Absolute Horizontal Accuracies of Pictometry s Individual Orthogonal Frame Imagery

Similar documents
Report for Oblique and Orthogonal Imagery Obtained between the dates of Friday, January 24, Sunday, March 09, 2014

LiDAR & Orthophoto Data Report

Accuracy Assessment of POS AVX 210 integrated with the Phase One ixu150

Technical Considerations and Best Practices in Imagery and LiDAR Project Procurement

The Applanix Approach to GPS/INS Integration

Terrestrial GPS setup Fundamentals of Airborne LiDAR Systems, Collection and Calibration. JAMIE YOUNG Senior Manager LiDAR Solutions

Exterior Orientation Parameters

AIRBORNE LIDAR TASK ORDER REPORT SHELBY COUNTY TN 1M NPS LIDAR/FEATURE EXTRACT TASK ORDER UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY (USGS)

MIDAS 5 Camera System. (Multi-camera Integrated Digital Acquisition System)

Trends in Digital Aerial Acquisition Systems

Orthophotography and LiDAR Terrain Data Collection Rogue River, Oregon Final Report

2017 OLC Silver Creek

SimActive and PhaseOne Workflow case study. By François Riendeau and Dr. Yuri Raizman Revision 1.0

Photogrammetry: DTM Extraction & Editing

Introduction Photogrammetry Photos light Gramma drawing Metron measure Basic Definition The art and science of obtaining reliable measurements by mean

UAV Surveying II. Precision. Accuracy. Reliability

OLC Wasco County: Delivery One.

Trimble VISION Positions from Pictures

ArcMap as a quality assurance tool in Photogrammetry Ron Frederiks. Abstract

1. LiDAR System Description and Specifications

UAV Flight Operations for Mapping. Precision. Accuracy. Reliability

CLOSING REMARKS. Dr. Qassim Abdullah, Woolpert, Inc. ASPRS Positional Accuracy Standards

Airborne Direct Georeferencing of Frame Imagery: An Error Budget

2017 OLC Siskiyou. September 27,

LIDAR MAPPING FACT SHEET

Overview of the USGS Plan for Quality Assurance of Digital Aerial Imagery

APPLANIX PRODUCTS AND SOLUTIONS FOR MOBILE MAPPING AND POSITIONING CAPTURE EVERYTHING. POSPac MMS HYDRO 08 November 2008

Performance Evaluation of Optech's ALTM 3100: Study on Geo-Referencing Accuracy

W D-0049/004 EN

Iowa Department of Transportation Office of Design. Photogrammetric Mapping Specifications

Mapping Project Report Table of Contents

Chapters 1 9: Overview

Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR)

Accuracy Assessment of an ebee UAS Survey

Quinnipiac Post Flight Aerial Acquisition Report

APPLANIX DIRECT GEOREFERENCING FOR AIRBORNE MAPPING. and FLIGHT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS. The Better Way to Reduce the Cost of Airborne Mapping

Reality Modeling Drone Capture Guide

Central Coast LIDAR Project, 2011 Delivery 1 QC Analysis LIDAR QC Report February 17 th, 2012

Photogrammetry: DTM Extraction & Editing

GI-Eye II GPS/Inertial System For Target Geo-Location and Image Geo-Referencing

Saddle Mountain LiDAR. March 25, Technical Data Report.

Chapters 1 7: Overview

Quality Control Concepts for LiDAR

G2-AS100. Presents: A mid-format fully integrated photogrammetric camera

Trimble Geospatial Division Integrated Solutions for Geomatics professions. Volker Zirn Regional Sales Representative

Lidar Technical Report

Airborne Kinematic Positioning and Attitude Determination Without Base Stations

10/2/2012 Corporate Headquarters 9390 Gateway Dr, Ste 100 Reno, NV p: f:

SESSION VIII Panel: Looking Ahead at Factors Influencing the Industry. Moderator Brittany Mabry, University of Arkansas

PSLC King County LiDAR. July 18, Technical Data Report.

