The first run of mapping with the Mavic.

[Sencorp]

Greetings all.
I wanted to place a few images of the first scans using the Mavic in 3D mapping. I did a mapping of a mates new home over the weekend, and collected the following data;

• Plant health
• Land elevation
• And 3D modeling

I have tons more data other then the three top categories and am in the process of 3D printing the 3D scan of the property. I would love to hear from anyone else out there that is active in mapping now, that would like to be added to the coming collaboratory that my company is developing to be part of a think tank program around this type of tech. If so, please feel free to get in touch with me.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

**Just adding an edit to the post with the 3D scan ** Please note this was done with only 36 images and manually flown.

 

[Ed_2020]

A very interesting field, would like to exchange views on this subject.

My first question: would you agree that quads are not the most appropriate for mapping? Fixed wing planes seem more effective for large areas where high maneuverability is not required (grid pattern flights)

 

[Threshold]

Very cool, I was waiting to see someone accomplish this. The house seems to have a wrong (low) elevation, perhaps I could be wrong. How are you setting the min and max elevations of the point cloud? Since the mavic's elevation is arbitrary, I would have to assume the levels of the point could would need to be adjusted.

I am also curious if you are using automation to capture the site with the mavic pro.

As far as a future application. More and more states are releasing lidar and updated aerial imagery. The only benefit this type of survey would create is small sites and/or states with old GIS resources.

 

[Threshold]

A very interesting field, would like to exchange views on this subject.

My first question: would you agree that quads are not the most appropriate for mapping? Fixed wing planes seem more effective for large areas where high maneuverability is not required (grid pattern flights)

Fixed wing planes are more effective for imagery capturing but often requires a lot of money to capture and process all the data. Many states get these data for free because of a government initiative (I.E. mapping flood areas or taking inventory). This means that most of the state is not covered by the data.

 

[bakerboy]

My first question: would you agree that quads are not the most appropriate for mapping? Fixed wing planes seem more effective for large areas where high maneuverability is not required (grid pattern flights)

More area, yes. But at the loss of a stabilized image

 

[Threshold]

More area, yes. But at the loss of a stabilized image

Just curious what you mean by stabilized image?

 

[bakerboy]

Just curious what you mean by stabilized image?

A fixed wing uav are mostly running a camera attached directly to the airframe, and as the wind hits the airframe and it rolls the camera is no longer pointing straight down

a quad runs at least a 2 axis gimbal so it will always point straight down, allowing for better stitching and modelling

 

[Ed_2020]

More area, yes. But at the loss of a stabilized image

Just hope they start selling light planes with gimbals (actually never searched for such models, maybe they already exist).

I'm a Mavic and Phantom owner, but my subject of interest (mountains) is too large for them.

 

[tkinva]

I think you will find that the Mavic may be more suited because it's better at maintaining a fixed altitude and speed, and can fly lower than most other aircraft.

Some mapping done with my Mavic

 

[Sencorp]

A very interesting field, would like to exchange views on this subject.

My first question: would you agree that quads are not the most appropriate for mapping? Fixed wing planes seem more effective for large areas where high maneuverability is not required (grid pattern flights)

Actually multi-rotor may be more tedious to do mapping with. And depending on the mission, in some cases fixed wing is better. But understand that for a long time now, this has been done. First by satellites and aircraft, and now by UAS. The beauty of doing it with a multi is that you can fly the mission at various heights, and with the right data software can get an incredible result that is impossible by fixed wing.

For example. I can fly a mission then, take some time to do some close up captures of a structure or the whole area. When this renders, the image quality is superb. As for accuracy, I did a scan of a near by Rugby field, and then used the measure tool to determine if the area scale was correct. I calculated that it was off by 20mm. And in residential property, if I get really good shots of a back yard pool, I can tell you the volume of said pool as well.
So the age old debate if fixed wing is better then multi, the answer is yes, and no. Each aircraft is mission specific. Vast large area for 3D map only and low rez NDVI scan. Fixed wing. For detailed data analysis and comprehensive data collection, multi rotor all the way.

