Investigating the length, area and volume measurement accuracy of UAV-Based oblique photogrammetry models produced with and without ground control points

IF 3.1 Q2 ENGINEERING, GEOLOGICAL
Erdem Emin MARAŞ, Noman NASERY
{"title":"Investigating the length, area and volume measurement accuracy of UAV-Based oblique photogrammetry models produced with and without ground control points","authors":"Erdem Emin MARAŞ, Noman NASERY","doi":"10.26833/ijeg.1017176","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aimed to investigate the performance and sensitivity of 3D photogrammetric models generated without GCPs (ground control points). To determine whether the models with no GCPs retained accuracy in all terrain types as well as under varying climate or meteorological conditions, two separate studies were conducted in two areas with different characteristics (elevation, slope, topography, and meteorological differences). The study areas were initially modelled with GCPs and were later modelled without GCPs. Furthermore, some of the dimensions and areas within the modelled regions were measured using terrestrial techniques (with GPS/GNSS) for accuracy analyses. After regional modelling was conducted with and without GCPs, different territories with different slopes and geometric shapes were selected. Various length, area and volume measurements were carried out over the selected territories using both models (generated with and without GCPs). The datasets obtained from the measurement results were compared, and the measurements obtained using the models produced with GCPs were accepted as the true values. The length measurement results provided various levels of success. The first study area exhibited very promising length measurement results, with a relative error less than 1% and an RMSE (root mean square error) of 0.139 m. In the case of the area measurements, in the first study area (Sivas), a minimum relative error of 0.04% and a maximum relative error of 1.05% with an RMSE of 1.264 m² were obtained. In the second study areas (Artvin), a minimum relative error of 0.56% and a maximum relative error of 5.27% with an RMSE of 1.76 m² were achieved. Finally, in the case of the volume measurements, for the first study area (Sivas), a minimum relative error of 0.8% and a maximum relative error of 6.8% as well as an RMSE of 2.301 m³ were calculated. For the second study area (Artvin), the minimum relative error of the volume measurements was 0.502%, and the maximum relative error was 2.01%, with an RMSE of 7.061 m³.","PeriodicalId":42633,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Engineering and Geosciences","volume":"66 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Engineering and Geosciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26833/ijeg.1017176","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, GEOLOGICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the performance and sensitivity of 3D photogrammetric models generated without GCPs (ground control points). To determine whether the models with no GCPs retained accuracy in all terrain types as well as under varying climate or meteorological conditions, two separate studies were conducted in two areas with different characteristics (elevation, slope, topography, and meteorological differences). The study areas were initially modelled with GCPs and were later modelled without GCPs. Furthermore, some of the dimensions and areas within the modelled regions were measured using terrestrial techniques (with GPS/GNSS) for accuracy analyses. After regional modelling was conducted with and without GCPs, different territories with different slopes and geometric shapes were selected. Various length, area and volume measurements were carried out over the selected territories using both models (generated with and without GCPs). The datasets obtained from the measurement results were compared, and the measurements obtained using the models produced with GCPs were accepted as the true values. The length measurement results provided various levels of success. The first study area exhibited very promising length measurement results, with a relative error less than 1% and an RMSE (root mean square error) of 0.139 m. In the case of the area measurements, in the first study area (Sivas), a minimum relative error of 0.04% and a maximum relative error of 1.05% with an RMSE of 1.264 m² were obtained. In the second study areas (Artvin), a minimum relative error of 0.56% and a maximum relative error of 5.27% with an RMSE of 1.76 m² were achieved. Finally, in the case of the volume measurements, for the first study area (Sivas), a minimum relative error of 0.8% and a maximum relative error of 6.8% as well as an RMSE of 2.301 m³ were calculated. For the second study area (Artvin), the minimum relative error of the volume measurements was 0.502%, and the maximum relative error was 2.01%, with an RMSE of 7.061 m³.
对有无地面控制点的无人机斜向摄影测量模型的长度、面积和体积测量精度进行了研究
本研究旨在探讨在没有gcp(地面控制点)的情况下生成的3D摄影测量模型的性能和灵敏度。为了确定没有gcp的模式是否在所有地形类型以及不同气候或气象条件下保持精度,在两个具有不同特征(高程、坡度、地形和气象差异)的地区进行了两项独立研究。研究区域最初用gcp建模,后来不使用gcp建模。此外,利用地面技术(GPS/GNSS)测量了模拟区域内的一些尺度和面积,以进行精度分析。在使用和不使用gcp进行区域建模后,选择具有不同坡度和几何形状的不同区域。使用两种模型(使用和不使用gcp生成)在选定的领土上进行了各种长度、面积和体积测量。对测量结果得到的数据集进行比较,采用gcp生成的模型得到的测量值被接受为真实值。长度测量结果提供了不同程度的成功。第一个研究区域的长度测量结果非常理想,相对误差小于1%,均方根误差(RMSE)为0.139 m。在面积测量的情况下,在第一个研究区域(Sivas),最小相对误差为0.04%,最大相对误差为1.05%,RMSE为1.264 m²。在第二个研究区(Artvin),最小相对误差为0.56%,最大相对误差为5.27%,RMSE为1.76 m²。最后,在体积测量的情况下,对于第一个研究区域(Sivas),计算出最小相对误差为0.8%,最大相对误差为6.8%,RMSE为2.301 m³。在第二个研究区(Artvin),体积测量的最小相对误差为0.502%,最大相对误差为2.01%,RMSE为7.061 m³。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
30 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信