Home Monitoring of a rockfill embankment dam using TLS and sUAS point clouds
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Monitoring of a rockfill embankment dam using TLS and sUAS point clouds

  • Dimitrios Bolkas EMAIL logo , Matthew O’Banion , Jordan Laughlin and Jakeb Prickett
Published/Copyright: June 14, 2024
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill
Submit Manuscript Author Information
Journal of Applied Geodesy
From the journal Journal of Applied Geodesy Volume 19 Issue 1

Abstract

Terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) and camera-equipped small unmanned aircraft systems (sUAS) are two methods that are often used to produce dense point clouds for several monitoring applications. This paper compares the two methods in their ability to provide accurate monitoring information for rockfill embankment dams. We compare the two methods in terms of their uncertainty, data completeness, and field data acquisition/processing challenges. For both datasets, we derive an error budget that considers registration and measurement uncertainty. We also proceed to merge the TLS and sUAS data and leverage the advantages of each method. Furthermore, we conduct an analysis of the multiscale model-to-model cloud comparison (M3C2) input parameters, namely projection scale, normal scale, and sub-sampling of the reference point cloud, to show their effect on the M3C2 distance estimation. The theoretical methodologies and practical considerations of this paper can assist surveyors, who conduct monitoring of rockfill embankment dams using point clouds, in establishing reliable change/deformation estimations.

Keywords: dam monitoring; sUAS; TLS; point clouds; M3C2; accuracy assessment
Corresponding author: Dimitrios Bolkas, Department of Surveying Engineering, The Pennsylvania State University, Wilkes-Barre Campus, Dallas, PA, USA, E-mail: 

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge David Williams and Brett Anderton, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, for their assistance in this project. This project has received funding from Chancellor Endowment Funds, Penn State University, Wilkes-Barre Campus and the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency. In addition, undergraduate students Gregory Ellsworth, Hannah Corson, Gerald Rusek, Nick Lawler, Tanner Smith, and Tyler Pokrinchak are thanked for their contribution in the data collection. We also want to thank the anonymous reviewers for their excellent comments that have notably improved the original version of this manuscript.

  1. Research ethics: Not applicable.

  2. Author contributions: The authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.

  3. Competing interests: The authors state no conflict of interest.

  4. Research funding: None declared.

  5. Data availability: The raw data can be obtained on request from the corresponding author.

References

1. Alba, M, Fregonese, L, Prandi, F, Scaioni, M, Valgoi, P. Structural monitoring of a large dam by terrestrial laser scanning. Int Arch Photogrammetry 2006;36:6.Search in Google Scholar

2. González-Aguilera, D, Gómez-Lahoz, J, Sánchez, J. A new approach for structural monitoring of large dams with a three-dimensional laser scanner. Sensors 2008;8:5866–83. https://doi.org/10.3390/s8095866.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

3. Scaioni, M, Marsella, M, Crosetto, M, Tornatore, V, Wang, J. Geodetic and remote-sensing sensors for dam deformation monitoring. Sensors 2018;18:3682. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18113682.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

4. Jaboyedoff, M, Oppikofer, T, Abellán, A, Derron, MH, Loye, A, Metzger, R, et al.. Use of LIDAR in landslide investigations: a review. Nat Hazards 2012;61:5–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-010-9634-2.Search in Google Scholar

5. Abellan, A, Derron, MH, Jaboyedoff, M. “Use of 3D point clouds in geohazards” special issue: current challenges and future trends. Rem Sens 2016;8:130. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs8020130.Search in Google Scholar

6. O’Banion, MS, Olsen, MJ, Rault, C, Wartman, J, Cunningham, K. Suitability of structure from motion for rock slope assessment. Photogramm Rec 2018;33:217–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/phor.12241.Search in Google Scholar

7. Bolkas, D, Walton, G, Kromer, R, Sichler, T. Registration of multi-platform point clouds using edge detection for rockfall monitoring. ISPRS J Photogrammetry 2021;175:366–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2021.03.017.Search in Google Scholar

8. Azam, S, Li, Q. Tailings dam failures: a review of the last one hundred years. Geotech News 2010;28:50–4.Search in Google Scholar

9. Corsetti, M, Fossati, F, Manunta, M, Marsella, M. Advanced SBAS-DInSAR technique for controlling large civil infrastructures: an application to the Genzano di Lucania dam. Sensors 2018;18:2371. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18072371.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

10. Brown, CA, Graham, WJ. Assessing the threat to life from dam failure 1. J Am Water Resour Assoc 1988;24:1303–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.1988.tb03051.x.Search in Google Scholar

