Effects of camera calibration on the accuracy of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle sensor products

Year 2024, Volume: 9 Issue: 3, 314 - 323, 31.10.2024

Dianah Rose Abeho , Moreblessings Shoko , Patroba Achola Odera

https://doi.org/10.26833/ijeg.1422619

Abstract

The utilisation of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) mounted with non-metric consumer-grade digital cameras is on the rise globally due to their affordability and ease of operation. For high-accuracy UAV products, accurate camera parameters must be determined through camera calibration. Camera calibration can be performed before (pre-calibration) or during the bundle block adjustment (self-calibration). This study aims to analyse the effect of camera calibration parameters on the accuracy of UAV products, namely the Digital Elevation Model (DEM) and orthoimage. Camera calibration parameters are estimated using self-calibration, which deploys 3D image information of the scene in a bundle adjustment, and a 2D reference object-based approach known as Zhang's technique, which requires image information of a planar pattern. This study deployed a DJI FC220 camera mounted on a DJI Mavic Pro UAV. Self-calibration was deployed in Agisoft Metashape software based on Brown's method, and Zhang's technique was deployed in MATLAB and OpenCV. Based on internal accuracy measures, OpenCV yields a minor reprojection error of 0.14, followed by MATLAB (0.79) and self-calibration (1.21). Processing without calibration yields the highest reprojection error of 2.18. Based on external measures of accuracy, that is, the geometric accuracy of UAV products, self-calibration yields the least RMSE of 8.2 and 1.4 cm for the horizontal and vertical, respectively, followed by Zhang's technique with 9.6 and 2.3 cm in MATLAB and 13.5 and 4.3 cm in OpenCV. Processing without calibration yields the highest vertical RMSE of 20.0 and 22.9 cm for the horizontal and vertical, respectively. Comparison of the accuracy of UAV mapping products computed with and without calibration emphasises the need for camera calibration to optimise the accuracy of UAV products. This study recommends assessing other photogrammetric mapping software and camera calibration approaches and the effect of flying heights on calibration parameters and mapping accuracy.

Keywords

Camera calibration, Camera orientation parameters, UAV, DEM, Orthoimage

Thanks

The authors acknowledge the support and contribution of the Organization of Women in Science for the Developing World (OWSD), University of Cape Town (UCT), Ministry of Lands Housing and Urban Development (MLHUD) Uganda, Makerere University Kampala (MUK) and Ministry of Defense and Veteran Affairs (MoDVA) Uganda.

