A Novel Airborne 3D Laser Point Cloud Hole Repair Algorithm Considering Topographic Features

doi:10.11947/j.JGGS.2020.0303

Abstract

Abstract:

Hole repair processing is an important part of point cloud data processing in airborne 3-dimensional (3D) laser scanning technology. Due to the fragmentation and irregularity of the surface morphology, when applying the 3D laser scanning technology to mountain mapping, the conventional mathematical cloud-based point cloud hole repair method is not ideal in practical applications. In order to solve this problem, we propose to repair the valley and ridge line first, and then repair the point cloud hole. The main technical steps of the method include the following points: First, the valley and ridge feature lines are extracted by the GIS slope analysis method; Then, the valley and ridge line missing from the hole are repaired by the mathematical interpolation method, and the repaired results are edited and inserted to the original point cloud; Finally, the traditional repair method is used to repair the point cloud hole whose valley line and ridge line have been repaired. Three experiments were designed and implemented in the east bank of the Xiaobaini River to test the performance of the proposed method. The results showed that compared with the direct point cloud hole repair method in Geomagic Studio software, the average repair accuracy of the proposed method, in the 16m buffer zone of valley line and ridge line, is increased from 56.31cm to 31.49cm. The repair performance is significantly improved.

Key words: airborne 3D laser scanning; point cloud hole repair; topographic feature line extraction; mountain mapping

Zan ZHU, Shu GAN, Jianqi WANG, Nijia QIAN. A Novel Airborne 3D Laser Point Cloud Hole Repair Algorithm Considering Topographic Features[J]. Journal of Geodesy and Geoinformation Science, 2020, 3(3): 29-38.