11. Lacroix, P, Handwerger, AL, Bièvre, G. Life and death of slow-moving landslides. Nat Rev Earth Environ 2020;1:404–19. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-020-0072-8.Search in Google Scholar

12. Fan, X, Dufresne, A, Whiteley, J, Yunus, AP, Subramanian, SS, Okeke, CA, et al.. Recent technological and methodological advances for the investigation of landslide dams. Earth Sci Rev 2021;218:103646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2021.103646.Search in Google Scholar

13. Rico, M, Benito, G, Salgueiro, AR, Díez-Herrero, A, Pereira, HG. Reported tailings dam failures: a review of the European incidents in the worldwide context. J Hazard Mater 2008;152:846–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2007.07.050.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

14. Jeon, J, Lee, J, Shin, D, Park, H. Development of dam safety management system. Adv Eng Software 2009;40:554–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2008.10.009.Search in Google Scholar

15. Xi, R, Zhou, X, Jiang, W, Chen, Q. Simultaneous estimation of dam displacements and reservoir level variation from GPS measurements. Measurement 2018;122:247–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2018.03.036.Search in Google Scholar

16. Xiao, R, Shi, H, He, X, Li, Z, Jia, D, Yang, Z. Deformation monitoring of reservoir dams using GNSS: an application to south-to-north water diversion project, China. IEEE Access 2019;7:54981–92. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2019.2912143.Search in Google Scholar

17. Alba, M, Bernardini, G, Giussani, A, Ricci, PP, Roncoroni, F, Scaioni, M, et al.. Measurement of dam deformations by terrestrial interferometric techniques. Int Arch Photogrammetry 2008;37:133–9.Search in Google Scholar

18. Mascolo, L, Nico, G, Di Pasquale, A, Pitullo, A. Use of advanced SAR monitoring techniques for the assessment of the behaviour of old embankment dams. In: Proceedings of earth resources and environmental remote sensing/GIS applications V. International Society for Optics and Photonics; 2014:92450N p.10.1117/12.2067363Search in Google Scholar

19. Buffi, G, Manciola, P, Grassi, S, Barberini, M, Gambi, A. Survey of the ridracoli dam: UAV–based photogrammetry and traditional topographic techniques in the inspection of vertical structures. Geomatics Nat Hazards Risk 2017;8:1562–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2017.1362039.Search in Google Scholar

20. Ridolfi, E, Buffi, G, Venturi, S, Manciola, P. Accuracy analysis of a dam model from drone surveys. Sensors 2017;17:1777. https://doi.org/10.3390/s17081777.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

21. Khaloo, A, Lattanzi, D, Jachimowicz, A, Devaney, C. Utilizing UAV and 3D computer vision for visual inspection of a large gravity dam. Front Built Environ 2018;4:1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2018.00031.Search in Google Scholar

22. Xu, H, Li, H, Yang, X, Qi, S, Zhou, J. Integration of terrestrial laser scanning and nurbs modeling for the deformation monitoring of an earth-rock dam. Sensors 2019;19:22. https://doi.org/10.3390/s19010022.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

23. Zhao, S, Kang, F, Li, J, Ma, C. Structural health monitoring and inspection of dams based on UAV photogrammetry with image 3D reconstruction. Autom ConStruct 2021;130:103832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103832.Search in Google Scholar

24. O’Banion, MS, Olsen, MJ, Parrish, CE, Bailey, M. Interactive visualization of 3D coordinate uncertainties in terrestrial laser-scanning point clouds using OpenGL shader language. J Survey Eng 2018;145:04018012. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)su.1943-5428.0000267.Search in Google Scholar

25. Bolkas, D, O’Bannion, M, Prickett, J, Ellsworth, G, Rusek, G, Corson, H. Comparison of TLS and sUAS point clouds for monitoring embankment dams. In: Proceedings of the 5th joint international symposium on deformation monitoring (JISDM), Valencia, Spain, 6–8 April; 2022.10.4995/JISDM2022.2022.13868Search in Google Scholar

26. Xiao, P, Zhao, R, Li, D, Zeng, Z, Qi, S, Yang, X. As-built inventory and deformation analysis of a high rockfill dam under construction with terrestrial laser scanning. Sensors 2022;22:521. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22020521.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

27. O’Banion, MS, Olsen, MJ, Hollenbeck, JP, Wright, WC. Data gap classification for terrestrial laser scanning-derived digital elevation models. ISPRS Int J Geo-Inf 2020;9:749. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi9120749.Search in Google Scholar

