Scholarly record
COMPARING MOBILE LASER SCANNING AND STATIC TERESTRIAL LASER SCANNING
Abstract
The use of mobile laser scanners and static terrestrial laser scanners is becoming increasingly commonplace today. Otherwise, it is not even in the field of modern geodesy, where they are already using devices to collect from thousands to millions of points per second. For example, in the detailed survey of caves, forests, or underground mines, where the technology of mobile laser scanners stands out, or in the survey with the help of static terrestrial laser scanner technology, which is particularly useful for targeting objects requiring higher accuracy. This article focuses on the comparison of point clouds captured by the mobile scanner ZEB-REVO RT and the static terrestrial laser scanner FARO Focus M 70 in a residential building interior. The real interior of the building has been deliberately chosen because of its segmentation caused mainly by the amount of furniture. The subject of the scan was one floor of the building with four rooms, which was first scanned by the laser scanner FARO Focus M 70 by Geotronics Praha s.r.o. Subsequently, the same floor of the building was scanned using the mobile laser scanner ZEB-REVO RT by Mensuro s.r.o. From the survey with the help of the scanner ZEB-REVO RT was the only one point cloud that was exported directly from a mobile laser scanner in the .las format. From scanner FARO Focus M70 we got scans that had to be transformed using spherical targets and across the same surfaces in Trimble RealWorks. Subsequently, also in Trimble RealWorks, both clouds were cleared of outliers and were created vertical and horizontal cuts. In these sections, specific sites were selected for detailed comparison. These data were then compared in CloudCompare. The purpose of this testing was to determine in particular the dependence of each technology on the environment and the conditions affecting the final point cloud in terms of accuracy and also the difficulty of using individual scanners to get the final point cloud.
Publication Impact Profile
- Citations
- Scopus - Citation Indexes: 2
- Captures
- Mendeley - Readers: 5
Publication details
References0
Structured references will appear here after the reference import pass. The count is preserved now so the scholarly record is not incomplete.
Citing literature
Number of times cited according to Crossref: 1
View or Download full articleAccess options
SWS access login
Login as SWS Scientific CommitteeLogin as SWS Scientific PartnerLogin as SWS AuthorAuthors and approved SWS contributors will read and export their own linked papers after identity matching by SWS profile, email and SGEM GlobalID.
For librarian assistance: [email protected]
Purchase Instant Access
- Article can be downloaded after successful payment.
- Article may be used according to SWS library access terms.
- Article cannot be redistributed.