Alaska Department of Transportation Roads to Resources Project LiDAR & Imagery Quality Assurance Report Juneau Access South Corridor

Mayden VP of Business Development Surdex Corporation

PSLC King County Delivery 1 LiDAR

LiDAR Remote Sensing Data Collection: Salmon River Study Area, Oregon

PSLC Walla Walla, Washington LiDAR

GUIDELINES FOR THE IN SITU GEOMETRIC CALIBRATION OF THE AERIAL CAMERA SYSTEM

CONTENTS. Quick Start Guide V1.0

Geometry of Aerial photogrammetry. Panu Srestasathiern, PhD. Researcher Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (Public Organization)

AN INTEGRATED SENSOR ORIENTATION SYSTEM FOR AIRBORNE PHOTOGRAMMETRIC APPLICATIONS

Sandy River, OR Bathymetric Lidar Project, 2012 Delivery QC Analysis Lidar QC Report March 26 th, 2013

Project Report Lower Columbia River. Report Presented to:

PSLC King County LiDAR

Lewis County Public Works Department (County) GIS Mapping Division 350 N. Market Blvd. Chehalis, WA Phone: Fax:

Low-Cost Orthophoto Production Using OrthoMapper Software

ICC experiences on Inertial / GPS sensor orientation. A. Baron, W.Kornus, J.Talaya Institut Cartogràfic de Catalunya, ICC

High resolution survey and orthophoto project of the Dosso-Gaya region in the Republic of Niger. by Tim Leary, Woolpert Inc.

The use of different data sets in 3-D modelling

Direct Georeferencing and Flight Management Solutions for Airborne Mapping

ixu-rs1900 Aerial Solutions

ALS40 Airborne Laser Scanner

ADS40 Calibration & Verification Process. Udo Tempelmann*, Ludger Hinsken**, Utz Recke*

Aerial and Mobile LiDAR Data Fusion

LiDAR REMOTE SENSING DATA COLLECTION BISCUIT FIRE STUDY AREA, OREGON

Geometric Rectification of Remote Sensing Images

William E. Dietrich Professor 313 McCone Phone Fax (fax)

BLM Fire Project, 2013 QC Analysis Lidar and Orthophoto QC Report November 25th, 2013

ifp Universität Stuttgart Performance of IGI AEROcontrol-IId GPS/Inertial System Final Report

Section G. POSITIONAL ACCURACY DEFINITIONS AND PROCEDURES Approved 3/12/02

Project Report Nooksack South Fork Lummi Indian Nation. Report Presented to:

Airborne Laser Survey Systems: Technology and Applications

APPLICATION OF AERIAL VIDEO FOR TRAFFIC FLOW MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT

Journal Online Jaringan COT POLIPD (JOJAPS) Accuracy Assessment of Height Coordinate Using Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Images Based On Leveling Height

Rogue River LIDAR Project, 2012 Delivery 1 QC Analysis LIDAR QC Report September 6 th, 2012

Quality Accuracy Professionalism

PREPARATIONS FOR THE ON-ORBIT GEOMETRIC CALIBRATION OF THE ORBVIEW 3 AND 4 SATELLITES

An Overview of Applanix.

TRAINING MATERIAL HOW TO OPTIMIZE ACCURACY WITH CORRELATOR3D

Evaluating the Performance of a Vehicle Pose Measurement System

Qinertia THE NEXT GENERATION INS/GNSS POST-PROCESSING SOFTWARE. For all mobile surveying applications

New Features In TerraPhoto. What s New in Terrasolid v011? Webinar 15 February Feb 2011 What's New in Terrasolid v011? 2

LIDAR REMOTE SENSING DATA COLLECTION: DOGAMI, CAMP CREEK PROJECT AREA

Airborne Hyperspectral Imaging Using the CASI1500

LiDAR data overview. Dr. Keiko Saito Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR)

LiDAR Technical Report NE Washington LiDAR Production 2017

Airborne LiDAR Surveys and Data Delivery in the Pipeline Industry

Training i Course Remote Sensing Basic Theory & Image Processing Methods September 2011

Project Report Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe. Report Presented to:

Phase One ixa-r-180 Aerial Triangulation

Phone: Fax: Table of Contents

Qinertia THE NEXT GENERATION INS/GNSS POST-PROCESSING SOFTWARE. For all mobile surveying applications

