Closed WorksWellWithOthers closed 2 years ago
I don't HAVE to use the etopo5 tif file. It was the easiest to grab after needing a new .tif file since the ASTGTM2_N51W001_dem.tif wasn't covering the coordinates I was passing.
Tried converting to ft to m. I'll have to look for another dem tif file. Don't remember much about this one that I grabbed. Are the values in the original_surface_profile_m meters or km? I'm guessing the _m stands for meters.
surface_profile_m : list Contains surface profile measurements in meters.
ETOPO5 Info
Downloaded: https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/world-digital-elevation-model-etopo5 Info: https://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/global/etopo5.HTML
The download source doesn't match the info but I think it would be fair to say the data is in meters.
Hello, I passed the alwdgg.tif file from ETOPO5 to
When the distance is great (8000km) the path loss comes out to be 800+.
Comparing the alwdgg.tif with the original_surface_profile_m the values of alwdgg.tif seem way off (+3000 to -4900) in the range where original_surface_profile_m is above 0 (15 to 201).
Is there a recommended .tif file to use with the terrain_module? Should I be converting the etopot5/alwdgg.tif in some way to be compatible?