Latest Contributions by ShannonShy

‎02-26-2016

Hi there, I'm working on calculating tree heights (canopy height) for our school's research forest. All was going well until I processed Raw comprehensive lidar data into terrain data then back into raster for a DSM. When I ran the bare earth lidar data I didn't receive any complications but for the final DSM output there are these extremely high data cells that seem to run North/South through the data. I would say that these are power lines but power lines do not run 2133.24 meters above ground also I know the area and there aren't power lines there. I've included images of both the DEM and DSM raster. Above is the DSM raster, notice the HIGH elevation value relative to the DEM's HIGH elevation value. This is not a natural feature. Above is the DEM raster, extremely smooth and normal. No problems. So all in all, is there a way to fix this weird issue? I've tried to exclude the high value in the symbology tab under the properties but that won't help when it comes time to crunch some numbers. I'm going to subtract the DEM from the DSM to get canopy heights, then overlay that onto stem mapping data, but first I need to fix the issue. here are the links I followed to help me with DEM and DSM processing: Creating raster DEMs and DSMs from large lidar point collections—Help | ArcGIS for Desktop Importing terrain dataset source measurements—Help | ArcGIS for Desktop Estimating forest canopy density and height—Help | ArcGIS for Desktop

‎10-20-2015

Hi Jeff, I would appreciate it if you could elaborate further on intersecting the 3d buffer with a surface model.The main requirements (parameters): 1000 ft buffer on main stem "main portion of water" form the left and right banks 500 ft buffer on all tributaries 500 ft buffers on all intersecting water-bodies (ponds, reservoirs) 1000 ft buffer on lakes potential parameter requirement account for topography in buffer There are other parameters concerning the stream's time of travel to the nearest surface water intake, but these aren't in question.

‎10-19-2015

Thank you for the response and insight, I think what might happen is that the companies filing a lawsuit (or appeal) will be able to argue their case and if they win then I will have to revise that particular zone. Which, to me doesn't make sense because that will set a precedent for these companies to file for an appeal when ever they don't want to pay out of pocket.

‎10-19-2015

No need for apologies because I'll be taking the code if it is produced!

‎10-19-2015

Correct this is an option, but I don't think it's feasible in terms of replication and consistency (also probably not efficient)

‎10-19-2015

Well to be short, the oil and gas companies are not happy with my model (it is a revised model compared to the old standard) and my new model will cause them to register more tanks which results in less money for them. All in all there is a lawsuit (not against me personally) to say that the zones would need to reflect the topography. So it may be court ordered that the zones be revised

‎10-19-2015

I agree that Cost Distance and Path Distance might be my best option. The challenge is replicating this process for ~160 zones, all of which have unique topographic features that surround the streams. Also being able to adopt this method for future delineations of new zones

‎10-19-2015

Some background, so I work for and go to school at West Virginia University and I have been subcontracted to work with the DEP on stream management and analysis for the entire state. My most recent project has been to create buffers around streams leading to surface water intakes in order to help monitor chemical spills and also regulate tanks used by oil and gas companies. My problem is that when creating the buffers around the streams I failed to include elevation and slope when calculating the distance of the buffers from the stream center (left and right banks for major rivers). My idea is to take the buffers I have (~160 of them) and make them flexible to reflect the topography because 1000 ft linearly looks a lot different than when that same 1000 ft would "decay" because of the topography and slope. I imagine my buffers being able to snap to contour lines to limit the planar length and reflect the topography. I'm also wondering if using any tools in the 3D analyst would be of use, tools such as 3D length...I'm just not sure. I'm aware that this could be solved by re delineating these buffers by working out of grid and also using cost-path but I would like to save myself the trouble of having to do these again since the entire project took about 6 months due to tedious calculations and attributions. Thanks! I am using Arc Map 10.3 and surrounding software.

‎09-08-2014

Will the merge be able to differentiate between the raster values, (0,1) both with a certain count which is different for each species, for each species? I understand assigning each layer a column for each species but I want to make sure that the data for each layer won't merge into one big mess with all of the species distribution "counts" showing all at once.

‎09-08-2014

I've been working on a distribution model of about 40 different species that encompass one specific location. Each species' range/distribution has been made into a layer, so i have about 40 layers. I want to make a map book that contains a page for each layer, this is different than making a map book of data driven pages because that shows an entire area at different extents. How do I automate the map book process without having to make a different map for each individual layer? Thank you, and any solution will help.

Online Status	Offline
Date Last Visited	‎11-11-2020 02:24 AM

My Ideas

Latest Contributions by ShannonShy

DSM processing issues when calculating tree canopy heights

Re: Is it possible to take pre-existing buffers, make them "flexible", and overlay those buffers onto a topo map, so that the buffer would reflect the contours?

Re: Is it possible to take pre-existing buffers, make them "flexible", and overlay those buffers onto a topo map, so that the buffer would reflect the contours?

Re: Is it possible to take pre-existing buffers, make them "flexible", and overlay those buffers onto a topo map, so that the buffer would reflect the contours?

Re: Is it possible to take pre-existing buffers, make them "flexible", and overlay those buffers onto a topo map, so that the buffer would reflect the contours?

Re: Is it possible to take pre-existing buffers, make them "flexible", and overlay those buffers onto a topo map, so that the buffer would reflect the contours?

Re: Is it possible to take pre-existing buffers, make them "flexible", and overlay those buffers onto a topo map, so that the buffer would reflect the contours?

Is it possible to take pre-existing buffers, make them "flexible", and overlay those buffers onto a topo map, so that the buffer would reflect the contours?

Re: Creatng a Map Book of single layers

Creatng a Map Book of single layers