摘要
【目的】针对人工实测与地基激光雷达(TLS)在林业资源调查中数据获取效率低下的问题,以哈尔滨市城市林业示范基地黑皮油松林为研究对象,综合对比地基激光雷达和手持式移动激光雷达(HMLS)两种扫描方式,为高效的森林资源调查和经营管理提供有效的参考。【方法】利用TLS单站与多站扫描以及HMLS获取研究样地单木点云数据,然后基于点云数据处理软件提取单木结构参数并与实测数据进行匹配,综合对比两种扫描方式的数据获取效率、点云质量以及单木结构参数提取精度。【结果】1)HMLS在扫描高郁闭度黑皮油松林样地时扫描速度大约为27 m^2/min,TLS4站扫描该样地速度为10 m^2/min,扫描速度上HMLS扫描约为TLS多站扫描的3倍。2)TLS4站扫描的胸径处点云数量与单木点云数量远高于HMLS,且HMLS相比于TLS4存在冠层点云缺失的问题,但HMLS相较于TLS数据拥有更好的胸径处切片点云完整度。3)HMLS、TLS单站、TLS4站数据胸径估测结果的R^2分别为0.92、0.84、0.95,HMLS与TLS4站扫描均给出了较好的胸径估测结果,单站TLS扫描估测胸径结果较差。HMLS扫描与TLS单站扫描由于冠层点云扫描不完整导致估测树高和树冠面积的决定系数均小于0.5。TLS4站扫描相较于HMLS扫描在树高和树冠面积的估测精度上有了较大提升,R^2达到了0.7以上。【结论】TLS4站扫描拥有最高的点云数据质量与单木结构参数提取精度,但扫描效率最低,而单站扫描由于遮挡效应单木结构提取精度较低但扫描效率最高;HMLS具有较高的扫描效率与胸径估测精度,但由于冠层点云的缺失在树高和树冠面积等参数的估测精度较低。
【Objective】For the problem of inefficient data acquisition in forestry resource surveys for manual measurements and terrestrial laser scanning(TLS),the Pinus tabulaeformis forest plot of Harbin Urban Forestry Demonstration Base was selected as the research objects in this study,and the TLS and hand-held mobile laser scanning(HMLS)were comprehensively compared,which provides an effective reference for efficient forest resource investigation and management.【Method】The TLS single-station and multi-station scanning and HMLS were used to obtain individual tree point cloud data.Then,based on the point cloud data processing software,the individual tree structure parameters were extracted and matched with the measured data.The data acquisition efficiency,point cloud quality and individual tree structure parameters extraction precision of the two scanning methods were comprehensively compared.【Result】1)HMLS scanning speed was about 27 m^2/min when the scanning of the Pinus tabulaeformis forest plot with the high canopy closeness,and the speed of the TLS with four station(TLS4)was 10 m^2/min,and the HMLS scanning speed was approximately three times that of TLS scanning.2)The number of point clouds at the DBH of the TLS4 stations scanning was much higher than that of the HMLS,and HMLS had a problem of canopy point cloud missing compared to TLS4.However,HMLS had a better point cloud integrity than the TLS data.3)The R^2 of the HMLS,TLS single station,and TLS4 stations data used for estimating DBH results were 0.92,0.84,and 0.95,respectively,and both HMLS and TLS4 station scanning gave better results of DBH estimation,and single station TLS scanning estimated poorer DBH results.The HMLS scanning and TLS single-station scanning had a coefficient of determination of less than 0.5 for both tree height and canopy area due to incomplete canopy point cloud scanning.Compared with HMLS scanning,TLS4 station scanning had greatly improved the estimation accuracy of tree height and canopy area,and R^2 had reached 0.7 or more
作者
范伟伟
刘浩然
徐永胜
林文树
FAN Weiwei;LIU Haoran;XU Yongsheng;LIN Wenshu(College of Engineering&Technology,Northeast Forestry University,Harbin 150040,Heilongjiang,China)
出处
《中南林业科技大学学报》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2020年第8期63-74,共12页
Journal of Central South University of Forestry & Technology
基金
中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金项目(2572019BL03)
国家自然科学基金项目(31971574)
黑龙江省博士后基金项目(LBH-Z15007)。
关键词
地基激光雷达
手持式移动激光雷达
单木结构参数
精度
terrestrial laser scanning
hand-held mobile laser scanning
individual tree structure parameters
precision
