Home Dealing with systematic laser scanner errors due to misalignment at area-based deformation analyses
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Dealing with systematic laser scanner errors due to misalignment at area-based deformation analyses

  • Christoph Holst EMAIL logo , Tomislav Medić and Heiner Kuhlmann
Published/Copyright: March 7, 2018
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

The ability to acquire rapid, dense and high quality 3D data has made terrestrial laser scanners (TLS) a desirable instrument for tasks demanding a high geometrical accuracy, such as geodetic deformation analyses. However, TLS measurements are influenced by systematic errors due to internal misalignments of the instrument. The resulting errors in the point cloud might exceed the magnitude of random errors. Hence, it is important to assure that the deformation analysis is not biased by these influences. In this study, we propose and evaluate several strategies for reducing the effect of TLS misalignments on deformation analyses. The strategies are based on the bundled in-situ self-calibration and on the exploitation of two-face measurements. The strategies are verified analyzing the deformation of the Onsala Space Observatory’s radio telescope’s main reflector. It is demonstrated that either two-face measurements as well as the in-situ calibration of the laser scanner in a bundle adjustment improve the results of deformation analysis. The best solution is gained by a combination of both strategies.

References

[1] M. A. Abbas, H. Setan, Z. Majid, K. M. Idris, M. F. M. Ariff, A. K. Chong and D. D. Lichti, The effect of datum constraints for terrestrial laser scanner self-calibration, in: FIG Congress 2014, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia 16–21 June 2014, 2014.Search in Google Scholar

[2] M. A. Abbas, D. D. Lichti, A. K. Chong, H. Setan, Z. Majid, C. L. Lau, K. M. Idris and M. F. M. Ariff, Improvements to the accuracy of prototype ship models measurement method using terrestrial laser scanner, Measurement 100 (2017), 301–310.10.1016/j.measurement.2016.12.053Search in Google Scholar

[3] J. C. K. Chow, W. F. Teskey and J. W. Lovse, In-situ Self-calibration of Terrestrial Laser Scanners and Deformation Analysis Using Both Signalized Targets and Intersection of Planes for Indoor Applications, 1st Joint International Symposium on Deformation Monitoring (JISDM), 2011.Search in Google Scholar

[4] T. A. Clark and P. Thomsen, Deformations in VLBI antennas, Nasa Technical Memorandum 100696, NASA, Greenbelt, Md., Report, 1988.Search in Google Scholar

[5] W. Förstner and B. Wrobel, Photogrammetric Computer Vision. Statistics, Geometry, Orientation and Reconstruction, Springer International Publishing, 2016.10.1007/978-3-319-11550-4Search in Google Scholar

[6] D. García-San-Miguel and J. L. Lerma, Geometric calibration of a terrestrial laser scanner with local additional parameters: An automatic strategy, ISPRS J. Photogramm. 79 (2013), 122–136.10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2013.02.007Search in Google Scholar

[7] C. Holst and H. Kuhlmann, Aiming at self-calibration of terrestrial laser scanners using only one single object and one single scan, J. Appl. Geodesy 8 (2014), 295–310.10.1515/jag-2014-0017Search in Google Scholar

[8] C. Holst, A. Nothnagel, M. Blome, P. Becker, M. Eichborn and H. Kuhlmann, Improved area-based deformation analysis of a radio telescope’s main reflector based on terrestrial laser scanning, J. Appl. Geodesy 9 (2015), 1–13.10.1515/jag-2014-0018Search in Google Scholar

[9] C. Holst, D. Schunck, A. Nothnagel, R. Haas, L. Wennerbäck, H. Olofsson, R. Hammargren and H. Kuhlmann, Terrestrial Laser Scanner Two-Face Measurements for Analyzing the Elevation-Dependent Deformation of the Onsala Space Observatory 20-m Radio Telescope’s Main Reflector in a Bundle Adjustment, Sensors 1833 (2017).10.3390/s17081833Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[10] C. Holst and H. Kuhlmann, Challenges and Present Fields of Action at Laser Scanner Based Deformation Analyses, J. Appl. Geodesy 10 (2016), 17–25.10.1515/jag-2015-0025Search in Google Scholar

[11] L. E. B. Johansson, A. O. H. Olofsson and E. De Beck, OSO 20 m Telescope Handbook, Onsala Space Observatory, Report, 2016.Search in Google Scholar

