIT) (all ~ 36 m RMSE) had an inferior performance to NASADEM. However, their errors were reduced in the ablation zone when glacier variations were excluded. Errors in the six DEMs increased from the south-facing to the north-facing aspect and become larger with increasing slope. Misregistration of DEMs relative to ICESat-2 footprint in most glacier areas is small (less than one pixel). An intercomparison of four ice-thickness models: GlabTop2, Open Global Glacier Model (OGGM), Huss-Farinotti (HF), Ice Thickness Inversion Based on Velocity (ITIBOV), show that GlabTop2 is sensitive to the accuracy of both elevation and slope, while OGGM and HF are less sensitive to DEM quality, and ITIBOV is the most sensitive to slope accuracy. Considering the inconsistency of DEMs acquisition dates, NASADEM would be a best choice for ice-thickness estimates over the TP, followed by AW3D30, and TanDEM-X (if steep and high elevation terrain can be avoided). Our assessment figures out the performances of mainly global DEMs over the glacierized TP. This study not only avails the glacier thickness estimation with ice thickness inversion models, but also offered references for other cryosphere studies using DEM.

show abstract

Evaluation of TanDEM-X 90 m Digital Elevation Model

Cited by 19 publications

References 44 publications

A Relief Dependent Evaluation of Digital Elevation Models on Different Scales for Northern Chile

A Relief Dependent Evaluation of Digital Elevation Models on Different Scales for Northern Chile

Assessment of Vertical Accuracy for TanDEM-X 90 m DEMs in Plain, Moderate, and Rugged Terrain

Towards ice thickness inversion: an evaluation of global DEMs by ICESat-2 in the glacierized Tibetan Plateau

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About