Author
Listed:
- Renee C. Oats
(Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI 49931, USA)
- Rudiger Escobar-Wolf
(Department of Geological and Mining Engineering and Sciences, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI 49931, USA)
- Thomas Oommen
(Department of Geological and Mining Engineering and Sciences, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI 49931, USA)
Abstract
Structure from Motion (SfM)/Photogrammetry is a powerful mapping tool in extracting three-dimensional (3D) models from photographs. This method has been applied to a range of applications, including monitoring of infrastructure systems. This technique could potentially become a substitute, or at least a complement, for costlier approaches such as laser scanning for infrastructure monitoring. This study expands on previous investigations, which utilize photogrammetry point cloud data to measure failure mode behavior of a retaining wall model, emphasizing further robust spatial testing. In this study, a comparison of two commonly used photogrammetry software packages was implemented to assess the computing performance of the method and the significance of control points in this approach. The impact of control point selection, as part of the photogrammetric modeling processes, was also evaluated. Comparisons between the two software tools reveal similar performances in capturing quantitative changes of a retaining wall structure. Results also demonstrate that increasing the number of control points above a certain number does not, necessarily, increase 3D modeling accuracies, but, in some cases, their spatial distribution can be more critical. Furthermore, errors in model reproducibility, when compared with total station measurements, were found to be spatially correlated with the arrangement of control points.
Suggested Citation
Renee C. Oats & Rudiger Escobar-Wolf & Thomas Oommen, 2019.
"Evaluation of Photogrammetry and Inclusion of Control Points: Significance for Infrastructure Monitoring,"
Data, MDPI, vol. 4(1), pages 1-12, March.
Handle:
RePEc:gam:jdataj:v:4:y:2019:i:1:p:42-:d:213709
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jdataj:v:4:y:2019:i:1:p:42-:d:213709. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.