In ArcMap, when creating a line feature class within a geodatabase, the length of each record is automatically derived upon creation. This length is based on a distance measurement for a planar surface. Let us say, however, that the line feature is meant to represent an entity in an area with high topographic relief.
- Wouldn't the actual length of that line be different than the result from this planar measurement?
- Wouldn't the cumulative length of a line be longer than the planar distance measurement anytime the line does not sit on a planar surface?
- How much of a difference is there between the planar and cumulative length measurements?
Best Answer
A distance calculation on a sloping surface is different than that on a planar surface. This appears to be a latent danger that many may not consider, although it is most important when a project requires high quality measurements and/or when the topographic relief is great. The difference between planar distance and cumulative distance appears to be independent of the distance involved. This is revealed in the table below.
A cumulative distance (i.e., one that incorporates slope in its measurement), and the difference between it and a planar distance, may be derived using ArcMap. The following steps demonstrate one way this may be done.
[Shape_Length] /Cos ((0.01745 * [GRIDCODE]) )
The sum of the derived values may be used to determine the cumulative distance of the line feature of interest. The table below demonstrates how this value changes with regards to changes in distance and slope. Note that the "Difference" column displays the difference between the a horizontal and cumulative distance calculations.
Lastly, one should consider that the slope value attributed to the line is the average slope of the cells containing a given segment of the line. This may not reflect the actual slope of a the line feature being represented (e.g., a road running through a roadcut.) A DEM with a high spatial resolution may, however, record such detail.