Transcription:

A Pictometry International, Corp White Paper Absolute Horizontal Accuracies of Pictometry s Individual Orthogonal Frame Imagery Michael J. Zoltek VP, Surveying & Mapping Pictometry International, Corp ASPRS Certified Photogrammetrist (CP) State Licensed Land Surveyor/Photogrammetrist AL, AZ, CA, CO, CT, FL, GA, ID, LA, MS, NC, NM, NV, NY, ND, OR, SC, SD, TN, TX, USVI, WA, WI, WV Geographic Information System Professional (GISP) Nevada State Water Right Surveyor Certified Federal Surveyor (CFedS) NCEES Model Law Surveyor Thom S. Salter Director, Photogrammetric Technology Pictometry International, Corp ASPRS Certified Photogrammetrist (CP) State Licensed Land Surveyor/Photogrammetrist FL, VA September 04, 2014 Page 1 of 6

Contents Contents 2 Glossary 2 Introduction 2 Problem Statement 2 Conclusion 2 Equipment and Software 3 Camera System 3 Collection procedures 3 Standard Product Horizontal Accuracies 5 Background 5 Testing 5 Summary Absolute Horizontal Accuracies 6 Glossary DEM FOV GPS GSD GSE IMU SBET PDOP USGS Digital Elevation Model Field Of View Global Positioning System Ground Sample Distance (a.k.a. Pixel size) Ground Surface Error Inertial Measurement Unit Smoothed Best Estimate Trajectory Positional Dilution of Precision United States Geological Survey Introduction This paper will outline the procedures used, and the results of, absolute horizontal accuracy testing of individual orthogonal frame imagery captured and processed utilizing Pictometry s patented system. Problem Statement The goal of this testing is to generate values suitable to use in the compiled to meet accuracy statement as defined in the Geospatial Positioning Accuracy Standards Part 3: National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy (FGDC-STD- 007.3-1998) Conclusion Based on testing in accordance with the procedures outlined in (FGDC-STD-007.3-1998) the absolute horizontal accuracy of Pictometry s individual orthogonal frame imagery has the following compiled to meet horizontal accuracies at the 95% confidence interval utilizing a DEM accurate to 1 meter: 3 inch [7.5 cm] GSD = 2.9 feet [88 cm] 4 inch [10 cm] GSD = 3.5 feet [106 cm] 6 inch [15 cm] GSD = 4.4 feet [134 cm] 9 inch [22.5 cm] GSD = 5.8 feet [176 cm] Page 2 of 6

Equipment and Software Camera System Pictometry s Pentaview and C6 camera systems are based on architecture designed and patented by Pictometry. The Pentaview camera system is a multi-camera system comprised of five digital camera modules and an acquisition computer (with sensor control hardware and software). The C6 system is comprised of six digital camera modules that includes two overlapping nadir (a.k.a. ortho ) cameras allowing for an increased capture width and an acquisition computer (with sensor control hardware and software). Key components of the both systems are manufactured and assembled by qualified suppliers under contract to Pictometry. Individual subsystems of the Pentaview system are integrated and tested at Pictometry s facilities in Rochester, NY. The finished camera systems are calibrated and tested in the laboratory at Pictometry s facilities in Rochester, NY. Pictometry s 16-megapixel Pentaview imaging system carries the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Camera Type Certification and comprises five custom designed cameras and an Applanix Position and Orientation System (POS) which includes both a Global Positioning System (GPS) antenna and an Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU). The five cameras are aimed with one looking nadir and four looking in each of the four cardinal oblique directions. Pictometry s 29-megapixel Pentaview imaging system is constructed on the USGS approved platform and incorporates upgraded 29-megapixel sensors. Pictometry s C6 imaging system is comprised of six custom designed cameras and an Applanix Position and Orientation System (POS) which includes both a Global Positioning System (GPS) antenna and an Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU). The six cameras are aimed with two cameras each looking 10 degrees from nadir (resulting in a ~33% overlap) and four looking in each of the four cardinal oblique directions. As part of the manufacture, Pictometry s individual cameras are put through a rigorous calibration process developed by Pictometry and licensed to the USGS. This process is used to solve for the camera s precise focal length, principal point location, and radial distortion coefficients. These parameters are then incorporated into the camera model. Each camera is also put through a color calibration process designed by Pictometry in order to ensure consistent response. Collection procedures In advance of capturing the data, an additional aerial boresight calibration is performed on each of the systems involved in the project. An adjustment then is computed to solve for the alignment between the optical axis of the camera and the internal coordinate axes of the Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU). This adjustment is then applied to the imagery captured throughout the project. Each system completes a boresight flight at regular intervals to ensure that the sensors have stayed in alignment. Once the cameras are calibrated and the system is aligned, data capture can begin. Throughout each of the capture missions, GPS/IMU data is logged on the aircraft, the GPS data is recorded at a minimum rate of 2Hz and the IMU data is logged at a minimum rate of 200Hz. Concurrently, one or more GPS reference stations are logging data on the ground. These reference stations may be either part of the NGS CORS network, or a base station set up and run by Pictometry or a licensed Surveyor sub-consultant. Page 3 of 6

