Evaluating the Performance of SRTM, NASADEM, and Copernicus DEM: A Case Study of the Perlis State Region

Authors

  • Hairie Ilkham Sibaruddin Department of Civil Engineering, Politeknik Ungku Omar, Jalan Raja Musa Mahadi, 31400 Ipoh, Perak, Malaysia
  • Muhammad Faiz Pa'suya Ocean Mapping and Marine Geospatial (OMMAR), Faculty of Built Environment, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Arau Campus, Perlis Branch, 02600 Arau, Perlis, Malaysia
  • Noorfatekah Talib Faculty of Built Environment, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Arau Campus, Perlis Branch, 02600 Arau, Perlis, Malaysia
  • Ami Hassan Md Din Faculty of Built Environment and Surveying, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia
  • Chien Zheng Yong National School of Surveying, University of Otago, 310 Castle Street, Dunedin 9016, New Zealand
  • Afreena Nisha Mohd Zamri Faculty of Built Environment, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Arau Campus, Perlis Branch, 02600 Arau, Perlis, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24191/bej.v23i1.8308

Keywords:

Global Digital Elevation Models (DEMs), NASA DEM, SRTM DEM, Copernicus DEM, Accuracy

Abstract

Digital Elevation Models (DEMs) are fundamental tools for various applications including flood risk mapping, geoid modelling, and terrain analysis. The increasing availability of global DEMs (GDEMs) such as the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM), NASADEM, and Copernicus DEM (CopDEM) has enhanced the accessibility of elevation data worldwide. However, their accuracy varies depending on topographic characteristics and data acquisition methods. This study aims to evaluate the performance of SRTM, NASADEM, and CopDEM over the Perlis State region in Malaysia. Ground truth data were obtained from 38 GNSS benchmarks and 1,177 ICESat ATLAS08 altimetry points. Prior to analysis, ellipsoidal heights were converted to orthometric heights using the EGM96 geoid model. DEM elevation values were interpolated at each validation point, and accuracy was assessed using Mean Error (ME), Standard Deviation (STD), and Root Mean Square Error (RMSE). The results reveal that NASADEM exhibits the highest accuracy, with RMSE values of 1.855 m (GNSS) and 5.814 m (ICESat), followed by CopDEM and SRTM DEM. All three GDEMs show strong positive correlations with ground truth data, with correlation coefficients exceeding 0.98. These findings indicate that NASADEM provides more reliable elevation data in the Perlis region, especially in relatively flat areas. The study contributes to informed decision-making in selecting appropriate DEMs for environmental and geospatial applications in similar terrains.

Author Biographies

  • Hairie Ilkham Sibaruddin, Department of Civil Engineering, Politeknik Ungku Omar, Jalan Raja Musa Mahadi, 31400 Ipoh, Perak, Malaysia

    Hairie Ilkham Sibaruddin, is a Senior Lecturer at Politeknik Ungku Omar. His primary research focuses on the environment, engineering surveying, and photogrammetry. He has published extensively on these topics in journals such as the Journal of Geosciences and Geomatics. He can be reached via email at hairie@puo.edu.my

  • Muhammad Faiz Pa'suya, Ocean Mapping and Marine Geospatial (OMMAR), Faculty of Built Environment, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Arau Campus, Perlis Branch, 02600 Arau, Perlis, Malaysia

    Muhammad Faiz Pa’suya, PhD, is a Senior Lecturer in the Faculty of Built Environment at Universiti Teknologi MARA, Perlis Branch. His primary research focuses on the environment, climate change, physical geodesy, and GNSS. He has published on these topics in journals such as the International Journal of HRM, Industrial Marketing Management, Journal of Business Research, International Journal of Information Management, and Management Decision. He can be reached via email at faiz524@uitm.edu.my

  • Noorfatekah Talib, Faculty of Built Environment, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Arau Campus, Perlis Branch, 02600 Arau, Perlis, Malaysia

    Noorfatekah Talib is a Senior Lecturer in the Faculty of Built Environment at Universiti Teknologi MARA, Perlis Branch. Her primary research focuses on environmental studies, climate change, GIS, photogrammetry, and GNSS surveying. She has published extensively on these topics in journals such as Earth Systems and Environment, International Journal of Geoinformatics, Air, Soil and Water Research, and Geography, Environment, Sustainability. She can be reached via email at noorf492@uitm.edu.my

