Performing two independent surveys in 2016 and 2017 over a flat sample plot (6700 m2), we compare snow-depth measurements from Unmanned-Aerial-System (UAS) photogrammetry and from a new high-resolution laser-scanning device (MultiStation) with manual probing, the standard technique used by operational services around the world. While previous comparisons already used laser scanners, we tested for the first time aMultiStation, which has a different measurement principle and is thus capable of millimetric accuracy. Both remote-sensing techniques measured point clouds with centimetric resolution, while we manually collected a relatively dense amount of manual data (135 pt in 2016 and 115 pt in 2017). UAS photogrammetry and the MultiStation showed repeatable, centimetric agreement in measuring the spatial distribution of seasonal, dense snowpack under optimal illumination and topographic conditions (maximum RMSE of 0.036 m between point clouds on snow). A large fraction of this difference could be due to simultaneous snowmelt, as the RMSE between UAS photogrammetry and the MultiStation on bare soil is equal to 0.02 m. The RMSE between UAS data and manual probing is in the order of 0.20-0.30 m, but decreases to 0.06-0.17 m when areas of potential outliers like vegetation or river beds are excluded. Compact and portable remote-sensing devices like UASs or aMultiStation can thus be successfully deployed during operational manual snow courses to capture spatial snapshots of snow-depth distribution with a repeatable, vertical centimetric accuracy.

Centimetric accuracy in snow depth using unmanned aerial system photogrammetry and a multistation

Avanzi, Francesco;Bianchi, Alberto;CINA, ALBERTO;De Michele, Carlo;Pagliari, Diana;Passoni, Daniele;Pinto, Livio;Rossi, Lorenzo
2018

Abstract

Performing two independent surveys in 2016 and 2017 over a flat sample plot (6700 m2), we compare snow-depth measurements from Unmanned-Aerial-System (UAS) photogrammetry and from a new high-resolution laser-scanning device (MultiStation) with manual probing, the standard technique used by operational services around the world. While previous comparisons already used laser scanners, we tested for the first time aMultiStation, which has a different measurement principle and is thus capable of millimetric accuracy. Both remote-sensing techniques measured point clouds with centimetric resolution, while we manually collected a relatively dense amount of manual data (135 pt in 2016 and 115 pt in 2017). UAS photogrammetry and the MultiStation showed repeatable, centimetric agreement in measuring the spatial distribution of seasonal, dense snowpack under optimal illumination and topographic conditions (maximum RMSE of 0.036 m between point clouds on snow). A large fraction of this difference could be due to simultaneous snowmelt, as the RMSE between UAS photogrammetry and the MultiStation on bare soil is equal to 0.02 m. The RMSE between UAS data and manual probing is in the order of 0.20-0.30 m, but decreases to 0.06-0.17 m when areas of potential outliers like vegetation or river beds are excluded. Compact and portable remote-sensing devices like UASs or aMultiStation can thus be successfully deployed during operational manual snow courses to capture spatial snapshots of snow-depth distribution with a repeatable, vertical centimetric accuracy.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Remote Sensing _ Free Full-Text _ Centimetric Accuracy in Snow Depth Using Unmanned Aerial System Photogrammetry and a MultiStation _ HTML.pdf

accesso aperto

Descrizione: pdf
: Publisher’s version
Dimensione 1.15 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.15 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
remotesensing-10-00765.pdf

accesso aperto

: Publisher’s version
Dimensione 8.79 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
8.79 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11311/1079675
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 33
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 28
social impact