2013
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-36379-5_3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Calibration and Accuracy Assessment of Leica ScanStation C10 Terrestrial Laser Scanner

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The first scan was at a minimal resolution, which correspond to 0.2 m in horizontal and vertical spacing when the range is 100 m [ 37 ], with an entire field of vision (360 degree with respect to Z-axis and 270 degree for vertical amplitude) which is used for obtaining a general frame of the whole scanner field of view, where smaller areas can be selected for subsequent scans. The second high-resolution scan, which corresponds to 0.05 m in horizontal and vertical spacing at a range of 100 m [ 37 ], was of an area including the moving wall, stable wall and targets. Due to the different ranges to the scanner, the horizontal and vertical spacing at patch A, patch B, patch C and patch D is 0.0055 m, 0.0035 m, 0.0047 m and 0.0028 mm, respectively.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first scan was at a minimal resolution, which correspond to 0.2 m in horizontal and vertical spacing when the range is 100 m [ 37 ], with an entire field of vision (360 degree with respect to Z-axis and 270 degree for vertical amplitude) which is used for obtaining a general frame of the whole scanner field of view, where smaller areas can be selected for subsequent scans. The second high-resolution scan, which corresponds to 0.05 m in horizontal and vertical spacing at a range of 100 m [ 37 ], was of an area including the moving wall, stable wall and targets. Due to the different ranges to the scanner, the horizontal and vertical spacing at patch A, patch B, patch C and patch D is 0.0055 m, 0.0035 m, 0.0047 m and 0.0028 mm, respectively.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When it goes to the range covered by the scanners, the accuracy rank is inversely proportionate. Time of flight technique can measure a kilometre in distance, in addition, in line with technology progress, the accuracy also improved until sub-centimetre level [11].…”
Section: Time-of-flight Scannermentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Furthermore, errors are not only be yielded from the instrument itself, the processing procedure involving with algorithm can also contribute for the uncertainty. For instance, derivation of transformation parameters using poor network can cause a weak solution [10], false determination of target centroid due to the less resolution [11], algorithm for form fitting has wrongly identify the object [12] and vegetation filtering procedure that wrongly remove the ground data. Thus, investigation of errors should not only limited to the sensor but including the algorithm involves in the processing phase.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many of them focus on small archaeological heritage objects in order to ascertain the accuracy of both data acquisition techniques. On the one hand, there are research works into the calibration of laser scanners to ascertain their measurement uncertainties, errors and accuracies [17][18][19][20][21][22][23]. It is also worth mentioning other applications of TLS technology, which include change detection and deformation monitoring in buildings, constructions and engineering systems [24][25][26][27][28][29], as well as the digitisation of archaeological heritage sites for analysis [7,30,31].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%