Scanstation P20 & Registration Accuracy

Leica BLK360, C5, C10, P15, P16, P20, P30, P40, P50, HDS8800, HDS8400, Riegl VZ6000, VZ4000, VZ2000, VZ1000 & VZ400i, Topcon GLS2000S,M&L, GLS1500, etc
Post Reply
gmanca
I have made <0 posts
I have made <0 posts
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 2:09 pm
Full Name: Giuseppe
Company Details: Undisclosed
Company Position Title: Technical Manager
Country: Italy
Linkedin Profile: Yes

Scanstation P20 & Registration Accuracy

Post by gmanca » Tue Dec 17, 2013 11:29 am

Hi all,
Is there anyone out there who can provide some information about the accuracy of a registration using the traverse function of the P20? We are planning to use the P20's traverse option instead of the more conventional "total station + targets" method, but we're not sure about the final result; we work with hundreds (sometimes thousands) of scans and our customers require registration errors <5 mm: We managed to achieve this result using a total station to survey the targets coordinates, but will it be possible using the traverse option?

Thanks,
Regards,
Giuseppe

Jamesrye
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 432
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 4:13 pm
Full Name: James Rye
Company Details: Merrett Survey Partnership
Company Position Title: Spatial Analyst

Re: Scanstation P20 & Registration Accuracy

Post by Jamesrye » Tue Dec 17, 2013 2:24 pm

There is a good thread on the subject here:

http://www.laserscanningforum.com/forum ... =43&t=3034

For the best accuracy I'd go with resection, otherwise you'd likely have to 'augment' the registration with cloud to cloud - and then adjust target weights etc...

User avatar
pburrows145
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 1722
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 9:16 am
Full Name: Paul Burrows
Company Details: Leica Geosystems Europe
Company Position Title: Scanning Solutions Manager - Europe
Country: UK
Linkedin Profile: Yes
Location: UK

Re: Scanstation P20 & Registration Accuracy

Post by pburrows145 » Wed Dec 18, 2013 9:18 am

Use the field set up method, create a registration on board, unfreeze the registration (which requires you to delete the modelspace) and then use auto-add cloud constraints to tighten up the entire registration... I have used this route successfully many many times.

However, it's up to you which route you go with. I also like working with existing control and setting up the scanner and targets over them (with heights etc), enabling the known-backsight function for 1 target registration in the field.

Saying that, I love using no targets and using cloud-to-cloud too - so quick! :)

User avatar
Matt Young
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 3798
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 3:03 pm
Full Name: Matt Young
Company Details: Baker Hicks
Company Position Title: CAD-BIM Lead
Country: UK
Linkedin Profile: No

Re: Scanstation P20 & Registration Accuracy

Post by Matt Young » Wed Dec 18, 2013 9:33 am

With the correct procedures you should achieve a mean average of around 1 or 2mm for your overall registration result. You must use the cloud 2 cloud function after the traverse in order to achieve this type of accuracy, and you must adjust constraints within the registration after the cloud 2 cloud process.

I always prefer using coincident targets with scans - as Paul suggests using no targets is fast but not reportable in the same way as traverse or coincident targets.

If you have a project with thousands of scans then don't try and do it all in one registration, it will be slow going. Try to break the project up into manageable areas. Two or three hundred scans max per registration is usually my preference.
Arya Stark - Lots of people name their swords.
The Hound - Lots of c----s.

User avatar
pburrows145
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 1722
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 9:16 am
Full Name: Paul Burrows
Company Details: Leica Geosystems Europe
Company Position Title: Scanning Solutions Manager - Europe
Country: UK
Linkedin Profile: Yes
Location: UK

Re: Scanstation P20 & Registration Accuracy

Post by pburrows145 » Wed Dec 18, 2013 11:40 am

Also, remember that targets should only be used up to 50m away with the P20. Up to 100m-150m (Though Steve says he's managed >170m before) with the C10.

User avatar
Matt Young
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 3798
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 3:03 pm
Full Name: Matt Young
Company Details: Baker Hicks
Company Position Title: CAD-BIM Lead
Country: UK
Linkedin Profile: No

Re: Scanstation P20 & Registration Accuracy

Post by Matt Young » Wed Dec 18, 2013 12:20 pm

I find the optimal range for targets is between 30 to 40m - you can scan them at further ranges but tend to lose accuracy a little.
Arya Stark - Lots of people name their swords.
The Hound - Lots of c----s.

Scan-Ninja
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 244
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 2:04 pm
Full Name: Fabien
Company Details: Amec Foster Wheeler
Company Position Title: Geomatics Project Manager
Country: USA
Linkedin Profile: Yes

Re: Scanstation P20 & Registration Accuracy

Post by Scan-Ninja » Mon Jul 07, 2014 7:33 pm

I have found that the P20 is as accurate as the total station, getting the same type of error as the total station when used on a traverse mode.

tbwester
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 1:49 pm
Full Name: Thad Wester
Company Details: WeWork
Company Position Title: Head of Reality Capture
Country: USA
Linkedin Profile: Yes
Location: SC/NYC

Re: Scanstation P20 & Registration Accuracy

Post by tbwester » Mon Jul 07, 2014 9:27 pm

I find that the p20 looses accuracy on target acquisition after 20-25m or so.

I've done long traverses (~800 feet), and when I went to close the loop, I was off by several inches (maybe 6 inches, I can't remember exactly). Once I closed the loop in registration it was perfect, so it just comes down to having a robust methodology in the field.

One thing that amazes me with the P20 is the cleanliness of the data. When you check your registrations, it looks like there is a fair amount of error (between overlapping scans) , but when you measure it - its a lot less than you expect. I attached an image as an example. It looks like clear mis alignment - but the distance between the clouds is less than 1/4 inch.

I like the p20 a lot, but c10 is better for projects that require significant data capture past 75-100 feet.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by tbwester on Mon Jul 07, 2014 9:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Scan-Ninja
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 244
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 2:04 pm
Full Name: Fabien
Company Details: Amec Foster Wheeler
Company Position Title: Geomatics Project Manager
Country: USA
Linkedin Profile: Yes

Re: Scanstation P20 & Registration Accuracy

Post by Scan-Ninja » Mon Jul 07, 2014 9:34 pm

we have recently used the P20, using the traverse mode at the maximum distance (100 to 120m for targets), and we were able to get as good of a closure @6mm error.

tbwester
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 1:49 pm
Full Name: Thad Wester
Company Details: WeWork
Company Position Title: Head of Reality Capture
Country: USA
Linkedin Profile: Yes
Location: SC/NYC

Re: Scanstation P20 & Registration Accuracy

Post by tbwester » Mon Jul 07, 2014 9:37 pm

Scan-Ninja wrote:we have recently used the P20, using the traverse mode at the maximum distance (100 to 120m for targets), and we were able to get as good of a closure @6mm error.
nice work!

Post Reply

Return to “Pulse Based Scanners”