If ... when comes the day that laser scanners prices fall, could laser scanners become a tool of the boundary surveyor?
Until yesterday, I was not aware of the very limited range of the low-end laser scanners(about 200-250 meter?).
What I want to know, is are the laser scanners capable of turning a single angle to a single point, to a greater distance than when the laser "does it's thing"?
I can only imagine a laser scanner, with the typical range of say 200+meters, being able to coincidently measure accurate individual angles with the range of a distance meter.
If the price were to eventually fall to something like $15k or $20k, something like this would/could be the cat's meow on a boundary survey.
You run the boundary rather conventionally and get all this additional data of "things", all along the boundary as such that if you wanted to stake a line, you could return and use 1" saplings near the line to measure an offset, or if your pin was disturbed you could actually check into 5-10-20 trees or saplings to find where the pin was originally set(or mistakenly set).
I could really have fun with a usable 3-d laser scanner on a boundary survey.
Of course, after buying the much reduced laser unit, I wonder if I could afford the software and I wonder if my mind would go into data overload???
You'd beat your head on the desk suffering from data overload.
This is scan data of weeds growing between the cracks of stones on the C&O Canal. Extrapolate that to trying to pick out saplings along a wooded boundary.
> If ... when comes the day that laser scanners prices fall, could laser scanners become a tool of the boundary surveyor?
It would be like killing a fly with a shot gun....
But then you never know....
[flash width=560 height=315] http://www.youtube.com/v/-oYl-Lm9a6U?hl=en_US&version=3&rel=0 [/flash]
Each tool we use from the surveyors toolbox has its place to streamline current procedures and increase efficiencies on a project. The scanners realm is not in the standard boundary arena due to:
Enormous amount of data it provides that needs to be filtered through to get a simple location of an object.
Time needed for a tech to filter through said data in the office.
Time needed in the field to set up at multiple positions to capture full objects.
For topo of any kind, the scanners are amazing. We rent one, when a project comes along that we can fully utilise its awesomeness.
Just my 0.02c
> For topo of any kind, the scanners are amazing.
Especially urban hardscape
Here is a cut and paste of an idea I came up with awhile back.
It will be fueled by nano technology - staggering computing power - massive digital storage.
Laser scanning will be incorporated into markets that include advertisement, entertainment, video games, 3D cameras, ect. The technology will mature at a rate directly proportional to the size of the market share.
----------------------------
iFocus3D
The technology with the ability to assign a 3D coordinate to each pixel of a massively high resolution image, that is linked to another data set taken from a different aspect, linked to a different aspect, instantaneously as the camera moves. The data will be processed using software that takes advantage of the nature in which your brain processes what your eyes see. Product = a geographically correct 3D image. The laser, will also be the camera, capturing a single pixle.
A "picture" would be defined as a complete data set that includes all of the pixels within the field of view for a given aspect.
Rather than snapping a single "picture" at a single set focus, it will capture thousands of pictures for each aspect, each with a different depth of focus.
The viewing device will have two cameras on the front that will monitor your eyes to detect exactly where you are looking on the display as well as the depth of your focus. The image will automatically and instantaneously load the correct set of images to match your depth of focus. This will give the 3D image incredible depth. You will actually be able to zoom in with your eyes, look around, and have amazing clarity due to the depth of focus in the image matching the depth of focus of your eye. This is how they will be able to take advantage of a digital image that has a higher resolution than the human eye can detect - depth.
Advertisers will be the first to take advantage of this by partnering with display manufacturers.
They will direct your attention to a specific area of the image that shows their product, either in the foreground or the background, causing you to focus in on the product, everything else becoming less focused, thus highlighting their product until you look at other things in the image. They will use similar techniques as a magician.
They will gather a huge database linked to your account that keeps track of products you look at the most, which techniques work the best to focus your attention to their product, and what type of branding works the best. You will be so amazed with the technology that you will not care that there are hidden advertisements.
Because this approach would be limited to working with only 1 viewer at a time, the technology will first be incorporated into personal devices such as digital glasses, games, smart phones and digital books. The advertizing will be so sucessful, that the corporations will fund the expansion of a massive communication network supporting realtime delivery of this technology.
--------------------
I hereby lay claim to the rights for royalties if this technology is invented per my idea, recorded this day on the internet for perpetuity.
I agree that data overload is the issue, as posted in a post above. I tried it. There is just too much stuff to deal with to make it practical to do it that way. Even with high speed computer, there is just to much stuff to make it faster. Also, if you get out in the sun with something like a Faro, you may become terribly disappointed in the range. I was, but I am sure that is a matter of opinion. All said and done, based upon what I have seen, just doing it with a conventional total station, robot, gps are still the way to go.
> If the price were to eventually fall to something like $15k or $20k, something like this would/could be the cat's meow on a boundary survey.
> .......
> Of course, after buying the much reduced laser unit, I wonder if I could afford the software and I wonder if my mind would go into data overload???
Prices are going to continue to drop as the tech is starting to grow in demand by engineers. More scanner build companies are getting involved too.
As far as the boundary is concerned in a typical urban area I think it could be valuable for ALTA type surveys. It really does take a fairly complete digital mosaic of the current conditions. Extracting the data is a skill much as any other.
The Leica C-10 we use has a huge learning curve, but there are plenty of tools to help trim out the data. Breaklines are what we try to create. It is often easier using standard field techniques than sitting in an office trying to determine where they are. Utility identification can be difficult. Without photos it would be impossible.
As an archival snapshot of the conditions, it's hard to beat. Lot of pluses, some minuses.
It is still a cool tool to use.
Everybody hears laser scanning and they get all hot and heavy between the legs. Here is the problem. The value of laser scanning is not in boundary work (with a possible exception of urban ALTAs). But laser scanning is best used for mechanical applications. Even if they do get cheap, AutoCAD can't handle that many points, Microstation can't handle that many points and neither can Carlsons Scanning software. I find also that any thing past 10-20 feet there is just really crappy resolution (point data density). I scan for a living right now and I wish I was surveying again. Scanning is monkey business. Any knuckle dragging nitwit who can push a button can operate a scanner and there is little on the back end unless you want to completely leave traditional Surveying. Hate to sound so negative about a sexy new gadget, but it is not like GPS where there are huge gains in surveying productivity even if the equipment is expensive. Just my .04'
C. Tompkins,
Man, did you ever hit that nail on the head accurately. I totally agree 100% except for isolated uses.