  • Ami Hassan Md Din, Faculty of Built Environment and Surveying, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia

    Ami Hassan Md Din is a senior lecturer and associate professor at Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), specializing in geodesy, marine geodesy, and satellite positioning. His research focuses on areas such as radar remote sensing, hydrography, and tidal modeling, and he is a contributor to several research groups, including the Geospatial Imaging and Information Research Group (GI2RG) at UTM. He can be reached via email at amihassan@utm.my

  • Chien Zheng Yong, National School of Surveying, University of Otago, 310 Castle Street, Dunedin 9016, New Zealand

    Chien Zheng Yong, PhD, is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Otago. His primary research interests include plate tectonics, Earth deformation, and vertical land motion projects. His current research focuses on an alternative positioning approach using smartphones and low-cost receivers, which are capable of providing high-positioning performance for tectonic geodesy studies. He has published extensively on these topics in journals such as the Journal of Remote Sensing, Sensors, the Journal of Spatial Science, the Journal of Information Systems & Technology Management, the Geoscience Society of New Zealand Miscellaneous Publication, and the Journal of Advanced Geospatial Science & Technology. He can be reached via email at yong.chienzheng@otago.ac.nz

  • Afreena Nisha Mohd Zamri, Faculty of Built Environment, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Arau Campus, Perlis Branch, 02600 Arau, Perlis, Malaysia

    Afreena Nisha Mohd Zamri is a master's student in the Faculty of Built Environment at Universiti Teknologi MARA, Perlis Branch. Her primary research focuses on vertical datum, marine datum, and geoid modeling. Her current master's project investigates the vertical datum offset between land and marine regions. She has published several conference papers and journal articles. She can be contacted via email at afreenanisha99@gmail.com.

References

Avand, M., Kuriqi, A., Khazaei, M., & Ghorbanzadeh, O. (2022). DEM resolution effects on machine learning performance for flood probability mapping. Journal of Hydro-Environment Research, 40, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jher.2021.10.002

Aziz, M. A. C., Pa’suya, M. F., Talib, N., Din, A. H. M., Hashim, S., & Ramli, M. Z. (2023). Vertical Accuracy Assessment of Improvised Global Digital Elevation Models (MERIT, NASADEM, EarthEnv) Using GNSS and Airborne IFSAR DEM. International Journal of Geoinformatics, 19(12), 65–82. https://doi.org/10.52939/ijg.v19i12.2979

Bielski, C., Lopez-Vazquez, C., Grohmann, C. H., Guth, P. L., Hawker, L., Gesch, D., Trevisani, S., Herrera-Cruz,V., Riazanoff, S., Corseaux,A., Reuter, H.I., & Strobl, P. (2024). Novel Approach for Ranking DEMs: Copernicus DEM Improves One Arc Second Open Global Topography. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 62, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2024.3368015

Buckley, S. M., Agram, P. S., Belz, J. E., Crippen, R. E., Gurrola, E. M., Hensley, S., Kobrick, M., Lavalle, M., Martin, J. M., Neumann, M., Nguyen, Q. D., Rosen, P. A., Shimada, J. G., Simard, M., Tung, W. W. (2020). NASADEM: User guide (Version 1). NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory. https://lpdaac.usgs.gov/documents/592/NASADEM_User_Guide_V1.pdf

Dakheel, H. S., Abed, R. H., & Satchet, M. S. (2020). Building a digital model to protect the City of Nasiriyah from hydrological hazards by using topographic survey methods and GIS. In F. Mohamed Nazri (Ed.), Proceedings of AICCE’19. AICCE 2019. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering: Vol. 53, (pp. 1419–1441). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32816-0_109

Din, A.H.M., Xian , L. H., Zulkifli, N. A., Zheng, Y. C., & Mohd Adzmi, N. H. . (2022). Assessing Global Geodetic Datum between International Terrestrial Reference Frame 2014 and World Geodetic System 1984 using GPS Observation. Journal of Advanced Geospatial Science & Technology, 2(2), 90–116. https://jagst.utm.my/index.php/jagst/article/view/53

Fathy, I., Abd-Elhamid, H., Zelenakova, M., & Kaposztasova, D. (2019). Effect of topographic data accuracy on watershed management. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(21). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16214245

Gesch, D. B. (2018). Best practices for elevation-based assessments of sea-level rise and coastal flooding exposure. Frontiers in Earth Science, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2018.00230.

