Which scanner allows traversing
- landmeterbeuckx
- V.I.P Member
- Posts: 1615
- 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
Which scanner allows traversing
Hi,
I'm working with a tx5 but am looking for a new scanner with which i can traverse as with ordinary surveying equipment. I'm a bit tired of placing spheres and have to measure them separately.
I know a topcon gls2000 and leica p40 can do this but are there other possibilities?
I'm working with a tx5 but am looking for a new scanner with which i can traverse as with ordinary surveying equipment. I'm a bit tired of placing spheres and have to measure them separately.
I know a topcon gls2000 and leica p40 can do this but are there other possibilities?
- Chris Kercheval
- I have made <0 posts
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2016 3:07 pm
- 7
- Full Name: Christopher Kercheval
- Company Details: TopKerv Consulting
- Company Position Title: CEO
- Country: USA
- Skype Name: christopher.kercheval
- Linkedin Profile: Yes
- Contact:
Re: Which scanner allows traversing
Lieven,
The Z+F IMAGER 5010 series is capable of traversing by occupying a known point and by placing targets over other control points. The combination of a survey file and traverse functionality allows the user to tie into the control as well as easily register targets after manually picking 4 or 5 and matching the control point to the scanned target. The targets are automatically assigned in the software to match the CSV file, thus eliminating the need to measure and place spheres manually.
In addition to the traverse functionality the Scout software in conjunction with the IMAGER 5010X allows you to view the scans, assign target names, and run the registration all while you are in the field on the job site, thus eliminating the need to scan and later manually pick targets and run a registration.
The Z+F IMAGER 5010 series is capable of traversing by occupying a known point and by placing targets over other control points. The combination of a survey file and traverse functionality allows the user to tie into the control as well as easily register targets after manually picking 4 or 5 and matching the control point to the scanned target. The targets are automatically assigned in the software to match the CSV file, thus eliminating the need to measure and place spheres manually.
In addition to the traverse functionality the Scout software in conjunction with the IMAGER 5010X allows you to view the scans, assign target names, and run the registration all while you are in the field on the job site, thus eliminating the need to scan and later manually pick targets and run a registration.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Best Regards,
Christopher Kercheval
TopKerv Consulting
Christopher Kercheval
TopKerv Consulting
- jcoco3
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 1724
- Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 5:43 pm
- 12
- Full Name: Jonathan Coco
- Company Details: Consultant
- Company Position Title: Owner
- Country: USA
- Linkedin Profile: No
- Has thanked: 70 times
- Been thanked: 157 times
Re: Which scanner allows traversing
Lieven, the short answer is all of them to some degree or another. It seems as if term "traversing" has been stretched to mean all kinds of things, but if you are referring very strictly to traversing just like a total station, then I think only the new Trimble SX10 adheres to those same abilities. My justification for that last statement is that it has the same angular and range specifications as a comparable Trimble total station(without sacrifice), and it can also shoot standard survey prisms(something most laser scanners cannot do).
Many laser scanners can do something similar, but with certain limitations on range, accuracy, and accessory equipment used. As Chris just informed you, Z+F has a way. Leica uses a twin-target pole with reflectors on it:http://www.leica-geosystems.it/it/Targe ... mode=print. I think Rigel scanners can use any random piece of retro-reflective tape or target as a backsight or front sight. I am not sure what Topcon or Surphaser has, but I know Faro(your tx5) scanners can use multiple tripods with "mirror-height spheres" on tripbrachs as backsights and frontsights. You swap the front sight for the scanner then move the backsight setup ahead. Here is a list of compatible hardware from SECO: http://surveying.com/seco/media/Collate ... Matrix.pdf(Edit: I think that diagram is drawn wrong, as the line passing through the spheres, but over the scanner should really pass through the middle of the mirror...same goes for the prisms. Maybe somebody from SECO will update it).
From talking to many other users(of all mfgs) in the industry(and obtaining their opinions) none of these techniques really compare to what a surveyor can do with a good total station/gps/level in terms of accuracy over distance. It seems there is no replacement for a good control network for larger projects. The traversing workflows should still work for shorter range projects, but then again it depends on the laser scanner and operator to know how far "short" is.
