The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences
Download
Publications Copernicus
Download
Citation
Articles | Volume XLIII-B2-2022
Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., XLIII-B2-2022, 401–407, 2022
https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLIII-B2-2022-401-2022
Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., XLIII-B2-2022, 401–407, 2022
https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLIII-B2-2022-401-2022
 
30 May 2022
30 May 2022

ACCURACY INVESTIGATIONS OF HAND-HELD SCANNING SYSTEMS USING DIFFERENT DUMBBELL ARTEFACTS

P. Kalinowski1, J. Hindmarch2, and T. Luhmann1 P. Kalinowski et al.
  • 1Jade University of Applied Sciences, Institute of Applied Photogrammetry and Geoinformatics (IAPG), Ofener Str. 16/19, D-26121 Oldenburg, Germany
  • 2University of Bamberg, Digital Technologies in Heritage Conservation, Am Zwinger 4, D-96047 Bamberg, Germany

Keywords: hand-held 3D scanning, VDI 2634, accuracy investigations, cultural heritage, texture propertis

Abstract. The use of hand-held 3D scanning systems is becoming increasingly widespread in both the industrial and cultural sectors, and, particularly in the cultural sector, the systems are sometimes used by non-specialists. At the same time, the surface of cultural objects has a wide variety of textural properties. It is therefore of great importance that the measuring systems meet qualitative standards. For this purpose, the Creaform GO!Scan, Artec Eva and Artec Spider are compared in absolute terms of accuracy using a calibrated textured spherical dumbbell in accordance with the VDI 2634 guidelines. Both GO!Scan (sphere spacing error SD = 0.03 mm) and Eva (SD = 0.03 mm) meet the expected accuracy, while the Spider (SD = 0.3 mm) does not. Furthermore, a relative comparison is made with dumbbell bars with different texture properties. The probing error form (maximum range of residuals to the best-fit sphere) was able to reveal the effects of different texture properties on surface noise for both the Artec Eva and the Artec Spider. The Spider had larger margins for the metal sphere, while the Eva had larger margins for the textured sphere. In the case of the GO!Scan, texture properties did not matter. Furthermore, the scanners were tested on a cultural reference object. The quality standards of the VDI examination were achieved on average for every scan system, but this cannot be guaranteed for complex object areas.