Dual axis compensator VS IMU

Discuss all Leica Geosystems related issues here.
MomentEng
I have made 10-20 posts
I have made 10-20 posts
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2019 10:29 pm
Full Name: Jeremy Guillory
Company Details: Moment Engineering
Company Position Title: Owner
Country: USA
Linkedin Profile: Yes

Re: Dual axis compensator VS IMU

Post by MomentEng » Thu Feb 07, 2019 4:44 am

I put a call into FARO to ask about the DAC..specifically what technology they are using as well as if the unit is adjusting each scan slice like the Leica....(doubtful because the unit is half the cost!). Ill report back when I have an answer.

I was interested because I have recently purchased a FARO Focus S70 and I was not aware that Leica adjusted after each scan. Doubtful the increased accuracy will come into play at the ranges I am scanning so probably not an issue, BUUUUTTTT after carefully reading the spec sheet and asking some pointed questions during my demo .... the S70, S150, and S350 all have the same hardware! FARO imposes a software limitation, preventing the S70 from collecting data beyond 70 meters, same thing for the S150. There is no limitation on the S350, so it will collect data beyond that, but the data is highly suspect. That made me think that they are really making tons of cash on the S350 compared to the S70! I wasn't happy, but because I was able to find a used S70 at a considerable discount, all was OK with me...SO on to my point...

For someone spending the handsome sum of cash FARO is asking for the S350 which has the same hardware as the S70 but cost 50% more (for a line of code)...it better damn well re-calibrate after each pass of the laser!

Should I be in a situation where i need the extra range...Ill rent a Leica P40..just in case

User avatar
danielgadowski
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 451
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 3:49 pm
Full Name: Daniel Gadowski
Company Details: London Underground
Company Position Title: Laser Scanning Co-Ordinator
Country: UK
Linkedin Profile: Yes

Re: Dual axis compensator VS IMU

Post by danielgadowski » Thu Feb 07, 2019 10:26 am

MomentEng As far as I'm aware Faro does not compensate anything on site. What it does is it records it's tilt sensor's data at the beginning and at the end of the scan and then uses that in the office to level the scan. It does not correct the data on site. It cannot do that simply due to the rotational speed of the scanner - the centrifugal forces cause the sensor to drift. For sure wait for the confirmation from Faro and let us know what they'll tell you. I would be great to have the exact description on paper thou rather than just "yeah, it's all level" ;)

Slewis33
I have made 50-60 posts
I have made 50-60 posts
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2013 2:50 pm
Full Name: Shaun Lewis
Company Details: Clark Construciton
Company Position Title: Senior Manager - Reality Capture
Country: USA
Linkedin Profile: Yes

Re: Dual axis compensator VS IMU

Post by Slewis33 » Thu Feb 07, 2019 2:36 pm

The FARO has a dual axis compensator that checks the data after it is completed. The Leica C and P series have a real time dual axis compensator that checks the data as it goes.

The quote that I like to share is "Nobody buys a FARO because it is the best." and that is not a negative thing.

Similar to cars; essentially the GMC and Cadillac are the same, is one better...yes. Will both get you to the grocery store, to the ball game, and back home...yes.

User avatar
Matt Young
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 3808
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: Dual axis compensator VS IMU

Post by Matt Young » Mon Feb 11, 2019 9:05 am

Slewis33 wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 2:36 pm
The FARO has a dual axis compensator that checks the data after it is completed. The Leica C and P series have a real time dual axis compensator that checks the data as it goes.

The quote that I like to share is "Nobody buys a FARO because it is the best." and that is not a negative thing.

Similar to cars; essentially the GMC and Cadillac are the same, is one better...yes. Will both get you to the grocery store, to the ball game, and back home...yes.
Faro scanners do not have a Dual axis compensator. They have an inclinometer.
Arya Stark - Lots of people name their swords.
The Hound - Lots of c----s.

MomentEng
I have made 10-20 posts
I have made 10-20 posts
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2019 10:29 pm
Full Name: Jeremy Guillory
Company Details: Moment Engineering
Company Position Title: Owner
Country: USA
Linkedin Profile: Yes

Re: Dual axis compensator VS IMU

Post by MomentEng » Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:54 am

Faro claims on their data sheet that the Focus S is equipped with a dual axis compensator.

