Comparisons of Simultaneously Acquired Airborne Sfm Photogrammetry and Lidar

Abstract:

Digital elevation models (DEMs) created using images from a consumer DSLR camera are compared against simultaneously acquired LiDAR on a number of airborne mapping projects across Alaska, California and Utah. The aircraft used is a Cessna 180, and is equipped with the University of Alaska Geophysical Institute (UAF-GI) scanning airborne LiDAR system. This LiDAR is the same as described in Johnson et al, 2013, and is the principal instrument used for NASA’s Operation IceBridge flights in Alaska. The system has been in extensive use since 2009, and is particularly well characterized with dozens of calibration flights and a careful program of boresight angle determination and monitoring. The UAF-GI LiDAR has a precision of +/- 8 cm and accuracy of +/- 15 cm. The photogrammetry DEM simultaneously acquired with the LiDAR relies on precise shutter timing using an event marker input to the IMU associated with the LiDAR system. The photo positions are derived from the fully coupled GPS/IMU processing, which samples at 100 Hz and is able to directly calculate the antenna to image plane offset displacements from the full orientation data. This use of the GPS/IMU solution means that both the LiDAR and Cessna 180 photogrammetry DEM share trajectory input data, however no orientation data nor ground control is used for the photorammetry processing.

The photogrammetry DEMs are overlaid on the LiDAR point cloud and analyzed for horizontal shifts or warps relative to the LiDAR. No warping or horizontal shifts have been detectable for a number of photogrammetry DEMs. Vertical offsets range from +/- 30 cm, with a typical standard deviation about that mean of 10 cm or better. LiDAR and photogrammetry function inherently differently over trees and brush, and direct comparisons between the two methods show much larger differences over vegetated areas. Finally, the differences in flight patterns associated with the two methods will be discussed, highlighting the photogrammetry requirements for a well planned grid pattern and the effects of significant end lap and side lap in the imagery coverage.