References

• 1. Lim P, Seo J, Son J, Kim T. Analysis of orientation accuracy of an UAV image according to camera calibration. International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing & Spatial Information Sciences. 2019; XLII-2/W13.
• 2. Elkhrachy I. Accuracy assessment of low-cost Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) photogrammetry. Alexandria Engineering Journal. 2021;60(6):5579-90.
• 3. Zhou Y, Rupnik E, Meynard C, Thom C, Pierrot-Deseilligny M. Simulation and analysis of photogrammetric UAV image blocks—Influence of camera calibration error. Remote sensing. 2019;12(1):22.
• 4. He F, Zhou T, Xiong W, Hasheminnasab SM, Habib A. Automated aerial triangulation for UAV-based mapping. Remote Sensing. 2018;10(12):1952.
• 5. Sanz‐Ablanedo E, Chandler JH, Ballesteros‐Pérez P, Rodríguez‐Pérez JR. Reducing systematic dome errors in digital elevation models through better UAV flight design. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms. 2020;45(9):2134-47.
• 6. James MR, Robson S. Mitigating systematic error in topographic models derived from UAV and ground‐based image networks. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms. 2014;39(10):1413-20.
• 7. Pathak S, Acharya S, Bk S, Karn G, Thapa U. UAV-based topographical mapping and accuracy assessment of orthophoto using GCP. Mersin Photogrammetry Journal. 2024;6(1):1-8.
• 8. Huang W, Jiang S, Jiang W. Camera self-calibration with GNSS constrained bundle adjustment for weakly structured long corridor UAV images. Remote Sensing. 2021;13(21):4222.
• 9. Kılınç Kazar G, Karabörk H, Makineci HB. Evaluation of test field-based calibration and self-calibration models of UAV integrated compact cameras. Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing. 2022;50(1):13-23.
• 10. Cramer M, Przybilla H-J, Zurhorst A. UAV cameras: Overview and geometric calibration benchmark. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences. 2017;42:85-92.
• 11. Dzurisin D, Thompson RA, Schilling SP. Photogrammetry. Volcano Deformation: Geodetic Monitoring Techniques. 2007:195-221.
• 12. Kozmus Trajkovski K, Grigillo D, Petrovič D. Optimization of UAV flight missions in steep terrain. Remote Sensing. 2020;12(8):1293.
• 13. Huang W, Peng X, Li L, Li X. Review of Camera Calibration Methods and Their Progress. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress. 2023;60(16):1600001--11.
• 14. Sharma M, Raghavendra S, Agrawal S. Development of an open-source tool for UAV photogrammetric data processing. Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing. 2021;49(3):659-64.
• 15. Remondino F, Fraser C. Digital camera calibration methods: considerations and comparisons. International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences. 2006;36(5):266-72.
• 16. Zhang Z. Camera parameters (intrinsic, extrinsic). Computer Vision: A Reference Guide: Springer; 2021. p. 135-40.
• 17. Tang R. Mathematical methods for camera self-calibration in photogrammetry and computer vision 2013.
• 18. Guo K, Ye H, Gu J, Chen H. A novel method for intrinsic and extrinsic parameters estimation by solving perspective-three-point problem with known camera position. Applied Sciences. 2021;11(13):6014.
• 19. Hadi AH, Khalaf AZ. Accuracy Assessment of Establishing 3D Real Scale Model in Close-Range Photogrammetry with Digital Camera. Engineering and Technology Journal. 2022;40(11):1492-509.
• 20. Roncella R, Forlani G. UAV block geometry design and camera calibration: A simulation study. Sensors. 2021;21(18):6090.
• 21. Carbonneau PE, Dietrich JT. Cost‐effective non‐metric photogrammetry from consumer‐grade sUAS: implications for direct georeferencing of structure from motion photogrammetry. Earth surface processes and landforms. 2017;42(3):473-86.
• 22. Hastedt H, Luhmann T. Investigations on the quality of the interior orientation and its impact in object space for UAV photogrammetry. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences. 2015;40:321-8.
• 23. Luhmann T, Fraser C, Maas H-G. Sensor modelling and camera calibration for close-range photogrammetry. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing. 2016;115:37-46.
• 24. Duran Z, Atik ME. Accuracy comparison of interior orientation parameters from different photogrammetric software and direct linear transformation method. International Journal of Engineering and Geosciences. 2021;6(2):74-80.
• 25. Zhang Z. A flexible new technique for camera calibration. IEEE Transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence. 2000;22(11):1330-4.
• 26. Li W, Gee T, Friedrich H, Delmas P, editors. A practical comparison between Zhang's and Tsai's calibration approaches. 29th International Conference on Image and Vision Computing 2014 November 2014; New Zealand.
• 27. Gruen A, Beyer HA. System calibration through self-calibration. Calibration and orientation of cameras in computer vision: Springer; 2001. p. 163-93.
• 28. Wolf PR, Dewitt BA, Wilkinson BE. Elements of Photogrammetry with Applications in GIS: McGraw-Hill Education; 2014.
• 29. Clarke TA, Fryer JG. The development of camera calibration methods and models. The Photogrammetric Record. 1998;16(91):51-66.
• 30. Luhmann T, Robson S, Kyle S, Harley I. Close range photogrammetry: principles, techniques and applications: Whittles publishing Dunbeath; 2006.
• 31. Tsai RY, editor An efficient and accurate camera calibration technique fro 3d machine vision. CVPR'86; 1986.
• 32. Heikkila J, Silvén O, editors. A four-step camera calibration procedure with implicit image correction. IEEE computer society conference on computer vision and pattern recognition; 1997 17-19 June 1997; San Juan, PR, USA: IEEE.
• 33. Lenz R. Lens distortion corrected CCD-camera calibration with co-planar calibration points for real-time 3D measurements. Prodding of ISPRS, Fast Processing of Photogrammetric Data, 1987. 1987:60-7.
• 34. Pérez M, Agüera F, Carvajal F. Digital camera calibration using images taken from an unmanned aerial vehicle. International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences. 2011;38(1/C22).
• 35. Kršák B, Blišťan P, Pauliková A, Puškárová P, Kovanič Ľm, Palková J, et al. Use of low-cost UAV photogrammetry to analyze the accuracy of a digital elevation model in a case study. Measurement. 2016;91:276-87.
• 36. Drap P, Lefèvre J. An exact formula for calculating inverse radial lens distortions. Sensors. 2016;16(6):807.
• 37. Brown CD. Close-range camera calibration. Photogramm Eng. 1971;37(8):855-66.
• 38. Yan L, Tengfei L. Research on the improvement of Zhang Zhengyou's camera calibration method [J]. Optical technology. 2014;40(06):565-70.
• 39. Prakash CD, Karam LJ, editors. Camera calibration using adaptive segmentation and ellipse fitting for localizing control points. 2012 19th IEEE International Conference on Image Processing; 2012: IEEE.
• 40. Hemayed EE, editor A survey of camera self-calibration. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Advanced Video and Signal Based Surveillance, 2003; 2003: IEEE.
• 41. Liu S, Peng Y, Sun Z, Wang X. Self-calibration of projective camera based on trajectory basis. Journal of Computational Science. 2019;31:45-53.
• 42. Kingsland K. Comparative analysis of digital photogrammetry software for cultural heritage. Digital Applications in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage. 2020;18:e00157.