State of Michigan (SOM)
2016
South Michigan - Muskegon LiDAR - Michigan 2016
1.0
raster digital data
Michigan
State of Michigan
http://www.michigan.gov
This metadata record describes the hydro-flattened bare earth digital elevation model (DEM) derived from the classified LiDAR data for the 2016 Michigan LiDAR project covering approximately 527 square miles, in which its extents cover Muskegon County.
USGS Base Specification 1.2, QL2 meeting 19.6cm FVA
Leica ALS70
4
0.65
1.67
2.2
0.71
2250
135
32
64
167
10
3
1064
1
0.3
1222
30
NAD_1983_2011_State_Plane_Michigan_South_2113_Ft_Intl
NGS Geoid12a
0.196
0.137
183
0.156
183
0.169
211
1.4
1
Withheld points were identified in these files with the withheld flag
Overlap points were identified in these files with the overlap flag
10
1
Unclassified
2
Bare earth
7
Noise
9
Water
10
Ignored Ground (Breakline Proximity)
17
Bridges
18
High Noise
To acquire detailed surface elevation data for use in conservation planning, design, research, floodplain mapping, dam safety assessments, and hydrologic modeling. LAS and bare earth DEM data products are suitable for 1 foot contour generation. USGS LiDAR Base Specification 1.2, QL2. 19.6 cm FVA.
Project Projection, Datums and Units. Projection - State Plane Michigan South. Horizontal datum - North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83 (2011)). Vertical datum - North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88) using the latest geoid (Geoid12a) for converting ellipsoidal heights to orthometric heights. Units - intl feet
en
2016041420160416
ground condition
Unknown
-86.460300
-85.791420
43.468881
43.114456
770000
805000
4220000
4141400
MI
LiDAR
mapping
point cloud
Ground points
Unclassified points
Water points
Overlap points
ALS70
Intensity return
LAS
Digital Elevation Model (DEM)
Digital Terrain Model (DTM)
Digital Surface Model (DSM)
IMG
Grid
Bare Earth
First Return
Contour
MI
Michigan
Muskegon
United States
none
2016
This data may be used by the requested party for stated purposes and should not be re-distributed.
This data is for planning purposes only and should not be used for legal or cadastral purposes. Any conclusions drawn from analysis of this information are not the responsibility of Sanborn Map Company. Users should be aware that temporal changes may have occurred since this dataset was collected and some parts of this dataset may no longer represent actual surface conditions. Users should not use these data for critical applications without a full awareness of its limitations.
Contact:
State of Michigan
Everett Root
State of Michigan
Manager, Geodata Services Section
mailing address
111 S. Capitol Ave
Lansing
MI
48933
U.S.A.
10th Floor Romney
517-335-7180
roote@michigan.gov
8:00 AM - 5:00 PM
Microsoft Windows 7; ESRI ArcCatalog 9.3.1.1850
unknownUnclassifiedunknownBare Earth DEM
Michigan 10 Counties:
The LiDAR surface was evaluated using a collection of 183 GPS surveyed checkpoints for the raw NVA report. The DEM was compared to this checkpoint class yielding a better result than was required for the project.
Raw NVA Control Accuracy Report (feet)
--------- Report Disclaimer ---------
This report does not guarantee accuracy. The report only reflects one statistical representation of the control points, LIDAR data and surface used. This report does not replace a through quality control process.
--------- Report Summary ---------
Average dz 0.036
Minimum dz -0.657
Maximum dz 0.686
Average magnitude 0.181
Root mean square 0.230
Std deviation 0.228
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attribute accuracy is tested after the LiDAR processing stage. After classification of the LiDAR data, DEMs are created using the bare earth points. The NVA and VVA reports are generated from the comparison of the DEM and the ground control collected within the project area.
The DEM surface was evaluated using a collection of 183 GPS surveyed checkpoints for the NVA report. The DEM was compared to this checkpoint class yielding much better result than was required for the project.
NVA Control Accuracy Report (feet)
--------- Report Disclaimer ---------
This report does not guarantee accuracy. The report only reflects one statistical representation of the control points, LIDAR data and surface used. This report does not replace a through quality control process.
--------- Report Summary ---------
Average dz 0.018
Minimum dz -0.688
Maximum dz 0.686
Average magnitude 0.178
Root mean square 0.229
Std deviation 0.229
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attribute accuracy is tested after the LiDAR processing stage. After classification of the LiDAR data, DEMs are created using the bare earth points. The VVA report is generated from the comparison of the DEM and the ground control collected within the project area.
The DEM was evaluated using a collection of 211 GPS surveyed checkpoints. The DEM was compared to this checkpoint class yielding much better result than was required for the project.
