Tuesday, September 10, 2019

Annotated Bibliography

Bibliography:

To begin writing the whitepaper for 3D modeling, initial research must be done. This is a compiled list of valuable sources found that proves the need for this research to be done. Several of these sources also explain where they fall short and how research can be done better taking outside variables into consideration.

One of the databases used was google scholar. This was a useful tool as it provided a vast amount of information as easy as doing a typical Google search. One thing difficult about google scholar was that it was challenging to get correct citations and keep all of the articles found in order. Another database used was Purdue libraries. This was extremely useful as it provided access to several different databases. This made it easier to find relevant, high quality articles. One disadvantage to Purdue Libraries is that it is easy to get lost within the several databases. Accidentally searching only one database rather than all of them at once is quite common.

Full Bibliography:

Alidoost, F., and H. Arefi. “Comparison Of Uas-Based Photogrammetry Software For 3D Point
Cloud Generation: A Survey Over A Historical Site.” ISPRS Annals of Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, IV-4/W4, 2017, pp. 55–61., doi:10.5194/isprs-annals-iv-4-w4-55-2017.

Asperl, Andreas. “How to Teach CAD.” Computer-Aided Design and Applications, vol. 2, no. 1-4, 2005, pp. 459–468., doi:10.1080/16864360.2005.10738395.

Erenoglu, Ramazan Cuneyt, et al. “An UAS-Assisted Multi-Sensor Approach for 3D Modeling and Reconstruction of Cultural Heritage Site.” Journal of Cultural Heritage, vol. 26, 2017, pp. 79–90., doi:10.1016/j.culher.2017.02.007.

Grenzdörffer, G. J. “Crop Height Determination with UAS Point Clouds.” ISPRS - International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, XL-1, July 2014, pp. 135–140., doi:10.5194/isprsarchives-xl-1-135-2014.

Hinge, L., et al. “Comparative Analysis Of 3D Photogrammetry Modeling Software Packages For Drones Survey.” ISPRS - International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, XLII-4/W12, 2019, pp. 95–100., doi:10.5194/isprs-archives-xlii-4-w12-95-2019.

Héno, Raphaële, and Laure Chandelier. “3D Digitization Using Images.” 3D Modeling of Buildings, 2014, pp. 21–83., doi:10.1002/9781118648889.ch2.

Jóźków, G., et al. “Experiments With Uas Imagery For Automatic Modeling Of Power Line 3D Geometry.” ISPRS - International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, XL-1/W4, 2015, pp. 403–409., doi:10.5194/isprsarchives-xl-1-w4-403-2015.

Liang, Xinlian, et al. “The Use of a Hand-Held Camera for Individual Tree 3D Mapping in Forest Sample Plots.” Remote Sensing, vol. 6, no. 7, 2014, pp. 6587–6603., doi:10.3390/rs6076587.

Molnar, Andras. “3D Reconstruction of Monuments from Drone Photographs Based on The Spatial Reconstruction of The Photogrammetric Method.” Advances in Science, Technology and Engineering Systems Journal, vol. 3, no. 6, 2018, doi:10.25046/aj030633.

Muliady, et al. “UAV Photogrammetry for Generating 3D Campus Model.” 2019, doi:10.1063/1.5098281.

Noor, Norzailawati Mohd, et al. “3D City Modeling Using Multirotor Drone For City Heritage Conservation.” Planning Malaysia Journal, vol. 17, no. 9, June 2019, doi:10.21837/pmjournal.v17.i9.610.

Oniga, E., et al. “Accuracy Assessment Of A Complex Building 3D ModelReconstructed From Images Acquired With A Low-Cost Uas.” ISPRS - International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, XLII-2/W3, 2017, pp. 551–558., doi:10.5194/isprs-archives-xlii-2-w3-551-2017.

Paor, Declan G. De, and Steven J. Whitmeyer. “Geological and Geophysical Modeling on Virtual Globes Using KML, COLLADA, and Javascript.” Computers & Geosciences, vol. 37, no. 1, 2011, pp. 100–110., doi:10.1016/j.cageo.2010.05.003.

Remondino, F., et al. “Uav Photogrammetry For Mapping And 3D Modeling – Current Status And Future Perspectives.” ISPRS - International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, XXXVIII-1/C22, June 2012, pp. 25–31., doi:10.5194/isprsarchives-xxxviii-1-c22-25-2011.