Figures/Tables 14

Fig.1

Fig.2

Tab.1

Fig.3

Fig.4

Tab.2

Fig.5

Fig.6

Tab.3

Fig.7

Fig.8

Fig.9

Tab.4

Fig.10

References 26

[1]	GUISADO-PINTADO E, JACKSON D W T, ROGERS D. 3D mapping efficacy of a drone and terrestrial laser scanner over a temperate beach-dune zone[J]. Geomorphology, 2019,328:157-172.
[2]	QIU Junlin, XIA Qinglin, YAO Lingqing , et al. Mine geological modeling and application based on the three-dimensional laser scanner technology[J]. Earth Science-Journal of China University of Geosciences, 2012,37(6):1209-1216.
[3]	KASZA D . Modelling of underground objects and geological-tectonic structures from a point cloud: application of the developed models in studies of geodynamic processes[J]. E3s Web of Conferences, 2018,55:00014.
[4]	SANCHEZ V, ZAKHOR A. Planar 3D modeling of building interiors from point cloud data [C]∥Proceedings of the 2012 19th IEEE International Conference on Image Processing. Orlando, FL: IEEE, 2012: 1777-1780.
[5]	MI Chao, SHEN Yang, MI Weijian , et al. Ship identification algorithm based on 3D point cloud for automated ship loaders[J]. Journal of Coastal Research, 2015,73(sp1):28-34.
[6]	GUO Jiateng, LIU Shanjun, ZHANG Peina , et al. Towards semi-automatic rock mass discontinuity orientation and set analysis from 3D point clouds[J]. Computers & Geosciences, 2017,103:164-172.
[7]	YANG Huijun, CHANG Jian, GENG Nan , et al. Texture organisation and mapping on Citrus sinensis point cloud[J]. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 2017,76:14711-14732.
[8]	ZHANG Chengyi, ARDITI D . Automated progress control using laser scanning technology[J]. Automation in Construction, 2013,36:108-116.
[9]	WITT III E C . Evaluation of the U.S. Geological Survey standard elevation products in a two-dimensional hydraulic modeling application for a low relief coastal floodplain[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2015,531:759-767.
[10]	LI Bin, ZHAO Xiaofa, CHEN Yong , et al. Three dimensional laser point cloud slicing method for calculating irregular volume[J]. Journal of Geodesy and Geoinformation Science, 2019,2(4):31-43.
[11]	DENG Fei, ZHANG Zuxun, ZHANG Jianqing . 3D reconstruction of old architecture by laser scanner and digital camera[J]. Science of Surveying and Mapping, 2007,32(2):29-30.
[12]	YANG Bisheng, LIANG Fuxun, HUANG Ronggang . Progress, challenges and perspectives of 3D LIDAR point cloud processing[J]. Acta Geodaetica et Cartographica Sinica, 2017,46(10):1509-1516. DOI: 10.11947/j.AGCS.2017.20170351.
[13]	WANG Jianning, OLIVEIRA M M . Filling holes on locally smooth surfaces reconstructed from point clouds[J]. Image and Vision Computing, 2007,25(1):103-113.
[14]	LIANG P, ZHOU G Q, LU Y L, et al. Hole-filling algorithm for airborne LiDAR point cloud data[C]∥Proceedings of the International Conference on Geomatics in the Big Data Era. Guilin, China: International Society of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing(ISPRS). 2020, XLII-3/W10:739-745.
[15]	LI Hailiang, DENG Fei, LI Gang . Repairing holes of laser scanning point cloud based on photogrammetry[J]. Science of Surveying and Mapping, 2010,35(5):101-102.
[16]	BAREQUET G, SHARIR M . Filling gaps in the boundary of a polyhedron[J]. Computer Aided Geometric Design, 1995,12(2):207-229.
[17]	CAO Junjie, TAGLIASACCHI A, OLSON M, et al. Point cloud skeletons via laplacian based contraction [C]∥Proceedings of 2010 Shape Modeling International Conference. Aix-en-Provence, France: IEEE, 2010.
[18]	QUINSAT Y, LARTIGUE C . Filling holes in digitized point cloud using a morphing-based approach to preserve volume characteristics[J]. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2015,81(1-4):411-421.
[19]	LIU Bin, SHANGGUAN Ning, JIANG Kaiyong , et al. Triangular mesh model reconstruction from scan point clouds based on template[J]. Tsinghua Science & Technology, 2009,14(S1):56-61.
[20]	ZHANG Ruonan, WANG Renfang . Extraction of valley-ridge lines from point-sampled geometry with snake[J]. Journal of Graphics, 2015,36(5):662-670.
[21]	DANIELS II J, HA L K, OCHOTTA T, et al. Robust smooth feature extraction from point clouds [C]∥Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Shape Modeling and Applications 2007. Lyon, France: IEEE, 2007: 123-136.
[22]	LI Min, YANG Xin, CHEN Panpan , et al. Method of automatic shoulder line extraction in the Loess Hilly Area based on point cloud data[J]. Journal of Geo-information Science, 2016,18(7):869-877.
[23]	PAULY M, KEISER R, GROSS M . Multi-scale feature extraction on point-sampled surfaces[J]. Computer Graphics Forum, 2003,22(3):281-289.
[24]	ZHANG Jixian, LIN Xiangguo, LIANG Xinlian . Advances and prospects of information extraction from point clouds[J]. Acta Geodaetica et Cartographica Sinica, 2017,46(10):1460-1469. DOI: 10.11947/j.AGCS.2017.20170345.
[25]	STRAYER D L, BEIGHLEY R E, THOMPSON L C , et al. Effects of land cover on stream ecosystems: roles of empirical models and scaling issues[J]. Ecosystems, 2003,6(5):407-423.
[26]	CHEN Xiang, TONG Xiaohua . Research on points cloud hole filling algorithm and accuracy in triangle mesh[J]. Bulletin of Surveying and Mapping, 2013(4):1-3.

Method	Plane coordinate repair error			Elevation repair error
Method	Max.	Min.	Mean		Max.	Min.	Mean
Lagrange interpolation	26.97	1.66	10.27	7.13		1.64	3.68
Cubic spline interpolation	21.81	0.92	6.12	2.66		0.73	1.42
Piecewise interpolation (cubic)	8.11	1.48	3.00	1.99		0.21	0.80
Piecewise interpolation (linear)	8.11	0.74	2.72	1.70		0.03	0.79

Buffer	Hydrological analysis method					Slope analysis method
	Valley		Ridge				Valley		Ridge
	Number of points	Proportion /(%)		Number of points	Proportion /(%)		Number of points	Proportion /(%)		Number of points	Proportion /(%)
0.5m	8	11.4	18		20.2	9		12.7	21		22.8
1.5m	22	31.4	40		44.9	27		38.0	50		54.3
3.0m	40	57.1	62		69.7	50		70.4	68		73.9
5.0m	56	80	81		91	69		97.2	91		98.9
Total points	70	—	89		—	71		—	92		—

Buffer	Valley		Ridge
Buffer	Number of points	Proportion /(%)		Number of points	Proportion /(%)
0.5m	1	12.5	3		37.5
1.0m	3	37.5	5		62.5
1.5m	5	62.5	8		100
2.0m	8	100	8		100

Buffer	Valley hole		Ridge hole
Buffer	Routine method	Improvement method		Routine method	Improvement method
0~4m	112.27	32.25	82.2		56.33
4~8m	72.8	38.23	64.37		42.51
8~12m	33.18	24.25	57.44		41.36
12~16m	27.5	13.2	48.65		25.43
16~20m	21.4	2.11	39.47		20.69
Average accuracy	53.43	22.01	58.43		37.26