Dual axis compensator VS IMU

Discuss all Leica Geosystems related issues here.
User avatar
Matt Young
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 3750
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 » Thu Feb 14, 2019 7:56 am

JohnBunnFARO wrote:
Thu Feb 14, 2019 4:19 am
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.
So the Faro S does have an Dual Axis Inclinometer (DIA). And Not a Dual Axis Compensator (DAC). It's just that the way it's worded on the website seems miss-leading. whatever the difference (And I don't think there is much difference in the final result now), It's just nice to hear the correct terminology stated for things.

I'm really enjoying being a Faro user at the moment (having been a Leica user for so very long).

Great post by the way John. The Forum needs folks like yourself.

And BTW whatever accuracy the scanner can provide - Always back it up with some good old fashioned total station control ;)

User avatar
smacl
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 118
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 5:12 pm
Full Name: Shane MacLaughlin
Company Details: Atlas Computers Ltd
Company Position Title: Managing Director
Country: Ireland
Linkedin Profile: Yes
Location: Ireland

Re: Dual axis compensator VS IMU

Post by smacl » Thu Feb 14, 2019 9:18 am

JohnBunnFARO wrote:
Thu Feb 14, 2019 4:19 am
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/
Interesting reading, thanks for sharing. Reading it I'd note that "the participants included personnel from four contractors, two consultants, and representatives from two laser equipment manufacturers" which included testing 4 Faro scanners, 3 Leica scanners and 1 Trimble. No Z+F, Reigl, Topcon so it is hardly fair to say all major manufacturers were represented nor were they equally represented, given that among the 8 scanners there were 2 S150s and 2 P40s. With respect to picking a winner, I'd say it is clearly the people that carried out the study in terms of illustrating the efficacy of laser scanning for this task, which was clearly their goal. Given that there were two S150s and two P40s it is interesting to see that the range of errors when using the same instrument was as high as the range when comparing different instruments, similarly the range of errors when observing on different days using the same instrument and operator. The study also notes "each participant worked independently. All were instructed to use what they considered to be best practices for the work" which as any surveyor will tell you indicates that error is as much down to application of best practice as the colour of the survey instrument. As such, while this is a great study regarding the efficacy of the technology, it doesn't say much to me about the different instruments as there are far too many confounding variables and a very small sample size in terms of numbers of instruments.

What it does illustrate really nicely is that if you're going to get a new scanner, rather than reading too much into the specs, get kit from the different manufacturers on a site that corresponds to your needs, get them all to measure the same site, and compare the results.

User avatar
danielgadowski
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 446
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 14, 2019 10:20 am

Matt Young wrote:
Thu Feb 14, 2019 7:56 am
JohnBunnFARO wrote:
Thu Feb 14, 2019 4:19 am
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.
So the Faro S does have an Dual Axis Inclinometer (DIA). And Not a Dual Axis Compensator (DAC). It's just that the way it's worded on the website seems miss-leading. whatever the difference (And I don't think there is much difference in the final result now), It's just nice to hear the correct terminology stated for things.

I'm really enjoying being a Faro user at the moment (having been a Leica user for so very long).

Great post by the way John. The Forum needs folks like yourself.

And BTW whatever accuracy the scanner can provide - Always back it up with some good old fashioned total station control ;)
Here, Here!

Great post by John. Great to read a good response that clarifies things. As I previously stated - phase scanners of past and current have inclinometers, not compensators. It is true that they gotten more accurate and the whole process of putting all of the scans together has moved on quite a bit, which means that you can treat such data with more confidence. Still, as Matt pointed out - if you want to be certain - use a TPS, no matter if its a DAC or DAI :)

jedfrechette
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 803
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 7:51 pm
Full Name: Jed Frechette
Company Details: Lidar Guys
Company Position Title: Lidar Supervisor
Country: USA
Linkedin Profile: Yes
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: Dual axis compensator VS IMU

Post by jedfrechette » Thu Feb 14, 2019 5:26 pm

What's the difference between a DAI and a DAC?
Jed

Return to “Leica Geosystems”