Guth, P. L., & Geoffroy, T. M. (2021). LiDAR point cloud and ICESat-2 evaluation of 1 second global digital elevation models: Copernicus wins. Transactions in GIS, 25(5), 2245–2261. https://doi.org/10.1111/tgis.12825

Hawker, L., Bates, P., Neal, J., & Rougier, J. (2018). Perspectives on Digital Elevation Model (DEM) Simulation for Flood Modeling in the Absence of a High-Accuracy Open Access Global DEM. Frontiers in Earth Science, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2018.00233

Hermas, E. S., Gaber, A., & El Bastawesy, M. (2021). Application of remote sensing and GIS for assessing and proposing mitigation measures in flood-affected urban areas, Egypt. Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Science, 24(1), 119–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrs.2020.03.002

Li, B., Xie, H., Tong, X., Tang, H., & Liu, S. (2023). A Global-Scale DEM Elevation Correction Model Using ICESat-2 Laser Altimetry Data. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 61. https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2023.3321956

Li, H., Zhao, J., Yan, B., Yue, L., & Wang, L. (2022). Global DEMs vary from one to another: an evaluation of newly released Copernicus, NASA and AW3D30 DEM on selected terrains of China using ICESat-2 altimetry data. International Journal of Digital Earth, 15(1), 1149–1168. https://doi.org/10.1080/17538947.2022.2094002

Makineci, H. B., & Karabörk, H. (2016). Evaluation Digital Elevation Model Generated By Synthetic Aperture Radar Data. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, XLI-B1, 57–62. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-xli-b1-57-2016

Malys, S., Wong, R., & True, S. A. (2016). The WGS 84 terrestrial reference frame in 2016. 11th Meeting of the International Committee on Global Navigation Satellite Systems (ICG-11), Sochi, Russia. https://www.unoosa.org/pdf/icg/2016/icg11/wgd/02wgd.pdf

Nandam, V., & Patel, P. L. (2024). A framework to assess suitability of global digital elevation models for hydrodynamic modelling in data scarce regions. Journal of Hydrology, 630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.130654

National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA). (2014). Department of Defense World Geodetic System 2014 (WGS 84): Its definition and relationships with local geodetic systems (NGA Standardization Document No. 207). https://w3.uch.edu.tw/ccchang50/NGA.STND.0036_1.0.0_WGS84.pdf

Neuenschwander, A. L., & Magruder, L. A. (2019). Canopy and terrain height retrievals with ICESat-2: A first look. Remote Sensing, 11(14). https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11141721

Okolie, C. J., Mills, J. P., Adeleke, A. K., Smit, J. L., Peppa, M. V., Altunel, A. O., & Arungwa, I. D. (2024). Assessment of the global Copernicus, NASADEM, ASTER and AW3D digital elevation models in Central and Southern Africa. Geo-Spatial Information Science, 27(4), 1362–1390. https://doi.org/10.1080/10095020.2023.2296010

Pa’suya, M. F., Din, A. H. M., Amin, Z. M., Omar, K. M., Omar, A. H., & Ruslik, N. R. (2019). Evaluation of global digital elevation model for flood risk management in Perlis. In B. Pradhan (Ed.), GCEC 2017. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering (Vol. 9, pp. 1007–1017). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8016-6_70

Pa’suya, M. F., Din, A. H.M., Abbak, R. A., Hamden, M. H., Yazid, N. M., Aziz, M. A. C., & Samad, M. A. A. (2022). Hybrid geoid model over Peninsular Malaysia (PMHG2020) using two approaches. Studia Geophysica et Geodaetica, 66(3–4), 98–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11200-021-0769-2

Purinton, B., & Bookhagen, B. (2017). Validation of digital elevation models (DEMs) and comparison of geomorphic metrics on the southern Central Andean Plateau. Earth Surface Dynamics, 5(2), 211–237. https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-5-211-2017

Rahman, M. F. A., Din, A. H. M., Hamid, A. I. A., Alihan, N. S. A., Yazid, N. M., Ansar, A. M. H., Pa’suya, M. F., Yamen, S. N. M., Khalid, N. F., & Junid, M. A. H. (2022). Accuracy assessment of open-source global digital elevation models (GDEMs) with global navigation satellite system (GNSS) levelling. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1064, 012018. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1064/1/012018

