Improvements to and Comparison of Static Terrestrial LiDAR Self-Calibration Methods

被引:35
|
作者
Chow, Jacky C. K. [1 ]
Lichti, Derek D. [1 ]
Glennie, Craig [2 ]
Hartzell, Preston [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calgary, Dept Geomat Engn, Calgary, AB T2N 1N4, Canada
[2] Univ Houston, Dept Civil & Environm Engn, Houston, TX 77204 USA
基金
加拿大创新基金会; 加拿大自然科学与工程研究理事会;
关键词
LiDAR; terrestrial laser scanners; calibration; accuracy; error analysis; quality assurance; VELODYNE HDL-64E S2; LASER SCANNER; STABILITY;
D O I
10.3390/s130607224
中图分类号
O65 [分析化学];
学科分类号
070302 ; 081704 ;
摘要
Terrestrial laser scanners are sophisticated instruments that operate much like high-speed total stations. It has previously been shown that unmodelled systematic errors can exist in modern terrestrial laser scanners that deteriorate their geometric measurement precision and accuracy. Typically, signalised targets are used in point-based self-calibrations to identify and model the systematic errors. Although this method has proven its effectiveness, a large quantity of signalised targets is required and is therefore labour-intensive and limits its practicality. In recent years, feature-based self-calibration of aerial, mobile terrestrial, and static terrestrial laser scanning systems has been demonstrated. In this paper, the commonalities and differences between point-based and plane-based self-calibration ( in terms of model identification and parameter correlation) are explored. The results of this research indicate that much of the knowledge from point-based self-calibration can be directly transferred to plane-based calibration and that the two calibration approaches are nearly equivalent. New network configurations, such as the inclusion of tilted scans, were also studied and prove to be an effective means for strengthening the self-calibration solution, and improved recoverability of the horizontal collimation axis error for hybrid scanners, which has always posed a challenge in the past.
引用
收藏
页码:7224 / 7249
页数:26
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparing self-calibration methods for static cameras
    Gonzalez, J. Isern
    Gamez, J. Cabrera
    Sosa, J. D. Hernandez
    Brito, A. C. Dominguez
    COMPUTER AIDED SYSTEMS THEORY- EUROCAST 2007, 2007, 4739 : 660 - 667
  • [2] Improvements for volume self-calibration
    Wieneke, Bernhard
    MEASUREMENT SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2018, 29 (08)
  • [3] A REVIEW OF GEOMETRIC MODELS AND SELF-CALIBRATION METHODS FOR TERRESTRIAL LASER SCANNERS
    Lichti, Derek D.
    BOLETIM DE CIENCIAS GEODESICAS, 2010, 16 (01): : 3 - 19
  • [4] Improvements in spectrograph self-calibration for planet search
    Endl, M
    Kürster, M
    Els, S
    FROM GIANT PLANETS TO COOL STARS, PROCEEDINGS, 2000, 212 : 315 - 321
  • [5] A Comparison of Three Geometric Self-Calibration Methods for Range Cameras
    Lichti, Derek D.
    Kim, Changjae
    REMOTE SENSING, 2011, 3 (05) : 1014 - 1028
  • [6] A unified approach to self-calibration of terrestrial laser scanners
    Reshetyuk, Yuriy
    ISPRS JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAMMETRY AND REMOTE SENSING, 2010, 65 (05) : 445 - 456
  • [7] A review of camera self-calibration methods
    Chen Aihua
    Gao Chenghui
    He Bingwei
    3RD CHINA-JAPAN CONFERENCE ON MECHATRONICS 2006 FUZHOU, 2006, : 115 - 119
  • [8] Extrinsic self-calibration of an operational mobile LiDAR system
    Diehm, Axel L.
    Gehrung, Joachim
    Hebel, Marcus
    Arens, Michael
    LASER RADAR TECHNOLOGY AND APPLICATIONS XXV, 2020, 11410
  • [9] POINT-BASED VERSUS PLANE-BASED SELF-CALIBRATION OF STATIC TERRESTRIAL LASER SCANNERS
    Chow, J. C. K.
    Lichti, D. D.
    Glennie, C.
    ISPRS WORKSHOP LASER SCANNING 2011, 2011, 38-5 (W12): : 121 - 126
  • [10] A LiDAR data-based camera self-calibration method
    Xu, Lijun
    Feng, Jing
    Li, Xiaolu
    Chen, Jianjun
    MEASUREMENT SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2018, 29 (07)