Watershed Marching Delineation Algorithm

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing algorithms for watershed delineation from digital flow direction grids are inefficient, particularly in terms of computational complexity and storage requirements, especially for large watersheds, as they scale with the number of grid cells rather than the number of vertices, leading to significant processing time and resource challenges.

Innovation Solution

The Haag Shokoufandeh Marching (HSM) algorithm uses a modified nested set data structure to efficiently retrieve watershed boundaries by traversing the flow direction grid, recording discovery and finish times, and employing a marching algorithm that identifies boundary lattice points with a linear increase in storage costs, allowing for local determination of global watershed identity.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If traditional watershed delineation algorithms are used, then watershed boundaries can be identified, but computational complexity and storage requirements increase significantly with the number of grid cells

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveprocessing speedVSAvoidcomputational complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The algorithm segments the watershed delineation process into three distinct phases: (1) identifying stream cells using a modified nested set data structure, (2) extracting boundary lattice points through a marching algorithm, and (3) constructing the final boundary. This segmentation allows each phase to operate efficiently with linear complexity O(N) relative to the number of vertices N, rather than scaling with the total number of grid cells.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The algorithm transitions from operating on the grid cell dimension to operating on the vertex dimension by identifying boundary lattice points that define the watershed boundary. This dimensional shift allows the computational complexity to scale with the number of vertices rather than the number of grid cells, significantly improving efficiency for large watersheds.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

2Reliability

If traditional watershed delineation algorithms are used, then complete watershed boundaries are obtained, but storage requirements increase with the number of grid cells

Engineering Contradiction:
ImproveaccuracyVSAvoidstorage requirements
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The algorithm extracts only the essential boundary lattice points that define the watershed boundary, rather than storing or processing all grid cells. By using a marching algorithm to identify and connect boundary points, the storage requirements scale linearly with the number of vertices rather than the number of grid cells, while maintaining complete and accurate boundary representation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The algorithm applies different processing strategies to different parts of the watershed: stream cells are identified using nested set properties, boundary cells are identified through local gradient analysis, and interior cells are inferred. This local quality approach ensures accuracy where needed while reducing overall storage requirements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

3Reliability

If traditional watershed delineation algorithms are used, then watershed boundaries are delineated, but processing time increases significantly for large watersheds

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovecompletenessVSAvoidprocessing time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The algorithm performs preliminary identification of stream cells and boundary cells before constructing the final watershed boundary. By pre-identifying these key cells using efficient nested set properties and local gradient analysis, the algorithm reduces the computational burden of the final boundary construction phase, achieving linear time complexity O(N) relative to the number of vertices.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The marching algorithm continuously traces the watershed boundary by systematically moving from one boundary lattice point to the next, maintaining continuous progress around the entire perimeter. This continuous action ensures complete boundary delineation without requiring repeated processing or backtracking, optimizing processing time.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #20Continuity of useful action

Data Source

PatentUS11954410B2Watershed marching-delineation algorithm
Publication Date: 2024.04.09 DREXEL UNIV
  • US11954410B2 patent drawing
  • US11954410B2 patent drawing
  • US11954410B2 patent drawing

AI summary

The constrained watershed boundary (CWB), defined as a polygon containing all the flow direction grid cells with a surface flow distance less than a user prescribed threshold uses an algorithm that builds upon the HSM algorithm proposed and augments the data structure with a flow distance grid calculated directly from the original flow direction grid.