Xu, Hanwei, et al. “Research for 3D Visualization of Digital City Based on SketchUp and ArcGIS.” International Symposium on Spatial Analysis, Spatial-Temporal Data Modeling, and Data Mining, 2009, doi:10.1117/12.838558.


Jeremy Cousins, Multipatch and Thermal:
Noor, N.M., Abdullah, A.A.A., Abdullah, A., Ibrahim, I., & Sabeek, S. (2019). 3D city
 modeling using multirotor drone for city heritage conservation. Planning Malaysia,
 17(1), 338-349 https://purdue-primo-prod.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/1c3q7im/TN_scopus2-s2.0-85065715369
The goal of this article is to emphasise the usage of drones in urban planning and as a platform for data collection. This type of data is used so city planners can see how the future building would affect the urban area in a real world setting. The study attempts to construct a 3D Malay city based on data collected from a multi-rotor. Kota Bharu is the study area. The area is near a river and the city was strategically planned by the Sultan during its building phase. The sultan put the palace in the center of the city with temples, government buildings, and government officials homes right outside of the palace to keep the most important assets of the city protected
A DJI Phantom 3 was used as the UAS platform to carry out the mission. Pix4Dcapture was used to program waypoints for the Phantom while Agisoft software was used to process the UAS images. GIS software such as MapInfo and ArcGIS were used in finalizing the urban form analysis. The UAS was set at an altitude of 150 meters with an 80% frontal overlap and a 65% side overlap. These setting produced 793 images. The analysis investigated the land use, streets, and buildings on the heritage site.
This study was very useful for validating multipatch and it’s capabilities. Although Pix4D is a very useful software, to process 793 images would take hours on a high end computer. This is where ArcPro can be very useful. Rather than mapping the entire city as they did, specs on the buildings could be acquired and far less pictures could be taken resulting in an even faster turnaround time. This study also shows how useful UAS capabilities can be to help plan city layouts and see how new buildings or streets can affect the surrounding areas. 
Hinge, L., Gundorph, J., Ujang, U., Azri, S., Anton, F., and Abdul Rahman, A.:
 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF 3D PHOTOGRAMMETRY MODELING
 SOFTWARE PACKAGES FOR DRONES SURVEY, Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote
 Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., XLII-4/W12, 95-100, https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-4-W12-95-2019, 2019.
The goal of this article is to compare 3D modeling softwares such as EyesMap3D, Drone Deploy, Agisoft PhotoScan, and Pix4Dmapper. A golf course in Horsholm, Denmark was used as the study area to test the capabilities of each software package. The goal was to create a model of the golf course using tie points. 24 Paper markers were printed out and used as ground control points for tie point accuracy and GCP accuracy. A Phantom 4 was used as the UAS platform to map the golf course. Since the study took place in Denmark, strict UAS regulations were followed to make sure the study was legal.
The results showed that each software had their own advantages in disadvantages. Due to a more dense point cloud being produced, Dronedeploy and Pix4D were able to show the trees the best on the gold course. Dronedeploy and Pix4D also leads the competition in detecting elevation. Agisoft Photoscan had the most detailed texture but failed to show any elevation most likely due to the low amount of tie points produced. Drone Deploy and Pix4D were also able to make out a trash can on the golf course when Agisoft Photoscan failed to do so. EyesMap3D may have been the best software for 3D modeling, however, prior knowledge in photogrammetry is needed to use the software properly. 
This study showed the capabilities of Pix4D. This was reassuring as Pix4D is the software I am most familiar with. This also showed how each software is superior in one aspect or the other. In terms of user friendliness and capabilities, Pix4D wins this competition due to accurate elevation mapping and the point cloud being superior than other software packages. Pix4D will be the go to 3D modeling software throughout the capstone project. 
Kim, C., Moon, H., & Lee, W. (2016). International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote
 Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences - ISPRS Archives, 41, 31-33
This purpose of this article is to explain the functionality of UAS platforms in disaster sites and to develop the use of these technologies. In order to safely and efficiently gather data on the disaster site, UAS platforms have been an essential tool. With this information, they can then process and create a 3D model of the site to better understand dangerous areas or areas to help first. The UAS platform was equipped with GPS, AHRS, and IMU. The DJI Ronin gimbal was used to install the stereo-vision camera module. 
After the platform gathers the images of the disaster site, a 3D model is then created. The location of each picture is geotagged. A depth map is created which is then merged with a point cloud. From here, close to true measurements can be taken from the 3D model that has been generated.
Although this article did not specifically explain 3D models in the sense of what our capstone is focusing on, this is a good proof of concept on other areas this technology can help with. This could also be used for the reconstruction process of a disaster site and to plan how the city will be rebuilt. This technology could also be used during the cleanup phase of a disaster site and how to efficiently do it. This would not be the best way to perform a search and rescue operations as it would take a good amount of time to gather the data and then process all of the images. By the time there is a full 3D model, there would already have been several casualties. 
Oniga, E., Chirilă, C., & Stătescu, F. (2017). ACCURACY ASSESSMENT OF A COMPLEX
 BUILDING 3D MODEL RECONSTRUCTED FROM IMAGES ACQUIRED WITH A
 LOW-COST UAS. The International Archives of Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing
 and Spatial Information Sciences, XLII-2/W3(2), 551-558.   
The goal of this study is to determine if a UAS platform and respective software packages can create an accurate 3D model of a complex building structure.The chosen study area was in Iasi, Romania due to its complex structure and a roof shaped as a paraboloid. Three ground control points were used and four were used as checkpoints for accuracy assessment. A standard Phantom 3 was used as the UAS platform. The images were taken at 15 meters above ground with a total of 63 images being collected. To check the accuracy of the 3D model created, the coordinates of the checkpoints were measured and compared ones that were found using GNSS technology.
The results show the back side and the right side of the building being very distrurbed. This was due to trees and foliage around those areas blocking the cameras view of the building. Out of the four checkpoints coordinates, three of them could not be measured due to trees blocking the view. The conclusions showed that the software was able to recreate the building structure with close to exact accuracy. The best software package that they tested ended up being Drone2Map since it produced a dense point cloud and was the most accurate with the least amount of error. 
This study was extremely useful. It explains and guarantees that no matter how complex a building’s architecture may be, the software will be able to recreate it accurately. Although Pix4D is not a software they tested, it is good to know that Drone2Map is the next best option to use. It would have been interesting to see how Pix4D compared to Drone2Map with accuracy and point cloud creation. 
Andras Molnar. (2018). 3D Reconstruction of Monuments from Drone Photographs Based
 on The Spatial Reconstruction of The Photogrammetric Method. Advances in
 Science, Technology and Engineering Systems, 3(6), 252-258.  
This study explains using UAS platforms to 3D model and reconstruct historic monuments. The goal of the study is to create a virtual museum with notable historic monuments as well as explain other useful ways this technology can be used. A DJI Inspire 1 was the UAS platform used for this study. In order to create a 3D model, several pictures of the object must be taken at slightly different angles with overlap. From there, the exact location of where the image was taken is needed for the software to be able to stitch it together. Pictures can even be taken randomly as long as every part of the object is photographed and each image has a slight overlap. If part of the building is covered by an object such as a tree, although difficult, it is possible to remove that object within the software.
For parts of a building such as a cross on the top of the church, up close photos are needed to reconstruct it. This proves to be difficult and can sometimes trick the software. Shadowed sides of structures were also poorly reconstructed due to not enough light hitting them making it difficult for the software to create. Follow up filtering of unneeded points and other objects in the model was necessary. This made the 3D model more accurate and gave it an all around cleaner look. Only unprocessed images can be used for the 3D model. If the images are filtered and changed beforehand, it will drastically decrease the quality of the finished product. 
This study explained many key points when constructing a 3D model. The tips on weather and what tricks the software was very useful information. It should also be noted that the information regarding using unprocessed images is also very useful as it can ruin a 3D model. This study showed the importance of 3D modeling and how easy it can be in respect to traditional methods. It also showed the different uses of this technology and where the technology can go from here.   
Evan Brueggemann
             
