Assessing the quality for hydrological applications of digital elevation models derived from contours

Abstract

Digital elevation models (DEMs) are becoming increasingly important tools in hydrological research and in water resources management. The quality of DEMs, however, normally is reported simply as the root mean square error of elevation, a statistic that fails to capture the numerous sources of error in DEMs or to predict their effect on the result of using the DEM. This paper presents a review of other approaches to assessing DEM quality, and argues that a full assessment of DEM quality must focus on the accuracy and reliability of the final product of the DEM analysis. A number of DEMs for the Slapton Ley catchments in Devon derived from digitized contour data are compared in an initial assessment of their sustainability for use in hydrological work. Two are available for purchase from data suppliers, and five more were created using a variety of interpolation techniques in widely available geographical information system software. The different interpretation methods produce DEMs with different artefacts, although analyses of the distribution of elevation values, and visual techniques, suggested that none of these were of a particularly pronounced nature. The results of using the DEMs to derive drainage networks and catchment areas showed that at the broad scale there was a high level of agreement between the DEMs. There were, however, important differences of detail. For example, some DEMs predicted drainage lines that occasionally crossed the original contours. The results of calculating the TOPMODEL topographic index showed far more variation, because the index is calculated for each pixel in the area, rather than being an aggregate result derived from numerous pixels. The main conclusion was that care should always be taken to assess the quality of a DEM before attempting to use it, and that results should always be checked to ensure that they appear to be reasonable. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.