28. Dreier, A, Kuhlmann, H, Klingbeil, L. The potential of UAV-based laser scanning for deformation monitoring. Case study on a water dam. In: Proceedings of the 5th joint international symposium on deformation monitoring (JISDM), Valencia, Spain 6–8 April; 2022.10.4995/JISDM2022.2022.13833Search in Google Scholar

29. Salach, A, Bakuła, K, Pilarska, M, Ostrowski, W, Górski, K, Kurczyński, Z. Accuracy assessment of point clouds from LiDAR and dense image matching acquired using the UAV platform for DTM creation. ISPRS Int J Geo-Inf 2018;7:342. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi7090342.Search in Google Scholar

30. Štroner, M, Urban, R, Línková, L. A new method for UAV lidar precision testing used for the evaluation of an affordable DJI ZENMUSE L1 scanner. Rem Sens 2021;13:4811. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13234811.Search in Google Scholar

31. Albeaino, G, Kelly, CR, Lassiter, HA, Wilkinson, B, Gheisari, M, Issa, RR. Quantitative and qualitative assessments of geometric feature accuracy using a UAS-lidar system for building surveying applications. J Architect Eng 2023;29:04022046. https://doi.org/10.1061/jaeied.aeeng-1493.Search in Google Scholar

32. Eltner, A, Kaiser, A, Castillo, C, Rock, G, Neugirg, F, Abellán, A. Image-based surface reconstruction in geomorphometry–merits, limits and developments. Earth Surf Dyn 2016;4:359–89. https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-4-359-2016.Search in Google Scholar

33. Bolkas, D. Assessment of GCP number and separation distance for small UAS surveys with and without GNSS-PPK positioning. J Survey Eng 2019;145:04019007. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)su.1943-5428.0000283.Search in Google Scholar

34. Javadnejad, F, Slocum, RK, Gillins, DT, Olsen, MJ, Parrish, CE. Dense point cloud quality factor as proxy for accuracy assessment of image-based 3D reconstruction. J Survey Eng 2021;147:04020021. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)su.1943-5428.0000333.Search in Google Scholar

35. Brookshier, P. Hydropower technology. Enc Energy 2004;3:333–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/b0-12-176480-x/00340-0.Search in Google Scholar

36. Richard, L, Wiltshire, PE. 100 years of embankment dam design and construction in the US bureau of reclamation. Denver, Colorado: Technical Service Center Bureau of Reclamation. US Department of the Interior; 2002.Search in Google Scholar

37. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Engineering and design: structural deformation surveying. Washington, DC: Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Manual No. 1110-2-1009; 2009.Search in Google Scholar

38. Berberan, A, Marcelino, J, Boavida, J, Oliveira, A. Deformation monitoring of earth dams using laser scanners and digital imagery. In: Proceedings of the HYDRO symposium. Granada, Spain; 2007:15–17 pp.Search in Google Scholar

39. Boavida, J, Oliveira, A, Berberan, A. Dam monitoring using combined terrestrial imaging systems. Civ Eng Surv 2009;33–8.Search in Google Scholar

40. Lague, D, Brodu, N, Leroux, J. Accurate 3D comparison of complex topography with terrestrial laser scanner: application to the Rangitikei canyon (NZ). ISPRS J Photogrammetry 2013;82:10–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2013.04.009.Search in Google Scholar

41. Martin, RA, Rojas, I, Franke, K, Hedengren, JD. Evolutionary view planning for optimized uav terrain modeling in a simulated environment. Rem Sens 2015;8:26. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs8010026.Search in Google Scholar

42. Psomiadis, E, Tomanis, L, Kavvadias, A, Soulis, KX, Charizopoulos, N, Michas, S. Potential dam breach analysis and flood wave risk assessment using HEC-RAS and remote sensing data: a multicriteria approach. Water 2021;13:364. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13030364.Search in Google Scholar

43. Mukupa, W, Roberts, GW, Hancock, CM, Al-Manasir, K. A review of the use of terrestrial laser scanning application for change detection and deformation monitoring of structures. Surv Rev 2017;49:99–116.Search in Google Scholar

44. Li, Y, Liu, P, Li, H, Huang, F. A comparison method for 3D laser point clouds in displacement change detection for arch dams. ISPRS Int J Geo-Inf 2021;10:184. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi10030184.Search in Google Scholar

