Slashdot Mirror


Drones Could 3D-Map Scores of Hectares of Land In Just a Few Hours

sciencehabit writes: Unmanned drones aren't just for warfare. In recent years, they've been used to map wildlife and monitor crop growth. But current software can't always handle the vast volume of images they gather. Now, researchers have developed an algorithm that will allow drones to 3D-map scores of hectares of land in less than a day — an advance that is important for cost-effective farming, disaster relief, and surveillance operations.

Their computer program directly projects the points from each photo onto a 3D space without knowing the exact shape of the land or the camera positions. As a result, the tie points don't necessarily match up, which means the same corn plant can have two projections on the model. When that happens, the algorithm automatically takes the middle point between the two projections as the more accurate location and adjusts the camera position accordingly, one image at a time. Because the algorithm tweaks far fewer things at each step, the shortcut drastically speeds up calculations. Once the software has adjusted the camera positions for all the photos, the software repeats the entire process — starting from projecting the points to the 3D space — to correct for any errors.

13 of 94 comments (clear)

  1. LOL ... Scores of Hectares? by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Funny

    Scores of Hectares? Really guys?

    Why, with our revolutionary fly-a-micating devices, which are capable of travelling at dozens of furlongs per fortnight, we will be able to monitor the Aether, and map the location of the peasants houses to within a few rods, thus ensuring we can maximize tithing.

    A spokesman for the government was overcome with the vapors at the excitement of it all, and needed to be leeched lest her spleen overtake the rest of her humors and leave her dyspeptic and the evil spirits sway her from her normal temperament.

    Off the record, a spokesman was hopeful that the new phrenology module would be available in version III.V, and evil people will be easily spotted from the air, and can then be rounded up for burning at the stake.

    Goode Frye was optimistic this would remove the threat of the witches which have been stealing the souls of babies.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:LOL ... Scores of Hectares? by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2

      Hey that's not fair. Hectares are a totally valid unit, for any time you want to describe a largish quantity of land without having to worry about most poeple knowing how much exactly you're talking about, and maybe realizing you're overbilling them.

    2. Re:LOL ... Scores of Hectares? by chihowa · · Score: 2

      You're having a hard time seeing the problem here because you're familiar with the units. FWIW, what you're feeling right now (the whole, "what's the problem?" feeling), is exactly how people in the US feel about their non-metric units. I use SI every day for work, so I'm familiar with metric (and like it very much), but not with the customary metric units (which break the elegance of SI to make people feel comfortable).

      The issue with the units we've been discussing is "due to the many different conversion factors". All of the factors are multiples of ten, which helps, but the nice consistency in order of magnitude is lost. For example, mass is measured in grams and masses larger or smaller than a gram can be denoted by changing the order of magnitude associated with "gram"... except if the mass is above 10^6, in which case a new unit is used without a prefix (or sometimes with one). Converting between megagrams and milligrams is easy, as metric should be. But converting between tens of thousands of tonnes and milligrams is much less elegant.

      You'll keep your tonnes and hectares for the same (invalid) reasons as Americans (and sometimes Brits) will keep their odd units and no argument will convince them otherwise.

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
  2. Re:This isn't new. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you actually learn to read, you'll discover that the new thing here is a newer algorithm that's significantly faster than the current "standard".

  3. Farm topography by caseih · · Score: 3, Informative

    Depending on the accuracy obtained, such mapping would be highly useful on our farm for figuring out drainage. Some areas of a field might drain better with only a very small slope, if we knew where to put the channel. Currently the only real option is to drive over the field with an RTK GPS receiver and make a GIS map of elevations. Which works well enough (depending on the grid resolution; can get really old driving every 10 feet over 160 acres), but takes quite a long time to do.

    1. Re:Farm topography by RingDev · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It doesn't have to be highly accurate for agricultural use. More valuable is the soil samples. Nothing your average joe-farmer is going to spring for, but many of the mega-farms already do this to identify the minimal amount of fertilizer/herbicides to use to maintain a maximum profit margin.

      I'm interested in this for another reason though. The state (assuming other states have similar programs) already has recording equipment attached to a truck that they drive every road with. When project requests come in, they can play back the video and do things like count the cracks per mile, look for shoulder erosion, count pot holes, etc... It is a manual process, literally a guy sits in front of a monitor and takes notes as he watches the road roll by.

