Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Vegetation structure mapping with airborne and ground-based laser scanning to advance forest fire research Suzanne Marseli...
Acknowledgements • Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC • ACT Parks and Conservation Service • Earth Observation and Informati...
Content • Introduction • Aim of research • Airborne LiDAR • Limitation of Airborne LiDAR • Ground-based LiDAR opportunitie...
Bunyip State Forest, Victoria, 7 February 2009 © AAP 2009
Introduction • Need for monitoring • Two important aspects • Fuel flammability • Fuel load • Problem: Field fuel assessmen...
Aim of my research • Study the potential of using remote sensing data to map forest structural characteristics that descri...
Project Vesta Fuel assessment Forest Surface Near- surface Elevated Canopy Continuity of litter: LiDAR Available fuel: LiD...
Remote sensing • Any data collected from a distance • Active and Passive remote sensing • Optical - Hyperspectral • Light ...
Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) • Airborne LiDAR • Point cloud Airborne LiDAR data (Source: Blair et al. 1999) Full-wa...
LiDAR LiDAR point cloud for 1 isolated tree LiDAR point cloud for Black Mountain Nature Reserve • Point cloud • x,y,z value
LiDAR – 2 datasets • Research areas • Black Mountain Nature Reserve • Mulligans Flat Nature Reserve • Point cloud: height ...
Tree dimensions • Isolated trees on Mulligans Flat
Tree dimensions R² = 0.8889 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 10 20 30 40 LiDARcalculatedtopheight(meter) Field measured top height (me...
Spatial Maps – Black Mountain • Canopy height • Canopy base height • Canopy cover
> 20 > 20
Canopy cover Canopy cover, Black Mountain
How about understory and midstory? Adam Leavesley, March 2014
Source: Wagner et al. 2008
Limitations • It seems to work … • But can we actually ground-truth this? • Required: • High resolution, reliable understo...
Ground-based LiDAR - Zebedee Tom Jovanovic (CSIRO) preparing the Zebedee for data collection
Data collection in Mulligans Flat
Result: in 15 minutes a floating point cloud
Data collection in Mulligans Flat • 3 field sites
Zebedee data ‘floating in space’ Airborne LiDAR data, plot Tom Un-georeferenced Zebedee LiDAR data, plot Tom
Georeferencing Zebedee point cloud Rotation
Matching two datasets Airborne Ground-based Merged
Compare Zebedee with Airborne LiDAR • Create same classification for Zebedee • Ground • Understory (z < 0.3 meter, noise?)...
Understory presence: z< 0.3 meter PLOT 1 Airborne Airborne 0 1 Total Zebedee 0 1336 97 1433 Zebedee 1 463 220 683 Total 17...
Midstory presence: 0.3 < z < 2 meter PLOT 1 Airborne Airborne 0 1 Total Zebedee 0 1524 2 1526 Zebedee 1 532 58 590 Total 2...
What else can we do with Zebedee data? • Interpolate tree heights, 1x1 meter resolution Airborne LiDAR Zebedee LiDAR
Height difference Airborne - Zebedee = height difference meter meter Reclassified Height Difference (meter)
Height difference (meter) Zebedee point density
Calculate canopy cover Zebedee Airborne Plot nr. R2 R2 – restriction* Plot 1 0.438 0.851 Plot 2 0.143 0.557 Plot Tom 0.368...
Calculate DBH – Slice at 1.3 – 1.35 meter Slice Raw slice Selection of the stems
Automating this processing? • Need for good classification Height classification Understory, midstory & canopy Understory,...
Calculating grass volumes The total volume of grass: 33.12 m3 Area: 234 m2 Average volume: 0.14 m3/m2.
Summary of findings Dataset Pro’s Con’s Airborne - Covers large areas - Canopy height - Canopy base height - Canopy cover ...
Recommendations for fire research • Depending on the needs it would be better to invest in either: • Airborne LiDAR data c...
Thank you • For having me at ANU • For all the assistance • For the funds • And for listening to my story – I hope you enj...
Questions? Mourad Bandjee, 2014 Questions?
Clumping
Automating stem extraction 18 out of 29 stems = 62.07 %.
Automating stem extraction clustering of 14/18 = 77.78 % of the stems
Automating stem extraction R² = 0.9483 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 CalculatedDBH Measured DBH Correlation ...
DBH frequency distributions
Calculating shrub & grass dimensions Measure Field – Measured LiDAR - Calculated Error (meter) Grass1 NZ 0.45 0.82 -0.37 E...
Canopy cover & height error
Biomass estimations • Tree recognition • DBH calculations • Height calculations • Allometric equation: Calculate biomass.
Marselis 2014 Vegetation Structure mapping with LiDAR for forest fire research
Marselis 2014 Vegetation Structure mapping with LiDAR for forest fire research
Marselis 2014 Vegetation Structure mapping with LiDAR for forest fire research
Marselis 2014 Vegetation Structure mapping with LiDAR for forest fire research
Marselis 2014 Vegetation Structure mapping with LiDAR for forest fire research
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Marselis 2014 Vegetation Structure mapping with LiDAR for forest fire research

