UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES

DEPARTMENT OF GEODETIC ENGINEERING

GE 118 HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEYING
Research Project

Roel Bahia1, Jan Carmel Bernardino1, Immanuel Mallari1, Pauline Faye Marasigan1, Patricia Nicole
Valena1, Gy-Anne Marcess Yepes1, Ariana Louise Yute1
1Department of Geodetic Engineering, College of Engineering, University of the Philippines Diliman, 1101 Quezon

City, Philippines

I. Project Title
A Comparative Analysis between Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) and
Side Scan Sound Navigation and Ranging (Side Scan Sonar) Bathymetry.
II. Project Overview
A. Background of the Study
Many marine forms in the world have not been characterized enough
because they have not been mapped and represented accurately. In mapping
the water bodies, the exploration of the water requires several datasets that are
concurrently the product of hydrographic surveying charts for the needs and
support in ecosystem based management. The researchers are in need of fast,
consistent and accurate methods in acquiring dataset without sacrificing cost
efficiency, and although more and more innovations have been surfacing for
the past few years, these marine environments have still been poorly mapped
for the benefit of the society. Of these innovations are the (1) Light Detection
and Ranging (LiDAR) and the (2) Side Scan Sound Navigation and Ranging
(Side Scan Sonar); both of these have been used for the collection of
Bathymetric data in shallow waters.
Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) Bathymetry has been readily
available for already 20 years yet only a few have been using this technology
especially in riverine areas. LiDAR is an efficient airborne remote-sensing
technology with production rates up to 70 kilometers squared per hour over
large linear areas and provides complete bottom coverage at point densities up
to 2 meters x 2 meters without the need for the surveyors to get in or on to the
water body (Millar;Gerhard;Hilldale, 2006). This is one the most efficient and
cost-efficient technology which can capture both land and seafloor
simultaneously to provide a continuous and detailed 3D elevation model along
the coastline (Quadros, 2016)
Side Scan Sound Navigation and Ranging (Side Scan Sonar)
Bathymetry was the technology used even before LiDAR surfaced. The Side
Scan Sonar is attached to a vessel and it creates an image of the seafloor
depending on how “strong” or “loud” the return echo is (Did you know?.
2005). It uses the concept of the distance travelled by the sound but is affected
of the speed of the sound provided that the medium it travels in is of different
composition. This technology can sometimes be used for some shallow areas
but is widely used for areas that are deeper. This method has been one of the
 most popular one that surveyors and researchers use, despite it being time-
consuming and sometimes dangerous, because this practice has been going on
for years already.
For this paper, a comparative analysis between the LiDAR and Side
Scan Sonar Bathymetry will be conducted based on several materials such as
journals and researches to see which method is much more effective and useful
for a bathymetric survey. Also, an analysis of the data from both methods will
be compared to see which one creates more accurate and precise results.
B. Research Objectives
This study aims to create an overview of both LiDar and Side Scan
Sonar and with the given information about the two, the group will do a
comparison with a specific criteria in obtaining bathymetric data that will be
considered in the analysis; LiDAR and Side Scan Sonar, compare the data
obtained from LiDAR and Side Scan Sonar bathymetry, and lay down the
advantages and disadvantages of both technologies for a more detailed
comparison.
C. Research Problem
Both technologies (LiDAR and Side Scan Sonar) have been used for
the collection of bathymetric data. The researchers want to improve studies
that focuses only on one method for the acquisition of bathymetric data and by
the theories and application of hydrographic surveying, an analysis will be
made. A comparative analysis of their capabilities will be done to create an
avenue for future researchers to see which one produces more accurate and
more reliable data. In this study, the group will be able to make logical and
credible points which will be presented through knowledge from previous
researches and journals.

III. Review of Related Literature

Bathymetric Surveying
A bathymetric survey is a basic operation involves in a hydrographic
survey and its purpose is to measure the water depth and to establish their
respective locations. With the help of the bathymetric survey, we will be able
to depict the orientation of the bottom of the water form concerned.
A bathymetric survey is of large importance in doing hydrographic
survey and serves a variety of purpose from simple projects, ensuring
navigational safety, to a large work underwater such as dredging and
reclamation. Different procedures and techniques are used depending on the
field conditions, scope of work and desired accuracy.

Hydrographic surveys may be broadly classified as:

• Reconnaissance or Class 3
• Project condition or design or Class 2
 • Contract payment or Class 1

Figure 1. Maximum Allowable errors in hydrographic surveys

Both data for horizontal and vertical measurement are needed in order
to do a bathymetric survey. Because of the technology we enjoy today, easier
techniques are present in determining these data.

