The Application of Terrestrial LiDAR for Geohazard Mapping, Monitoring and Modelling in the British Geological Survey
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Geodetic Technology
3. Terrestrial LiDAR Scanning (TLS) outside British Geological Survey (BGS)
- In the gaming industry, it is used to quickly and precisely render whole cities, or to recreate an accurate reproduction of a racetrack, including every undulation etc.
- The police can record the scene a car accident within a few minutes, enabling the emergency services to clear the scene, reducing traffic jams as well as preserving the evidence digitally.
- The automotive industry use TLS as a guidance system for autonomous vehicles. Near real-time processing allows the device controlling the vehicle to detect obstacles and to update its route almost instantly.
- TLS gives archaeologists the ability to create high-resolution DEMs of archaeological sites that can reveal micro-topography that may otherwise be hidden by vegetation.
- LiDAR is used in a variety of ways in meteorology including the studies of atmospheric composition, structure, clouds, and aerosols.
- In astronomy, a worldwide network of observatories uses LiDAR to measure the distance to reflectors placed on the moon, allowing the moon’s position to be measured with mm precision.
- LiDAR allows conservation research scientists to not only measure the height of previously unmapped trees but to determine the biodiversity of the forest.
4. Mobile Mapping
5. Monitoring Change
6. Virtual Outcrop Modelling
7. Discussion
- Use of TLS to generate digital models of historic buildings, geological outcrops, or other structures for geo-conservation, geo-tourism, and distance learning.
- Combine TLS with multi-spectral imaging cameras in order to create virtual outcrop models (VOM) of geological structures.
- Use TLS to detect cracks and wet spots in the clay-lined caps of landfill sites, particularly with respect to “closed” landfills.
- Use TLS to monitor long-term ground movement due to shrink–swell clays, compressible soils or Karst as a ground-truthing procedure for InSAR techniques.
- Use TLS to “join-up” fractures and faults in outcrops. The structures of one side of the outcrop can be measured and then the other side (inside, if a cave etc.) and a virtual model can be created of the two parts.
- Use TLS to measure the loss of glacial volume. This could be compared to the volume of water flowing out of the glacial lake (during the same time interval). This would give us the total runoff volume that was accounted for by net change in glacier snout storage over time.
- Use of TLS for 3D mapping of temporary exposures, made by excavations, blasting, mass movements (landslides etc.), or even trial pits.
- Use of TLS to study coastal evolution, in order to determine the changes in beach thickness over time.
- Use of TLS to monitor pre-cursor displacement failures in cuttings or embankments.
- Use of TLS to complement and calibrate the outputs of digital aerial photogrammetry.
- Use of the Pegasus Backpack allows building information modelling (BIM) using both imagery and point cloud data to document outdoor, indoor, and even underground areas to be carried out.
- Use of InSAR to calculate long-term and future effects of coastal retreat in low-lying areas, or glacial retreat, on a local, national, or global scale.
- Use of InSAR to calculate potential subsidence rates due to natural subsidence.
- Use of UAVs in tandem (or more) to cover medium-large areas of land simultaneously, making surveys quicker.
- Use of UAV incorporating blue/green LiDAR to look at near-shore and inland water sources to determine depth and structure of bed.
8. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Anon. ISO/TC 211 Geographic Information/Geomatics; ISO: Stockholm, Sweden, 1994; Available online: https://www.iso.org/committee/54904.html (accessed on 30 July 2020).