I have had really good results with the Faro Focus S. No doubt that the P and C series are more accurate over range, but in my industry, I don't foresee needing to scan items that are more than 150ft away very often. I work in refineries and chemical plants and to get the data we need, you physically cant be far and have to shoot many angles because of the congestion and piping and are on concrete. I am VERY happy with the Faro for the work I'm doing.

Scott
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 758
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 7:39 pm
Full Name: Scott Page
Company Details: Scott Page Design- Architectural service
Company Position Title: Owner
Country: USA
Linkedin Profile: No
Contact:

Re: Dual axis compensator VS IMU

Post by Scott » Tue Feb 12, 2019 3:33 am

Matt Young wrote:
Mon Feb 11, 2019 9:05 am
Slewis33 wrote:
Thu Feb 07, 2019 2:36 pm
The FARO has a dual axis compensator that checks the data after it is completed. The Leica C and P series have a real time dual axis compensator that checks the data as it goes.

The quote that I like to share is "Nobody buys a FARO because it is the best." and that is not a negative thing.

Similar to cars; essentially the GMC and Cadillac are the same, is one better...yes. Will both get you to the grocery store, to the ball game, and back home...yes.
Faro scanners do not have a Dual axis compensator. They have an inclinometer.
I thought Ground Hog Day was only on February 2nd? :?

User avatar
Matt Young
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 3808
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: Dual axis compensator VS IMU

Post by Matt Young » Tue Feb 12, 2019 7:50 am

MomentEng wrote:
Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:54 am
Faro claims on their data sheet that the Focus S is equipped with a dual axis compensator.
So it does.
Arya Stark - Lots of people name their swords.
The Hound - Lots of c----s.

Oatfedgoat
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 1039
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 8:31 pm
Full Name: Matthew McCarter
Company Details: Costain
Company Position Title: BIM Manager
Country: England
Linkedin Profile: Yes
Has thanked: 1 time

Re: Dual axis compensator VS IMU

Post by Oatfedgoat » Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:00 pm

Visiting the forum for a quick catch up.

Seems the site is only showing posts dating back to 2012.
Back to work I go!

User avatar
JohnBunnFARO
I have made 20-30 posts
I have made 20-30 posts
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 6:18 pm
Full Name: John Bunn
Company Details: FARO
Company Position Title: Account Manager
Country: USA
Linkedin Profile: Yes

Re: Dual axis compensator VS IMU

Post by JohnBunnFARO » Thu Feb 14, 2019 4:19 am

Hi everyone,

I see a lot of confusion and misinformation going around about FARO's Focus S scanners. I would like to clear some of this up. Anyone who knows me...knows I am a man of my word and will be able to prove anything I say. I also have no problem saying "i don't know" (a lost art these days), and I actually enjoy admitting when I am wrong. I am always willing to learn, and I am always excited for what FARO offers, as well as all of our competition.

First off, let me say that I am a fan of the technology, in general, and I will always put the customer first, because I feel that laser-scanning needs to be successful in order for all of our companies to be sucessful.

Secondly, I would like to say that the P40/P50 compensation is absolutely remarkable. Not to mention, the simplicity in its internal design made me a huge fan of that series of scanner. So, definitely a hats off for that :)

Regarding the Focus-S series of scanners, it is true that the S70, S150, and S350 scanners share nearly identical parts, however, it is not simply a software limitation to limit the range of the laser. Yes, we make more margin on a S350, but so does any manufacturer when you compare their shorter and longer range options. Also, try to remember we only offered the S150 and S350 for the first 8 months of that product-line's release. We decided to create the S70 to service certain markets that don't need the extra range and would not benefit from anything past 200 ft.

Also, I don't see the difference between our S-Series scanners and Lieca's P-Series scanners. https://www.sccssurvey.co.uk/pdfs/HDS/L ... -Chart.pdf. That is quite possibly the most Apples-to-Apples comparison imaginable.

I can't see anything wrong with deciding to offer the same level of accuracy, real on-site registration, dual-axis compensation, etc. at a lower price. Also, just because the scanner has a lower price-point...doesn't mean it is inferior quality. You have to remember that we have been offering light-weight, phase-based scanners since 2009, and we were engineering the original S120 for about 3 years before that. We are simply improving our craft. Lieca's RTC360 solution is honestly a testament to our approach in many ways. Once Lieca figures out how to fit their typically-stellar dual-axis compensator in the smaller casing of the RTC360, they will definitely have an exciting solution. I was told by a Lieca employee that they spent 6 years engineering the RTC360, and if that is true, the large file sizes and ability to only equip a single-IMU with 180" tilt error are signs that they have a few kinks to iron out. This is not meant as an insult at all. Go look at our first attempt in this realm, the S-120. It's absolutely terrible by today's standards. The data is ridiculously noisy and the interface makes me want to throw it off of a bridge at this point. For their first light-weight scanner, Lieca has done well. It has some noticeable pain points, but they definitely have great engineers/technicians, and they have loads of money to pump into improvements for their next release.

