Lidar Bathymetry Data of Cape Canaveral, Florida, (2014) in XYZ ASCII text file format

Metadata also available as - [Outline] - [Parseable text] - [XML]

Frequently anticipated questions:

What does this data set describe?

Title:
Lidar Bathymetry Data of Cape Canaveral, Florida, (2014) in XYZ ASCII text file format
Abstract:
The Cape Canaveral Coastal System (CCCS) is a prominent feature along the Southeast U.S. coastline and is the only large cape south of Cape Fear, North Carolina. Most of the CCCS lies within the Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge and included in its boundaries are the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS), NASA’s Kennedy Space Center (KSC), and a large portion of Canaveral National Seashore. The actual promontory of the modern cape falls within the jurisdictional boundaries of the CCAFS. These various agencies have ongoing concerns related to erosion hazards and vulnerability of the system including critical infrastructure, habitats, and recreational and cultural resources. The USGS conducted a bathymetric mapping survey August 18-20, 2014, in the Atlantic Ocean offshore of Cape Canaveral, Florida (USGS Field Activity Number 2014-324-FA). The study area covered an area extending south from Port Canaveral, Florida, to the northern end of the KSC property and from the shoreline to about 2.5 km offshore. Bathymetric data were collected with single-beam sonar- and lidar-based systems. Two jet skis and a 17-ft outboard motor boat equipped with the USGS SANDS hydrographic system collected precision sonar data. The sonar operations were conducted in three missions, one on each day, with the boat and jet skis operating concurrently. The USGS airborne EAARL-B mapping system flown in a twin engine plane was used to collect lidar data. The lidar operations were conducted in three missions, one in the afternoon of August 19, 2015, and two more in the morning and afternoon of August 20, 2014. The missions were synchronized such that there was some temporal and spatial overlap between the sonar and lidar operations. Additional data were collected to evaluate the actual water clarity corresponding to lidar's ability to receive bathymetric returns. This dataset serves as an archive of processed single-beam and lidar bathymetry data collected at Cape Canaveral, Florida, in 2014 (in XYZ comma delimited, ASCII and shapefile format). Also included in this archive are Geographic Information System (GIS) data products: gridded map data (in ESRI binary and ASCII grid format), and a color-coded bathymetry map (in PDF format).
  1. How might this data set be cited?
    Hansen, Mark, 20150920, Lidar Bathymetry Data of Cape Canaveral, Florida, (2014) in XYZ ASCII text file format: Archive of Bathymetry Data Collected at Cape Canaveral, Florida, 2014 U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 957, U.S. Geological Survey, St. Petersburg, Florida.

    Online Links:

  2. What geographic area does the data set cover?
    West_Bounding_Coordinate: -80.625
    East_Bounding_Coordinate: -80.500
    North_Bounding_Coordinate: 28.750
    South_Bounding_Coordinate: 28.375
  3. What does it look like?
  4. Does the data set describe conditions during a particular time period?
    Beginning_Date: 18-Aug-2014
    Ending_Date: 20-Aug-2014
    Currentness_Reference:
    ground condition
  5. What is the general form of this data set?
    Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: tabular digital data
  6. How does the data set represent geographic features?
    1. How are geographic features stored in the data set?
      This is a Point data set. It contains the following vector data types (SDTS terminology):
      • Point (1)
    2. What coordinate system is used to represent geographic features?
      Horizontal positions are specified in geographic coordinates, that is, latitude and longitude. Latitudes are given to the nearest 0.0000001. Longitudes are given to the nearest 0.0000001. Latitude and longitude values are specified in decimal degrees. The horizontal datum used is WGS84-G1150.
      The ellipsoid used is WGS84.
      The semi-major axis of the ellipsoid used is 6378137.0.
      The flattening of the ellipsoid used is 1/298.257223563.
      Vertical_Coordinate_System_Definition:
      Depth_System_Definition:
      Depth_Datum_Name: NAVD88
      Depth_Resolution: 0.01
      Depth_Distance_Units: meters
      Depth_Encoding_Method: Explicit depth coordinate included with horizontal coordinates
  7. How does the data set describe geographic features?
    Canaveral_2014-324-FA_EAARL_WGS84_NAVD88_G12a_CCanaveral.xyz, Canaveral_2014-324-FA_EAARL_WGS84_NAVD88_G12a_FalseCape.xyz, Canaveral_2014-324-FA_EAARL_WGS84_NAVD88_G12a_WilsonOEE.xyz
    Post-processed, area-specific x,y,z attributed lidar bathymetry data an ASCII text, comma delimited file. (Source: USGS)
    longitude
    WGS84(G1150) x-coordinate (easting) of sample point (Source: ALPS)
    Range of values
    Minimum:-80.625
    Maximum:-80.500
    Units:decimal degrees
    Resolution:0.00000001
    latitude
    WGS84(G1150) y-coordinate (northing) of sample point (Source: ALPS)
    Range of values
    Minimum:28.375
    Maximum:28.750
    Units:decimal degrees
    Resolution:0.00000001
    z-ellipsoid height
    WGS84(G1150) ellipsoid height of sample point, in meters (Source: ALPS)
    Range of values
    Minimum:0.5
    Maximum:-20.0
    Units:meters
    Resolution:0.01
    z-NAVD88
    Orthometric height of sample point, in meters. Relative to geoid model Geoid12a. (Source: ALPS)
    Range of values
    Minimum:0.5
    Maximum:-20.0
    Units:meters
    Resolution:0.001

Who produced the data set?

  1. Who are the originators of the data set? (may include formal authors, digital compilers, and editors)
    • Mark Hansen
  2. Who also contributed to the data set?
    The project was funded by the U.S. Air Force, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. Chris Pali and Calvin Peacock were the acquisition engineers and pilots on board the aircraft, ground acquisition crew were Rudy Troche and Christine Kranenburg. Emily Klipp coordinated flight and acquisition logistics.
  3. To whom should users address questions about the data?
    Mark Hansen
    U.S. Geological Survey
    Oceanographer
    600 4th Street South
    St. Petersburg, FL
    USA

    (727) 502-8000 (voice)
    mhansen@usgs.gov

Why was the data set created?

The work was conducted as part of a study to describe an updated bathymetric dataset collected in 2014 and compare it to previous data sets. The updated data focus on the bathymetric features and sediment transport pathways that connect the offshore regions to the shoreline and, therefore, are related to the protection of other portions of the coastal environment, such as dunes, that support infrastructure and ecosystems. 

How was the data set created?

  1. From what previous works were the data drawn?
    USGS (source 1 of 1)
    U.S. Geological Survey, 2015, Archive of Bathymetry Data Collected at Cape Canaveral, Florida, 2014.

    Type_of_Source_Media: digital tabular data
    Source_Contribution: Original processed lidar bathymetric data.
  2. How were the data generated, processed, and modified?
    Date: 21-Aug-2014 (process 1 of 8)
    The data were collected using a Cessna 310 aircraft. The EAARL-B laser scanner collects the data using a green-wavelength (532-nanometer) raster scanning laser, while a digital camera acquires a visual record of the flight. The data are stored on hard drives and archived at the U.S. Geological Survey office in St. Petersburg, Florida. Person who carried out this activity:
    U.S. Geological Survey
    Attn: Rudy Troche
    Engineer
    600 4th Street South
    St. Petersburg, FL
    USA

