TITLE:
Geomorphometric Analysis of the Kshetrapal Landslide in Chamoli, Uttarakhand, India Using the White Box Tool (WBT) and QGIS by Comparing various DEMs Obtained from UAV and TLS
AUTHORS:
Ashok Anand
KEYWORDS:
Landslide, Morphometric Analysis, Digital Elevation Models (DEMs), TLS, UAV (Drone), QGIS, WBT
JOURNAL NAME:
International Journal of Geosciences,
Vol.16 No.1,
January
23,
2025
ABSTRACT: Utilizing multispectral satellite data and digital elevation models (DEMs) has emerged as the primary approach for cartographically representing landforms. By using high-resolution satellite photos that capture spatial, temporal, spectral, and radiometric data, one may get a fresh comprehension of the geomorphology of a particular area by recognizing its landforms. In addition, a synergistic method is used by using data produced from digital elevation models (DEMs) such as Slope, Aspect, Hillshade, Curvature, Contour Patterns, and 3-D Flythrough Visuals. The increasing use of UAV (drone) technology for obtaining high-resolution digital images and elevation models has become an essential element in developing complete topographic models in landslide scars that are very unstable and prone to erosion. Comparison (differences in values) of seven (7) different DEMs between two algorithms used, i.e., QGIS and White Box Tool (WBT), were successfully attempted in the present research. The TLS, UAV and Satellite data of the study area—Kshetrapal Landslide, Chamoli (District), Uttarakhand (State), India was subjected to two different algorithms (QGIS and WBT) to evaluate and differentiate seven different DEMs (CARTOSAT, ASTER, SRTM, Alos 3D, TanDEM, MERIT, and FabDEM/FATHOM) taking into consideration various parameters viz. Aspect, Hillshade, Slope, Mean Curvature, Plan Curvature, Profile Curvature and Total Curvature. The different values of aforesaid parameters of various DEMs evaluated (using algorithms QIGS and WBT) reveal that only three parameters, i.e., Aspect, Hillshade, and Slope, show results. In contrast, the remaining ones do not show any meaningful results, and therefore, the comparison was possible only with regard to these three parameters. The comparison is drawn by comparing minimum, maximum, and elevation values (by subtracting WBT values from QGIS values) regarding Aspect, Hillshade, and Slope, arranging the differences in values as per their importance. (Increasing or decreasing order), assigning merit scores individually, and then cumulatively, and ascertaining the order of application suitability of various Dems, which stand in the order of (CARTOSAT, ASTER, SRTM, Alos 3D, TanDEM, and MERIT, and FabDEM/FATHOM).