Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 7, 2025

08:24
Sit-to-stand-and-walk from 120% Knee Height: A Novel Approach to Assess Dynamic Postural Control Independent of Lead-limb
Published on: August 30, 2016
10.4K
An Investigation on a Plane-Based Dynamic Calibration Method for the Handheld LiDAR Scanner
1Department of Land Economics, Chengchi University, No. 64, Sec. 2, ZhiNan Rd., Wenshan District, Taipei City 11605, Taiwan.
Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)
|January 11, 2022
Summary
This study validated a dynamic calibration method for the GeoSLAM ZEB Horizon LiDAR scanner. The approach proved efficient, significantly improving accuracy and reducing errors across multiple datasets.
Area of Science:
- Geomatics Engineering
- Geospatial Technology
- LiDAR Surveying
Background:
- Handheld LiDAR scanners like the GeoSLAM ZEB Horizon require precise calibration for accurate spatial data acquisition.
- Previous studies proposed a plane-based dynamic calibration method but lacked comprehensive validation.
- The efficiency and reliability of this calibration method needed further investigation using diverse datasets.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the effectiveness of a proposed plane-based dynamic calibration method for the GeoSLAM ZEB Horizon LiDAR scanner.
- To assess the calibration results using multiple datasets collected under varying conditions.
- To determine the impact of calibration data quality on the accuracy of LiDAR measurements.
Main Methods:
- Collected three distinct datasets in a dedicated calibration field on different dates and times.
- Applied the plane-based dynamic calibration method to each dataset.
- Analyzed calibration results by examining average residuals, a posteriori unit weight standard deviations, and root mean square error (RMSE) of check planes.
Main Results:
- All datasets showed reduced average residuals and significantly lower a posteriori unit weight standard deviations after calibration.
- Root mean square error (RMSE) of check planes improved by an average of 32.61%, 28.44%, and 14.7% across the three datasets.
- Calibration results were consistent regardless of data collection dates or times, indicating robustness.
Conclusions:
- The plane-based dynamic calibration method is highly efficient for the GeoSLAM ZEB Horizon LiDAR scanner.
- The method consistently improves measurement accuracy and reduces errors.
- The quality of calibration data influences the degree of accuracy improvement, but the method remains reliable across different collection conditions.
Related Concept Videos
Instrument Calibration
324
Instrument calibration is essential for ensuring that instruments produce accurate and consistent results. It is vital in manufacturing, healthcare, testing laboratories, and scientific research. Calibration processes are specific to each instrument and help enhance data accuracy. Each instrument has a unique calibration process tailored to its design and function to improve data accuracy.
Analytical Balance Calibration
An analytical balance measures mass and requires regular calibration to...
Analytical Balance Calibration
An analytical balance measures mass and requires regular calibration to...
324
Calibration Curves: Linear Least Squares
3.0K
A calibration curve is a plot of the instrument's response against a series of known concentrations of a substance. This curve is used to set the instrument response levels, using the substance and its concentrations as standards. Alternatively, or additionally, an equation is fitted to the calibration curve plot and subsequently used to calculate the unknown concentrations of other samples reliably.
For data that follow a straight line, the standard method for fitting is the linear...
For data that follow a straight line, the standard method for fitting is the linear...
3.0K
Common Leveling Mistakes and Errors
153
A survey team is tasked with determining the elevation difference between points Point A and Point B, separated by uneven terrain. They use a leveling instrument and a leveling rod.Common MistakesMisreading the Rod: During a backsight reading at Point A, the instrumentman observes the rod partially obscured by tall grass. Instead of reading 1.135 m, they mistakenly record 1.735 m due to the misalignment of the crosshair with the wrong graduation. This error adds 0.600 m to all subsequent...
153

