Affiliation:
1. Remote Sensing and Image Analysis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Technical University of Darmstadt, 64287 Darmstadt, Germany
2. Geodetic Measurement Systems and Sensor Technology, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Technical University of Darmstadt, 64287 Darmstadt, Germany
Abstract
Due to their low cost and portability, using entertainment devices for indoor mapping applications has become a hot research topic. However, the impact of user behavior on indoor mapping evaluation with entertainment devices is often overlooked in previous studies. This article aims to assess the indoor mapping performance of entertainment devices under different mapping strategies. We chose two entertainment devices, the HoloLens 2 and iPhone 14 Pro, for our evaluation work. Based on our previous mapping experience and user habits, we defined four simplified indoor mapping strategies: straight-forward mapping (SFM), left–right alternating mapping (LRAM), round-trip straight-forward mapping (RT-SFM), and round-trip left–right alternating mapping (RT-LRAM). First, we acquired triangle mesh data under each strategy with the HoloLens 2 and iPhone 14 Pro. Then, we compared the changes in data completeness and accuracy between the different devices and indoor mapping applications. Our findings show that compared to the iPhone 14 Pro, the triangle mesh accuracy acquired by the HoloLens 2 has more stable performance under different strategies. Notably, the triangle mesh data acquired by the HoloLens 2 under the RT-LRAM strategy can effectively compensate for missing wall and floor surfaces, mainly caused by furniture occlusion and the low frame rate of the depth-sensing camera. However, the iPhone 14 Pro is more efficient in terms of mapping completeness and can acquire a complete triangle mesh more quickly than the HoloLens 2. In summary, choosing an entertainment device for indoor mapping requires a combination of specific needs and scenes. If accuracy and stability are important, the HoloLens 2 is more suitable; if efficiency and completeness are important, the iPhone 14 Pro is better.
Funder
China Scholarship Council
Reference72 articles.
1. (2023, December 15). Timeline of 3D Laser Scanners. Available online: https://scantech-international.com/blog/timeline-of-3d-laser-scanners.
2. Review of Earth Science Research Using Terrestrial Laser Scanning;Telling;Earth-Sci. Rev.,2017
3. Hoon, Y.J., and Hong, S. (2019). Three-Dimensional Digital Documentation of Cultural Heritage Site Based on the Convergence of Terrestrial Laser Scanning and Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Photogrammetry. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf., 8.
4. Chen, Y., Tang, J., Jiang, C., Zhu, L., Lehtomäki, M., Kaartinen, H., Kaijaluoto, R., Wang, Y., Hyyppä, J., and Hyyppä, H. (2018). The Accuracy Comparison of Three Simultaneous Localization and Mapping (SLAM)-Based Indoor Mapping Technologies. Sensors, 18.
5. Assessing the Quality of the Leica BLK2GO Mobile Laser Scanner versus the Focus 3D S120 Static Terrestrial Laser Scanner for a Preliminary Study of Garden Digital Surveying;Machado;Heritage,2023
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献