VVA Control Accuracy Report (feet)
--------- Report Disclaimer ---------
This report does not guarantee accuracy. The report only reflects one statistical representation of the control points, LIDAR data and surface used. This report does not replace a through quality control process.
--------- Report Summary ---------
Average dz 0.033
Minimum dz -0.775
Maximum dz 0.825
Average magnitude 0.189
Root mean square 0.255
Std deviation 0.254
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LiDAR data is collected within the project area and processed. After the DEMs were created, the dataset was verified against control. Control was collected in 10 adjoining counties in Michigan. These counties include: Clare, Lake, Mecosta, Missaukee, Montcalm, Muskegon, Newaygo, Osceola, Roscommon, and Wexford. Accuracy is reported for all 10 counties combined.
LiDAR data is collected for the project area. Post processing of the simultaneously acquired GPS/INS is performed and applied to the laser returns to output a point cloud in the specified project coordinate system and datums. The point cloud data is then subjected to automated classification routines to assign all points in the point cloud to ground, water, overlap and unclassified point classes. Anomalous laser returns that occur infrequently are removed entirely from the data set. Once clean bare earth points are established, DEMs are created using bare earth points and hydro features. The DEM surface is then compared to the survey checkpoints. These accuracies must pass the Fundamental Vertical Accuracy, Supplemental Vertical Accuracy, and Consolidated Vertical Accuracy specifications.
Horizontal positional accuracy for the 10 counties is dependent upon the quality of the GPS/INS solution, sensor calibration and ground conditions at the time of data capture. The standard system results for horizontal accuracy meet or exceed the project specified 1.0 meter RMSE.
1.0
For the 10 counties, this value is computed by comparing ground control to a DEM derived from the classified LiDAR data and represents the RMSE of residuals on controls within the project area.
For the DEM data derived from the classified point cloud, the NVA and VVA were computed. The vertical accuracy was tested with independent survey check points located in various terrain types within the 10 counties. These check points were not used in the calibration or post processing of the lidar point cloud data. The survey check points were distributed throughout the block area. Specifications for this project require that the NVA be 19.6 cm or better @ 95 percent confidence level.
0.070m RMSE, or 0.137m NVA @ 95 percent Confidence Level
The raw NVA was tested using 183 independent survey check points located in flat terrain types within the 10 counties. The survey checkpoints were distributed throughout the block area. The 183 independent check points were surveyed using static GPS base stations collecting point location for 20 minute intervals. Elevations were measured for the x,y,z location of each check point. Elevations interpolated from the DEM surface were then compared to the elevation values of the surveyed control. The RMSE was computed to be 0.070 m. AccuracyZ has been tested to meet 10 cm Nonvegetated Vertical Accuracy at 95 Percent confidence level using RMSE(z) x 1.9600 as defined by the National Standards for Spatial Data Accuracy (NSSDA); assessed and reported using National Digital Elevation Program (NDEP)/ASPRS Guidelines.
0.070m RMSE, or 0.156m NVA @ 95th PercentileThe NVA was tested using 183 independent survey check points located in bare earth terrain types within the 10 counties. The 183 independent check points contained all NVA points and were surveyed using static GPS base stations collecting point location for 20 minute intervals. Elevations were measured for the x,y,z location of each check point. Elevations interpolated from the DEM surface were then compared to the elevation values of the surveyed control. The RMSE was computed to be 0.070m, or 0.156m @ 95th Percentile defined by the National Standards for Spatial Data Accuracy (NSSDA); assessed and reported using National Digital Elevation Program (NDEP)/ASRPS Guidelines.The VVA was tested using 211 independent survey check points located in various vegetation terrain types within the 10 counties. The 211 independent check points were surveyed using static GPS base stations collecting point location for 20 minute intervals. Elevations were measured for the x,y,z location of each check point. Elevations interpolated from the DEM surface were then compared to the elevation values of the surveyed control. The RMSE was computed to be 0.078m, or 0.169m @ 95th Percentile defined by the National Standards for Spatial Data Accuracy (NSSDA); assessed and reported using National Digital Elevation Program (NDEP)/ASRPS Guidelines.0.078m RMSE, or 0.169m VVA @ 95th Percentile
Sanborn Map Company Inc.
Unpublished Material
LiDAR Data
1.0
Remote sensing image
None
None
disc
2016
ground condition
LIDAR and GPS_RAW
Aerial LiDAR and GPS/IMU data are recorded for the defined project area at an altitude, flight speed, scanner swath width and scanner pulse frequency to achieve the design goals of the project.
Sanborn Map Company Inc.
2010
Ground control
1.0
tabular digital data
None
None
disc
2015
Ground condition
CONT
Targeted ground control is used to create a digital control file and control report as well as QC check of LiDAR accuracy. Predefined points (NGS when available) within the project area are targeted.