Sorry to be a little ambiguous, it is a bit of a complicated topic. Hopefully others can shed more light on the possibilities from each manufacturer. Anybody know what Optech or other can do for traversing? You might also consider that there are other options. Three alternate, but similar methods mentioned here where a scanner and total station are used together for "traversing":https://laserscanningforum.com/forum/vi ... 58&t=11307 Speaking of, I need to get back to that thread for a proper response
Many laser scanners can do something similar, but with certain limitations on range, accuracy, and accessory equipment used. As Chris just informed you, Z+F has a way. Leica uses a twin-target pole with reflectors on it:http://www.leica-geosystems.it/it/Targe ... mode=print. I think Rigel scanners can use any random piece of retro-reflective tape or target as a backsight or front sight. I am not sure what Topcon or Surphaser has, but I know Faro(your tx5) scanners can use multiple tripods with "mirror-height spheres" on tripbrachs as backsights and frontsights. You swap the front sight for the scanner then move the backsight setup ahead. Here is a list of compatible hardware from SECO: http://surveying.com/seco/media/Collate ... Matrix.pdf(Edit: I think that diagram is drawn wrong, as the line passing through the spheres, but over the scanner should really pass through the middle of the mirror...same goes for the prisms. Maybe somebody from SECO will update it).
From talking to many other users(of all mfgs) in the industry(and obtaining their opinions) none of these techniques really compare to what a surveyor can do with a good total station/gps/level in terms of accuracy over distance. It seems there is no replacement for a good control network for larger projects. The traversing workflows should still work for shorter range projects, but then again it depends on the laser scanner and operator to know how far "short" is.
Sorry to be a little ambiguous, it is a bit of a complicated topic. Hopefully others can shed more light on the possibilities from each manufacturer. Anybody know what Optech or other can do for traversing? You might also consider that there are other options. Three alternate, but similar methods mentioned here where a scanner and total station are used together for "traversing":https://laserscanningforum.com/forum/vi ... 58&t=11307 Speaking of, I need to get back to that thread for a proper response
- LeicaUK_RC
- V.I.P Member
- Posts: 777
- Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2011 9:30 am
- 12
- Full Name: Phil Marsh
- Company Details: Leica Geosystems part of Hexagon
- Company Position Title: Reality Capture Director UK
- Country: UK
- Skype Name: Phil.H.Marsh
- Linkedin Profile: Yes
- Location: Barnsley, UK
- Been thanked: 52 times
- Contact:
Re: Which scanner allows traversing
One option would be the ScanStation P30/P40 range with some traversing capabilities plus the option of working with a scale factor too....
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
- DelioPontes
- V.I.P Member
- Posts: 213
- Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 1:45 pm
- 16
- Full Name: Delio Pontes
- Company Details: Fugro
- Company Position Title: Engineering Surveyor
- Country: United Kingdom
- Linkedin Profile: Yes
- Location: United Kingdom
- Contact:
-
- I have made 90-100 posts
- Posts: 93
- Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 4:12 pm
- 12
- Full Name: Dave Davey
- Company Details: Engineering Surveyor
- Company Position Title: Director
- Country: Europe
- Linkedin Profile: No
Re: Which scanner allows traversing
If he went from the data collection speed of a TX5 to an MS60 then he'd notice a difference in timeanonimou wrote:Multistation Leica MS50 or MS60?
I think the suggestion above is a much better way forward for survey methodology whilst on site.
-
- 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: Which scanner allows traversing
Traverse is perhaps a little bit of a misnomer?
C10/P-series etc .. sure you can set up over known control, back/fore sight etc or use forced centering ..
We have found with the weight of these things though that the best option is to essentially free-station .. and do the reductions in the office (the less you move the targets the better the accuracy) .. aka Cyclone. Hard to explain in text I guess, but you have your control network and crunch it at the end - what difference does it make what the coordinates are on the way through? True - you don't get that feedback in the field that your "close" has worked - but even if it hasn't - what are you honestly going to do about it in the field? It will be a wrong target height/ID or some other silly thing that you will sort out back in the office - worst case you will cloud-to-cloud the thing.
These things (C/P series scanners) can easily hit targets as you go, these targets can be on legs over control with target heights .. so you can place nails/screws/whatever so you can repeat your efforts, or connect to known datums/cadastre.
So if all scanner locations are 0,0,0 .. you get an arbitrary coordinate system with the registered cluster. Then if you already have control, you nominate that in Cyclone via a list of xyz's and matching target ID's .. or you pick a point and azimuth to 2nd point and you are away. Alternatively - going arbitrary? Pick a point and give it 1000,1000,100 ... Geodetic? That gets trickier - and as Phil alluded to - you want it scaled - go the P40. Geodetic truncated? Get your arbitrary data, walk around the control you placed with your GNSS, scale/truncate it and give those values to Cyclone and you are away.
