This "seams" wrong.....
- dcacioppo
- I have made 70-80 posts
- Posts: 71
- Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2015 11:08 pm
- 8
- Full Name: David Cacioppo
- Company Details: Park Ridge Police Department
- Company Position Title: Patrol Officer and Forensic Technician
- Country: USA
- Linkedin Profile: No
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 4 times
This "seams" wrong.....
I have noticed mismatches in my x330 scanner start/stop locations. Anyone else seeing this? Using Scene 2022.0.0. The scanner was sent in for calibration due to this, but came back with the same issue and an invoice......
I attached the planar view that clearly shows the mismatch. I also included a picture of the scan point data showing the overlap with mismatched points. The scan data a single scan, not multiple scans registered together.
Any thoughts?
I attached the planar view that clearly shows the mismatch. I also included a picture of the scan point data showing the overlap with mismatched points. The scan data a single scan, not multiple scans registered together.
Any thoughts?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
- landmeterbeuckx
- V.I.P Member
- Posts: 1616
- Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 5:19 pm
- 11
- Full Name: Lieven Beuckx
- Company Details: Studiebureau Beuckx
- Company Position Title: Owner
- Country: Belgium
- Linkedin Profile: Yes
- Has thanked: 183 times
- Been thanked: 548 times
Re: This "seams" wrong.....
This is not uncommon. Just measure a point left and right from the line which have to have a certain z-value.
Points visual at different heights should give the same z
Points visual at different heights should give the same z
- Leandre Robitaille
- V.I.P Member
- Posts: 542
- Joined: Sat Aug 03, 2019 1:53 am
- 4
- Full Name: Leandre Robitaille
- Company Details: Cima+
- Company Position Title: Civil Technician - Surveyor
- Country: Canada
- Has thanked: 61 times
- Been thanked: 246 times
Re: This "seams" wrong.....
This could maybe be fixed with a on site calibration but this being the older X series you can't do that and need to send the unit in for calibration.
This is your tipical out of calibration error, could result from a bunch of things, faro units loose calibration easily.
This is your tipical out of calibration error, could result from a bunch of things, faro units loose calibration easily.
- Mike Annear
- V.I.P Member
- Posts: 800
- Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 5:45 am
- 14
- Full Name: Mike Annear
- Company Details: The Yard Brisbane
- Company Position Title: Manager - 3D Design and Scanning
- Country: Australia
- Linkedin Profile: Yes
- Location: Hemmant, Queensland, Australia
- Has thanked: 122 times
- Been thanked: 196 times
- Contact:
Re: This "seams" wrong.....
I agree with Lieven,
Measure the pointcloud, don't go by the image in faro Scene, I vaguely remember seeing this issue before.
Mike.
Measure the pointcloud, don't go by the image in faro Scene, I vaguely remember seeing this issue before.
Mike.
-
- V.I.P Member
- Posts: 544
- Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2017 10:47 am
- 7
- Full Name: Martin Graner
- Company Details: PointCab GmbH
- Company Position Title: Research and Development
- Country: Germany
- Linkedin Profile: No
- Has thanked: 160 times
- Been thanked: 175 times
- Contact:
Re: This "seams" wrong.....
dcacioppo wrote: ↑Sat Aug 13, 2022 2:11 pm I have noticed mismatches in my x330 scanner start/stop locations. Anyone else seeing this? Using Scene 2022.0.0. The scanner was sent in for calibration due to this, but came back with the same issue and an invoice......
I attached the planar view that clearly shows the mismatch. I also included a picture of the scan point data showing the overlap with mismatched points. The scan data a single scan, not multiple scans registered together.
Any thoughts?
landmeterbeuckx wrote: ↑Sat Aug 13, 2022 2:28 pm This is not uncommon. Just measure a point left and right from the line which have to have a certain z-value.
Points visual at different heights should give the same z
What Liven said, but in addition: Same points should have the same X, Y and Z.
Perhaps you never noticed before or the gap was smaller.
Explanation: The scanner measures not 360° in one face, but 2 * 180° in 2 faces. When measuring a little bit more, like 181°, you get two areas which are doubled, the start - end and in the middle is another overlap area.