- Jones, L.D. Ground-Based Geomatic Surveys at the BGS: A Manual for Nasic Data Collection & Processing; British Geological Survey Open Report No. OR/15/057; British Geological Survey: London, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Buckley, S.J.; Howell, J.; Enge, H.; Kurz, T. Terrestrial laser scanning in geology: Data acquisition, processing and accuracy considerations. J. Geol. Soc. 2008, 165, 625–638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jones, L.D. Measuring our changing Earth. Planet Earth 2014, 28–29. [Google Scholar]
- Jones, L.D.; Kirkham, M.; Hobbs, P.R.N. Ground-Based Geomatics for Geohazard Mapping, Modelling and Characterization; British Geological Open Report OR/20/019; British Geological Survey: London, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Jordan, C.A.; Napier, B. Developing digital fieldwork technologies at the British Geological Survey. Geol. Soc. Lond. Spéc. Publ. 2015, 436, 219–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Artese, S.; Zinno, R. TLS for Dynamic Measurement of the Elastic Line of Bridges. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kamnik, R.; Perc, M.N.; Topolšek, D. Using the scanners and drone for comparison of point cloud accuracy at traffic accident analysis. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2020, 135, 105391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Moskal, L.M.; Zheng, G. Retrieving Forest Inventory Variables with Terrestrial Laser Scanning (TLS) in Urban Heterogeneous Forest. Remote Sens. 2011, 4, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pejanović Đurišić, M.; Tafa, Z.; Dimić, G.; Milutinovi, V. A survey of military applications of wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the Mediterranean Conference on Embedded Computing, Budva, Montenegro, 19–21 June 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Jones, L.D. Ground-Based Geomatic Surveys: Specification for Terrestrial & Mobile LiDAR Scanning; British Geological Survey Open Report No. OR/19/033; British Geological Survey: London, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- West, J.P.; Bowman, J.S. The Domestic Use of Drones: An Ethical Analysis of Surveillance Issues. Public Adm. Rev. 2016, 76, 649–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karakostas, I.; Mademlis, I.; Nikolaidis, N.; Pitas, I. UAV Cimematography Constraints Imposed by Visual Tracking. In Proceedings of the 25th IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), Athens, Greece, 7–10 October 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Nguyen, L.D.; Nguyen, K.K.; Kortun, A.; Duong, T.Q. Real-Time Deployment and Resource Allocation for Distributed UAV Systems in Disaster Relief. In Proceedings of the IEEE Workshop on Signal Processing Advances in Wireless Communications (SPAWC), Cannes, France, 2–5 July 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Tapete, D.; Banks, V.; Jones, L.; Kirkham, M.; Garton, D. Contextualising archaeological models with geological, airborne and terrestrial LiDAR data: The Ice Age landscape in Farndon Fields, Nottinghamshire, UK. J. Archaeol. Sci. 2017, 81, 31–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Glendell, M.; McShane, G.; Farrow, L.; James, M.R.; Quinton, J.; Anderson, K.; Evans, M.; Benaud, P.; Rawlins, B.; Morgan, D.; et al. Testing the utility of structure-from-motion photogrammetry reconstructions using small unmanned aerial vehicles and ground photography to estimate the extent of upland soil erosion. Earth Surf. Process. Landf. 2017, 42, 1860–1871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giordan, D.; Adams, M.S.; Aicardi, I.; Alicandro, M.; Allasia, P.; Baldo, M.; De Berardinis, P.; Dominici, D.; Godone, D.; Hobbs, P.; et al. The use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for engineering geology applications. Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. 2020, 79, 3437–3481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Liu, X. Airborne LiDAR for DEM generation: Some critical issues. Prog. Phys. Geogr. Earth Environ. 