Cargando…

Error Budget for Geolocation of Spectroradiometer Point Observations from an Unmanned Aircraft System

We investigate footprint geolocation uncertainties of a spectroradiometer mounted on an unmanned aircraft system (UAS). Two microelectromechanical systems-based inertial measurement units (IMUs) and global navigation satellite system (GNSS) receivers were used to determine the footprint location and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gautam, Deepak, Watson, Christopher, Lucieer, Arko, Malenovský, Zbyněk
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6210439/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30326591
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s18103465
_version_ 1783367114895130624
author Gautam, Deepak
Watson, Christopher
Lucieer, Arko
Malenovský, Zbyněk
author_facet Gautam, Deepak
Watson, Christopher
Lucieer, Arko
Malenovský, Zbyněk
author_sort Gautam, Deepak
collection PubMed
description We investigate footprint geolocation uncertainties of a spectroradiometer mounted on an unmanned aircraft system (UAS). Two microelectromechanical systems-based inertial measurement units (IMUs) and global navigation satellite system (GNSS) receivers were used to determine the footprint location and extent of the spectroradiometer. Errors originating from the on-board GNSS/IMU sensors were propagated through an aerial data georeferencing model, taking into account a range of values for the spectroradiometer field of view (FOV), integration time, UAS flight speed, above ground level (AGL) flying height, and IMU grade. The spectroradiometer under nominal operating conditions (8 [Formula: see text] FOV, 10 m AGL height, 0.6 s integration time, and 3 m/s flying speed) resulted in footprint extent of 140 cm across-track and 320 cm along-track, and a geolocation uncertainty of 11 cm. Flying height and orientation measurement accuracy had the largest influence on the geolocation uncertainty, whereas the FOV, integration time, and flying speed had the biggest impact on the size of the footprint. Furthermore, with an increase in flying height, the rate of increase in geolocation uncertainty was found highest for a low-grade IMU. To increase the footprint geolocation accuracy, we recommend reducing flying height while increasing the FOV which compensates the footprint area loss and increases the signal strength. The disadvantage of a lower flying height and a larger FOV is a higher sensitivity of the footprint size to changing distance from the target. To assist in matching the footprint size to uncertainty ratio with an appropriate spatial scale, we list the expected ratio for a range of IMU grades, FOVs and AGL heights.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6210439
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62104392018-11-02 Error Budget for Geolocation of Spectroradiometer Point Observations from an Unmanned Aircraft System Gautam, Deepak Watson, Christopher Lucieer, Arko Malenovský, Zbyněk Sensors (Basel) Article We investigate footprint geolocation uncertainties of a spectroradiometer mounted on an unmanned aircraft system (UAS). Two microelectromechanical systems-based inertial measurement units (IMUs) and global navigation satellite system (GNSS) receivers were used to determine the footprint location and extent of the spectroradiometer. Errors originating from the on-board GNSS/IMU sensors were propagated through an aerial data georeferencing model, taking into account a range of values for the spectroradiometer field of view (FOV), integration time, UAS flight speed, above ground level (AGL) flying height, and IMU grade. The spectroradiometer under nominal operating conditions (8 [Formula: see text] FOV, 10 m AGL height, 0.6 s integration time, and 3 m/s flying speed) resulted in footprint extent of 140 cm across-track and 320 cm along-track, and a geolocation uncertainty of 11 cm. Flying height and orientation measurement accuracy had the largest influence on the geolocation uncertainty, whereas the FOV, integration time, and flying speed had the biggest impact on the size of the footprint. Furthermore, with an increase in flying height, the rate of increase in geolocation uncertainty was found highest for a low-grade IMU. To increase the footprint geolocation accuracy, we recommend reducing flying height while increasing the FOV which compensates the footprint area loss and increases the signal strength. The disadvantage of a lower flying height and a larger FOV is a higher sensitivity of the footprint size to changing distance from the target. To assist in matching the footprint size to uncertainty ratio with an appropriate spatial scale, we list the expected ratio for a range of IMU grades, FOVs and AGL heights. MDPI 2018-10-15 /pmc/articles/PMC6210439/ /pubmed/30326591 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s18103465 Text en © 2018 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/).
spellingShingle Article
Gautam, Deepak
Watson, Christopher
Lucieer, Arko
Malenovský, Zbyněk
Error Budget for Geolocation of Spectroradiometer Point Observations from an Unmanned Aircraft System
title Error Budget for Geolocation of Spectroradiometer Point Observations from an Unmanned Aircraft System
title_full Error Budget for Geolocation of Spectroradiometer Point Observations from an Unmanned Aircraft System
title_fullStr Error Budget for Geolocation of Spectroradiometer Point Observations from an Unmanned Aircraft System
title_full_unstemmed Error Budget for Geolocation of Spectroradiometer Point Observations from an Unmanned Aircraft System
title_short Error Budget for Geolocation of Spectroradiometer Point Observations from an Unmanned Aircraft System
title_sort error budget for geolocation of spectroradiometer point observations from an unmanned aircraft system
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6210439/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30326591
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s18103465
work_keys_str_mv AT gautamdeepak errorbudgetforgeolocationofspectroradiometerpointobservationsfromanunmannedaircraftsystem
AT watsonchristopher errorbudgetforgeolocationofspectroradiometerpointobservationsfromanunmannedaircraftsystem
AT lucieerarko errorbudgetforgeolocationofspectroradiometerpointobservationsfromanunmannedaircraftsystem
AT malenovskyzbynek errorbudgetforgeolocationofspectroradiometerpointobservationsfromanunmannedaircraftsystem