Józków, G., & Toth, C. (2015). EXPERIMENTS WITH UAS IMAGERY FOR AUTOMATIC MODELING OF POWER LINE 3D GEOMETRY. The International Archives of Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, XL-1/W4(1), 403-409.
The purpose of the following study was to test the potential for using UAS technology for making 3D models for powerline inspection. The study first begins by describing the most popular current method that includes using helicopters equipped with platforms and LiDAR systems.  Data collection with this system is fast but is costly when using such expensive equipment. The UAS approach proposed in this study consists of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) cameras which are very affordable in comparison to other systems using LiDAR. 
            The method for data collection in this study was to use high resolution images of the powerlines to create a dense point cloud that can be used to stitch the images together.  This method is similar to LiDAR applications that use point clouds to base 3D models off of. The results from the study vary. It was concluded that in order to have the most accurate model, one needs to ensure that it includes high amounts of overlap and sidelap.  The accuracy of the model was approximated at 8 centimeters in the horizontal and 6 centimeters in the vertical axis. 
            This study showed that UAS technology has the potential to replace the much more expensive methods for powerline inspection. The study also displays how the easily available UAS technology can help with everyday inspections and commercial work. The data presented in this study helps people understand that even affordable technology can be utilized to create high quality imagery.

Grenzdörffer, G. (2014). Crop height determination with UAS point clouds. The International Archives of Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, XL-1(1), 135-140.
The goal for this study was to accurately determine the crop height to help make comparisons with biomass and predicting yield.  Knowing the crop height is important because it helps predict what crop yields could be and aids with analyzing the land. There are many methods currently being used for determining crop height.  A popular system used are laser scanners mounted to the tractor to find the height. Although these systems are accurate their coverage is limited. There are two methods presented in this study. One method includes using a UAS surface model to compare with the digital terrain model.  The crop height is determined by taking the difference between the two models. This is called the “difference method”. The next method includes making a 3D-point cloud of the vegetation. This method does not require a digital terrain model for comparison.
            The tests for this study were conducted at the University of Rostock, Germany.  Different crops were used in order to check the accuracy across many species of vegetation. In this study, it emphasizes the errors that could be associated with the accuracy of crop height.  Three possible sources of error were identified. They include errors in relation to UAS surveying, data processing, and the crop’s life cycle. These errors can be mitigated with the proper steps and verifying which method results in the least amount of errors acceptable.
            The study found that the “difference method” was the recommended approach when determining crop height.  The 3D-point cloud struggled with finding the height for crops due to the always changing variables. Surveying smaller fields proved difficult for the 3D-point cloud because it was unable to find many ground control points in the plot.  However, Grenzdörffer’s study on crop height shows how useful the “difference method” for use in future applications. The “difference method” is easier and faster when measuring crop height. This method does not require nearly as much strenuous work that the point cloud requires for accurate data.
Sullivan-Nightengale, D. (2015). Unmanned Aerial Systems: Risks & Opportunities in the Workplace. Professional Safety, 60(3), 34-42.
The main purpose behind this article is to outline the hazards that relate to UAS operations and how to properly apply them to the workplace.  Many workplaces do not understand the proper laws and regulations that must be followed for legal UAS operations. This means that the majority do not know what steps to take in order to have safe missions. The article breaks the process down to four aspects: aircraft, control system, people, and operational environment.
The article first describes the origin of UAS flights and what sizes they can range from.  Small UAS systems usually consist of materials made from Styrofoam and different plastics. The larger the UAS means it requires more sturdy and reliable materials.  According to Sullivan-Nightengale, the military is known for putting less value on UAS systems because they are more expendable being unmanned.
The next major section covered was communication. Communication is a key concept in our research for UAS.  It is crucial to have proper links to the aircraft for safe operations. Three components are discussed that can be affected by link loss.  The two radios and the GPS link are sources of possible failure. Before flights, it is important for the flight crew to create a flight operations quality assurance (FOQA) program.  By following this system, crews have a better opportunity for a successful and safe operation.
This article was incredibly helpful for our topic. It highlights the importance of mitigating risks and how to manage a proper UAS operation.  This article is crucial in helping our group decide how to conduct our weekly flights and how to prepare for them.
F. Alidoost, & H. Arefi. (2017). COMPARISON OF UAS-BASED PHOTOGRAMMETRY SOFTWARE FOR 3D POINT CLOUD GENERATION: A SURVEY OVER A HISTORICAL SITE. ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, IV-4-W4(4), 55-61.
The purpose for this study was mainly to compare the differences between software such as 3DSurvey, Agisoft Photoscan, Pix4Dmapper Pro, and SURE when creating 3D-point clouds.  The digital surface models created will also be used to further compare the software. The location used for the data in the study is the historical site of Harireh located in Kish Island, Iran.
