Assessing the influence of DEM source on derived streamline and catchment boundary accuracy

dc.contributor.authorMashimbye, Zama Ericen_ZA
dc.contributor.authorDe Clercq, Willem Petrusen_ZA
dc.contributor.authorVan Niekerk, Adriaanen_ZA
dc.date.accessioned2021-01-20T08:49:14Z
dc.date.available2021-01-20T08:49:14Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.descriptionCITATION: Mashimbye, Z. E., De Clercq, W. P. & Van Niekerk, A. 2019. Assessing the influence of DEM source on derived streamline and catchment boundary accuracy. Water SA, 45(4):672-684, doi:10.17159/wsa/2019.v45.i4.7549.
dc.descriptionThe original publication is available at http://www.wrc.org.za
dc.description.abstractAccurate DEM-derived streamlines and catchment boundaries are essential for hydrological modelling. Due to the popularity of hydrological parameters derived mainly from free DEMs, it is essential to investigate the accuracy of these parameters. This study compared the spatial accuracy of streamlines and catchment boundaries derived from available digital elevation models in South Africa. Two versions of Stellenbosch University DEMs (SUDEM5 and DEMSA2), the second version of the 30 m advanced spaceborne thermal emission and reflection radiometer global digital elevation model (ASTER GDEM2), the 30 and 90 m shuttle radar topography mission (SRTM30 and SRTM90 DEM), and the 90 m Water Research Commission DEM (WRC DEM) were considered. As a reference, a 1 m GEOEYE DEM was generated from GeoEye stereo images. Catchment boundaries and streamlines were extracted from the DEMs using the Arc Hydro module. A reference catchment boundary was generated from the GEOEYE DEM and verified during field visits. Reference streamlines were digitised at a scale of 1:10 000 from the 1 m orthorectified GeoEye images. Visual inspection, as well as quantitative measures such as correctness index, mean absolute error, root mean squares error and figure of merit index were used to validate the results. The study affirmed that high resolution (<30 m) DEMs produce more accurate parameters and that DEM source and resampling techniques also play a role. However, if high resolution DEMs are not available, the 30 m SRTM DEM is recommended as its vertical accuracy was relatively high and the quality of the streamlines and catchment boundary was good. In addition, it was found that the novel Euclidean distance-based MAE and RMSE proposed in this study to compare reference and DEM-extracted raster datasets of different resolutions is a more reliable indicator of geometrical accuracy than the correctness and figure of merit indices.en_ZA
dc.description.urihttps://www.watersa.net/article/view/7549
dc.description.versionPublisher's version
dc.format.extent13 pages : illustrations, mapsen_ZA
dc.identifier.citationMashimbye, Z. E., De Clercq, W. P. & Van Niekerk, A. 2019. Assessing the influence of DEM source on derived streamline and catchment boundary accuracy. Water SA, 45(4):672-684, doi:10.17159/wsa/2019.v45.i4.7549
dc.identifier.issn1816-7950 (online)
dc.identifier.otherdoi:10.17159/wsa/2019.v45.i4.7549
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/109002
dc.language.isoen_ZAen_ZA
dc.publisherSouth African Water Research Commission
dc.rights.holderAuthors retain copyright
dc.subjectHydrologyen_ZA
dc.subjectHydrologic models -- Analysisen_ZA
dc.subjectSoil moisture -- Computer simulation -- Measurementen_ZA
dc.subjectWatershedsen_ZA
dc.subjectDigital elevation models -- South Africaen_ZA
dc.titleAssessing the influence of DEM source on derived streamline and catchment boundary accuracyen_ZA
dc.typeArticleen_ZA
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
mashimbye_assessing_2021.pdf
Size:
4.12 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download article
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: