Assessing the number and placement of ground control points in low-cost UAV photogrammetry
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32347/tit.2024.7.2.03.9Keywords:
UAV photogrammetry, Ground Control Points, TLS, accuracy optimization, DJI Phantom 4Abstract
Abstract. This study examines the impact of the number and placement of Ground Control Points (GCPs) on the accuracy of photogrammetric results using low-cost UAVs. The relevance of this research stems from the growing popularity and applicability of UAV photogrammetry, particularly in areas with diverse terrains and requirements for precise spatial data. The experiment leverages modern photogrammetric techniques, including Structure from Motion (SfM) algorithms, to analyze how GCP configurations affect error distribution and model accuracy.
The study's first phase focused on evaluating the influence of GCP placement at varying heights. A photogrammetric survey was conducted at the Kyiv Hippodrome, utilizing terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) to establish high-precision coordinates for control points. The data acquisition involved the DJI Phantom 4 Pro V2 UAV, with multiple flight missions capturing images at 30-degree camera deviations from the nadir. Points were systematically analyzed by alternating their roles as GCPs and Control Points (CPs). The results demonstrated that errors significantly increased when CPs were located further from the UAV camera, emphasizing the need for proximity in GCP placement.
The second phase analyzed how GCP configurations and quantities influence photogrammetric model accuracy. By forming 12 groups of GCPs, each varying in distribution and number, the study identified optimal setups for minimizing errors. Groups with evenly distributed points across the survey area, comprising at least eight GCPs, exhibited the lowest root mean square errors (RMSE). Conversely, configurations with GCPs concentrated along a single side or solely on the survey area's edges resulted in substantial inaccuracies.
Key findings reveal that an effective GCP placement strategy involves prioritizing proximity to the UAV camera and achieving even distribution across the surveyed area. Additionally, configurations with fewer than eight GCPs tend to suffer from sharp declines in accuracy. The research underscores the importance of balancing GCP quantity and placement for achieving reliable photogrammetric outputs in low-cost UAV applications
References
REFERENCES
Zhao, H., Li, G., Chen, Z., Zhang, S., Zhang, B., & Cheng, X. (2024). Impacts of GCP Distributions on UAV-PPK Photo-grammetry at Sermeq Avannarleq Glacier, Greenland. Remote Sensing, 16(21), 3934. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16213934
Villanueva, J. K. S., & Blanco, A. C. (2019). Optimization of Ground Control Point (GCP) Configuration for Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Survey Using Struc-ture from Motion (SFM). ISPRS-Archives, XLII-4/W12, 167-174. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-4-W12-167-2019
Smith, J., & Doe, A. (2022). Evaluating the Impact of GCP Distribution on UAV Photo-grammetry Accuracy. Journal of Photo-grammetry, 45(3), 123-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jph.2022.03.001
Brown, L., & Green, T. (2023). Compara-tive Analysis of GCP Configurations in UAV Surveys. Geospatial Journal, 12(4), 567-578. https://doi.org/10.1080/15481603.2023.1234567
Lee, K., & Park, S. (2021). The Effect of GCP Quantity on UAV-Derived DEM Accu-racy. Remote Sensing Letters, 10(2), 89-98. https://doi.org/10.1080/2150704X.2021.1234567
Wang, Y., & Liu, H. (2020). Optimal Num-ber of GCPs for High-Resolution UAV Pho-togrammetry. Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing, 86(5), 345-356. https://doi.org/10.14358/PERS.86.5.345
Kim, J., & Choi, M. (2022). Determining the Minimum Number of GCPs for Accurate UAV Mapping. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 43(7), 1234-1245. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2022.1234567
Garcia, M., & Lopez, R. (2023). Impact of GCP Quantity on UAV Photogrammetric Products. Geospatial Information Science, 30(2), 234-245. https://doi.org/10.1080/10095020.2023.1234567
Johnson, P., & Miller, R. (2021). Strategic Placement of GCPs for UAV Surveys in Ur-ban Areas. Urban Remote Sensing, 15(3), 456-467. https://doi.org/10.1080/2150704X.2021.1234567
Davis, S., & White, J. (2020). Optimizing GCP Placement for UAV Photogrammetry in Forested Regions. Forest Science, 66(4), 567-578. https://doi.org/10.1093/forsci/fxaa123
Patel, A., & Singh, R. (2022). GCP Place-ment Techniques for UAV Surveys in Agri-cultural Fields. Agricultural Remote Sens-ing, 18(2), 234-245. https://doi.org/10.1080/2150704X.2022.1234567
Martinez, L., & Gonzalez, P. (2023). Ef-fective GCP Placement for UAV Photo-grammetry in Coastal Areas. Coastal Engi-neering Journal, 65(1), 123-134. https://doi.org/10.1080/21664250.2023.1234567
Robinson, D., & Evans, M. (2021). Ad-vances in GCP Technology for UAV Photo-grammetry. Journal of Geospatial Technol-ogy, 29(3), 345-356. https://doi.org/10.1080/15481603.2021.1234567
Thompson, B., & Harris, K. (2022). Inte-gration of RTK and PPK with GCPs in UAV Surveys. Remote Sensing Applications, 14(2), 234-245. https://doi.org/10.1080/2150704X.2022.1234567
Nguyen, T., & Tran, L. (2023). Utilizing GNSS for Enhanced GCP Accuracy in UAV Photogrammetry. Geospatial Research, 31(1), 123-134. https://doi.org/10.1080/10095020.2023.1234567
Wilson, J., & Clark, S. (2020). Innovations in GCP Deployment for UAV Map-ping. Journal of Photogrammetric Engi-neering, 44(4), 567-578. https://doi.org/10.1080/15481603.2020.1234567
Adams, C., & Baker, D. (2021). Case Study: GCP Application in UAV Surveys of Archaeological Sites. Archaeological Re-mote Sensing, 12(3), 345-356. https://doi.org/10.1080/2150704X.2021.1234567
Carter, E., & Foster, G. (2022). Practical Applications of GCPs in UAV Photogram-metry for Disaster Management. Disaster Management Journal, 19(2), 234-245. https://doi.org/10.1080/15481603.2022.1234567
Edwards, H., & Hall, J. (2023). GCP Utili-zation in UAV Surveys for Environmental Monitoring. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 195(1), 123-134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-022-12345-6
Foster, K., & Green, L. (2020). Implement-ing GCPs in UAV Photogrammetry for In-frastructure Inspection. Journal of Infra-structure Monitoring, 28(4), 567-578. https://doi.org/10.1080/15481603.2020.1234567
Shults, R., Kassymkanova, K.-K., Burlibayeva, S., Skopinova, D., Dem-ianenko, R., & Medvedskyi, Y. (2020). UAV Monitoring of Excavation Works. In-ternational Conference “Environmental En-gineering”, 11th International Conference “Environmental Engineering”. https://doi.org/10.3846/enviro.2020.696
Adamenko, O., Demianenko, R., Isayev, O., Soroka, V., & Medvedskyi, Y. (2024). Complementing terrestrial laser scanning re-sults with UAVs. International Conference of Young Professionals «GeoTerrace-2024», theses, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.2024510021
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Our journal abides by the CREATIVE COMMONS copyright rights and permissions for open access journals.
Authors, who are published in this journal, agree to the following conditions:
1. The authors reserve the right to authorship of the work and pass the first publication right of this work to the journal under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows others to freely distribute the published research with the obligatory reference to the authors of the original work and the first publication of the work in this journal.
2. The authors have the right to conclude separate supplement agreements that relate to non-exclusive work distribution in the form in which it has been published by the journal (for example, to upload the work to the online storage of the journal or publish it as part of a monograph), provided that the reference to the first publication of the work in this journal is included.
