Next Article in Journal
Three-Dimensional Growth of Flexural Slip Fault-Bend and Fault-Propagation Folds and Their Geomorphic Expression
Next Article in Special Issue
Multiscale and Hierarchical Classification for Benthic Habitat Mapping
Previous Article in Journal
Interpretation of the Factors Defining Groundwater Quality of the Site Subjected to the Wildfire of 2007 in Ilia Prefecture, South-Western Greece
Previous Article in Special Issue
Geomorphology and Late Pleistocene–Holocene Sedimentary Processes of the Eastern Gulf of Finland
Open AccessArticle

The Impact of Acoustic Imaging Geometry on the Fidelity of Seabed Bathymetric Models

Center for Coastal and Ocean Mapping/National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Joint Hydrographic Center, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824, USA
Geosciences 2018, 8(4), 109;
Received: 4 March 2018 / Revised: 20 March 2018 / Accepted: 22 March 2018 / Published: 24 March 2018
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Marine Geomorphometry)
Attributes derived from digital bathymetric models (DBM) are a powerful means of analyzing seabed characteristics. Those models however are inherently constrained by the method of seabed sampling. Most bathymetric models are derived by collating a number of discrete corridors of multibeam sonar data. Within each corridor the data are collected over a wide range of distances, azimuths and elevation angles and thus the quality varies significantly. That variability therefore becomes imprinted into the DBM. Subsequent users of the DBM, unfamiliar with the original acquisition geometry, may potentially misinterpret such variability as attributes of the seabed. This paper examines the impact on accuracy and resolution of the resultant derived model as a function of the imaging geometry. This can be broken down into the range, angle, azimuth, density and overlap attributes. These attributes in turn are impacted by the sonar configuration including beam widths, beam spacing, bottom detection algorithms, stabilization strategies, platform speed and stability. Superimposed over the imaging geometry are residual effects due to imperfect integration of ancillary sensors. As the platform (normally a surface vessel), is moving with characteristic motions resulting from the ocean wave spectrum, periodic residuals in the seafloor can become imprinted that may again be misinterpreted as geomorphological information. View Full-Text
Keywords: swath geometry; multibeam spatial resolution; integration artefacts swath geometry; multibeam spatial resolution; integration artefacts
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Hughes Clarke, J.E. The Impact of Acoustic Imaging Geometry on the Fidelity of Seabed Bathymetric Models. Geosciences 2018, 8, 109.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

Back to TopTop