            The differences found between the software was interesting.  The Agisoft Photoscan software created the most final dense points while the Pix4Dmapper had the highest number of extracted points per individual image.  However, it was found that the final quality of the 3D model did not differ greatly from each other due to their own individual errors. Each rendering experienced problems with gaping near trees and other hidden areas.
            This study was incredibly useful for determining which software we should use for the completion of our research project.  The study did a great job of laying out which aspects of the data collection are more time consuming with certain software.  With our topic we will most likely be sticking to Pix4D to process our data since the study found this software to be very efficient.
Jazayeri, Rajabifard, & Kalantari. (2014). A geometric and semantic evaluation of 3D data sourcing methods for land and property information. Land Use Policy, 36, 219-230.
The article discusses the challenges that are encountered with working with 2D models and property information.  The purpose of the article is to display the benefits of using 3D building information to help transition away from current 2D models.  With the increasing complexity with modern buildings, 2D models become even more challenging to use making them near obsolete.
            Different forms for gathering the 3D models are discussed, but the one I would like to focus on in the article is the use of UAS to collect images.  The article points out specific limitations that a UAS possesses and which aspects it excels at. There is a large emphasis on the variety of equipment and sensors that can be mounted on the UAS.  The cameras our research directly deals with is the rgb and thermal camera. The article highlights previous applications of UAS being used around the world. One example was seen in Alaska, the UAS was excellent for reaching remote areas where surveyors have difficulties collecting accurate data.
            Key elements of this article included relevant applications of UAS and the different approaches to implementing them.  I will be able to use this source as a guide to which route I will take to process the collected data. This article does a great job of showing the importance of 3D building information and what the future looks like for it. 
James Borders
Paor, D. G. D., & Whitmeyer, S. J. (2011). Geological and geophysical modeling on virtual globes using KML, COLLADA, and Javascript. Computers & Geosciences, 37(1), 100–110. doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2010.05.003
This article is written to show how virtual globes could be advanced from the current resolution. It uses NASA’s WindWorld and Google Earth as its two biggest examples. Right now, they are able to create these virtual globes using KML or Keyhole Markup Language. KML does create these 3D models, but it takes a lot of additional editing and blending, and even then it creates patches where the terrain is poorly rendered and causes poor response time when manipulating the model. 
Previously, Data Pyramids had to be created by hand for all of the terrain and every 3D feature that would be created on the virtual globe. This took excessive man hours and once the object was moved or edited, it had problems realigning perfectly again. Due to this, an alternate way to portrait 3D models needed to be used. COLLADA, Collaborative Design Activity files, are now up and coming and looking like an amazing solution.with COLLADA files, image pyramids are created a lot easier and allowed for extra definition like strikes and dips in the Earth’s terrain without causing the responsiveness of the application to falter. 
The extra definition and efficiency that COLLADA files bring to the table allow for new data to be shown and compared. For example, this article writes about raising the island of Hawaii and creating a surface bump out, where the elevation was raised and the dip of the subduction zone of tectonic plates were easily compared. From the figures shown, it looks to be the same process as multipatch, which leads me to think that more things may be done with Multipatch than we previously believed. Another thing that is done using COLLADA files  is that they are lowered onto the terrain and used to create geologic and geophysical data of different time periods of Earth’s continental crust, allowing for a time-based comparison to be easily illustrated using a slider.
Xu, H., Badawi, R., Fan, X., Ren, J., & Zhang, Z. (2009). Research for 3D visualization of Digital City based on SketchUp and ArcGIS. International Symposium on Spatial Analysis, Spatial-Temporal Data Modeling, and Data Mining. doi: 10.1117/12.838558
This article has two main sections. In its first section, it compares five different #d model formats and shows pros and cons on them. The ones that are relevant to my research include looking at AutoCAD, ArcGIS, and Google SketchUp. While it does have a valid con of ArcGIS, the data structure and platform making the creation of 3D models as a standalone software is quite difficult, it also goes on to show how AutoCAD and Google SketchUp can be used in collaboration with ArcGIS to create a top of the line 3D model.
This article was written recently enough to go into depth on MultiPatch, a new featureclass in ArcGIS. It goes into downsides of Multipatch, saying that debugging is a difficulty because the two interfaces ‘IconstructMultiPatch’ and ‘IgeneralMultiPatchCreater’ are in fact interfaces and cause some bugs to be created in the use of them. Along with that, setting textures and material parameters can be quite difficult but gets easier once you are used to the program. 
While the paper goes on for awhile stating the upsides of SketchUp, eventually it starts to show the collaboration between ArcGIS and SketchUp. ArcGIS requires a coordinate system to be integrated at all times or the data cannot be exported into the Multipatch format to allow for easy modeling. The MultiPatch file can be created from either Google SketchUp or the Multipatch function from ArcPro. Then once the photos of the building are patched on using either software, they recommend creating it in ArcGlobe or ArcScene, where multiple Multipatch files or COLLADA files can be brought in at once, easily creating a 3D model of a city.
Erenoglu, R. C., Akcay, O., & Erenoglu, O. (2017). An UAS-assisted multi-sensor approach for 3D modeling and reconstruction of cultural heritage site. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 26, 79–90. doi: 10.1016/j.culher.2017.02.007


