The Impact of Acoustic Imaging Geometry on the Fidelity of Seabed Bathymetric Models
Attributes derived from digital bathymetric models (DBM) are a powerful means of analyzing seabed characteristics. Those models however are inherently constrained by the method of seabed sampling. Most bathymetric models are derived by collating a number of discrete corridors of multibeam sonar data...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2018-03-01
|
| Series: | Geosciences |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.mdpi.com/2076-3263/8/4/109 |
| _version_ | 1818600737287962624 |
|---|---|
| author | John E. Hughes Clarke |
| author_facet | John E. Hughes Clarke |
| author_sort | John E. Hughes Clarke |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Attributes derived from digital bathymetric models (DBM) are a powerful means of analyzing seabed characteristics. Those models however are inherently constrained by the method of seabed sampling. Most bathymetric models are derived by collating a number of discrete corridors of multibeam sonar data. Within each corridor the data are collected over a wide range of distances, azimuths and elevation angles and thus the quality varies significantly. That variability therefore becomes imprinted into the DBM. Subsequent users of the DBM, unfamiliar with the original acquisition geometry, may potentially misinterpret such variability as attributes of the seabed. This paper examines the impact on accuracy and resolution of the resultant derived model as a function of the imaging geometry. This can be broken down into the range, angle, azimuth, density and overlap attributes. These attributes in turn are impacted by the sonar configuration including beam widths, beam spacing, bottom detection algorithms, stabilization strategies, platform speed and stability. Superimposed over the imaging geometry are residual effects due to imperfect integration of ancillary sensors. As the platform (normally a surface vessel), is moving with characteristic motions resulting from the ocean wave spectrum, periodic residuals in the seafloor can become imprinted that may again be misinterpreted as geomorphological information. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-16T12:40:14Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-6e6a357eaf6a4be2ad912674c0dc2ccc |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2076-3263 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-16T12:40:14Z |
| publishDate | 2018-03-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Geosciences |
| spelling | doaj.art-6e6a357eaf6a4be2ad912674c0dc2ccc2022-12-21T22:31:27ZengMDPI AGGeosciences2076-32632018-03-018410910.3390/geosciences8040109geosciences8040109The Impact of Acoustic Imaging Geometry on the Fidelity of Seabed Bathymetric ModelsJohn E. Hughes Clarke0Center for Coastal and Ocean Mapping/National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Joint Hydrographic Center, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824, USAAttributes derived from digital bathymetric models (DBM) are a powerful means of analyzing seabed characteristics. Those models however are inherently constrained by the method of seabed sampling. Most bathymetric models are derived by collating a number of discrete corridors of multibeam sonar data. Within each corridor the data are collected over a wide range of distances, azimuths and elevation angles and thus the quality varies significantly. That variability therefore becomes imprinted into the DBM. Subsequent users of the DBM, unfamiliar with the original acquisition geometry, may potentially misinterpret such variability as attributes of the seabed. This paper examines the impact on accuracy and resolution of the resultant derived model as a function of the imaging geometry. This can be broken down into the range, angle, azimuth, density and overlap attributes. These attributes in turn are impacted by the sonar configuration including beam widths, beam spacing, bottom detection algorithms, stabilization strategies, platform speed and stability. Superimposed over the imaging geometry are residual effects due to imperfect integration of ancillary sensors. As the platform (normally a surface vessel), is moving with characteristic motions resulting from the ocean wave spectrum, periodic residuals in the seafloor can become imprinted that may again be misinterpreted as geomorphological information.http://www.mdpi.com/2076-3263/8/4/109swath geometrymultibeam spatial resolutionintegration artefacts |
| spellingShingle | John E. Hughes Clarke The Impact of Acoustic Imaging Geometry on the Fidelity of Seabed Bathymetric Models Geosciences swath geometry multibeam spatial resolution integration artefacts |
| title | The Impact of Acoustic Imaging Geometry on the Fidelity of Seabed Bathymetric Models |
| title_full | The Impact of Acoustic Imaging Geometry on the Fidelity of Seabed Bathymetric Models |
| title_fullStr | The Impact of Acoustic Imaging Geometry on the Fidelity of Seabed Bathymetric Models |
| title_full_unstemmed | The Impact of Acoustic Imaging Geometry on the Fidelity of Seabed Bathymetric Models |
| title_short | The Impact of Acoustic Imaging Geometry on the Fidelity of Seabed Bathymetric Models |
| title_sort | impact of acoustic imaging geometry on the fidelity of seabed bathymetric models |
| topic | swath geometry multibeam spatial resolution integration artefacts |
| url | http://www.mdpi.com/2076-3263/8/4/109 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT johnehughesclarke theimpactofacousticimaginggeometryonthefidelityofseabedbathymetricmodels AT johnehughesclarke impactofacousticimaginggeometryonthefidelityofseabedbathymetricmodels |