It would be the same story if FARO had decided to enter into the time-of-flight realm or even total stations, perhaps. There is no way on earth we would be able to come out of the gate with a better version of what Lieca has dominated historically.

OK back to the topic at hand...

These scanners also offer on-site compensation, which can be performed at any time to greatly improve the scanner's accuracy and noise level. The noise level improves quite a bit, going from [email protected] to [email protected] The on-site compensation process takes roughly 10 mins to perform, and it honestly only needs to be done once a month or so. It is kinda like adjusting a scope on a sniper rifle to account for wind, in a sense. (terrible metaphor, i know)

As far as the Focus S dual-axis compensation/inclinometer/etc., they are equipped with a Dual-Axis Inclinometer. This is essentially how it works https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inclinome ... clinometer.

This inclinometer takes an initial reading before the scan and another reading at the end of the scan. We also have GPS, Compass, Altimeter, and On-Site Registration constantly updating scans to cloud data or tying to survey control, depending on what settings are chosen by the user. We have tons of independent tests performed by high-level surveyors that prove our leveling accuracy. The ASCC performed an official test of our scanner alongside a total-station (Lieca, actually) and a dipstick. Our levelness was within 99.91% of the total-station throughout the entire tests, and we were better than 96% of the dipstick. It is actually one of the main studies that proved laser-scanning should be officially standardized for FFFL measurements.

Also, Just last month, ASCC conducted another massive independent study where all major manufacturers sent out their own engineers to compete for accuracy, flatness, levelness, etc. The scanners in the study included FARO S150, Lieca P40, Lieca RTC360, FARO X330, FARO S350, and Trimble TX-8. Guess which won? Here is the link to that study https://www.bkf.com/ascc-3-d-laser-scanning-study/

At this point, I should definitely apologize for the length of this post, and I also don't particularly like being this vocal on a competitor's thread. I just saw a lot of mis-information and wanted to try to help.

I have the utmost respect for anyone in this industry who puts the customer first and takes the time to research their opinion/side.

For instance, I think Paul Burrows is an outstanding member of our community, and i look forward to hopefully having very spirited debates with him in the future. I believe all companies and colleagues can learn from each other if we always put the technology and workflows first.

Have a great night, fellow laser-scanners!
Half Nerd, Half Amazing

User avatar
landmeterbeuckx
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 322
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 5:19 pm
Full Name: Lieven Beuckx
Company Details: Studiebureau Beuckx
Company Position Title: Owner
Country: Belgium
Linkedin Profile: Yes

Re: Dual axis compensator VS IMU

Post by landmeterbeuckx » Thu Feb 14, 2019 7:07 am

JohnBunnFARO wrote:
Thu Feb 14, 2019 4:19 am
Hi everyone,


This inclinometer takes an initial reading before the scan and another reading at the end of the scan. We also have GPS, Compass, Altimeter, and On-Site Registration constantly updating scans to cloud data or tying to survey control, depending on what settings are chosen by the user. We have tons of independent tests performed by high-level surveyors that prove our leveling accuracy. The ASCC performed an official test of our scanner alongside a total-station (Lieca, actually) and a dipstick. Our levelness was within 99.91% of the total-station throughout the entire tests, and we were better than 96% of the dipstick. It is actually one of the main studies that proved laser-scanning should be officially standardized for FFFL measurements.


Have a great night, fellow laser-scanners!
Great post John. I've once did a measurement with my tx5 (faro 120S) where i had only 2 levels at both sides of the building and had to check levels of the floors throughout. At the end i had an error of 2mm over 50 or so scans. Was impressed with this. I just calculated and reviewed the height of the endpoint.
LSBbvba
Surveying services - 3D Laserscanning
Tel : +3211661621
www.landmeter-beuckx.be
[email protected]

Post Reply

Return to “Leica Geosystems”