1,917 views

Published on

Assessing the three dimensional vegetation structure is important in fire management. Manually mapping forest structural characteristics is time consuming and hence expensive and automated methods should prove beneficial. In this research I investigated the use of airborne light detection and ranging (LiDAR) for mapping vegetation height and canopy cover and to derive information on the understory. Airborne LiDAR data provided good quality information on both vegetation height and canopy cover, but understory information was more uncertain. The use of automated hand-held LiDAR data collection to obtain information on the understory and to complement the airborne LiDAR data was investigated and looks to have strong potential.

Published in: Environment, Technology
no profile picture user
  • Have u ever tried external professional writing services like ⇒ www.WritePaper.info ⇐ ? I did and I am more than satisfied.
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Hello! I do no use writing service very often, only when I really have problems. But this one, I like best of all. The team of writers operates very quickly. It's called ⇒ www.HelpWriting.net ⇐ Hope this helps!
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • This Single Mother Makes Over $700 per Week Helping Businesses with their Facebook and Twitter Accounts! and Now You Can Too! ♥♥♥ http://t.cn/AieXipTS
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • This Deadly Molecule Causes Diabetes (not belly fat)... ■■■ http://ishbv.com/bloodsug/pdf
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Real people just like you are kissing the idea of punching the clock for someone else goodbye, and embracing a new way of living. The internet economy is exploding, and there are literally THOUSANDS of great earnings opportunities available right now, all just one click away. ●●● http://t.cn/AisJWUCf
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
Show More
Show More

