Analyzing the Effectiveness of Photogrammetry Software in Calculating Aerial Triangulation and in Spatial Data Production from Drone Images | ||
| JES. Journal of Engineering Sciences | ||
| Article 1, Volume 52, Issue 2, March and April 2024, Pages 53-70 PDF (1.69 M) | ||
| Document Type: Research Paper | ||
| DOI: 10.21608/jesaun.2024.248129.1287 | ||
| Author | ||
| Ahmed EL ashiry* | ||
| Faculty of Engineering, Beni-Suef University, Beni-Suef, Egypt. | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Drones are used by surveyors as an alternative to traditional methods of obtaining orthophoto maps and large-scale topographical maps, but several factors affect the accuracy of its data, one of them is software used in image processing. Because there are many types of software, choosing one of them is a real problem in survey projects using drones. Processing software is divided into commercial and open source software. Commercial software is a black box situation, which highlights the challenge of isolating accurate sources of errors and judging the accuracy of processing products. In this research, the capabilities of the commercial software Pix4Dmapper, Agisoft Metashape, and 3DF Zephyr Aerial were compared in calculating the aerial triangulation of the image blocks taken by drones, with a comparison of the capabilities of these softwares in getting the most important spatial products for surveyors from these images (Digital Elevation Model and Orthophoto). The results showed that Pix4Dmapper was able to perform aerial triangulation more accurate than Agisoft Metashape and 3DF Zephyr Aerial, with great convergence between the results of Agisoft Metashape and 3DF Zephyr A. The results also showed that 3DF Zephyr Aerial had extracted the densest point cloud. Another finding is that Pix4Dmapper produced the most accurate orthophoto and took the shortest processing time, and that the Agisoft Metashape interface is more flexible and user-friendly than the rest of the tested software. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Drone; Commercial software; Orthophoto; Aerial triangulation; Point cloud | ||
| References | ||
|
[1] COLOMINA, I., BLAZQUEZ, M., MOLINA, P., PARES, M., WIS, M.- Towards a new paradogm for high-resolution low-cost photogrammetry and remote sensing. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and spatial Information Sciences, Vol. XXXVII, Part B1, 2008. pp. 1201-1206.
[2] NEX, F., REMONDINO, F.- UAV for 3D mapping applications: a review. Applied Geomatics, Vol. 6, 2014. pp. 1-15.
[3] WOLF, P.R., DEWITT, B.A.- Elements of Photogrammetry with Applications in GIS. 4rd Edition, 2016, 756p.
[4] IRSCHARA, A., KAUFMANN, V., KLOPSCHITZ, M., BISCHOF, H., LEBERL, F.- Towards fully automatic photogrammetric reconstruction using digital images taken from UAVs. ISPRS TC VII Symposium – 100 Years ISPRS, Vienna, Austria, IAPRS, Vol. XXXVIII, Part 7A, 2010, pp.65-70.
[5] ALKHALIL, O.- Assessment of Factors Affecting the Use of Drones in Map Production. Adv Environ Eng Res 2022; 3(3): 029; doi:10.21926/aeer.2203029.
[6] LAUTERBACH, H A., NÜCHTER, A.- Preliminary results on instantaneous UAV-based 3D mapping for rescue applications. In: 2018 IEEE International Symposium on Safety, Security, and Rescue Robotics (SSRR). IEEE, 2018. pp.1-2.
[7] HINGE, L., GUNDORPH, J., UJANG, U., AZRI, S., ANTON, F., RAHMAN, A.- A Comparative analysis of 3D photogrammetry modeling software packages for drones survey. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Vol. XLII, 2019, 4/W12, pp.95-100.
[8] SNAVELY, N.- Scene reconstruction and visualization from Internet photo collections. unpublished PhD thesis, University of Washington, USA, 2008.
[9] GUIMARÃES, N., PÁDUA, L., MARQUES, P., SILVA, N., PERES, E., SOUSA, J.J.- Forestry Remote Sensing from Unmanned Aerial Vehicles: A Review Focusing on the Data, Processing and Potentialities. Remote Sens. 12, 2020,6, 1046.