Zones of Confidence
In order to classify the quality of the bathymetric data, International
Hydrographic Organization (IHO) developed a simple and logical mean to
know how confidence does the national charting authority places on a set of
bathymetric data. The criteria in determining the zone of confidence includes:

· Depth and position accuracy,

· Thoroughness of seafloor search, and
· Conformance to an approved quality plan.

Figure 2. Category of Zones of Confidence in Data- ZOC Table

Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR)

Airborne Laser Hydrography (ALH), or Bathymetric Light Detection
and Ranging (LIDAR), uses laser transmitters to conduct hydrographic surveys
from aircraft. It is useful in areas of complex hydrography where rocks, shoals
and obstructions pose a danger to traditional survey vessels, and under ideal
conditions it can create a high-resolution map of the seafloor. Because of the
nature of the laser pulses, LiDAR is mostly used to measure the exact distances
of an object. The laser pulses travel at the speed of light increasing the
accuracy of the measurements.
LiDAR data has a higher accuracy of measurement because of its speed
and short wavelength. It also targets specific objects which contribute to the
accuracy of the data relayed. Because of the speed and accuracy of the laser
pulses from its sensors, the data can be collected fast and with utmost
accuracy. The data collected will map the exact location of the object in the
image since LiDAR’s sensors are highly accurate and not affected by
geometric distortions. The LiDAR technology is capable of creating high
resolution images of an object at any surface. Moreover, this technology is
cheaper when used in large scale applications because it is fast and saves a lot
of time and not very labor-intensive. LiDAR data can easily be integrated with
other data sources like GPS and used in mapping and calculation of distances.
LIDAR has a few confinements likewise with all review procedures.
Water penetration is constrained by the quality of the laser signal and the
clarity of the water. Under perfect conditions, depth measurements have been
gathered in up to 60 meters of water depth, however in most cases, the laser
eradication depth is more like 20 meters. Feature discovery is restricted by the
footprint of the laser beam when it enters the water, as with SONAR, some
features might be missed. Extremely smooth ocean surface conditions can
prevent data gathering in light of the fact that the surface moves toward
becoming mirror-like, reflecting pulses off the surface rather than penetrating
the water column. On the other hand, patches of surf, or very rough water, can
cause the laser pulse to diffuse. LiDAR pulses are adversely affected by
atmospheric weather conditions such as dense fogs, smoke and even rain. The
light pulses will be distorted during flight and this will affect the accuracy of
the data collected. A laser pulse is sent to the surface where a portion is
returned to the receiver, while the remainder continues until the bottom is
reached and is reflected back. The duration of the mentioned process allows
determination for water depth. Earlier models of LiDAR can measure depths
from 0.9m to 40m with a vertical accuracy of 15cm and horizontal accuracy of
2.5m. The maximum depth penetration is also gravely dependent on the
clarity of water, water turbidity and bottom reflection. In the case of shallow
depths, however, the signals overlap making it impossible to determine the
water depth. But with the release of newer models, it seems that the LiDAR
has put a solution to these problems. Take for example the Leica HawkEye III.
It is an airborne multi sensor deep water bathymetric and topographic LiDAR
system that can cover the shore to deep waters. It can collect seabed data from
the air down to 50m with the 3.0 Secchi depth penetration capability. It can
also acquire accuracy and data density in deep water surveying down to 50
metres depth. It optimises coastal mapping and shallow water surveys down to
2 metres depth. Another is a hybrid one where it employs both infrared and
green laser, making it possible to capture both land topography and water bed
bathymetry simultaneously. With that said, LiDAR has the edge when it comes
to data collection as it is an airborne sensing technology which makes it fast
and accurate because of positional advantage. It can be also used day and night
and is not affected by light variations hence proving its efficiency. Since most
of the processes are automated, there is little human dependence, making it less
prone to human error, thus saving time and effort. LiDAR technology is a
relatively cheaper method of remote sensing as it gets the work done fast and
efficiently through vast area or surface. But still, LiDAR has it own limitations.
Although mentioned it is relatively cheaper, it is not ideal to be used for
smaller areas as it would cost quite expensive. It is also deemed to be
ineffective when there is heavy rain, or is under extreme weather conditions
due to effects of refraction.
 Side Scan Sound Navigation and Ranging (Side Scan Sonar)
Sonar stands for Sound Navigation and ranging. It transmits sound
waves that are then returned in form of echoes which are used to analyze
various qualities or attributes of the target or object. Sonar is mainly used to
detect under water objects because the sound waves can penetrate the water
depths to the bottom of the sea. Sound travels slowly in fresh water than in sea
water hence the variations in the speed of sound may affect the return echoes
which may also have an impact on the data or attribute of the target. Because
of its unique capabilities of penetrating sea water, sonar is mainly used to
calculate the depth of the sea because it is fast and accurate. The sound waves
are not affected by the calmness or the roughness of the water surface and still
can penetrate even tides. However, SONAR may cause decompression
sickness that may be fatal.
Side-Scanning sonar has two arrays, each of which has a sonar beam
that pass through a 90-degree arc, one horizontally and another vertically
therefore it can see in almost every direction, except for straight up and down.
Side-scanning sonar is used to collect data as an ROV moves through the
water; unlike scanning and multibeam sonars, they do not provide information
in real-time. Instead, it provides a historical view of what was there when the
ROV was moving past a certain point. The advantage of side-scanning sonar is
that they see almost everything, providing great resolution and covering an
enormous area. Side-scanning sonar is suitable for wide-area searches for
stationary object, surveying, and environmental monitoring.
Side scan sonar makes an image or a picture of the sea floor. It gauges
the quality of how loud the return echo is, and paints an image. Hard zones of
the sea floor like rocks reflect more sound and have a stronger or louder return
signal than softer parts like sand. Areas with loud echoes are darker than areas
with soft echoes. Objects or features that rise above the sea floor also cast
shadows in the sonar image where no sound hit. The measure of the shadow
can be utilized to figure out the extent of the feature.