    (727) 502-8000 (voice)
    rtroche@usgs.gov
    Data sources produced in this process:
    • Raw sensor data files in binary format and GPS carrier-phase data in binary format.
    Date: 10-Sep-2014 (process 2 of 8)
    Differentially Corrected Navigation Processing - The coordinate values of the reference GPS base stations obtained from OPUS were provided in IGS08 coordinate system. All survey data for the project were referenced to WGS84. Consequently, reference station coordinates were transformed to WGS84 coordinates using the NOAA/NGS software HTDP v3.2.3. The respective reference (base) station coordinates utilized as reference positions were imported into GrafNav© v8.50 software by Novatel. Differentially corrected rover trajectories were computed using GrafNav© by merging the master and rover the GPS data. During processing, steps were taken to ensure that the trajectories between the base to the rover were clean, resulting in fixed positions. By analyzing the graphs, trajectory maps, and processing logs that GrafNav© produces for each GPS session, GPS data from satellites flagged by the program as having poor health or satellite time segments that had cycle slips could be excluded, or the satellite elevation mask angle could be adjusted to improve the position solutions. The final differentially corrected precise DGPS positions were computed for each rover GPS session. Trajectory files are then merged with inertial motion unit (IMU) data using Novatel/Waypoint Inertial Explorer© software v8.5 to obtain high rate coordinate and attitude information: position, velocity and attitude. Person who carried out this activity:
    Rudy Troche
    U.S. Geological Survey
    Engineer
    600 4th Street South
    St. Petersburg, FL

    727-502-8000 (voice)
    rtroche@usgs.gov
    Data sources produced in this process:
    • Aircraft position, velocity and attitude data files in binary format.
    Date: 30-Jan-2015 (process 3 of 8)
    The navigational data along with the raw data are downloaded into ALPS, or the Airborne lidar Processing System (20130211-20140219). Data are converted from units of time to x,y,z points for elevation and formatted into .xyz files. Person who carried out this activity:
    U.S. Geological Survey
    Attn: Rudy Troche
    Engineer
    600 4th Street South
    St. Petersburg, FL
    USA

    (727) 502-8000 (voice)
    rtroche@usgs.gov
    Data sources produced in this process:
    • Fully processed XYZ data in ASCII and binary formats.
    Date: 19-Sep-2014 (process 4 of 8)
    An automated filter, known as the Random Consensus Filter (RCF), was used to remove outliers from the EAARL-B point cloud data. Parameters for the filter were horizontal window=1,000 cm, vertical window=60 cm. Person who carried out this activity:
    Cherokee Nation Technology Solutions, U.S. Geological Survey
    Attn: Christine Kranenburg
    Programmer / Analyst
    600 4th Street South
    St. Petersburg, FL
    USA

    (727) 502-8000 (voice)
    ckranenburg@usgs.gov
    Date: 19-Sep-2014 (process 5 of 8)
    A manual, quick cleaning of the data was done to remove obvious noise points not removed by the RCF filter. Person who carried out this activity:
    Cherokee Nation Technology Solutions, U.S. Geological Survey
    Attn: Christine Kranenburg
    Programmer / Analyst
    600 4th Street South
    St. Petersburg, FL
    USA

    (727) 502-8000 (voice)
    ckranenburg@usgs.gov
    Date: 27-Aug-2014 (process 6 of 8)
    A depth related bias correction of was applied to the point-cloud data to account for a change in configuration and environmental parameters. Data are formatted into .xyz files. Person who carried out this activity:
    David Thompson
    U.S. Geological Survey, St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center, St. Petersburg, FL
    Physical scientists
    600 4th Street South
    St. Petersburg, FL
    USA

    727 502-8000 (voice)
    dthompson@usgs.gov
    Date: 24-Jan-2017 (process 7 of 8)
    Keywords section of metadata optimized for discovery in USGS Coastal and Marine Geology Data Catalog. Person who carried out this activity:
    U.S. Geological Survey
    Attn: Alan O. Allwardt
    Contractor -- Information Specialist
    2885 Mission Street
    Santa Cruz, CA

    831-460-7551 (voice)
    831-427-4748 (FAX)
    aallwardt@usgs.gov
    Date: 13-Oct-2020 (process 8 of 8)
    Added keywords section with USGS persistent identifier as theme keyword. Person who carried out this activity:
    U.S. Geological Survey
    Attn: VeeAnn A. Cross
    Marine Geologist
    384 Woods Hole Road
    Woods Hole, MA