The imagery is nominally captured while PDOP values are monitored and the aircraft is within 45 kilometers of an operating GPS reference station. Due to the small format of Pictometry s camera, and automatic aerial triangulation techniques available, Pictometry limits its sensor to 6 degrees of pitch and yaw; this limit can be utilized due to the narrow field of view of Pictometry s cameras which, by design, limits the off-nadir distance of features at the edge of the frame. Applanix POSPac software is utilized to post process the GPS/IMU data utilizing the SmartBase (IN-fusion) or single base station technology. The SmartBase technology uses a centralized filter approach to combine the GPS receiver s raw observables (psuedorange and phase observables) with the IMU data (tightly coupled solution). The Applanix SmartBase engine processes the raw observables (phase and psuedorange to each tracked satellite) from a minimum of four to a maximum of 50 continuously-working GPS reference stations surrounding the trajectory. The computed ionospheric, tropospheric, satellite clock, and orbital errors at all the reference stations are used to correct for the errors at the location of the remote receiver. The SmartBase Quality Check tool is utilized to perform a network adjustment on all the base-lines and reference stations in the network. Quality checks are also performed on the individual reference station observation files before the Applanix SmartBase is computed. The result of this process is that the integrity of the reference station s data and coordinates are known before the data is processed. The single base technology is different as only one dedicated base station is used as a reference station and atmospheric delay and other correction data are only retrieved at the dedicated master station. The final smoothed best estimated trajectory (SBET) is computed from the GPS track (including Kalman Filtering) utilizing either the SmartBase or single base station mode. Once the trajectory has been generated, it is applied to the imagery on the basis of the individual time stamps associated with each frame. The location (X, Y, Z) and orientation (Roll, Pitch, Yaw) values derived from the SBET and assigned to each frame serve as the initial exterior orientation (EO) values for the aerial triangulation phase of the processing. Concurrent with the GPS/INS processing, the imagery in RAW format is developed to uncompressed TIFF format. After the development process, the imagery is put through a rigorous QA/QC process whereby images of low quality, due to either improper exposure or sensor artifact, are identified and marked for recapture. Pictometry uses both automated software it has created (proprietary) and human examination when considering whether to reject an image or pass it for production. The final approved imagery is put through a verification process wherein common points are compared in the images (tie-points). The calculated coordinates for each tie-point are then checked against those from the other tie-points of the same point in different images. Any anomalous points are investigated to ensure the tie-point is valid and the image data is reprocessed if necessary. Page 4 of 6