Sampson, C. C., Smith, A. M., Bates, P. B., Neal, J. C., Alfieri, L., & Freer, J. E. (2015). A high-resolution global flood hazard model. Water Resources Research, 51(9), 7358–7381. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR016954

Santillan, J. R. (2023). Vertical accuracy evaluation of the Forest and Buildings Removed Copernicus DEM (FABDEM) over the Philippines. International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, XLVIII-4/W6-2022, 311–318. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLVIII-4-W6-2022-311-2023

Snay, R. A. (2012). Evolution of NAD 83 in the United States: Journey from 2D toward 4D. Journal of Surveying Engineering, 138(4), 161–171. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)su.1943-5428.0000083

Tahir, H., & Din, A. H. M. (2023). Vertical accuracy assessment for open-source digital elevation model: A case study of Basrah City, Iraq. International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, XLVIII-4/W6-2022, 355–361. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLVIII-4-W6-2022-355-2023

Tesema, T. A. (2021). Impact of identical digital elevation model resolution and sources on morphometric parameters of Tena watershed, Ethiopia. Heliyon, 7(11). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e08345

Trevisani, S., Skrypitsyna, T. N., & Florinsky, I. V. (2023). Global digital elevation models for terrain morphology analysis in mountain environments: insights on Copernicus GLO-30 and ALOS AW3D30 for a large Alpine area. Environmental Earth Sciences, 82(9). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-023-10882-7

Uuemaa, E., Ahi, S., Montibeller, B., Muru, M., & Kmoch, A. (2020). Vertical accuracy of freely available global digital elevation models (Aster, aw3d30, merit, tandem-x, srtm, and nasadem). Remote Sensing, 12(21), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12213482

Varga, M., Pitoňák, M., Novák, P., & Bašić, T. (2021). Contribution of GRAV-D airborne gravity to improvement of regional gravimetric geoid modelling in Colorado, USA. Journal of Geodesy, 95(5). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-021-01494-9

Vashist, K., & Singh, K. K. (2023). HEC-RAS 2D modeling for flood inundation mapping: a case study of the Krishna River Basin. Water Practice and Technology, 18(4), 831–844. https://doi.org/10.2166/wpt.2023.048

Yilmaz, N. (2017). Comparing the volume methods through using digital elevation models created by different interpolation methods. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 26(7), 4734–4741. https://avesis.ktu.edu.tr/yayin/9c4ed725-8b1d-4c4c-872a-3f6ece8b668f/comparing-the-volume-methods-through-using-digital-elevation-models-created-by-different-interpolation-methods

Yue, L., Shen, H., Zhang, L., Zheng, X., Zhang, F., & Yuan, Q. (2017). High-quality seamless DEM generation blending SRTM-1, ASTER GDEM v2 and ICESat/GLAS observations. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 123, 20–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2016.11.002

Zayed, A. M. A., Saber, A., Hamama, M. A., Rabah, M., & Zaki, A. (2023). Evaluation of vertical accuracy of TanDEM-X Digital Elevation Model in Egypt. Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Science, 26(4), 919–936. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrs.2023.10.003

Zhao, S., Wang, L., Cheng, W., Liu, H., & He, W. (2015). Rectification methods comparison for the ASTER GDEM V2 data using the ICESat/GLA14 data in the Lvliang mountains, China. Environmental Earth Sciences, 74(8), 6571–6590. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-015-4614-1

Downloads

Published

01-01-2026 — Updated on 07-01-2026

Versions

Issue

Vol. 23 No. 1 (2026): Built Environment Journal

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Hairie Ilkham Sibaruddin, Muhammad Faiz Pa'suya, Noorfatekah Talib, Ami Hassan Md Din, Chien Zheng Yong, Afreena Nisha Mohd Zamri

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 DEED

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International

 

How to Cite

Evaluating the Performance of SRTM, NASADEM, and Copernicus DEM: A Case Study of the Perlis State Region. (2026). Built Environment Journal, 23(1). https://doi.org/10.24191/bej.v23i1.8308 (Original work published 2026)

Similar Articles

21-30 of 49

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.