Is it possible that different versions of ArcMap produce different "path distance" results?

619
3
10-26-2018 08:28 AM
netafriedman
New Contributor

I have previously calculated the catchment areas for a series of archaeological sites. After making some minor adjustments to site locations, I now have to repeat the same calculations. The results should be very similar, but they are quite different. I'm using the same table summarizing the Tobler function in the way it is explained elsewhere (e.g. http://mapaspects.org/node/3744/) I'm pretty sure I've been doing the same thing I did last time, only then I used ArcMap 10.2.2 and now am using 10.5.1.

Iv'e tryed different rasters, different versions of Tobler's table, different coordinate systems, adding a slope raster as an additional variable, you name it! If it could be tryed, it was. nothing helped, I never get the same result as before.

To be sure, I ran the Path Distance tool on the old location as well, and again the result seems to be wrong.

In the Image you can see the the problem. the blue dot and polygons are the new location, the red are the old location and the raster is the old location result when I ran it now. The raster and the new (blue) location polygon are very similar, except for the slight shift in position, but I think the red polygon is more accurate.

Could this be the reason for the different results?

How can I say which is true if they are similar?

0 Kudos
3 Replies
DanPatterson_Retired
MVP Emeritus

same

  • coordinate systems?
  •  extent?
  • snap raster?
  • DEM? hence, slope?, slope calculation method?

Lots of inputs before path distance is even run that can produce differences.

0 Kudos
netafriedman
New Contributor

Hi Dan,

The coordinate system is UTM zone 36 N

The extent was set to be the same as an AOI I'm working on. It's quite a large area, but it worked before with the older version.

Snap raster was not set.

DEM is 30x30, downloaded from USGS. its 32 float

Slope calculation is Toblers Hiking function table.

all of the above is true for both tries, I'm almost certain I did everything exactly the same.

Any ideas?

0 Kudos
DanPatterson_Retired
MVP Emeritus

Neta, a final check would be to ensure that the number of rows and columns of both rasters and their extent are identical and the X, Y and Z values are in the same units

After that, would it still be possible to subtract both raster results to see 'what' the differences are and 'where' they are occurring.

0 Kudos