Lidar and Sonar Integration in Hydrographic Surveying

A research done by the National Oceanic & Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) includes integration of Lidar and Sonar
Hydrographics Surveys. This paper shows comparison between LiDAR and
SONAR in hydrographic surveying. Shallow, near shore areas are difficult to
survey with multibeam sonar system. This requires complex maneuver and,
huge number of survey lines. LiDAR, though with limited depth capability of
35m under normal conditions, can easily survey these areas at shorter time due
to large coverage. Accessibility is also one of the advantages of LiDAR.
SONAR, though with slow acquisition time, takes significantly greater amount
of sounding , giving it higher resolution than LiDAR. (Gianoutsos,n.d.)
 Comparison between LiDAR and SONAR in Bathymetry
A research was conducted last 2009 to compare airborne LiDAR and
multibeam SONAR for bathymetry and intensity for mapping coral reef
ecosystem of Abrir La Sierra Conservation District, a marine protected area
located off the western coast of Puerto Rico. Both LiDAR and MBES sensors
were collected and processed to meet the IHO’s Order 1 horizontal and vertical
accuracy standards to make both technologies comparable. Also, both datasets
were pre-processed to have identical radiometric and spatial resolution. In this
study, LiDAR data were acquired for elevations 70m below sea level while
MBES data were acquired for depths 10 to 55m. In this research, it is
calculated that LiDAR data acquisition costs 6.6% less than MBES data
acquisition. This is due to LiDAR having 146 fewer survey lines, 362 fewer
kilometres, and 40 fewer mapping hours than MBES. MBES obtained 2 times
greater resolution than LiDAR bathymetric surfaces. Evaluating the depths
obtained from both technologies, a maximum of 6.53m difference in depth
between the two bathymetric surfaces, in which 5.7% of the area has
differences greater than the maximum allowable error. Their bathymetric
surfaces show similar profiles in most of survey lines with LiDAR surface
being shallower (by 0.042m+-0.007). (Costa, 2007)

Figure 3. Bathymetric Profile of LiDAR and

SONAR of 1 transect.
IV. Methodology
In this project, the researchers have conducted several researches in
relation to LiDAR and Side Scan Sonar Bathymetry from many journals,
articles, and published research papers as well as various internet sources to
create a reliable comparison of the two surveying methods. The research
included acquisition of data of each method’s definition, characteristics, uses,
importance, advantages, disadvantages, and efficiency. Various sample data
from existing LiDAR and Side Scan Sonar Bathymetric Survey comparative
analyses were also gathered and compared to see which produced a better
result. Then, the data acquired from each method were then compared from
each other to create a criteria for the analyzation of which method is better.
The criteria used for analysis includes depth of acquisition, the
resolution of data gathered, the swath ranges or footprints, cost of the
technology, and the efficiency of gathering clear and effective data for both
LiDAR and Side Scan Sonar Bathymetry. The group has read through multiple
research papers and accounted the results of those surveys in order to decide
which method is better.