[10]. TMUŠI´C, G., MANFREDA, S., AASEN, H., JAMES, M.R., GONÇALVES, G., BEN DOR, E., BROOK, A., POLINOVA, M., ARRANZ, J.J., MÉSZÁROS, J., et al.- Current Practices in UAS-based Environmental Monitoring. Remote Sens. 12, 2020, 1001.
[11] WOODGET, A.S., AUSTRUMS, R., MADDOCK, I.P., HABIT, E.- Drones and digital photogrammetry: From classifications to continuums for monitoring river habitat and hydromorphology. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Water 2017, 4, e1222.
[12] FORSMOO, J., ANDERSON, K., MACLEOD, C.J.A., WILKINSON, M.E., DEBELL, L., BRAZIER, R.E.- Structure from motion photogrammetry in ecology: Does the choice of software matter? Ecol. Evol. 2019, 9, pp.12964–12979.
[13] CHIKATSU, H., ODAKA, A., YANAGI, H., YOKOYAMA, H.- Performance Evaluation of 3D Modeling Software for UAV Photogrammetry. J. Jpn. Soc. Photogram. Remote Sens. 2016, 55, pp.117–127.
[14] SUGAI, S.; MIYAJI, K., NAKAMURA, T., MINAMI, H., TACHIBANA, K.- Accuracy verification of photogrammetry using UAV. J. Geospat. Inf. Auth. Jpn. 2017, 129, pp.147–157.
[15] SONA, G., PINTO, L., PAGLIARI, D., PASSONI, D., GINI, R.- Experimental analysis of different software packages for orientation and digital surface modelling from UAV images. Earth Sci. Inform. 2014, 7, pp.97–107.
[16] JAUD, M., PASSOT, S., LE BIVIC, R., DELACOURT, C., GRANDJEAN, P., LE DANTEC, N.- Assessing the accuracy of high resolution digital surface models computed by PhotoScan® and MicMac® in sub-optimal survey conditions. Remote Sens. 2016, 8, 465.
[17] HAALA, N., CRAMER, M., ROTHERMEL, M.- Quality of 3D point clouds- from highly overlapping UAV imagery. ISPRS, Vol XL, No 1/W2, 2013, pp. 183–188.
[18] JAVADNEJAD, FARID. - SMALL UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS (UAS) FOR ENGINEERING INSPECTIONS AND GEOSPATIAL MAPPING. 2018.
[19] AGISOFT METASHAPE, L.L.C. - Agisoft Metashape PhotoScan User Manual: Professional Edition. 2023. Available online: https://www.agisoft.com/pdf/photoscan-pro_1_8_en.pdf (accessed on 9 March 2023).
[20] Pix4D, S.A., - Pix4Dmapper 4.1 User Manual. Pix4D SA: Lausanne, Switzerland, 2016. Available online: HTTPS://SUPPORT.PIX4D.COM/HC/EN-US/ARTICLES/204272989-OFFLINE-GETTING-STARTED-AND-MANUAL-PDF- (accessed on 9 March 2023).
[21] 3DFLLOW.- 3DF Zephyr Aerial user manual. 2023. Available online: http://3dflow.net/zephyr-doc/3DF%20Zephyr%20Manual%204.500%20English.pdf. (accessed on 9 March 2023).
[22] AGARWAL, S., et al.- Bundle adjustment in the large. In: Computer Vision–ECCV 2010: 11th European Conference on Computer Vision. Heraklion, Crete, Greece, September 5-11, 2010, Proceedings, Part II 11. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2010. pp.29-42.
[23] PENG, A S., et al.- Design of a Ground Sampling Distance Graphical User Interface for an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle System. In: 2019 53rd Annual Conference on Information Sciences and Systems (CISS). IEEE, 2019. pp.1-6.
[24] Dowaje, M. -Proposition of 3D modelling approach for the as built in-door parts of ordinary and historical building using automated close-range photogrammetry. Phd thesis, Tishreen University, Faculty of civil Engineering, Department of Topographic Engineering, 2021, 200p.
[25] AGUERA-VEGA, F. CARVAJAL-RAMIREZ, F. AND MARTINEZ-CARRICONDO, P. - Accuracy of Digital Surface Models and Orthophotos Derived from Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Photogrammetry- Journal of Surveying Engineering. Vol.143, 2017. | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 312 PDF Download: 568 |
||