2008, 32, 31–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Larsen, C.F. Comparisons of Simultaneously Acquired Airborne Sfm Photogrammetry and LiDAR. In Proceedings of the American Geophysical Union, 2014 Fall Meeting, San Francisco, CA, USA, 15–19 December 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Caduff, R.; Schlunegger, F.; Kos, A.; Wiesmann, A. A review of terrestrial radar interferometry for measuring surface change in the geosciences. Earth Surf. Process. Landf. 2015, 40, 208–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Takada, Y.; Motono, G. Spatiotemporal behavior of a large-scale landslide at Mt. Onnebetsu-dake, Japan, detected by three L-band SAR satellites. Earth Planets Space 2020, 72, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Williams, R.D.; Lamy, M.L.; Maniatis, G.; Stott, E. Three-dimensional reconstruction of fluvial surface sedi-mentology and topography using personal mobile laser scanning. Earth Surf. Process. Landf. 2020, 45, 251–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Toschi, I.; Rodriguezgonzalvez, P.; Remondino, F.; Minto, S.; Orlandini, S.; Fuller, A. Accuracy Evaluation of A Mobile Mapping System With Advanced Statistical Methods. ISPRS Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. 2015, 5, 245–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hobbs, P.; Jones, L.D.; Kirkham, M.P.; Pennington, C.V.L.; Morgan, D.J.R.; Dashwood, C. Coastal landslide monitoring at Aldbrough, East Riding of Yorkshire, UK. Q. J. Eng. Geol. Hydrogeol. 2019, 53, 101–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hobbs, P.; Jones, L.; Kirkham, M.P.; Holyoake, S.J.; Pennington, C.V.L.; Dashwood, C.; Banks, V.J.; Reeves, H.J. Establishment of a coastal landslide observatory at Aldbrough, East Riding of Yorkshire, UK. Q. J. Eng. Geol. Hydrogeol. 2019, 53, 88–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anon. Overview of Icelandic Glaciers at the End of 2017. Newsletter. Newsletter. Icelandic Meteorological Office, Institute of Earth Sciences, University of Iceland and Southeast Iceland Nature Centre. 2018. Available online: https://en.vedur.is/media/Eplican%C3%A1mskei%C3%B0/VAT/_newsletter/_2018/_06.pdf (accessed on 30 July 2020).
- Philips, E.; Finlayson, A.; Jones, L. Fracturing, block-faulting and moulin development associated with progressive collapse and retreat of a polar maritime glacier: Virkisjökull-Falljökull, SE Iceland. J. Geophys. Res. Earth Surf. 2013, 118, 1545–1561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Philips, E.; Finlayson, A.; Bradwell, T.; Everest, J.; Jones, L. Structural evolution triggers a dynamic reduction in active glacier length during rapid retreat: Evidence from Falljokull, SE Iceland. J. Geophys. Res. Earth Surf. 2014, 119, 2194–2208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- O’ Dochartaigh, B.E.; MacDonald, A.M.; Black, A.R.; Everest, J.; Wilson, P.; Darling, W.G.; Jones, L.; Raines, M. Groundwatermeltwater interaction in proglacial aquifers amid rapid glacier retreat. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2019, 23, 4527–4539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Anon, Zombie Glacier Surprises Scientists. Climate Central. 2014. Available online: https://www.climatecentral.org/news/zombie-glacier-surprises-scientists-18209 (accessed on 30 July 2020).
- Jones, L.D. Monitoring landslides in hazardous terrain using terrestrial LiDAR: An example from Montserrat. Q. J. Eng. Geol. Hydrogeol. 2006, 39, 371–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ryan, G.A.; Loughlin, S.C.; James, M.R.; Jones, L.D.; Calder, E.S.; Christopher, T.; Strutt, M.H.; Wadge, G. Growth of the lava dome and extrusion rates at Soufrière Hills Volcano, Montserrat, West Indies: 2005–2008. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2010, 37, 472–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chambers, J.; Wilkinson, P.B.; Kuras, O.; Ford, J.R.; A Gunn, D.; I Meldrum, P.; Pennington, C.; Weller, A.; Hobbs, P.R.N.; Ogilvy, R. Three-dimensional geophysical anatomy of an active landslide in Lias Group mudrocks, Cleveland Basin, UK. Geomorphology 2011, 125, 472–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
System | Terrestrial | Airborne | Aerial | UAV |
---|---|---|---|---|
LiDAR | LiDAR | SfM | SfM | |