      To be able to take that video and run it through a system like this to get a point cloud, then work out a "smooth road" algorithm to identify deviations... we could take a guy out of the eye-glazing/brain killing job of watching road videos for hours each day to reviewing short segments of deviations, letting him spend more time on putting together proposal responses or proactively notifying municipalities/agencies when there are significant issues that need to be addressed.

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
  4. FAA is not allowing Drone use in farming today by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Talking with a large farm owner over the weekend who is ready to start using Drones to cover about 5500 acres as a supplement to their current sat. imagery. They were told no by the FAA, which says they will not be able to accommodate farming drones until 2016 at the earliest.

    So instead of figuring out how it's going to benefit the farmer and working through the leading edge adoption issues with farms who are motivated to give it a try, they are regulating them out of existence, before it can even get started.

    I can certainly understand the need for regulations as problems arise, but to write the regulations before there is an issue is just a typical stupid gov response. The FAA will make the entire process more expensive, more cumbersome and more restrictive than it needs to be without any real world experiences upon which to regulate.

    It would be simple to set a weight, height and radius limit for farming drone use. Could be done in just a couple of days with 2-3 smart people but that is just too easy for gov work.

    1. Re:FAA is not allowing Drone use in farming today by xdor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Agree. Either by design or ineptitude the FAA couldn't put together a workable process for commercial UAS

      For farmers (private land owners) below the navigational airspace (500 feet above obstacles) IMO this the land-owner's property and non of the FAA's domain.

      i.e. the FAA is blowing smoke to threaten people out of working their own land until they can contort it into a regulatory money pump.

    2. Re:FAA is not allowing Drone use in farming today by xdor · · Score: 2

      Yes, I noticed that. Maybe as a reminder that the rest of the world is moving on with this whilst the US government manages to (at least verbally) stifle innovation.

      And as one of the thousands of people who own a UAS in "the land of the free" who can't use it for anything but recreation, I never miss an opportunity to disparage FAA policy and pseudo-policy regarding drone use.

    3. Re:FAA is not allowing Drone use in farming today by rgbscan · · Score: 2

      According to court rulings, you actually own the first 83 feet. The most famous case of this kind comes from 1945 when a chicken farmer named Thomas Lee Causby sued the US government for flying approximately 83 feet above his property, the noise of which caused a bunch of Causby’s chicken’s to accidentally kill themselves by running into walls. Causby won his case and the courts agreed that although a property owner wasn’t entitled to own all of the air above their land, they were entitled to enough so that planes flying overhead wouldn’t kill their chickens.

      As the FAA considers 500 feet and below non-navigational space, it has been assumed that you own that too, but that part has never been tried in court, and you can't count on it.

  5. Work hard, get strong, work harder, get stronger by deathcloset · · Score: 2

    I've always been fascinated when software makes dramatic enhancements to the capabilities of existing hardware and data. Like a few years ago there was the release of the TLD algorithm which suddenly turned my old webcam into an futuristic object recognition/tracking device!

    What I wonder is, when these software enhancements are made, does hardware usually evolve to converge with the software? Meaning, in this example, if the software is using a new method for processing point data, does that not mean the hardware could be made to collect point data in a way more conducive to this new method?

    And is this kind of progress a common thing? Is it common or rare this leapfrog progressive dance of hardware and software?

  6. Re:This isn't new. by plover · · Score: 3, Informative

    TFA states that the old algorithm breaks down once the number of source images exceeds a few hundred, at which point it can take thousands of hours to process. The new algorithm can accommodate over a thousand images and process them all in about four hours.

    --
    John
  7. Re:units by Immerman · · Score: 2

    I don't see your problem. Hectares are a fairly common unit for measuring land areas, essentially it's the SI analogue to the acre - a unit of area that's readily applicable to most land-working uses, without introducing clunky customary-unit conversion factors. At 10,000 times smaller, measurements in square meters have far too many trailing zeros to be convenient, and at 100x larger you'll usually be dealing with small fractions of square kilometers. And at 4046.86 square meters, do you really expect any scientist or engineer to futz around with acres if they can avoid it?

    Meanwhile in modern usage "scores" is a conveniently vague number that's a bit larger and less specific than "tens" or "dozens", while still being being considerably smaller than "hundreds"

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.