45. Girardeau-Montaut, D, Roux, M, Marc, R, Thibault, G. Change detection on points cloud data acquired with a ground laser scanner. Int Arch Photogrammetry 2005;36:W19.Search in Google Scholar

46. Cignoni, P, Rocchini, C, Scopigno, R. Metro: measuring error on simplified surfaces. Comput Graph Forum 1998;17:167–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8659.00236.Search in Google Scholar

47. Gojcic, Z, Schmid, L, Wieser, A. Dense 3D displacement vector fields for point cloud-based landslide monitoring. Landslides 2021;18:3821–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-021-01761-y.Search in Google Scholar

48. Huang, R, Jiang, L, Shen, X, Dong, Z, Zhou, Q, Yang, B, et al.. An efficient method of monitoring slow-moving landslides with long-range terrestrial laser scanning: a case study of the Dashu landslide in the three Gorges reservoir region, China. Landslides 2019;16:839–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-018-1118-6.Search in Google Scholar

49. Winiwarter, L, Anders, K, Höfle, B. M3C2-EP: pushing the limits of 3D topographic point cloud change detection by error propagation. ISPRS J Photogrammetry 2021;178:240–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2021.06.011.Search in Google Scholar

50. Girardeau-Montaut, D. CloudCompare. In: France: EDF R&D telecom ParisTech; 2016, vol 11.Search in Google Scholar

51. DiFrancesco, PM, Bonneau, D, Hutchinson, DJ. The implications of M3C2 projection diameter on 3D semi-automated rockfall extraction from sequential terrestrial laser scanning point clouds. Rem Sens 2020;12:1885. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12111885.Search in Google Scholar

52. Borradaile, GJ, Borradaile, G. Statistics of earth science data: their distribution in time, space, and orientation. Berlin: Springer; 2003, vol 351.10.1007/978-3-662-05223-5Search in Google Scholar

53. Lichti, DD, Gordon, SJ. Error propagation in directly georeferenced terrestrial laser scanner point clouds for cultural heritage recording. In: Proceedings of FIG working week. Athens, Greece; 2004:22–7 pp.Search in Google Scholar

54. Lichti, DD, Gordon, SJ, Tipdecho, T. Error models and propagation in directly georeferenced terrestrial laser scanner networks. J Survey Eng 2005;131:135–42. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9453(2005)131:4(135).10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9453(2005)131:4(135)Search in Google Scholar

55. Hartzell, PJ, Gadomski, PJ, Glennie, CL, Finnegan, DC, Deems, JS. Rigorous error propagation for terrestrial laser scanning with application to snow volume uncertainty. J Glaciol 2015;61:1147–58. https://doi.org/10.3189/2015jog15j031.Search in Google Scholar

56. Reshetyuk, Y. Self-calibration and direct georeferencing in terrestrial laser scanning [Ph.D. dissertation]. Stockholm, Sweden: KTH Royal Institute of Technology; 2009.Search in Google Scholar

57. Soudarissanane, SS. The geometry of terrestrial laser scanning; identification of errors, modeling and mitigation of scanning geometry [Ph.D. dissertation]. Delft, Netherlands: Delft University of Technology; 2016.Search in Google Scholar

58. Wujanz, D. Terrestrial laser scanning for geodetic deformation monitoring [Ph.D. dissertation]. Germany: Technische Universitaet Berlin; 2016.Search in Google Scholar

59. Kerekes, G. An elementary error model for terrestrial laser scanning [Ph.D. dissertation]. Germany: University of Stuttgart; 2023.Search in Google Scholar

60. Bolkas, D, Martinez, A. Effect of target color and scanning geometry on terrestrial LiDAR point-cloud noise and plane fitting. J Appl Geodesy 2018;12:109–27. https://doi.org/10.1515/jag-2017-0034.Search in Google Scholar

61. Baltsavias, EP. Airborne laser scanning: basic relations and formulas. ISPRS J Photogrammetry 1999;54:199–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0924-2716(99)00015-5.Search in Google Scholar

62. Goulden, T, Hopkinson, C. Mapping simulated error due to terrain slope in airborne lidar observations. Int J Rem Sens 2014;35:7099–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2014.965284.Search in Google Scholar

63. Schaer, P, Skaloud, J, Landtwing, S, Legat, K. Accuracy estimation for laser point cloud including scanning geometry. Int Arch Photogram Rem Sens 2007;36:1–8.Search in Google Scholar

64. Agisoft, LLC. Forum, topic: point cloud variance; 2019. https://www.agisoft.com/forum/index.php?topic=10805.0 [Accessed 11 Nov 2022].Search in Google Scholar