Standard Product Horizontal Accuracies Background The absolute horizontal accuracy (of features) within a particular frame of Pictometry orthogonal imagery depends on a number of factors. Among these are the accuracy of point location within the image, the accuracy of the ground surface (DEM) used for rectification, and the accuracy of the exposure station coordinates and orientation of the sensor at the time of the exposure (Exterior orientation Parameters). The Position and Orientation System (POS) data provides the Exterior Orientation Parameters of the sensor at the time of exposure in a ground coordinate system. These parameters (commonly referred to as EOs) are primarily derived from the post-processed POS solution, the accuracy of which in turn depends upon the accuracy of the GPS reference station coordinates and the solved vector to the capture system. The absolute horizontal accuracy of individual pixels as measured within individual orthogonal frames is dependent primarily upon the accuracy of the POS solution. In orthogonal imagery, the DEM used for rectification is generally of less significance than the POS solution and the error introduced by the DEM increases as we move away from the nadir point. At the nadir point, the contribution to the horizontal error from the DEM is zero and at the edge of the field of view (FOV) the contribution is at its maximum. For standard Pictometry orthogonal imagery, the maximum horizontal error introduced at the edge of the FOV, due to feature distances from the nadir point, is calculated to be approximately 0.32 times the error in the ground surface. Testing Coordinate points were collected across the project area, in accordance with specifications set forth in FGDC- STD-007.3-1998. These surveyed points were then compared against the coordinates measured in the imagery captured and produced by Pictometry. The data tested consisted of well-identified points within Pictometry imagery, measured against surveyed ground control points, at different project locations. Testing was performed in accordance with the Case 2 procedures outlined in (FGDC-STD-007.3-1998). Case 2: Approximating circular standard error when RMSEx is not equal to RMSEy If RMSEmin/RMSEmax is between 0.6 and 1.0 (where RMSEmin is the smaller value between RMSEx and RMSEy and RMSEmax is the larger value), circular standard error (at 39.35% confidence) may be approximated as 0.5*(RMSEx + RMSEy) (Greenwalt and Schultz, 1968). If error is normally distributed and independent in each the x- and y-component and error, the accuracy value according to NSSDA may be approximated according to the following formula: ACCURACYr ~ 2.4477 * 0.5 * (RMSEx + RMSEy) Page 5 of 6

Summary Absolute Horizontal Accuracies Pictometry has tested 58 total projects containing 1,407 total points across varying GSD s over the 2013 and 2014 flight seasons: 3-inch areas 18 projects, 415 points 4-inch areas 27 projects, 682 points 6-inch areas 6 projects, 166 points 9-inch areas 7 projects, 144 points The computed compiled to 95% absolute horizontal accuracy results of the tested areas are as follows: 3 inch [7.5 cm] GSD 1, 3 = 2.9 feet [88 cm] @ 95% 4 inch [10 cm] GSD 1, 3 = 3.5 feet [106 cm] @ 95% 6 inch [15 cm] GSD 2, 4 = 4.4 feet [134 cm] @ 95% 9 inch [22.5 cm] GSD 2, 4 = 5.8 feet [176 cm] @ 95% 1 Meets or exceeds ASPRS Class V, Accuracy Standards for Digital Geospatial Data (2014) 2 Meets or exceeds ASPRS Class IV, Accuracy Standards for Digital Geospatial Data (2014) 3 Meets or exceeds ASPRS Class I @ 1 = 150 Accuracy Standards for Large Scale Maps (1990) 4 Meets or exceeds ASPRS Class I @ 1 = 200 Accuracy Standards for Large Scale Maps (1990) Additional conditions that may affect actual accuracies achieved include specific project site conditions, accuracy of the DEM utilized in imagery rectification, GPS and IMU errors, and variability in control station (e.g. CORS network) availability, accuracies and geometry. The areas tested in support of this document are areas with DEMs having nominal vertical accuracy of 1 meter* for orthorectification of the nadir frames and the imagery was captured with Pictometry s Pentaview and/or C6 Camera system. Due to the impact of DEM error stated previously ( approximately 0.32 times the error in the ground surface ) the following additional absolute horizontal errors may exist in the imagery created utilizing DEMs of the accuracy listed below: Assumed Source DEM Error Equivalent Contour Interval of Source DEM Additional Possible Horizontal Error from Source DEM 2.98 feet [91 cm] * 5-foot [1.5 m] contour 0 5.96 feet [1.82 m] 10-foot [3 m] contour interval 1.9 feet [58 cm] 11.92 feet [3.63 m] 20-foot [6 m] contour interval 3.8 feet [116 cm] 17.89 feet [5.45 m] 30-foot [10 m] contour interval 5.7 feet [174 cm] Page 6 of 6