Pros | Long range | Very long range | Good accuracy | Good accuracy |
High accuracy, high precision | Downward scanning | Full colour | Full colour | |
High speed data acquisition | Cover large areas | 2D & 3D models | 2D & 3D models | |
Built-in camera | Good accuracy | Downward looking | Down & side looking | |
Cons | Shadow’ areas | Pilot required | ||
Dense vegetation | Very expensive | Dense vegetation | Dense vegetation | |
Severe weather | Lower accuracy | Expensive | Severe weather | |
Cloud & fog | Downward scanning | Downward looking | Strong wind | |
Data Collection | Active Sensing | Active Sensing | Passive Sensing | Passive Sensing |
Survey: 1 h–5+ days | Survey: 4 h–5+ days | Survey: 4 h–5+ days | Survey: 1 h–5+ days | |
Data: 1 day–5+ days | Data: 1 day–5+ days | Data: 1 day–5+ days | Data: 1 day–5+ days | |
Typical Cost | Hardware: £130k | Hardware: £20k (rental) | Hardware: £20k (rental) | Hardware: £5k |
Software: ~£2.5k p.a. | Software: ~£10k p.a. | Software: £3500 | Software: ~£3k p.a. | |
Reference | 11 | 18 | 19 | 16 & 17 |
System | Terrestrial | Satellite | Backpack | Vehicle |
Radar | Radar | MMS | MMS | |
Pros | Extremely long range | Extremely long range | Scan as fast as can walk | Scan at up to 30 mph |
Very high accuracy | High accuracy | High accuracy | High accuracy | |
Real time, continuous monitoring | Cover large areas | High speed data acquisition | High speed data acquisition | |
Works in cloud & fog | Works in any weather | Works inside & outside | Built-in cameras | |
Cons | Dense vegetation | Dense vegetation | Heavy | |
Severe weather | Expensive | Only scan where walk | Only scan where drive | |
Strong wind | Downward looking | Point density | Expensive | |
Points must be coincident | Points must be coincident | Bad weather | Severe weather | |
Heavy | ||||
Data Collection | Active Sensing | Active Sensing | Active Sensing | Active Sensing |
Survey: 1 h–5+ days | Survey: Multiple days | Survey: 1 h–5+ days | Survey: 1 h–5+ days | |
Data: 1 day–5+ days | Data: 1 day–5+ days | Data: 1 day–5+ days | Data: 1 day–5+ days | |
Typical Cost | Hardware: £140k | Hardware: Free (data) | Hardware: £230k | Hardware: £350k |
Software: ~£2.5k p.a. | Software: ~£10k p.a. | Software: ~£16k p.a. | Software: ~£16k p.a. | |
Reference | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 |
Project | Use | Reason | Figure |
---|---|---|---|
Bacton Sandscaping Project | Initial geological modelling | 4 km long cliff section | |
Hollin Hill Landslide Observatory | Inland landslide monitoring | 1 Pegasus walk = 17 TLS setups | |
Aldbrough Coastal Observatory | Coastal landslide monitoring | Extend coastal section, beach and foreland | |
Incipient Block Failure, Dover | 3D survey & change anaylysis | Difficult ground, requiring multiple TLS setups | |
Nottingham Castle Pre-design | Internal & external facade scans | Impossible with any other form of laser scanner | Figure 3 and Figure 4 |
BGS Geological Walkway | Incorporation into Minecraft | 2 Pegasus walks = 12 TLS setups | |
Tenby Beach E-trike Survey | Tidal sand volume calculations | 8 km on E-trike only possible with Pegasus | Figure 5 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Jones, L.; Hobbs, P. The Application of Terrestrial LiDAR for Geohazard Mapping, Monitoring and Modelling in the British Geological Survey. Remote Sens. 2021, 13, 395. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13030395
Jones L, Hobbs P. The Application of Terrestrial LiDAR for Geohazard Mapping, Monitoring and Modelling in the British Geological Survey. Remote Sensing. 2021; 13(3):395. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13030395
Chicago/Turabian StyleJones, Lee, and Peter Hobbs. 2021. "The Application of Terrestrial LiDAR for Geohazard Mapping, Monitoring and Modelling in the British Geological Survey" Remote Sensing 13, no. 3: 395. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13030395
APA StyleJones, L., & Hobbs, P. (2021). The Application of Terrestrial LiDAR for Geohazard Mapping, Monitoring and Modelling in the British Geological Survey. Remote Sensing, 13(3), 395. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13030395