This article goes in depth on why 3D modeling cultural heritage sites is important, and the ways that modeling takes place. In their example data, they talked about archaeology ruins in Hungary, Germany, and Italy. The first use of a copter UAS was in Italy when it was taking an orthomosaic of a Roman Villa.  They flew missions in RGB, Thermal, and Multispectral imaging to gather data that they could not previously obtain. This type of Non-destructive testing allows for reconstruction and protection of the cultural sites in the case of any damage or aging.
Different outfits of unmanned systems are used for different functions in the reconstruction of these sites. A fixed wing system is recommended for orthomosaics and gathering mainly 2D data, but it can easily cover more range than rotor systems. Rotor systems are more maneuverable and allow for the camera angle to be changed, giving different angles for a 3D model. Now the payload is also changible, the use of an IMU allows for interior sites to be mapped, where no GPS signal could be obtained. 
The use of 3D modeling and UAS have brought new light to archaeology. It allows for data to be gathered easier and looked at differently. Archaeologists are now commonly using unmanned systems in the field and are looking at UAS specialists to hire and create the data now available.
Remondino, F., Barazzetti, L., Nex, F., Scaioni, M., & Sarazzi, D. (2012). Uav Photogrammetry For Mapping And 3D Modeling – Current Status And Future Perspectives. ISPRS - International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, XXXVIII-1/C22, 25–31. doi: 10.5194/isprsarchives-xxxviii-1-c22-25-2011
This article shows Unmanned Systems as if the reader was completely new to them. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but most of this paper has to be skimmed as it goes into basics that we have been covering for a couple of years, like what modes it can fly in, or how it gathers data. Once that data is parsed through, there is some interesting topics about 3D modeling and careers that UAS can be used for. 
3D modeling can be used in a variety of careers. These include Forestry and Agriculture, Archaeology, Environmental Surveying, and traffic monitoring. Forestry and agriculture use 3D modeling get accurate data on what they are observing. For farmers, this is called precision farming and can be used for things like feed efficiency or for forestry it can be used for things like assessment of woodlots.
Archaeology uses UAS to document and save 3D maps of the sites so new data can be collected. Traffic Monitoring is using UAS to simulate travel time estimation and efficiency.  Applications of all the 3D modeling in UAS include seeing an aerial view from a closer perspective than what was previously available. This article showed me that 3D modeling can be used for far more things than I previously imagined.
Muliady, Sartika, E. M., Lesmana, C., & Elizabeth. (2019). UAV photogrammetry for generating 3D campus model. doi: 10.1063/1.5098281
This article shows how 3D modeling a college campus could be viable. While it just used the basics that many UAS majors would know how to do, it gave good information on what to do with 3D models that are created. It just uses simple integrated software to process the orthophoto and meshing that allows for a 3D model to be easily created.
Doing a base orthomosaic of the building allowed them to create a basemap, but instead of using an angled camera, you could gather the fronts of the buildings and create a MultiPatch, which would allow for greater efficiency while processing that data. Instead of having problems putting the orthomosaics together, which they did, you could export them into a COLLADA file then import it into ArcScene or another 3D model view software, allowing for better creation of the model.
They used this to compare the phases of construction of a building, but many more things could be completed based off the data that was collected since they gathered multiple buildings. They could use this to create a 3D model of the entire campus, where you can gather hotspots of when it is the busiest and how to relieve those spots. It could be used to estimate walk times from place to place, along with many more things.
 Austin Sullins
Liang, Xinlian, et al. “The Use of a Hand-Held Camera for Individual Tree 3D Mapping in Forest Sample Plots.” MDPI, Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, 18 July 2014, https://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/6/7/6587/htm.
Simply being able to scan a building is something that would make my life a lot easier in this project because then I could just use that file in the muti-patch software and be able to have the entire building perfectly 3D mapped in a matter of minutes compared to hours that it takes now. Unfortunately for me that technology won’t be around and free by the time that this project is due, however  what this is saying is that it is on its way soon! The ability to take whatever smart phone you have and be able to aim it at a tree or building and have the dimensions of it is coming quickly.
