home    corporate Fugro website    contact us  
 
  solutions    deliverables    IFSAR technology    events    downloads    blog    
 

Posts Tagged ‘LiDAR’

Precision and Accuracy

Thursday, August 26th, 2010

As a key player in the map-making business, Fugro is always engaged in discussions about precision, accuracy, and reliability standards within the geospatial marketplace. Fugro’s GeoSAR system has unique features that ensure quality standards are always met. These features include 4-look acquisition data redundancy as a primary feature of the GeoSAR dual-sided radar configuration, its large side overlap on adjacent flight lines, and its profiling LiDAR. As discussed in our previous “Ground Control” blog post on ground control on the fly.

Let’s first discuss what these quality terms mean in relation to GeoSAR. Accuracy is an absolute term, describing how close the estimated elevation (or position) at a given point is to the true elevation (or position) of that point. Precision is a relative term, describing the quality of the height difference between two points. Reliability is the ability to detect and correct measurement errors, which depends highly on the redundancy of the measurements.

For example, imagine using an old tape measure with 1/8” markings to measure the height of a table at all four corners. Suppose that the measurements are 30-2/8”, 30-1/8”, 29-7/8”, and 30-1/8” – or equivalent to an average of 30-1/8” with a precision of 1/8”. Suddenly, you discover you are off by an inch. That is accuracy. The measurements were inaccurate by about 1”. This example shows that measurements can be very precise, but not necessarily accurate, or they can be accurate, but not precise.

To prevent such errors, the GeoSAR system uses a calibration campaign to resolve systematic errors using precisely surveyed corner reflectors at known locations on a calibration site. A corner reflector is to radar what a benchmark is to photogrammetry—it provides a very precise geospatial correspondence between a radar point and a {X, Y, Z} location on the ground. This is done to ensure the GeoSAR measurements are accurate.

The precision of GeoSAR, or airborne IFSAR, depends on factors such as the aircraft altitude, amount of turbulence, the separation between flight lines, terrain slope, moisture, and other factors. In typical situations, airborne IFSAR is able to measure terrain elevation and geoposition at meter level precision. The accuracy of GeoSAR products depend on a variety of key factors, including the GPS position of the aircraft, the quality of ground control, and the accuracy of the geoid. Similar to GPS, Fugro GeoSAR elevations are measured in ellipsoidal heights and converted to orthometric heights using a geoid model. The more accurate the geoid model, the more accurate the GeoSAR orthometric height will be.

Understanding and applying these key factors is what separates Fugro’s GeoSAR services and products from other service providers. Stay tuned next week when we discuss Resolution and Posting. If you would like to continue this discussion or would like more information, please leave a comment!

Ground Control

Monday, June 21st, 2010

After receiving a significant amount of response for our metadata blog, we decided to discuss one of the most important aspects of any mapping project, ground control. Ground control refers to pre-marked or photo identifiable points on the Earth’s surface with known positions that is used either to process and rectify the raw geospatial data or to verify the accuracy of the final mapping products. Ground control networks are usually field surveyed in order to determine accurately their positions. However, other sources of accurate ground points can be used to verify and validate the accuracy of geospatial data products. Airborne LiDAR is excellent example of such sources as it provides highly accurate ground points that can be used in some instances as ground controls.

In GeoSAR mapping we typically use two types of ground control; a LiDAR profiler on the aircraft, and corner reflectors on the ground. As we fly over an area, our LiDAR profiler collects millions of 3-dimentional points (X,Y,Z) with high fidelity. These points provide a highly accurate dataset to compare and validate the GeoSAR products. Corner Reflectors, on the other hand, are deployed in the project area prior to our data collection. Corner Reflectors are targets constructed of material that is highly reflective to the radar signal. These reflectors are surveyed with a high level of accuracy and then imaged by the radar as we fly over them. They provide an easily identifiable known location in the radar data. Reflector data are used in the least-squares adjustment, removing slight offsets in the data between bands, and as another source of validation. The image below shows a radar reflector used during one of our mapping projects. You will notice that there are four sides to the reflector, allowing the reflector to be imaged from multiple sides during a single collection.

Copy of small_reflector

Ground control points are just one attribute of our unique GeoSAR mapping solution. If you would like to continue the conversation or receive more information please leave a comment. Stay tuned for more GeoSAR capabilities and updates!

The New FugroViewer

Wednesday, January 20th, 2010

Welcome back to On the Radar Screen! As our first entry in 2010, we wanted to spread the word about upgrades to Fugro’s 3D viewing software, FugroViewer. While FugroViewer is a standard deliverable on all GeoSAR projects, it’s also available to anyone (for free!) at www.fugroviewer.com.

FugroViewer

The software was originally released in January 2009 as a tool for technical and non-technical users to view, analyze, and communicate 3D geospatial data. It’s been a big hit. Designed for use with photogrammetric, LiDAR, and IFSAR data, FugroViewer now has hundreds of users in business, government, and university settings.

Upgrades to the new version include: enhanced memory management, additional LiDAR format support (including LAS version 2), additional image format support (including ERDAS Imagine).

Give it a try and let us know what you think!

Bada Bing: The Challenge of Innovation

Tuesday, July 28th, 2009

Earlier this summer, Microsoft launched its revamped “Live Search” service under the name “Bing.” If you haven’t seen it—and chances are you haven’t—you should. It’s pretty cool. The fact that you may not have tried it yet (we only recently did) proves how hard it can be to introduce a new product or service offering, despite its cool factor. Generating excitement for innovation among the din of complacency is an uphill battle, but once won, the rewards are as satisfying for the provider as they are for the early adopters and mass audience who follow.

Consider the rise of Google in the 1990s and our own recent “revolution” in the remote sensing world. At about the same time Google was overturning the well established likes of Yahoo and MSN, Optech and Leica were proving the same was possible in the remote sensing industry. By replacing photogrammetrically generated DEMs with dense, accurate LiDAR-sourced DEMs, these companies and early adopters helped usher in a new wave of productivity and an expanded user base for geospatial data.

Are we now facing a similar movement with IFSAR? While IFSAR will not replace LiDAR mapping altogether, it is gaining acceptance as a cost-effective alternative for large area, small scale topographic mapping projects. Further, dual-band IFSAR is showing value for even broader applications, including oil and gas exploration and carbon accounting. And that brings us to another question: what are the keys for successfully promoting new technology in the geospatial marketplace? Is it science first or marketing first? We believe it starts with science, but what about you?