Marselis 2014 Vegetation Structure mapping with LiDAR for forest fire research

  1. 1. Vegetation structure mapping with airborne and ground-based laser scanning to advance forest fire research Suzanne Marselis1,2,3 June 11th, 2014 Prof. Dr. Albert van Dijk1,2 Dr. Marta Yebra1,2 Tom Jovanovic2 Dr. Harry Seijmonsbergen3 1: Australian National University 2: CSIRO 3: University of Amsterdam
  2. 2. Acknowledgements • Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC • ACT Parks and Conservation Service • Earth Observation and Informatics Transformational Capability Platform (CSIRO) • Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Network (TERN)
  3. 3. Content • Introduction • Aim of research • Airborne LiDAR • Limitation of Airborne LiDAR • Ground-based LiDAR opportunities • Summary • Recommendations for forest fire research
  4. 4. Bunyip State Forest, Victoria, 7 February 2009 © AAP 2009
  5. 5. Introduction • Need for monitoring • Two important aspects • Fuel flammability • Fuel load • Problem: Field fuel assessments can be • Time consuming • Costly • Slightly subjective • Solution: Remote sensing? Phil Zylstra & Marta Yebra, January & April 2014
  6. 6. Aim of my research • Study the potential of using remote sensing data to map forest structural characteristics that describe the fuel load.
  7. 7. Project Vesta Fuel assessment Forest Surface Near- surface Elevated Canopy Continuity of litter: LiDAR Available fuel: LiDAR Amount of decomposition Continuity of fuel Proportion of dead material Percentage cover Amount of fuel (t/ha) Continuity of fuel Amount of fuel (t/ha) Fraction of dead material Type of bark based on tree species Canopy cover Canopy height Assigning hazard scores Information needed for fuel hazard scores Division in layers SF.FHS SF.depth.mm EF.FHS NSF.ht.cm NSF.FHS EF.ht.cm BK.FHS Canopy.PC Canopy.ht.m
  8. 8. Remote sensing • Any data collected from a distance • Active and Passive remote sensing • Optical - Hyperspectral • Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) Aranxta Cabello-Leblich, June 2014 Hyperspectral data for Black Mountain, collected March 2014
  9. 9. Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) • Airborne LiDAR • Point cloud Airborne LiDAR data (Source: Blair et al. 1999) Full-waveform LiDAR signal Source: Wagner et al. 2008 p1 p2 p3
  10. 10. LiDAR LiDAR point cloud for 1 isolated tree LiDAR point cloud for Black Mountain Nature Reserve • Point cloud • x,y,z value
  11. 11. LiDAR – 2 datasets • Research areas • Black Mountain Nature Reserve • Mulligans Flat Nature Reserve • Point cloud: height classification • Ground • Understory (z < 0.3 meter, noise?) • Midstory (0.3 < z < 2 meter) • Canopy (z > 2 meter) Black Mountain Mulligans Flat
  12. 12. Tree dimensions • Isolated trees on Mulligans Flat
  13. 13. Tree dimensions R² = 0.8889 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 10 20 30 40 LiDARcalculatedtopheight(meter) Field measured top height (meter) Canopy Top Height Individual trees R² = 0.7034 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 LiDARcalculatedbaseheight(meter) Field measured base height (meter) Canopy Base Height Individual trees Source: Wagner et al. 2008
  14. 14. Spatial Maps – Black Mountain • Canopy height • Canopy base height • Canopy cover
  15. 15. > 20 > 20
  16. 16. Canopy cover Canopy cover, Black Mountain
  17. 17. How about understory and midstory? Adam Leavesley, March 2014
  18. 18. Source: Wagner et al. 2008
  19. 19. Limitations • It seems to work … • But can we actually ground-truth this? • Required: • High resolution, reliable understory information • Is this possible? YES!
  20. 20. Ground-based LiDAR - Zebedee Tom Jovanovic (CSIRO) preparing the Zebedee for data collection
  21. 21. Data collection in Mulligans Flat
  22. 22. Result: in 15 minutes a floating point cloud
  23. 23. Data collection in Mulligans Flat • 3 field sites
  24. 24. Zebedee data ‘floating in space’ Airborne LiDAR data, plot Tom Un-georeferenced Zebedee LiDAR data, plot Tom
