Applied Single GPS Point Statistical Analysis to Geometric Correction of Digital Satellite Imagery



Field Work
The used image for the analysis is collected in the year 2003 for the area around the office of the Department of Water Resources Studies (DWRS) in the city of Abu Dhabi. It is relatively flat and very close to sea level so that errors related to terrain differences can be ignored. Image displacement were recognized but ignored because the test aimed to study errors at worse conditions. A single point above DWRS building were selected for the initial single GPS point statistical analysis and used as a reference for accuracy check. Nine points were selected to measure location data (Figure 1).


Figure 1. The selected image with the ten studies points (courtesy of MAPSGeosystems).

All GPS data were collected using latitude/longitude readings in the form of degree, minutes, and decimal seconds (DD, MM, SS.SS). The GPS used were selected so that it is sensitive to the nearest two digits after the decimal second for high accuracy. All latitude/longitude readings were transferred into the metric units of WGS84 UTM zone 40 before any calculations or analysis done. Table 1, shows the summary single GPS statistics for the reference point above the DWRS building. The distance measurements from all readings to the mean center are calculated and summarized in the Column “Distance”. The standard errors as expected are in the decimeter level and estimated at 22 centimeters in the Easting direction and 23 centimeters in the Northing direction. Figure 2, is the scatter graph of the GPS readings for the reference point.

Table 1. Summary statistics for the selected reference point.
  Eastings Northings Distance
Mean 234741.8 2709962 4.697459
Standard Error 0.223871 0.233049 0.118071
Median 234741 2709962 4.566636
Mode 234746.9 2709966 6.630051
Standard Deviation 3.50413 3.647787 1.848099
Sample Variance 12.27893 13.30635 3.41547
Kurtosis -0.97519 -0.75778 -0.56818
Skewness 0.420615 -0.35252 0.262275
Range 13.13756 16.9265 8.529888
Minimum 234736.6 2709952 0.822685
Maximum 234749.7 2709969 9.352573
Count 245 245 245

Note: All measurements are in meters.



Figure 2. GPS point distribution at the reference point.

The same process was applied to the all selected points. Table 3, shows the summary of the results that included location in Latitude/Longitude, UTM Eastings and Northigs, and standard errors are included.

Table 3. Summary results for all points Latitude, Longitude, Eastings, Nothings, and Standard Errors.
Name  Latitude  Longitude  Eastings  Northings  Mean Distance  Eastings Std. Error  Northings Std. Error  Distance Std. Error
                 
Point 1  54.38134883  24.48265883  234595.88  2710179.91  1.263  0.1203  0.131  0.084
Point 2  54.37990271  24.48185132  234447.55  2710093.22  2.569  0.2676  0.299  0.178
Point 3  54.38262817  24.48123784  234722.62  2710020.01  2.979  0.3474  0.268  0.168
Point 4  54.38245804  24.48362502  234710.38  2710284.83  2.035  0.1867  0.212  0.131
Point 5  54.38163284  24.48255934  234624.47  2710168.34  2.068  0.3243  0.354  0.211
Point 6  54.38362155  24.48212494  234825.21  2710116.39  1.241  0.1810  0.142  0.089
Point 7  54.38511924  24.48120303  234975.14  2710011.37  5.485  0.6800  0.466  0.351
Point 8  54.38351711  24.48020458  234810.59  2709903.82  2.325  0.3071  0.324  0.200
Point 9  54.38108556  24.48003282  234563.67  2709889.46  0.893  0.0649  0.217  0.116
Point 10  54.38188382  24.47915909  234642.78  2709791.12  1.420  0.2267  0.157  0.095
                 
R..Point  54.38282806  24.48071395  234741.79  2709961.58  4.698  0.2239  0.233  0.118

Note: All measurements are in meters.

The information in table three was used to perform the geometric correction to the original image. During the process, point 9 was found to be a clear blunder. The team was not able to determine why the GPS readings were wrong. The best guess was that a mistake was made during reading the numbers at the seconds’ level (not at the decimal second). The geometric correction program recommended the removal of points 5 and 8. When investigating a possible reason for that, the team suggested that heavy traffic and buildings were the cause of the high RMS values. In other words, the systematic error “multi path” is the probable cause for the error. The team also suggested that another possible reason for the error is caused because of difference in time between the image and analysis date. Table 4, summarizes the geometric correction Errors.

Table 4. Summary image geometric correction.
Name  X  Y  Eastings  Northings  X Residuals  Y Residuals  RMS
               
Point 1  12804.29  7310.17  234595.8837  2710179.906  3.54370  -0.59602  3.59347
Point 2  12122.94  6887.47  234447.5456  2710093.215  -2.01055  0.49346  2.07022
Point 3  13428.87  6563.02  234722.6216  2710020.014  -2.52818  -2.34743  3.44995
Point 4  13368.74  7804.00  234710.3806  2710284.827  0.50210  1.19160  1.29306
Point 6  13918.29  7015.07  234825.2134  2710116.388  -1.96130  -0.41335  2.00439
Point 7  14611.12  6515.02  234975.1419  2710011.368  0.90073  0.75419  1.17479
Point 10  13017.73  5455.64  234642.7847  2709791.115  1.55349  0.91755  1.80423

The table suggests a maximum error on the entire image to be 3.54 meters on the Easting direction and -2.3 on the Northing direction. The maximum RMS is 3.59 meters. Figure 3, is an image map that show the mean UTM grid with Latitude/Longitude tic marks. When the reference point checked for accuracy, the point location was about 1.94 meters from where it should be.


Figure 3. An image map for the selected area.

Page 2 of 3
| Previous | Next |