Sanborn Map Company Inc.
Unpublished material
Post processed GPS/INS
1.0
Tabular digital data
1200
disk
2015
Ground condition
GPS
Post processed GPS/INS is applied to the lidar point data to georeference each point in the project coordinate system
Sanborn Map Company Inc.
Unpublished material
Post processed lidar
1.0
Point digital data
1200
Disk
2015
ground condition
LAS
The post processed lidar data has been projected and oriented in the specified coordinate system as an un-classified point cloud.
Sanborn Map Company Inc.
Unpublished material
Classified lidar
1.0
Point digital data
1200
disk
2015
ground condition
LAS
The classified lidar point cloud is used to derive various data products such as, but not limited to, bare earth gridded DEM, triangulated irregular networks (TIN), contours, digital surface models (DSM). The output format is fully compliant LAS v1.4, Point Record Format 6
State of Michigan
Unpublished Material
Tile Definition
1.0
raster digital data
1200
disk
2015
ground condition
TLDEF
The tile definition defines discreet non-overlapping rectangular areas used as cut lines to break up the large classified lidar dataset into smaller, more manageable data tiles. Each tile is 2500ft by 2500ft in dimension.
At selected locations throughout the site, accurate GPS coordinates and elevations are surveyed and the points are marked with targets.
None
2016
CONT
New LiDAR data is captured for the project area using a Leica ALS70 w/MPiA LiDAR instrument an integrated IPAS20 GPS/INS system mounted within a Aero Commander twin engine airplane.
None
2016
LIDAR, GPS_RAW
The airborne GPS data is post-processed in Intertial Explorer software and LEICA CloudPro software to determine the LiDAR sensor's angle and orientation in the terrain (project) coordinate system and datums during the survey.
GPS_RAW
2016
GPS_SOL
The post processed GPS/INS solution is applied to the raw lidar data to orient and project the data points into the project area reference system as an unclassified point cloud.
LIDAR, GPS_SOL
2016
LAS
The georeferenced lidar data is then classified and edited in Terrasolid Terrascan software. Data is classified to produce: Class 1: unclassified, Class 2: ground, Class 7: low point, Class 9: water, Class 10: ignored ground, Class 11: withheld.
CONT, GPS_SOL, LIDAR
2016
LAS
The bare earth points of the processed lidar data are then output to a DEM tile format. The DEM is compared to the ground control and elevation differences between the surface and surveyed elevation are recorded in tabular form. Vertical accuracy statistics are then developed to produce vertical RMSE and overall accuracy estimates and reports.
CONT, LIDAR
2016
None
Point
North American Datum of 1983
Geodetic Reference System 80
6378137.000000
298.257222101004
GCS_North_American_1983NAD_1983_2011_State_Plane_Michigan_South_FIPS_2113Lambert Conformal Conic42.143.6666666666667-84.366666666666741.513123359.58005250coordinate pair22international feet
North American Vertical Datum of 1988(GEOID12a)
0.1
feet
Explicit elevation coordinate included with horizontal coordinates
Everett Root
State of Michigan
Manager, Geodata Services Section
mailing address
111 S. Capitol Ave
Lansing
MI
48933
U.S.A.
10th Floor Romney
517-335-7180
roote@michigan.gov
8:00 AM - 5:00 PM
Michigan 2016 LiDAR project
The State of Michigan Geographic Information Systems digital data have been tested and their documentation carefully reviewed. However, the State of Michigan and its representatives make no warranty or representation, either expressed or implied, with respect to the digital data and their documentation, their quality, performance, merchantability, or fitness for a particular purpose. The digital data are distributed on "as is" basis, and the user assumes all risk to their quality, the results obtained from their use, and the performance of the data. In no event will the State of Michigan or its representatives be liable for any direct, indirect, special, incidental or consequential damages resulting from and defect in the State of Michigan or in their documentation. This disclaimer of warranty is exclusive and in lieu of all others, oral or written, express or implied. No agent or employee is authorized to make any modification, extension, or addition to this warranty.
LAS
1.420002000
http://www.michigan.gov
unknown
5 - 1/2 inch hard driveLAS
unknown
State of Michigan
unknown
2016
2016
Shawn Benham
Sanborn Map Co
Project Manager
mailing address
1935 Jamboree Dr
Colorado Springs
CO
80920
U.S.A.
719.502.1296
sbenham@sanborn.com
8:00 AM - 5:00 PM
FGDC CSDGM
FGDC-STD-001-1998
2012033008500700TRUE2016083115372600{8DE3DE1B-30AB-48D1-9B5B-D8574399589A}Local Area NetworkUSGS Base Specification 1.2, QL2 meeting 19.6 cm NVABare Earth - DEMBare Earth only
Classes:
2 - Bare-Earth Ground20160831