[12] T. Jurek, H. Kuhlmann and C. Holst, Impact of spatial correlations on the surface estimation based on terrestrial laser scanning, J. Appl. Geodesy 11 (3) (2017), 143–155.10.1515/jag-2017-0006Search in Google Scholar

[13] S. Kauker, C. Holst, V. Schwieger, H. Kuhlmann and S. Schön, Spatio-temporal Correlations of Terrestrial Laser Scanning, Allgem. Verm. Nachr. (2016), 170–182.Search in Google Scholar

[14] S. Kauker and V. Schwieger, A synthetic covariance matrix for monitoring by terrestrial laser scanning, J. Appl. Geodesy 11 (2) (2017), 77–87.10.1515/jag-2016-0026Search in Google Scholar

[15] Leica Geosystems, Leica ScanStation P20, industry’s best performing ultra-high speed scanner, www.leica-geosystems.de, Juli 2014.Search in Google Scholar

[16] D. D. Lichti, The impact of angle parameterisation on terrestrial laser scanner self-calibration, Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. 38 (2009), 171–176.Search in Google Scholar

[17] D. D. Lichti, Terrestrial laser scanner self-calibration: Correlation sources and their mitigation, ISPRS J. Photogramm. 65 (2010), 93–102.10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2009.09.002Search in Google Scholar

[18] D. D. Lichti, J. Chow and H. Lahamy, Parameter de-correlation and model-identification in hybrid-style terrestrial laser scanner self-calibration, ISPRS J. Photogramm. 66 (2011), 317–326.10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2010.12.001Search in Google Scholar

[19] T. Medić, C. Holst and H. Kuhlmann, Towards system calibration of panoramic laser scanners from a single station, Sensors 1145 (2017).10.3390/s17051145Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[20] E. M. Mikhail and F. Ackermann, Observations and least squares, Dun-Donelly, New York, 1976.Search in Google Scholar

[21] B. Muralikrishnan, M. Ferrucci, D. Sawyer, G. Gerner, V. Lee, C. Blackburn, S. Phillips, P. Petrov, Y. Yakovlev, A. Astrelin, S. Milligan and J. Palmateer, Volumetric performance evaluation of a laser scanner based on geometric error model, Precis. Eng. 40 (2015), 139–150.10.1016/j.precisioneng.2014.11.002Search in Google Scholar

[22] B. Muralikrishnan, K. M. Shilling, D. S. Sawyer, P. K. Rachakonda, V. D. Lee, S. D. Phillips, G. S. Cheok and K. S. Saidi, Laser scanner two-face errors on spherical targets, in: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the ASPE 2014, 2014.Search in Google Scholar

[23] A. Nothnagel, M. Eichborn and C. Holst, Improved focal length results of the Effelsberg 100 m radio telescope, in: 21st Meeting of the European VLBI Group for Geodesy and Astronomy (EVGA 2013) (N. Zubko and M. Poutanen, eds.), pp. 55–60, Reports of the Finnish Geodetic Institute, Espoo, Finland, March 5–8 2013.Search in Google Scholar

[24] J. O. Ogundare, Precision Surveying. The Principles and Geomatics Practice, John Wiley & Sones, 2015.10.1002/9781119147770Search in Google Scholar

[25] Y. Reshetyuk, A unified approach to self-calibration of terrestrial laser scanners, ISPRS J. Photogramm. 65 (2010), 445–456.10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2010.05.005Search in Google Scholar

[26] P. Sarti, C. Abbondanza, L. Petrov and M. Negusini, Height bias and scale effect induced by antenna gravitational deformations in geodetic VLBI analysis, J. Geod. 85 (2011), 1–8.10.1007/s00190-010-0410-6Search in Google Scholar

[27] V. Schwieger, Nicht-lineare Sensitivitätsanalyse gezeigt an Beispielen zu bewegten Objekten, Ph.D. thesis, German Geodetic Commission (DGK), C, No. 581, 2005.Search in Google Scholar

[28] H. Wolf, Ausgleichungsrechnung. Formeln zur praktischen Anwendung, Dümmler, Bonn, 1975.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2017-12-21
Accepted: 2018-2-13
Published Online: 2018-3-7
Published in Print: 2018-4-25

© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 23.11.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/jag-2017-0044/html
Scroll to top button