 

[Oconnb910]

Has anybody tried this with the mavic using fixed-wing mode?

 

[Sencorp]

For those interested. Here are the low rez 3D prints of the scan.
This can give you a fair good idea of the quality of the scan. This was done using only 36 photos. If I had spent a fair amount of time getting better shots of the trees and fencing it would have been a much more sharp print.
I do find it funny though that it even printed the sheep in the field. Just two,

 

[Pekik]

Woow... that result is amazing ....

 

[Ed_2020]

Actually multi-rotor may be more tedious to do mapping with. And depending on the mission, in some cases fixed wing is better. But understand that for a long time now, this has been done. First by satellites and aircraft, and now by UAS. The beauty of doing it with a multi is that you can fly the mission at various heights, and with the right data software can get an incredible result that is impossible by fixed wing.

For example. I can fly a mission then, take some time to do some close up captures of a structure or the whole area. When this renders, the image quality is superb. As for accuracy, I did a scan of a near by Rugby field, and then used the measure tool to determine if the area scale was correct. I calculated that it was off by 20mm. And in residential property, if I get really good shots of a back yard pool, I can tell you the volume of said pool as well.
So the age old debate if fixed wing is better then multi, the answer is yes, and no. Each aircraft is mission specific. Vast large area for 3D map only and low rez NDVI scan. Fixed wing. For detailed data analysis and comprehensive data collection, multi rotor all the way.

Thank you for your feedback, I've being trying to create some models, achieved some reasonable quality so far, but would like to model some mountains now (around 4 km extension).

Planes seemed to be a better option, also because they are capable of more flying time, usually.

 

[Oconnb910]

The 3D models that you created are absolutely awesome and wow I can picture that future potential it is amazing

 

[bakerboy]

Since you have no GCP your results will be out by more than 20mm, you have no checks to prove your results and this will be an issue. Drone deploy/maps made easy are only as good as the info you feed in to them

 

[Sencorp]

Since you have no GCP your results will be out by more than 20mm, you have no checks to prove your results and this will be an issue. Drone deploy/maps made easy are only as good as the info you feed in to them

Your responses had me puzzled there for a moment, then I realized I have done a typo. That's supposed to be 200mm. And yes I agree with you. But like I explain to my clients that we are not doing this mapping for precise measurements, that is what ground survey crews are for, what we are doing is data gathering. So when it comes to the measurement debate it's always a mute point.

 

[Billabong]

Greetings all.
I wanted to place a few images of the first scans using the Mavic in 3D mapping. I did a mapping of a mates new home over the weekend, and collected the following data;

• Plant health
• Land elevation
• And 3D modeling

I have tons more data other then the three top categories and am in the process of 3D printing the 3D scan of the property. I would love to hear from anyone else out there that is active in mapping now, that would like to be added to the coming collaboratory that my company is developing to be part of a think tank program around this type of tech. If so, please feel free to get in touch with me.

Mate, what app/software did you use for this? I'd like to do the same at my parents Rural Property

 

[bakerboy]

Your responses had me puzzled there for a moment, then I realized I have done a typo. That's supposed to be 200mm. And yes I agree with you. But like I explain to my clients that we are not doing this mapping for precise measurements, that is what ground survey crews are for, what we are doing is data gathering. So when it comes to the measurement debate it's always a mute point.

You can data gather and output at a survey precision level with the use of GCP, a local surveying company does most of their surveying like this, and I have done the odd job like that too. TBH I don't see what you're bringing to the table if it's not accurate or can be used to get results from, do you do any ground sampling for the VARI plant health data? Whats the point of the DEM if you have no height checks? Contours will not be accurate if you're trying to show surface water flow etc

At the very least you can place scale bars for a greater 2D precision, just food for thought

 

[bakerboy]

Has anybody tried this with the mavic using fixed-wing mode?

The camera doesn't point down and rolls when the craft rolls, just use DJI GS Pro if you have an ipad or Drone Deploy app