V. Results and Discussion

For bathymetric surveying, SONAR technology is mainly used. Due to
evolving technology, LiDAR is now being integrated in bathymetric
surveying. Both technology emits its own signals or pulses which is converted
to range. Both LiDAR and SONAR has advantages and disadvantages in its
datasets.
Generally, bathymetric profiles produced from both technologies are
visually similar with LiDAR being shallower as can be seen in Figure 3.
Theoretically, soundings at high frequencies such as that of LiDAR can only
penetrate the seabed up to only a few centimeter unlike SONAR, resulting to
shallower result.
Resolution of the data depends mainly on the swath width of the
soundings. LiDAR technology, on the average has twice the swath width of
SONAR. With these, Significantly more soundings can be obtained from
SONAR, producing higher resolution. Swath width or footprint of LiDAR is
independent of its depth while SONAR is greatly affected by depth.
Consequently for shallow water, SONAR produces narrow swath width
requiring huge number of survey lines to cover the whole area. Also, near
shore areas are not recommended for navigation for SONAR bathymetry.
Vessels, submerged part ,may present danger to both the equipment and the
marine ecosystem. LiDAR , on the other hand can survey the area at ease, due
to its position and large swath width.
For depth, SONAR generally has greater range than that of LiDAR.
This concept varies depending on the quality and standard of the equipment.
Obstructions, such as fog, turbidity of water, and clouds significantly lessens
 the range that the LiDAR can reach, rendering SONAR to be better at these
conditions.
Both SONAR and LiDAR technologies are costly in acquiring datasets
for bathymetric mapping. For large areas, it is cost efficient to use LiDAR
system. Due to its fast vehicular speed, as well as acquisition rate, time can be
reduced significantly. In the research conducted by Costa, the aircraft
containing LiDAR is flying at a speed between 140 and 175 kn while the
vessel containing SONAR is running at a speed between 4 to 6 kn. Also,
since LiDAR has twice the swath width of SONAR, LiDAR travel
significantly less survey lines than SONAR to cover the same area.
Though SONAR and LiDAR bathymetric shows similar bathymetric
profile, noticeable difference can be observed in their results. In the same
research by Costa, through ground truthing video, it is known that the
noticeable difference in depth occurs along features with slope 25 % or greater.
This is due to the difference in acquisition geometries of both technologies.
LiDAR is fixed to near vertical acquisition geometry while SONAR can be
angled accordingly. With these, beam angle of SONAR can be adjusted to
lower the swath width on the side of high relief, producing higher resolution
data. Also, LiDAR having larger swath width than SONAR, causes its depth
range to vary widely than that of SONAR. Also, noticeable differences in
depth occurs in areas with depth greater than 35m. Ideally, their LiDAR
sensor can penetrate up to 70m, but due to the turbidity of water column, as
well as the suspended sediments. With these poor water conditions, SONAR
can still obtain bathymetric data, rendering it better than LiDAR.

VI. Conclusion and Recommendations

The group was able to make a comprehensive comparison between
Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) and Side Scan Sound Navigation and
Ranging (Side Scan Sonar) Bathymetry taking into account various important
factors like the depth of acquisition of the two technologies, the resolution of
the data gathered, the swath ranges or footprints, cost of the technology, and
the efficiency of gathering clear and effective data. Generally, both
technologies have there own advantages and disadvantages in certain aspects.
However, our group deemed LiDAR system more efficient in doing
bathymetric surveys compared to SONAR. Both are really great technologies
but in instances of poor water conditions, only SONAR can provide a decent
and usable bathymetric data.
VII. References

1. Costa, B., Battista, T., Pittman, S. (2009). Comparative evaluation of airborne

LiDAR and ship-based multibeam SoNAR bathymetry and intensity for
mapping coral reef ecosystems. Remote Sensing of Environment. Pp. 1082-
1100. Retrieved from https://sci-
hub.tw/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2009.01.015#.
2. Gianoutsos, N. , Greenaway S., Evans, B., et. al. (n.d.). Field Integration of
Lidar and Sonar Hydrographic Surveys. National Oceanic & Atmospheric
Administration, National Oceanic Service, NOAA Ship RAINIER. Retrieved
from http://ushydro.thsoa.org/hy07/05_05.pdf.
3. http://home.iitk.ac.in/~blohani/LiDAR_Tutorial/Bathymetric%20LiDAR.htm.
4. https://leica-geosystems.com/products/airborne-systems/lidar-sensors/leica-
hawkeye-iii.
5. http://lidarradar.com/info/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-lidar