65. Kraus, K. Photogrammetry: geometry from images and laser scans. Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter; 2007, vol 1.10.1515/9783110892871Search in Google Scholar

66. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Francis E. Walter dam; 2022. https://www.nap.usace.army.mil/Missions/Civil-Works/Francis-E-Walter-Dam/[Accessed 11 Nov 2022].Search in Google Scholar

67. Propeller Aero. Proppeller AeroPoints user manual; 2019. https://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/4253088/Assets,%20Guides,%20eBooks/AeroPoints/AeroPoints%20Manual_2019.pdf [Accessed 11 Nov 2022].Search in Google Scholar

68. NGS OPUS. Online positioning user service; 2023. https://geodesy.noaa.gov/OPUS/index.jsp [Accessed 17 Mar 2023].Search in Google Scholar

69. Setan, H, Singh, R. Deformation analysis of a geodetic monitoring network. Geomatica 2001;55:333–46.Search in Google Scholar

70. Saleh, B, Al-Bayari, O. Geodetic monitoring of a landslide using conventional surveys and GPS techniques. Surv Rev 2007;39:252–60. https://doi.org/10.1179/175227007x197165.Search in Google Scholar

71. Ghilani, CD. Adjustment computations: spatial data analysis. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons; 2017.10.1002/9781119390664Search in Google Scholar

72. Teunissen, PJ. Adjustment theory. Delft, Netherlands: Vereniging voor Studie- en Studentenbelangen te Delft (VSSD); 2003.Search in Google Scholar

73. Leica Geosystems. Leica ScanStation P50 – long range 3D terrestrial laser scanner; 2023. https://leica-geosystems.com/en-us/products/laser-scanners/scanners/leica-scanstation-p50 [Accessed 17 Mar 2023].Search in Google Scholar
Received: 2023-05-26
Accepted: 2024-05-22
Published Online: 2024-06-14
Published in Print: 2025-01-29

© 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Review
  3. Advancing polar motion prediction with derivative information
  4. Original Research Articles
  5. Analyses of data from the first Chinese seismo electromagnetic satellite (CSES-01) together with other earthquake precursors associated with the Turkey earthquakes (February 6, 2023)
  6. Regional evaluation of global geopotential models and three types of digital elevation models with ground-based gravity and GNSS/levelling data using several techniques over Sudan
  7. Correlation between rate of TEC index and positioning error during solar flares and geomagnetic storms using navigation with Indian constellation receiver measurements
  8. Analyzing recent deformation in Wadi Hagul, Eastern Desert, Egypt, via advanced remote sensing and geodetic data processing
  9. Monitoring of a rockfill embankment dam using TLS and sUAS point clouds
  10. The Modified Ambiguity Function Approach with regularization for instantaneous precise GNSS positioning
  11. A new challenge for cadastral surveying in Taiwan: feasibility analysis using combination on CORS data and online PPP service
  12. Occurrence characteristics of ionospheric scintillations in the civilian GPS signals (L1, L2, and L5) through a dedicated scintillation monitoring receiver at a low-latitude location in India during the 25th solar cycle
https://doi.org/10.1515/jag-2023-0038
Keywords for this article
dam monitoring; sUAS; TLS; point clouds; M3C2; accuracy assessment

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Review
  3. Advancing polar motion prediction with derivative information
  4. Original Research Articles
  5. Analyses of data from the first Chinese seismo electromagnetic satellite (CSES-01) together with other earthquake precursors associated with the Turkey earthquakes (February 6, 2023)
  6. Regional evaluation of global geopotential models and three types of digital elevation models with ground-based gravity and GNSS/levelling data using several techniques over Sudan
  7. Correlation between rate of TEC index and positioning error during solar flares and geomagnetic storms using navigation with Indian constellation receiver measurements
  8. Analyzing recent deformation in Wadi Hagul, Eastern Desert, Egypt, via advanced remote sensing and geodetic data processing
  9. Monitoring of a rockfill embankment dam using TLS and sUAS point clouds
  10. The Modified Ambiguity Function Approach with regularization for instantaneous precise GNSS positioning
  11. A new challenge for cadastral surveying in Taiwan: feasibility analysis using combination on CORS data and online PPP service
  12. Occurrence characteristics of ionospheric scintillations in the civilian GPS signals (L1, L2, and L5) through a dedicated scintillation monitoring receiver at a low-latitude location in India during the 25th solar cycle
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 25.10.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/jag-2023-0038/html
Scroll to top button