If you had particular jobs - runways, roads - then you might want a forced centering approach - but you probably want the extra redundancy in your targets anyway? Me - if I place a new target, the current station reads to at least three+ existing targets anyway - any issues show up really quick .. no point finding out you had a problem with a station at station 3 of 10 .. and we have seen these sorts of things - we had a party have a target in shopping centre move - distance remained the same - literally got kicked 700mm sideways (was a twin target) - he only scanned to two targets. Picked it by a complete rotation in mall line - the registration in Cyclone was good to < 5mm ..
C10/P-series etc .. sure you can set up over known control, back/fore sight etc or use forced centering ..
We have found with the weight of these things though that the best option is to essentially free-station .. and do the reductions in the office (the less you move the targets the better the accuracy) .. aka Cyclone. Hard to explain in text I guess, but you have your control network and crunch it at the end - what difference does it make what the coordinates are on the way through? True - you don't get that feedback in the field that your "close" has worked - but even if it hasn't - what are you honestly going to do about it in the field? It will be a wrong target height/ID or some other silly thing that you will sort out back in the office - worst case you will cloud-to-cloud the thing.
These things (C/P series scanners) can easily hit targets as you go, these targets can be on legs over control with target heights .. so you can place nails/screws/whatever so you can repeat your efforts, or connect to known datums/cadastre.
So if all scanner locations are 0,0,0 .. you get an arbitrary coordinate system with the registered cluster. Then if you already have control, you nominate that in Cyclone via a list of xyz's and matching target ID's .. or you pick a point and azimuth to 2nd point and you are away. Alternatively - going arbitrary? Pick a point and give it 1000,1000,100 ... Geodetic? That gets trickier - and as Phil alluded to - you want it scaled - go the P40. Geodetic truncated? Get your arbitrary data, walk around the control you placed with your GNSS, scale/truncate it and give those values to Cyclone and you are away.
If you had particular jobs - runways, roads - then you might want a forced centering approach - but you probably want the extra redundancy in your targets anyway? Me - if I place a new target, the current station reads to at least three+ existing targets anyway - any issues show up really quick .. no point finding out you had a problem with a station at station 3 of 10 .. and we have seen these sorts of things - we had a party have a target in shopping centre move - distance remained the same - literally got kicked 700mm sideways (was a twin target) - he only scanned to two targets. Picked it by a complete rotation in mall line - the registration in Cyclone was good to < 5mm ..
- jcoco3
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 1724
- Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 5:43 pm
- 12
- Full Name: Jonathan Coco
- Company Details: Consultant
- Company Position Title: Owner
- Country: USA
- Linkedin Profile: No
- Has thanked: 70 times
- Been thanked: 157 times
Re: Which scanner allows traversing
James, I think you just confirmed much of what I said about "traversing" with a laser scanner. Thanks Seems like it is a far cry from traversing with a total station.
-
- 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: Which scanner allows traversing
Don't get me wrong .. the traverse routines in the Leica gear at least (what we use) is real .. you can get current coords, residuals, the lot .. but you kind of don't need them - it is overkill in the field. I feel you need to think about laser control a bit differently - you have more stations and targets than a traditional survey, more of a mesh network than a control network. You still 'close' your work .. those tradtional survey techniques don't go away .. like distribution of marks, loops and so forth .. but with scanning you also add a final cloud to cloud.
So we target everything plus cloud .. and get great results.
So we target everything plus cloud .. and get great results.
- jcoco3
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 1724
- Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 5:43 pm
- 12
- Full Name: Jonathan Coco
- Company Details: Consultant
- Company Position Title: Owner
- Country: USA
- Linkedin Profile: No
- Has thanked: 70 times
- Been thanked: 157 times
Re: Which scanner allows traversing
Yep, I wasn't saying it doesn't work or serve a purpose. It is just confusing when you compare the results of a similar technique across a multitude of instruments with widely varying results. I think many surveyors are sold on the idea that the "traverse" technique will be just like that of a total station. It is in a way it is similar, but not an equal substitute. I might be splitting hairs though
Agreed, they never go away.those tradtional survey techniques don't go away