33
Comparison of Inertial Profiler Measurements with Leveling and 3D Laser Scanning Abby Chin and Michael J. Olsen Oregon State University Road Profile Users Group 28 September 2011

Comparison of Inertial Profiler Measurements with Leveling ... Chin and Michael Olsen.pdfComparison of Inertial Profiler Measurements with Leveling and 3D Laser Scanning Abby Chin

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    1

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • Comparison of Inertial Profiler Measurements with Leveling and 3D Laser Scanning

    Abby Chin and Michael J. OlsenOregon State University

    Road Profile Users Group28 September 2011

  • Outline

    • Research Objectives & Plan

    • 3D Laser Scanning

    • Field Data

    • Observations & Future Work

    1

  • Research Objectives

    • Establish certification test site

    • Determine repeatability and accuracy of reference profiler (inclinometer)

    • Develop procedures and guidelines for certification of inertial profilers

    2

  • Background

    • ODOT is implementing IRI-based incentive/disincentive program

    • Certification on site proved difficult

    • Inertial profilers were showing great repeatability, but did not meet AASHTO criteria

    3

  • Research Plan

    • Compare Methods• Inertial Profiler• Terrestrial LiDAR• Rod and Level• Inclinometer Profilers

    • Develop Certification Procedure Guidelines• Pavement Texture Analysis

    • Study Roughness and Aggregate Size

    4

  • What is LiDAR?

    Original Slide by: Evon Silvia - Oregon State University

    D = 0.5c∆t• c = speed of light• ∆t = travel time

    D

    ∆t

    LiDAR = Light Detection and Ranging

  • Terrestrial LiDAR

    • Time of Flight System• Produces 3D Point Cloud• ~5 mm Accuracy at 50 m• Data are Geo-referenced

    • Targets• GPS

    6

  • Equipment

    7

    Camera

    Power Source

    Scanner

    GPS

    Computer

  • Data

    • Point Cloud• X Y Z coordinates• R G B color mapped• Intensity value (return signal strength)• 3D model

    8

  • Point Cloud Example

    9

  • Point Cloud Example

    10

  • Laser Scanning Advantages• Multiple Profiles• Redundant Data

    • Dense Point Cloud (1-5 cm Spacing)• Quick Data Acquisition• Improved Safety• Road Open to Traffic• Identify Localized Depressions• Continual Evaluation• As Built Survey Data

    11

  • Laser Scanning Disadvantages• Individual measurements accurate to +/- 5mm

    • Objects can block line of sight

    • Field setup time

    • Data processing requires training and time

    12

  • Mobile Laser Scan System

    13

    Laser scanner

    Camera

    GPS receiver

  • Mobile Laser Scan Example

    14

  • Test Site – Albany, Oregon

    15

  • Field Testing

    16

  • Field Test Setup

    17

    • 528 ft Section• 6 Scan Positions

    • Every 50 m• GPS used to

    determine position• 5 Targets

    • Every 50 m• Total station used to

    determine position

  • Point Cloud

    18

  • Point Cloud – Colored from Photos

    19

  • Field Data - Workflow

    • Obtain 3D point cloud• Prune data to roadway

    • Statistically filter data to specified spacing

    • Obtain profile using GIS

    • Input data in ProVAL20

  • Editing Point Clouds

    21

  • Statistical FilteringProcess

    22

    http://www.lidarnews.com/content/view/8378/136/

  • • Inclinometer Profiler

    • Left – 66 in/mi

    • Right – 84 in/mi

    IRI Comparisons

    23

    • Laser Scanner

    • Left – 73 in/mi

    • Right – 88 in/mi

  • ProVAL Data – Left Wheel Path

    24

    Inclinometer

    Scanner

  • ProVAL Data – Right Wheel Path

    25

    Inclinometer

    Scanner

  • Observations

    • Data between inclinometer profiler and laser scanner is offset• Offset gets larger

    • Laser scan data filtered to 1 ft intervals• Visible noise in the data

    • Starting points may not be exactly the same

    26

  • Laser Scan Data Comparison - Worst

    27

    1 ft Spacing

    0.5 ft Spacing

    0.25 ft Spacing

    Grid Cell Dimensions2” V x 20’ H

  • Laser Scan Data Comparison - Best

    28

    1 ft Spacing

    0.5 ft Spacing

    0.25 ft Spacing

    Grid Cell Dimensions2” V x 20’ H

  • Localized Depressions

    29

    Right End

    Middle Section

  • Questions to Investigate

    • Laser Scanning• Can the noise be smoothed out while taking

    advantage of the dense data?• i.e. close point spacing

    • Compare the profiles in ProVAL• Are IRI values consistent?• Do the distance vs. elevation plots agree?• What are the reasons for any discrepancies?

    30

  • Future Work

    • Obtain and compare additional profiles from test site• Laser Scanning• Inertial Profiler• Rod & Level

    • Create procedures and guidelines for certification

    31

  • Questions?

    32

    Comparison of Inertial Profiler Measurements with Leveling and 3D Laser ScanningOutlineResearch ObjectivesBackgroundResearch PlanWhat is LiDAR?�Terrestrial LiDAREquipmentDataPoint Cloud ExamplePoint Cloud ExampleLaser Scanning AdvantagesLaser Scanning DisadvantagesMobile Laser Scan SystemMobile Laser Scan ExampleTest Site – Albany, OregonField TestingField Test SetupPoint CloudPoint Cloud – Colored from PhotosField Data - WorkflowEditing Point CloudsStatistical Filtering�ProcessIRI ComparisonsProVAL Data – Left Wheel PathProVAL Data – Right Wheel PathObservationsLaser Scan Data Comparison - Worst�Laser Scan Data Comparison - BestLocalized DepressionsQuestions to Investigate Future Work Questions?