Multisource Point Clouds, Point Simplification and Surface Reconstruction

dc.contributor.authorLingli Zhu
dc.contributor.authorAntero Kukko
dc.contributor.authorJuho-Pekka Virtanen
dc.contributor.authorJuha Hyyppä
dc.contributor.authorHarri Kaartinen
dc.contributor.authorHannu Hyyppä
dc.contributor.authorTuomas Turppa
dc.contributor.organizationfi=maantiede|en=Geography |
dc.contributor.organization-code2606901
dc.converis.publication-id45141641
dc.converis.urlhttps://research.utu.fi/converis/portal/Publication/45141641
dc.date.accessioned2022-10-28T13:19:03Z
dc.date.available2022-10-28T13:19:03Z
dc.description.abstractAs data acquisition technology continues to advance, the improvement and upgrade of the algorithms for surface reconstruction are required. In this paper, we utilized multiple terrestrial Light Detection And Ranging (Lidar) systems to acquire point clouds with different levels of complexity, namely dynamic and rigid targets for surface reconstruction. We propose a robust and effective method to obtain simplified and uniform resample points for surface reconstruction. The method was evaluated. A point reduction of up to 99.371% with a standard deviation of 0.2 cm was achieved. In addition, well-known surface reconstruction methods, i.e., Alpha shapes, Screened Poisson reconstruction (SPR), the Crust, and Algebraic point set surfaces (APSS Marching Cubes), were utilized for object reconstruction. We evaluated the benefits in exploiting simplified and uniform points, as well as different density points, for surface reconstruction. These reconstruction methods and their capacities in handling data imperfections were analyzed and discussed. The findings are that (i) the capacity of surface reconstruction in dealing with diverse objects needs to be improved; (ii) when the number of points reaches the level of millions (e.g., approximately five million points in our data), point simplification is necessary, as otherwise, the reconstruction methods might fail; (iii) for some reconstruction methods, the number of input points is proportional to the number of output meshes; but a few methods are in the opposite; (iv) all reconstruction methods are beneficial from the reduction of running time; and (v) a balance between the geometric details and the level of smoothing is needed. Some methods produce detailed and accurate geometry, but their capacity to deal with data imperfection is poor, while some other methods exhibit the opposite characteristics.
dc.identifier.eissn2072-4292
dc.identifier.olddbid181259
dc.identifier.oldhandle10024/164353
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.utupub.fi/handle/11111/58103
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:fi-fe2021042822397
dc.language.isoen
dc.okm.affiliatedauthorKaartinen, Harri
dc.okm.discipline1171 Geosciencesen_GB
dc.okm.discipline1171 Geotieteetfi_FI
dc.okm.internationalcopublicationnot an international co-publication
dc.okm.internationalityInternational publication
dc.okm.typeA1 ScientificArticle
dc.publisherMDPI
dc.publisher.countrySwitzerlanden_GB
dc.publisher.countrySveitsifi_FI
dc.publisher.country-codeCH
dc.relation.articlenumberARTN 2659
dc.relation.doi10.3390/rs11222659
dc.relation.ispartofjournalRemote Sensing
dc.relation.issue22
dc.relation.volume11
dc.source.identifierhttps://www.utupub.fi/handle/10024/164353
dc.titleMultisource Point Clouds, Point Simplification and Surface Reconstruction
dc.year.issued2019

Tiedostot

Näytetään 1 - 1 / 1
Ladataan...
Name:
remotesensing-11-02659-v2.pdf
Size:
49.82 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Publishers pdf