A Comparison of Accuracy of UAS Photogrammetry in Different Terrain Sites
Publication: Construction Research Congress 2024
ABSTRACT
Unmanned aerial systems (UASs) are now standard tools for 3D mapping across diverse terrains. Despite their ubiquity, achieving consistent and reliable mapping results across varied terrains remains a challenge due to differing site conditions. To ensure consistency and the highest accuracy across terrains, it is crucial to discern the optimal flight configuration (defined as the UAS’s predetermined flight pattern and altitude to capture overlapping survey images). This paper delves into four distinct terrains: construction, pit, preconstruction, and rock surface sites, collecting photogrammetry data from varied flight configurations. The research revealed that all sites achieved Class A horizontal accuracy, with the best accuracy levels falling within 1−3 times the Ground Sampling Distance (GSD). The findings of this study offer valuable insights to surveyors and other professionals by elucidating the level of accuracy achievable for UAV-based photogrammetric surveying across various sites, enabling them to make informed decisions about flight configurations and data collection methods for more precise and efficient surveying results.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this chapter.
REFERENCES
Agisoft. 2021. “Agisoft Metashape User Manual Professional Edition.” Retrieved May 15, 2023, from Agisoft Metashape User Manual Professional Edition, Version 1.7 website: https://docslib.org/doc/2783560/agisoft-metashape-user-manual-professional-edition-version-1-7-agisoft-metashape-user-manual-professional-edition-version-1-7.
Agüera-Vega, F., F. Carvajal-Ramírez, and P. Martínez-Carricondo. 2017. “Assessment of photogrammetric mapping accuracy based on variation ground control points number using unmanned aerial vehicle.” Measurement: Journal of the International Measurement Confederation, 98, 221–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2016.12.002.
ASPRS Positional Accuracy Standards for Digital Geospatial Data. 2015. Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing, 81(3), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.14358/pers.81.3.a1-a26.
Barba, S., M. Barbarella, A. Di Benedetto, M. Fiani, L. Gujski, and M. Limongiello. 2019. “Accuracy assessment of 3d photogrammetric models from an unmanned aerial vehicle.” Drones, 3(4), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/drones3040079.
Casella, E., A. Rovere, A. Pedroncini, C. P. Stark, M. Casella, M. Ferrari, and M. Firpo. 2016. “Drones as tools for monitoring beach topography changes in the Ligurian Sea (NW Mediterranean).” Geo-Marine Letters, 36(2), 151–163. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00367-016-0435-9/METRICS.
Chiabrandoa, F., F. D’Andriab, G. Sammartanoa, and A. Spanòa. 2018. “UAV photogrammetry for archaeological site survey. 3D models at the Hierapolis in Phrygia (Turkey).” Virtual Archaeology Review, 9(18), 28–43. https://doi.org/10.4995/VAR.2018.5958.
Domingo, D., H. O. Ørka, E. Næsset, D. Kachamba, and T. Gobakken. 2019. “Effects of UAV Image Resolution, Camera Type, and Image Overlap on Accuracy of Biomass Predictions in a Tropical Woodland.” Remote Sensing 2019, Vol. 11, Page 948, 11(8), 948. https://doi.org/10.3390/RS11080948.
Ferrer-González, E., F. Agüera-Vega, F. Carvajal-Ramírez, and P. Martínez-Carricondo. 2020. “UAV photogrammetry accuracy assessment for corridor mapping based on the number and distribution of ground control points.” Remote Sensing, 12(15). https://doi.org/10.3390/RS12152447.
Hu, Z., J. Peng, Y. Hou, and J. Shan. 2017. “Evaluation of Recently Released Open Global Digital Elevation Models of Hubei, China.” Remote Sensing 2017, Vol. 9, Page 262, 9(3), 262. https://doi.org/10.3390/RS9030262.
Hubbard, B., and S. Hubbard. 2020. “Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) for Bridge Inspection Safety.” Drones 2020, Vol. 4, Page 40, 4(3), 40. https://doi.org/10.3390/DRONES4030040.
Kong, D., C. Saroglou, F. Wu, P. Sha, and B. Li. 2021. “Development and application of UAV-SfM photogrammetry for quantitative characterization of rock mass discontinuities.” International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 141, 104729. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJRMMS.2021.104729.
Liu, Y., K. Han, and W. Rasdorf. 2022. “Evaluation of UAS Flight Configuration Factors and Their Impacts on Photogrammetric Survey Accuracy.” Construction Research Congress 2022, 225–234. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784483961.024.
Liu, Y., K. Han, and W. Rasdorf. 2022. “Assessment and Prediction of Impact of Flight Configuration Factors on UAS-Based Photogrammetric Survey Accuracy.” Remote Sensing 2022, Vol. 14, Page 4119, 14(16), 4119. https://doi.org/10.3390/RS14164119.
Losè, L. T., F. Chiabrando, and F. G. Tonolo. 2020. “Boosting the timeliness of UAV large scale mapping. Direct georeferencing approaches: Operational strategies and best practices.” ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 9(10). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi9100578.
Martinez, J. G., G. Albeaino, M. Gheisari, W. Volkmann, and L. F. AlarcónAlarc. 2020. “UAS Point Cloud Accuracy Assessment Using Structure from Motion–Based Photogrammetry and PPK Georeferencing Technique for Building Surveying Applications.” Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 35(1), 05020004. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000936.
Noghabaei, M., Y. Liu, and K. Han. 2022. “Automated compatibility checking of prefabricated components using 3D as-built models and BIM.” Automation in Construction, 143, 104566. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AUTCON.2022.104566.
North Carolina Administrative Code. 21 N.C. Admin. Code 56. 1606 - Specifications for Topographic and Planmtric Mapping, Including Ground, Airbrone, and Spaceborne Surveys. Retrieved May 15, 2023, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/regulations/north-carolina/21-N-C-Admin-Code-56-.1606.
Pix4D. 2019. “What is accuracy in an aerial mapping project?”. Retrieved October 30, 2021, from https://www.pix4d.com/blog/accuracy-aerial-mapping.
Szypuła, B. 2023. “Accuracy of UAV-based DEMs without ground control points.” GeoInformatica, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10707-023-00498-1/TABLES/9.
Torres-Sánchez, J., F. López-Granados, I. Borra-Serrano, and J. Manuel Peña. 2018. “Assessing UAV-collected image overlap influence on computation time and digital surface model accuracy in olive orchards.” Precision Agriculture, 19(1), 115–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11119-017-9502-0/METRICS.
Vacca, G., A. Dessì, and A. Sacco. 2017. “The Use of Nadir and Oblique UAV Images for Building Knowledge.” ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information 2017, Vol. 6, Page 393, 6(12), 393. https://doi.org/10.3390/IJGI6120393.
Žabota, B., M. Kobal, C. Vanneschi, M. Francioni, N. Bar, and C. W. Lee. 2021. “Accuracy Assessment of UAV-Photogrammetric-Derived Products Using PPK and GCPs in Challenging Terrains: In Search of Optimized Rockfall Mapping.” Remote Sensing 2021, Vol. 13, Page 3812, 13(19), 3812. https://doi.org/10.3390/RS13193812.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Construction Research Congress 2024
Pages: 369 - 377
History
Published online: Mar 18, 2024
ASCE Technical Topics:
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.