This means that I should in theory be able to go and personally measure a few buildings such as the beef unit with a simple rangefinder. This is critical because I am specifically trying to find which process is going to be the fastest to get the 3D modeling done no matter how you do it. I want to look outside the box when thinking about how to get this data because I believe we don’t grow thinking on the box.
I now have one more way to time my process and ad one more sample into the data. Also it allows me to be able to see into the future a little on where the industry and this technology is going. If we can put this technology toward the 3D mapping then there is no saying you can't take a scan of a house for sale and 5 photos and have a perfect 3D image in the matter of 3 minutes.
“How to Teach CAD.” Taylor & Francis, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/16864360.2005.10738395.
I have never taken a single day of a CAD class in my life and with the way it is looking is I am going to have to be able to teach people the basics of how to use a CAD system such as Catia. SoI need to have a general basis of how to make a simple step by step process inorder to assure that the subjects in our sample with be spending the time making the 3D model instead of blankly staring at the screen. 
I wasn’t able to learn much straightforward knowledge from the article, but I was able to learn a lot of valuable information on how to present the steps. This article was not clean on how to do things and was written as if I was just a bad teacher with failing students that I couldn’t communicate with. Instead what I really needed was an article that showed me how to do the steps and told me why I’m doing these steps and this is something that I am going to include in my report, I want someone off the streets to be able to walk in sit down and do the work and not feel like they need a doctorate just to even work with the data.
I realize that CAD is a very helpful tool that is being used in all sorts of real world applications I just feel like there has to be an easier way to do it than what is being said in this article. I should be able to just input numbers and have it start working it out I shouldn’t have to do all this work to get one straight line. Thankfully I learned a few tips and shortcuts, but I am still hesitant.
Chen, Jorge, and Kieth C. Clarke. “Sitepress.org.” Sitepress.org, https://scitepress.org/papers/2017/63642/63642.pdf.
There is one section in this article that just confirmed all of the things I have been reading about how to make a model and how to do it fast and efficient! Now in the article they are doing modeling on a smaller scale but they are using the same process to make the models. It goes into detail about using scan-to-CAD and Scan-to-BIM to make accurate models. However I did confirm one of my fears and that is that I will be very hard to find some sort of perfect digital copies to make these diagrams.
This article I believe will be my single most important piece I will be working with this entire semester because I shows how they were troubleshooting all of their problems and how they worked through them and where they went for all of their data. This is critical for me because I will be able to use their techniques while making and perfecting my own to teach to the sample students we are going to time for our research.
Prior to this article I thought there was only one website for cities and towns to find information on the land plots and now I have three that I will be able to cross match and find exact measurements and be able to get the data uploaded asap and be very efficient. 
“US9881416B2 - Obtaining 3D Modeling Data Using UAVs for Cell Sites.” Google Patents, Google, https://patents.google.com/patent/US9881416B2/en.
This article is all about the steps and process that was followed to be able to create the ability to 3D map a cell cite. This entire article isn’t necessarily useful however the way that it is set up and how the metadata is laid out and is easy to follow is very useful. You can follow every step of his process without any mishaps or confusion which is one thing I struggled with this summer being able to get right. Being able to have a visual of a paper that has a different style then I’ve seen before has already given me new ideas on how to lay out my information for this project that will be able to catch the users eye, but still remain useful and professional.

I know that I only used this article for a certain amount of information however  I believe it showed me more than just what we can see on the surface because I didn’t know how many people were even looking into real world application of fast 3D modeling and to see that it is not only being chased after by larger companies but it is being pursued by somewhat everyday people really set a new spark inside of me to know that we can do something great with this project.

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)