    508-548-8700 x2251 (voice)
    508-457-2310 (FAX)
    vatnipp@usgs.gov
  3. What similar or related data should the user be aware of?
    Thompson, D.M., Plant, N.G., and Hansen, M.E., 20150920, Analysis of Bathymetric Surveys to Identify Coastal Vulnerabilities at Cape Canaveral, Florida, USGS, Open-File Report 2015-1180: U.S. Geological Survey, St. Petersburg, FL.

    Online Links:

How reliable are the data; what problems remain in the data set?

  1. How well have the observations been checked?
    The accuracy of the data is determined during data collection. This dataset is derived from a single research cruise using identical equipment, set-ups, and staff; therefore, the dataset is internally consistent. Methods are employed to maintain data collection consistency aboard the platform. During mobilization, each piece of equipment is isolated to obtain internal and external offset measurements with respect to the survey platform. All the critical measurements are recorded manually and digitally entered into their respective programs. For the single-beam bathymetry, offsets between the single-beam transducers and the Ashtech antenna reference point (ARP) were measured and accounted for in post-processing. Bar checks were performed as calibration efforts and accounted for any drift in the Odum Echosounder. Differential Geographic Positioning System (DGPS) coordinates were obtained using post-processing software packages created by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)/National Geodetic Survey (NGS) Online Positioning User Service (OPUS). Boat trajectories were computed with GrafNav© v8.50 software by Novatel, Inc. These bathymetric data have not been independently verified for accuracy. Although these data have been processed successfully on a computer system at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), no warranty expressed or implied is made regarding the display or utility of the data on any other system or for general or scientific purposes, nor shall the act of distribution constitute any such warranty. The USGS or the U.S. Government shall not be held liable for improper or incorrect use of the data described and/or contained herein.
  2. How accurate are the geographic locations?
    The GPS antenna and receiver acquisition configuration used at the reference station was duplicated on the aircraft(rover). The base receiver and the rover receiver record their positions concurrently at 1Hz recording intervals throughout the survey. All processed measurements are referenced to the base station coordinates. One new ground-control point or benchmark, referenced as KTIX, within the study area was used as the reference receiver site. For this survey, the new benchmark was built using standard benchmarks procedures. GPS base stations were operated within approximately 15 to 50 km of the survey area. New benchmarks positions were surveyed using Ashtech Z-Extreme©, 12 channel dual-frequency GPS receivers. Full-phase carrier data were recorded on each occupied benchmark in Ashtech proprietary BIN format with daily occupations ranging from 6 to 12 hours. BIN files were then converted to RINEX-2 format for position processing. For newly established benchmarks, all static base station GPS sessions were submitted for processing to the NOAA/NGS OPUS software software. The base location results from OPUS were entered into a spreadsheet to compute one final positional coordinate and error analysis for that base location. The final positional coordinate (latitude, longitude, and ellipsoid height) is the weighted average of all GPS sessions. For each GPS session, the weighted average was calculated using the OPUS result and the total session time in seconds; therefore, longer GPS occupation times held more value than shorter occupation times. OPUS results are computed relative to IGS08 coordinate system. The established geodetic reference frame for the project was WGS84. It was assumed IGS08 is approximately equal to WGS84 for this survey. OPUS results provide an error measurement for each daily solution. Applying these error measurements, the horizontal accuracy of the base station is estimated to be 0.02 m root mean squared (RMS). The kinematic (rover) trajectories were processed using GrafNav© v8.50 software by Novatel, Inc. A horizontal error measurement, RMS is computed for each epoch. The horizontal trajectory errors for varied between 0 and 0.10 m. The combined horizontal error from base station coordinate solutions and rover trajectories range from 0 and 0.12 m, with the average approximately 0.08 m.
  3. How accurate are the heights or depths?
    The GPS antenna and receiver acquisition configuration used at the reference station was duplicated on the aircraft (rover). The base receiver and the rover receiver record their positions concurrently at 10Hz recording intervals throughout the survey. All processed measurements are referenced to the base station coordinates. One new ground-control point or benchmark, referenced as KTIX, within the study area was used as the reference receiver site. For this survey, the new benchmark was built using standard benchmarks procedures. GPS base stations were operated within approximately 15 to 50 km of the survey area. New benchmarks positions were surveyed using Ashtech Z-Extreme, 12 channel dual-frequency GPS receivers. Full-phase carrier data were recorded on each occupied benchmark in Ashtech proprietary BIN format with daily occupations ranging from 6 to 12 hours. BIN files were then converted to RINEX-2 format for position processing. For newly established benchmarks, all static base station GPS sessions were submitted for processing to the NOAA/NGS OPUS software software. The base location results from OPUS were entered into a spreadsheet to compute one final positional coordinate and error analysis for that base location. The final positional coordinate (latitude, longitude, and ellipsoid height) is the weighted average of all GPS sessions. For each GPS session, the weighted average was calculated using the OPUS result and the total session time in seconds; therefore, longer GPS occupation times held more value than shorter occupation times. OPUS results are computed relative to IGS08 coordinate system. The established geodetic reference frame for the project was WGS84. It was assumed IGS08 is approximately equal to WGS84 for this survey. OPUS results provide an error measurement for each daily solution. Applying these error measurements, the vertical accuracy of the base station is estimated to be 0.04 m root mean squared (RMS). The kinematic (rover) trajectories were processed using GrafNav© v8.50 software by Novatel, Inc. A vertical error measurement, RMS is computed for each epoch. The vertical trajectory errors for varied between 0 and 0.25 m. The combined vertical error from base station coordinate solutions and rover trajectories range from 0 and 0.30 m, with the average approximately 0.15 m.
  4. Where are the gaps in the data? What is missing?
    These are complete post-processed x,y,z bathymetric data points acquired with an aircraft lidar system collected in the Atlantic Ocean offshore of Cape Canaveral, FL.
  5. How consistent are the relationships among the observations, including topology?
    This dataset was acquired on multiple flights in 2014.

