I am looking for some articles to reference others data on the cost of laser scan surveys vs traditional surveying for as-built building documentation. Any suggestions?
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Cost of a laser scan survey vs traditional survey
-
- I have made 20-30 posts
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2013 7:48 pm
- 10
- Full Name: Stefanie Hartman
- Company Details: CASCO
- Company Position Title: architect
- Country: United States
- Linkedin Profile: No
-
- I have made 60-70 posts
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2016 11:54 am
- 7
- Full Name: Kyle Dersch
- Company Details: Matix Technologies
- Company Position Title: Engineer
- Country: USA
- Skype Name: [email protected]
- Linkedin Profile: Yes
Re: Cost of a laser scan survey vs traditional survey
I would like to see this as well, but I don't know that it's an apples to apples thing. I can survey a few hundred topo points/features in a few hours or scan the same area in the same amount of time and obtain so much more information. Scanning becomes more beneficial with larger areas when the complexity increases or there are challenges with access - such as heights or safety requirements preventing.
That being said, we will still do a traditional survey for some projects - such as greenfields, drainage projects, etc. Anything else in a building or involving mechanical/piping components is budgeted as a scan.
That being said, we will still do a traditional survey for some projects - such as greenfields, drainage projects, etc. Anything else in a building or involving mechanical/piping components is budgeted as a scan.
-
- V.I.P Member
- Posts: 537
- Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2014 1:45 pm
- 9
- Full Name: James Worrell
- Company Details: Bennett and Francis
- Company Position Title: Director
- Country: Australia
- Linkedin Profile: Yes
- Location: Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
- Has thanked: 14 times
- Been thanked: 87 times
- Contact:
Re: Cost of a laser scan survey vs traditional survey
The site is one consideration - the deliverables are another.
The world has gone 3D .. CAD is dead. The reality is our clients are doing 3D renders, visualisations, models, VR etc - and there is literally no point producing a CAD version of this that they then model over the top of for their deliverables.
The workflow is scan-to-model now .. pure and simple and people will catch up to this.
There are still plenty of people who take our 3D CAD data (from TS or scan) .. flatten it .. then model it in 3D by reading levels on the paper plan .. * facepalm * .. especially when we captured it via scanning in the first place.
Right now I am doing a CAD extract + DTM etc from scan data .. scan data I acquired a year+ ago - an intersection and 100m+ of road and buildings .. I needed 2 more scans and am doing the survey at "full freight". It was an extra 45 mins in field for what would have been a days pickup with a total station - and maybe 4 hours office work.
Scanning wins pretty much every time .. unless you are after a few dozen measurements that are dead set simple or you need higher precision - and even then we have validated scan captured data with total station and are within mm's (this was a new curtain wall facade at 30 floors or so).
The hardest part is not getting carried away modelling every nuance when looking at walls that aren't straight or lumps in pavement etc.
My 2c. ;-p
The world has gone 3D .. CAD is dead. The reality is our clients are doing 3D renders, visualisations, models, VR etc - and there is literally no point producing a CAD version of this that they then model over the top of for their deliverables.
The workflow is scan-to-model now .. pure and simple and people will catch up to this.
There are still plenty of people who take our 3D CAD data (from TS or scan) .. flatten it .. then model it in 3D by reading levels on the paper plan .. * facepalm * .. especially when we captured it via scanning in the first place.
Right now I am doing a CAD extract + DTM etc from scan data .. scan data I acquired a year+ ago - an intersection and 100m+ of road and buildings .. I needed 2 more scans and am doing the survey at "full freight". It was an extra 45 mins in field for what would have been a days pickup with a total station - and maybe 4 hours office work.
Scanning wins pretty much every time .. unless you are after a few dozen measurements that are dead set simple or you need higher precision - and even then we have validated scan captured data with total station and are within mm's (this was a new curtain wall facade at 30 floors or so).
The hardest part is not getting carried away modelling every nuance when looking at walls that aren't straight or lumps in pavement etc.
My 2c. ;-p
-
- I have made 20-30 posts
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 12:49 pm
- 8
- Full Name: Miquel Estupinya Gaudioso
- Company Details: CAPTAE DIGITALIZADO 3D
- Company Position Title: DIRECTOR TECNICO
- Country: SPAIN
Re: Cost of a laser scan survey vs traditional survey
In my opinion, they are diferent services for diferent needs.
At first the cost will be the right if the needs of the measurement has been covered (not excessively covered).
The optimum choise depends on the information volume, the accuracy and the sigularity of the object of survey.
For example surely you would obtain better results using traditional survey if you would need accurate coordinates of a few specific points with enough distance between them; and contrary, if you would need a lot of geometrical and positional information about surfaces and the objects of an environment would be more optimum the use of a 3D scanning.
At first the cost will be the right if the needs of the measurement has been covered (not excessively covered).
The optimum choise depends on the information volume, the accuracy and the sigularity of the object of survey.
For example surely you would obtain better results using traditional survey if you would need accurate coordinates of a few specific points with enough distance between them; and contrary, if you would need a lot of geometrical and positional information about surfaces and the objects of an environment would be more optimum the use of a 3D scanning.
-
- I have made <0 posts
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2016 8:42 am
- 8
- Full Name: Hannah Szwarc
- Company Details: NavVis
- Company Position Title: Account Manager
- Country: Germany
- Skype Name: hannahszw
- Linkedin Profile: Yes
Re: Cost of a laser scan survey vs traditional survey
We have observed that several German companies are beginning to question if 3D models or 2D plans are the best way to document or visualise a building. Or, do other methods exist that could work better? People that work on-site (e.g. construction workers, craftsmen, electricians) are often not able to read plans or models. Moreover, plans and models are only a geometric abstraction of a building. Most companies document the as-built status with models and with several hundred pictures.
In the future, a common use case will be the regular capture of changes to identify discrepancies with the design. Traditional surveying and laser scanning would be extremely expensive. 3D modelling is not needed to compare two as-built statuses. A faster and easier system, such as mobile system is needed and a programm that not only detects changes in point clouds, but also makes it easy to highlight those changes and share them with others.
In the future, a common use case will be the regular capture of changes to identify discrepancies with the design. Traditional surveying and laser scanning would be extremely expensive. 3D modelling is not needed to compare two as-built statuses. A faster and easier system, such as mobile system is needed and a programm that not only detects changes in point clouds, but also makes it easy to highlight those changes and share them with others.