J. Markiewicz, S. Łapiński, M. Pilarska-Mazurek, D. Zawieska, V. Levytskyi
{"title":"在采矿后勘探中使用低成本无人机-一个案例研究","authors":"J. Markiewicz, S. Łapiński, M. Pilarska-Mazurek, D. Zawieska, V. Levytskyi","doi":"10.55627/smla.001.01.0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The use of low-cost, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) has been growing in many sectors. Due to the sufficient accuracy of the products acquired from UAVs, this technology has also been applied in geodesy and remote sensing. It results from many factors: the low prices of UAVs and the availability of different sensors and software applications, which allows for simple data processing. Due to the required high accuracy, the inventory of a mine is usually performed with the use of conventional surveying techniques, such as tacheometry. This paper discusses the possibilities of applying low-cost UAVs to inventory open-cut mining. Using Phantom 3 Professional equipped with a factory-made camera, RGB photographs were acquired, which were then processed using three commercial software applications: Pix4D, 3D Survey and Agisoft Metashape. Different algorithms for image orientation (Structure-from-Motion, SfM) and dense point generation (Multi-View Stereo, MVS) were implemented for each of those applications, which influenced the accuracy of the final products. The results of the experiments proved that the highest accuracy in terms of photograph processing was achieved using the Pix4D software. The mean difference between the DTM (Digital Terrain Model) generated from surveys, and the DTM generated from photographs using Pix4D was equal to 0.106 m. This paper compared the DTMs and the DSMs (Digital Surface Models) generated by the selected software applications. The models generated with the use of Pix4D were assumed as a reference. According to the analysis of the DTMs and the DSMs, the smallest differences were obtained for the models generated by Pix4D and Agisoft Metashape. They equalled 0.080 m for the DTM and 0.246 m for the DSM. The differences between the DSMs generated by Pix4D and 3D Survey were two times bigger; the differences between the DTMs generated by those software applications were six times bigger. The differences between the models may result from the presence of vegetation and escarpments at the edges of the test site and different algorithms for generating dense point clouds applied in particular applications.","PeriodicalId":332959,"journal":{"name":"Sensors and Machine Learning Applications","volume":"453 ","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using low-cost UAVs in post-mining exploration - a case study\",\"authors\":\"J. Markiewicz, S. Łapiński, M. Pilarska-Mazurek, D. Zawieska, V. Levytskyi\",\"doi\":\"10.55627/smla.001.01.0009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The use of low-cost, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) has been growing in many sectors. Due to the sufficient accuracy of the products acquired from UAVs, this technology has also been applied in geodesy and remote sensing. It results from many factors: the low prices of UAVs and the availability of different sensors and software applications, which allows for simple data processing. Due to the required high accuracy, the inventory of a mine is usually performed with the use of conventional surveying techniques, such as tacheometry. This paper discusses the possibilities of applying low-cost UAVs to inventory open-cut mining. Using Phantom 3 Professional equipped with a factory-made camera, RGB photographs were acquired, which were then processed using three commercial software applications: Pix4D, 3D Survey and Agisoft Metashape. Different algorithms for image orientation (Structure-from-Motion, SfM) and dense point generation (Multi-View Stereo, MVS) were implemented for each of those applications, which influenced the accuracy of the final products. The results of the experiments proved that the highest accuracy in terms of photograph processing was achieved using the Pix4D software. The mean difference between the DTM (Digital Terrain Model) generated from surveys, and the DTM generated from photographs using Pix4D was equal to 0.106 m. This paper compared the DTMs and the DSMs (Digital Surface Models) generated by the selected software applications. The models generated with the use of Pix4D were assumed as a reference. According to the analysis of the DTMs and the DSMs, the smallest differences were obtained for the models generated by Pix4D and Agisoft Metashape. They equalled 0.080 m for the DTM and 0.246 m for the DSM. The differences between the DSMs generated by Pix4D and 3D Survey were two times bigger; the differences between the DTMs generated by those software applications were six times bigger. The differences between the models may result from the presence of vegetation and escarpments at the edges of the test site and different algorithms for generating dense point clouds applied in particular applications.\",\"PeriodicalId\":332959,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sensors and Machine Learning Applications\",\"volume\":\"453 \",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sensors and Machine Learning Applications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.55627/smla.001.01.0009\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sensors and Machine Learning Applications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55627/smla.001.01.0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
低成本、无人驾驶飞行器(uav)的使用在许多领域都在增长。由于从无人机获取的产品具有足够的精度,该技术也已应用于大地测量和遥感。这是由许多因素造成的:无人机的低价格和不同传感器和软件应用的可用性,这使得简单的数据处理成为可能。由于需要很高的精度,矿山的库存通常使用传统的测量技术,如测速法进行。本文讨论了将低成本无人机应用于露天矿盘存的可能性。使用配备工厂制造的相机的Phantom 3 Professional获取RGB照片,然后使用Pix4D, 3D Survey和Agisoft Metashape这三种商业应用软件进行处理。不同的图像定向算法(运动结构生成算法,SfM)和密集点生成算法(多视点立体成像算法,MVS)对每种应用程序都有影响,从而影响最终产品的精度。实验结果表明,Pix4D软件在图像处理方面具有最高的精度。调查生成的DTM (Digital Terrain Model)与Pix4D影像生成的DTM的平均差值为0.106 m。本文对所选软件生成的数字曲面模型和数字曲面模型进行了比较。假设使用Pix4D生成的模型作为参考。通过对dtm和DSMs的分析,Pix4D和Agisoft Metashape生成的模型差异最小。DTM为0.080 m, DSM为0.246 m。Pix4D生成的DSMs与3D Survey生成的DSMs相差2倍;由这些软件应用程序生成的dtm之间的差异要大6倍。模型之间的差异可能是由于在试验场边缘存在植被和悬崖,以及在特定应用中用于生成密集点云的不同算法。
Using low-cost UAVs in post-mining exploration - a case study
The use of low-cost, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) has been growing in many sectors. Due to the sufficient accuracy of the products acquired from UAVs, this technology has also been applied in geodesy and remote sensing. It results from many factors: the low prices of UAVs and the availability of different sensors and software applications, which allows for simple data processing. Due to the required high accuracy, the inventory of a mine is usually performed with the use of conventional surveying techniques, such as tacheometry. This paper discusses the possibilities of applying low-cost UAVs to inventory open-cut mining. Using Phantom 3 Professional equipped with a factory-made camera, RGB photographs were acquired, which were then processed using three commercial software applications: Pix4D, 3D Survey and Agisoft Metashape. Different algorithms for image orientation (Structure-from-Motion, SfM) and dense point generation (Multi-View Stereo, MVS) were implemented for each of those applications, which influenced the accuracy of the final products. The results of the experiments proved that the highest accuracy in terms of photograph processing was achieved using the Pix4D software. The mean difference between the DTM (Digital Terrain Model) generated from surveys, and the DTM generated from photographs using Pix4D was equal to 0.106 m. This paper compared the DTMs and the DSMs (Digital Surface Models) generated by the selected software applications. The models generated with the use of Pix4D were assumed as a reference. According to the analysis of the DTMs and the DSMs, the smallest differences were obtained for the models generated by Pix4D and Agisoft Metashape. They equalled 0.080 m for the DTM and 0.246 m for the DSM. The differences between the DSMs generated by Pix4D and 3D Survey were two times bigger; the differences between the DTMs generated by those software applications were six times bigger. The differences between the models may result from the presence of vegetation and escarpments at the edges of the test site and different algorithms for generating dense point clouds applied in particular applications.