How can someone get a copy of the data set?

Are there legal restrictions on access or use of the data?
Access_Constraints:
The U.S. Geological Survey requests that it be referenced as the originator of this dataset in any future products or research derived from these data.
Use_Constraints: These data should not be used for navigational purposes.
  1. Who distributes the data set? (Distributor 1 of 1)
    Mark E. Hansen
    U.S. Geological Survey
    Oceanographer
    600 4th Street South
    St. Petersburg, FL

    (727) 502-8000 (voice)
    mhansen@usgs.gov
  2. What's the catalog number I need to order this data set? 2015 bathymetric data
  3. What legal disclaimers am I supposed to read?
    The data have no explicit or implied guarantees. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although these data have been processed successfully on a computer system at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), no warranty expressed or implied is made regarding the display or utility of the data on any other system or for general or scientific purposes, nor shall the act of distribution constitute any such warranty. The USGS or the U.S. Government shall not be held liable for improper or incorrect use of the data described and/or contained herein.
  4. How can I download or order the data?

Who wrote the metadata?

Dates:
Last modified: 13-Oct-2020
Metadata author:
U.S. Geological Survey
Attn: Mark Hansen
Oceanographer
600 4th Street South
St. Petersburg, FL
USA

(727) 502-8000 (voice)
mhansen@usgs.gov
Metadata standard:
FGDC Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata (FGDC-STD-001-1998)
This page is <https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/catalog/spcmsc/2014-324-FA_LIDAR_WGS84_NAVD88_G12a_metadata.faq.html>
Generated by mp version 2.9.50 on Tue Sep 21 18:18:30 2021