Penn State University MGIS Program Capstone Project Proposal Peer Presentation:

Creating a Spatial Analysis Model for Generating Composite Cost Surfaces to Depict Cross Country Mobility in Natural

Terrain

Andrew Grogan (MGIS) Advisor: Dr. Peter Guth USNA April 20th 2009

2

Introduction

Creating a Spatial Analysis Model for Generating Composite Cost Surfaces to Depict Cross Country Mobility in Natural

Terrain

3

ObjectiveTo create a spatial analysis model which generates standardized Cross-

Country Mobility (CCM) cost surface data depicting the ease or difficulty of vehicle movement in natural terrain for a designated area of interest.

4

Goals

Project Focus

Applied spatial analysis model

Requires moderate GIS savvy

Customization:

I. Seasonal

II. Temporal

III. Unique

Modernize US Army Mylar Overlay Process

5

ObjectivesKey Components:

Composite Cost Surfaces from Themes.

Standardized Classification.

Adaptable to any AOI.

Flexibility for Input and Output.

Cost Surfaces facilitate further spatial analysis (LCP/CD).

Cost Surfaces used to generate semantic data and hardcopy maps.

6

Background

Military Geography Definitions

“The application of geographical principles and knowledge to the solution of military problems.” (Jackman 1962)

“It (Military Geography) links geography and the military science, and is a type of applied geography, employing the approaches, methods, techniques and concepts of the discipline to military affairs, places and regions.” (Palka 1995)

“Geospatial intelligence (GEOINT) is the exploitation and analysis of imagery and geospatial information to describe, assess, and visually depict physical features and geographically referenced activities on the Earth.” (US Army FM 3-24, 2006).

7

Background

US Army Geospatial Terrain Analysis Development History

“In the 1980s the U.S. Military finally recognized the need for routine input of terrain analysis for staff planning. Each army division and Corps has an organic engineer terrain-analysis team assigned.” (Guth 1998)

“In 1972 the Defense Mapping Agency (now NGA) was formed from the Army, Navy and Air Force mapping and charting operations to consolidate map production and distribution for all branches of the military.” (Bacastow, Peuquet 1991)

Logos used for educational purposes only

8

BackgroundUS Army Geospatial Terrain Analysis Development History

“In concept, the role of the Army’s topographic field units is to provide tailored support for the field decision maker through synthesis, transformation, update and quick emergency substitutes when DMA data are not available or insufficient.” (Bacastow, Peuquet 1991)

US Army Terrain Units

Unit Functions Include*:

Creating terrain analysis products to support military operations

Creating Tactical Decision Aides (TDAs) based on operational variables

Pulling existing data from appropriate sources, creating TDAs and pushing products to end users.

* CTIS Terrain Analysis Fact Sheet 2009

9

Background

Humanitarian Assistance

Peacekeeping

Nation/Security Assistance

Noncombatant Evacuation

Disaster Relief

Support of Domestic Civil Authority

Counter-drug Operations

Arms Control

Combating TerrorismPalka 1995

US Army Corps of Engineers Assisting a Trapped Motorist.

For Educational Purpose only

Military Operations Other than War (MOOTW):

10

Target UsersMilitary Users:

US Army Terrain Analysis Teams

Military Applications:

Combat Operations - Tactical Decision Aides (TDAs)

I. Spatial Analysis: Least Cost Paths and Cost Distances.

II. Semantic Data Generation: Avenues of Approach, No-Go Areas , Key Terrain, Barriers/Obstacles, Chokepoints.

Military operations other than war (MOOTW)

I. Spatial Analysis - Military Land Management, Environmental Impacts.

11

Target UsersCivilian Users:

Academic and Private Users

Civilian Applications:

Search and Rescue Operations:

I. Spatial Analysis: Least Cost Paths and Cost Distances.

Land Management

I. Spatial Analysis - Public Land Management, Environmental Impacts, Suitability/Capability for Land Use, Off-Road Vehicle Impacts.

II. Generation of Semantic Map Data for Presentations

12

Technical Approach

Evolution From Manual Process

Uses ESRI’s ModelBuilder

Based on FM 5-33 and NATO Reference Mobility Model II (NRMM) (Birkel 2003)

Model Development

13

Technical Approach

NATO Reference Mobility Model II (NRMM)*:

Developed in the 1970’s

Collection of Mobility Sub-Models

Predicts Physically Constrained Terrain

Calculates General Rates of Movement

*(Birkel 2003)

Limitations:

Focus on Force Controlled Speed

Time Constraints not Ease/Difficulty of Mobility

Engineering Point of View

Not a GIS solution

14

Technical ApproachUS Army Field Manual 5-33 Defines:

Traditional Mylar Overlay Process

Terrain Data Themes

Thematic Data Classification Scheme

Thematic Data Impact on Vehicle Movement

Inter-Theme Relationships

Analytical Approaches

15

Area of Interest

Representative Area of Interest (~ 2000 Km2)

Southern Arizona

I. Horst and Graben (Basin and Range)

II. Desert Scrub, Riparian Zones, High Mountain Alpine Terrain

AOI for Proposed Model Development

16

Data Resources

17

Technical ApproachCreating Composite Cost Surfaces

Map Algebra

Smoothing Algorithm

Data Classification

18

Objectives

Using GIS to Improve CCM Cost Data:

Prevent Bin Category “Stepped” Data Values

Provide Smoothed Cost Surfaces

Improve CCM Data Depiction

19

Methodology

20

Methodology

21

LimitationsPossible Restrictions and Limitations

Pre-Model Data Preparation Required

I. Unique Data Aspects

II. Dataset Variance

III. Data Equivalency

Model Limited to Select Thematic Variables

Trial and Error approach Required

Requires Adaptive Optimization (Smoothing Algorithm, Order of Operations)

22

Methodology

Anticipated Results

Composite CCM Cost Surfaces

Multi-Thematic Representation

Increased Level of Detail

Reproducible Results

Basis for Further Spatial Analysis (Least Cost Paths/Cost Distances)

Base Layer for Semantic Data Extraction and Depiction.

CCM Depiction for Spatio-Temporal Events

23

Questions

Questions ?Andrew Thomas Grogan

atg153@psu.edu