This was done by a FARO Focus: It is not harmful at all, if one wants to remove this a complete resample might be necessary.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
- Tanguy Nédélec
- I have made 90-100 posts
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2015 3:15 pm
- 8
- Full Name: NEDELEC Tanguy
- Company Details: Prigent et Associes
- Company Position Title: Surveyor - nooks and crannies explorer
- Country: France
- Linkedin Profile: No
- Location: Dinan
- Has thanked: 7 times
- Been thanked: 19 times
Re: This "seams" wrong.....
There is an easy way to test this: do a scan in front of a wall, and select a thin rectangle across the start/end overlap in quick view. Right-click the selection -> 3D view, and switch to a top view. If you see no "double wall", then all is good!
Do the same with the ceiling, floor, and test a few different spots (high/low, near/far).
You might have sent it to calibration unnecessarily...
Do the same with the ceiling, floor, and test a few different spots (high/low, near/far).
You might have sent it to calibration unnecessarily...
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
- TommyMaddox
- V.I.P Member
- Posts: 514
- Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2016 7:15 pm
- 7
- Full Name: Tommy R Maddox III
- Company Details: ONSITE3D
- Company Position Title: Director of Technology
- Country: USA
- Linkedin Profile: Yes
- Location: Calgary, Alberta
- Has thanked: 67 times
- Been thanked: 130 times
Re: This "seams" wrong.....
You're much more likely to see a seamline mismatch on a strip belonging to the floor and/or ceiling than on a surface normal to the mirror, you'd primarily be looking at a ranging error with that selection if it is at the same height as the scanner mirror/origin. Someone with a better understanding of photonics/scanner operation can correct me if I'm mistaken here.tengui wrote: ↑Wed Aug 17, 2022 8:03 am There is an easy way to test this: do a scan in front of a wall, and select a thin rectangle across the start/end overlap in quick view. Right-click the selection -> 3D view, and switch to a top view. If you see no "double wall", then all is good!
Do the same with the ceiling, floor, and test a few different spots (high/low, near/far).
You might have sent it to calibration unnecessarily...
1.png
2.png
3.png
- Tanguy Nédélec
- I have made 90-100 posts
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2015 3:15 pm
- 8
- Full Name: NEDELEC Tanguy
- Company Details: Prigent et Associes
- Company Position Title: Surveyor - nooks and crannies explorer
- Country: France
- Linkedin Profile: No
- Location: Dinan
- Has thanked: 7 times
- Been thanked: 19 times
Re: This "seams" wrong.....
I think so too, if you have error on the vertical axis, or on the vertical circle (vertical index). I don't know how likely these are to occur on a Faro, however I've seen ranging errors personally, and if I remember well, described on this forum too.TommyMaddox wrote: ↑Wed Aug 17, 2022 7:08 pm You're much more likely to see a seamline mismatch on a strip belonging to the floor and/or ceiling than on a surface normal to the mirror
So in conclusion: do check both the ceiling/floor and the wall in front .
-
- V.I.P Member
- Posts: 141
- Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2015 4:06 pm
- 8
- Full Name: John Newbegin
- Company Details: Travis County Sheriff Engineering
- Company Position Title: Engineering Specialist
- Country: USA
- Linkedin Profile: Yes
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 7 times
Re: This "seams" wrong.....
I have had this problem many times before, but doesnt usually affect the 3d points at all just an image thing, same suggestion grab selection that covers both sides and look at a 3d view of it in camera or perspective and you can see if its fine or messed up, I freaked out over this for a while also but same thing I sent in for calibration and still did this from time to time.
I dont know but I thought it had to do with when it does the inclometer spinning back and forth after scanning before doing photos I thought it came from there..
Same thing can happen if someone bumps the scanner but that will show really messed up like 2 different surfaces in the 3d view.
John
I dont know but I thought it had to do with when it does the inclometer spinning back and forth after scanning before doing photos I thought it came from there..
Same thing can happen if someone bumps the scanner but that will show really messed up like 2 different surfaces in the 3d view.
John