  25. 25. Georeferencing Zebedee point cloud Rotation
  26. 26. Matching two datasets Airborne Ground-based Merged
  27. 27. Compare Zebedee with Airborne LiDAR • Create same classification for Zebedee • Ground • Understory (z < 0.3 meter, noise?) • Midstory (0.3 < z < 2 meter) • Canopy (z > 2 meter) Zebedee dataset, classified in three classes based on heights
  28. 28. Understory presence: z< 0.3 meter PLOT 1 Airborne Airborne 0 1 Total Zebedee 0 1336 97 1433 Zebedee 1 463 220 683 Total 1799 317 2116 PLOT 2 Airborne Airborne 0 1 Total Zebedee 0 577 131 708 Zebedee 1 720 563 1283 Total 1297 694 1991 PLOT TOM Airborne Airborne 0 1 Total Zebedee 0 1028 202 1230 Zebedee 1 2354 640 2994 Total 3382 842 4224 Zebedee Airborne Omission error Commission error
  29. 29. Midstory presence: 0.3 < z < 2 meter PLOT 1 Airborne Airborne 0 1 Total Zebedee 0 1524 2 1526 Zebedee 1 532 58 590 Total 2056 60 2116 PLOT 2 Airborne Airborne 0 1 Total Zebedee 0 1179 3 1182 Zebedee 1 789 20 809 Total 1968 23 1991 PLOT TOM Airborne Airborne 0 1 Total Zebedee 0 1476 6 1482 Zebedee 1 2481 261 2742 Total 3957 267 4224 Zebedee Airborne Omission error Commission error
  30. 30. What else can we do with Zebedee data? • Interpolate tree heights, 1x1 meter resolution Airborne LiDAR Zebedee LiDAR
  31. 31. Height difference Airborne - Zebedee = height difference meter meter Reclassified Height Difference (meter)
  32. 32. Height difference (meter) Zebedee point density
  33. 33. Calculate canopy cover Zebedee Airborne Plot nr. R2 R2 – restriction* Plot 1 0.438 0.851 Plot 2 0.143 0.557 Plot Tom 0.368 0.649 - Fractional cover, 1x1 meter resolution - Airborne: straightforward - Zebedee: occupied grid cells within larger grid cell *Only cells with more than 20 Zebedee points included in analyses
  34. 34. Calculate DBH – Slice at 1.3 – 1.35 meter Slice Raw slice Selection of the stems
  35. 35. Automating this processing? • Need for good classification Height classification Understory, midstory & canopy Understory, midstory, canopy & stem Application in different area
  36. 36. Calculating grass volumes The total volume of grass: 33.12 m3 Area: 234 m2 Average volume: 0.14 m3/m2.
  37. 37. Summary of findings Dataset Pro’s Con’s Airborne - Covers large areas - Canopy height - Canopy base height - Canopy cover - Applicability for understory/midstory evaluations Zebedee - Easy data collection - Understory volume - Shrub dimensions - DBH calculations - Processing times - Algorithm availability - Small-scale
  38. 38. Recommendations for fire research • Depending on the needs it would be better to invest in either: • Airborne LiDAR data collection to large areas • Research on using Zebedee data and data sampling
  39. 39. Thank you • For having me at ANU • For all the assistance • For the funds • And for listening to my story – I hope you enjoyed • I definitely did!
  40. 40. Questions? Mourad Bandjee, 2014 Questions?
  41. 41. Clumping
  42. 42. Automating stem extraction 18 out of 29 stems = 62.07 %.
  43. 43. Automating stem extraction clustering of 14/18 = 77.78 % of the stems
  44. 44. Automating stem extraction R² = 0.9483 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 CalculatedDBH Measured DBH Correlation between Calculated & measured DBH
  45. 45. DBH frequency distributions
  46. 46. Calculating shrub & grass dimensions Measure Field – Measured LiDAR - Calculated Error (meter) Grass1 NZ 0.45 0.82 -0.37 EW 0.55 0.72 -0.17 Height 0.45 0.4 0.05 Grass2 NZ 0.8 0.85 -0.05 EW 0.85 0.88 -0.03 Height 0.5 0.675 -0.18 Shrub1 NZ 1.2 1.1418 0.06 EW 1.44 1.199 0.24 Height 2.5 2.2596 0.24 Shrub 3 NZ 1.2 0.7868 0.41 EW 1.18 1.1169 0.06 Height 1.45 1.4114 0.04 Shrub 4 NZ 1.4 1.1158 0.28 EW 1.4 1.1744 0.23 Height 1.8 1.7294 0.07
  47. 47. Canopy cover & height error
  48. 48. Biomass estimations • Tree recognition • DBH calculations • Height calculations • Allometric equation: Calculate biomass.

×