Isprsannals II 5 289 2014
Isprsannals II 5 289 2014
Isprsannals II 5 289 2014
ISPRS Technical Commission V Symposium, 23 25 June 2014, Riva del Garda, Italy
Dept. of Natural Resources and Environmental Engineering, University of Vigo, Maxwell s/n, 36310, Vigo, Spain (ipuente, higiniog, parias)@uvigo.es
b
Dept. of Geoscience and Remote Sensing, Delft University of Technology, Stevinweg 1, 2628 CN, Delft, The
Netherlands [email protected]
Commission V, WG V/3
KEY WORDS: LiDAR, point cloud, segmentation, breakwater modeling, change detection
ABSTRACT:
Rubble mound breakwaters are coastal defense structures that protect harbors and beaches from the impacts of both littoral drift and
storm waves. They occasionally break, leading to catastrophic damage to surrounding human populations and resulting in huge
economic and environmental losses. Ensuring their stability is considered to be of vital importance and the major reason for setting
up breakwater monitoring systems. Terrestrial laser scanning has been recognized as a monitoring technique of existing
infrastructures. Its capability for measuring large amounts of accurate points in a short period of time is also well proven. In this
paper we first introduce a method for the automatic extraction of face geometry of concrete cubic blocks, as typically used in
breakwaters. Point clouds are segmented based on their orientation and location. Then we compare corresponding cuboids of three
co-registered point clouds to estimate their transformation parameters over time. The first method is demonstrated on scan data from
the Baiona breakwater (Spain) while the change detection is demonstrated on repeated scan data of concrete bricks, where the
changing scenario was simulated. The application of the presented methodology has verified its effectiveness for outlining the 3D
breakwater units and analyzing their changes at the millimeter level. Breakwater management activities could benefit from this initial
version of the method in order to improve their productivity.
1. INTRODUCTION
Structural monitoring has become nowadays an important
research area involved in the structural integrity assessment of
civil infrastructures. Engineering communities have shown an
increasing interest to monitor bridges (Enckell et al., 2011; Ye
et al., 2013), tunnels (Lindenbergh et al., 2005; Puente et al.,
2014; Sharma et al., 2001) and other structures (Valena et al.,
2013) and to detect damage at the earliest stages. Specifically,
rubble mound breakwaters (Corredor et al., 2013) are
commonly employed to protect important coastal areas such as
ports, marinas or beaches from the effects of attacking ocean
waves.
Some studies have described fairly extensively the fluidstructure interaction (Altomare et al., 2014) and the breakwater
monitoring (Del Grosso et al., 2003; Yoon et al., 2012). It is
crucial to detect local defects on time, such as displacements,
breakage or removals of the concrete armor units (CAUs),
before they become a real threat to the safety of breakwaters.
The observed damages in these structures can be divided into
sliding, settlement or toppling, directly causing displacements,
breakage or removals of the concrete armor units. Other defects
such as scouring at dike foundations can also occurr and tend to
propagate into more serious damages under extreme wave
forces. Therefore, it is advantageous to develop a methodology
which identifies local movements in these coastal defense
structures.
Detection of changes using LiDAR data is growing quickly in
many engineering applications (Lindenbergh, 2010; Monserrat
and Crosetto, 2008). This technology allows for low risk and
rapid collection of accurate geospatial information as an
alternative for traditional surveying techniques. It has been
proved that an easy procedure to map and monitor topographic
changes is by using repeated LiDAR measurements from a fixed
position (Van Goor et al., 2011) or any mobile platform (Puente
et al., 2013).
This work presents a novel approach to automatically evaluate
changes in rubble mound breakwaters using point clouds of
different epochs. The method first identifies single segments
from each armour unit and their face geometry is outlined.
Secondly, the algorithm looks for corresponding cuboids in
different epochs and estimates their rigid body transformation
parameters. The paper has been organized into four main
sections. The second reflects the formal description of the
algorithm. In section three, the results are presented and
discussed. Finally, some conclusions are provided.
2. METHODOLOGY
In this section, we focus on the identification of individual
planar segments representing the cuboid faces. Those segments
are later grouped together to form individual cuboids (or
breakwater units), which are used to monitor changes in the
structure.
The algorithm overview summarizes the following steps, as
shown in Figure 1.
* Corresponding author.
This contribution has been peer-reviewed. The double-blind peer-review was conducted on the basis of the full paper.
doi:10.5194/isprsannals-II-5-289-2014
289
ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Volume II-5, 2014
ISPRS Technical Commission V Symposium, 23 25 June 2014, Riva del Garda, Italy
The resulting values of the PCA are used to reshape the original
data matrix (X, Y, Z, I) into a new one, where each point of the
cloud will now have 9 data values: X, Y, Z coordinates plus 3
surface normal coordinates (nx, ny, nz) and 3 eigenvalues (1, 2,
3). Before the segmentation process starts, we first filter the
dataset based on the third eigenvalue (3). Raw data points with
a greater 3 will be filtered out, as they mostly correspond to
edges or noise.
In the following step, we select a clustering method for
grouping the previously filtered data based on their surface
normal orientations. There are two common approaches:
hierarchical clustering and k-means algorithm. For this case
study, we used the latter. K-means clustering treats each
observation ni = (nxi, nyi, nzi) as an object having a location in
space. If the set N={ n1, , ni} defines the i points to be
clustered, we seek a collection of k mutually exclusive subsets
of N, say, C1,.Ck, that minimizes the sum of distances from
each point to its cluster centroid, over all clusters. Distances are
measured using the squared Euclidean distance metric and the
process is reiterated until the clustering processes stabilize,
which basically means that no points swap cluster anymore
(Spath, 1985).
This method needs both k and the initial centroid positions (also
known as seeds) to be specified to initialize it (Chiang and
Mirkin, 2010). For the case study, we selected the seeds from N
at random while the right number of clusters k was estimated by
plotting all normal directions on a stereographic projection.
Then, by applying some image processing techniques with
Matlab, k is semi-automatically estimated. Intermediate steps
include the image binarization, and the centroid and area
computation for each cluster in the binary image. In fact, the
only parameter provided by the user is the minimum number of
pixels that compose each cluster area.
It is therefore possible to segment point clouds into subsets,
each one made of points with similar orientation. Then, for each
cluster Ck, we applied a k-means clustering for the second time
where the input data matrix is composed of X, Y, Z coordinates.
We use an over-segmentation approach in some clusters but in
this way, we assure one single segment per cluster and also, we
can delete those small and unrepresentative clusters, classifying
them as outliers.
For each resulting cluster, we compute its centroid and the
mean surface normal vector. The next step aims at merging all
the clusters belonging to the same face. We use a standard
region growing algorithm in 3D to cluster the points based on
an angular threshold (p) and a distance threshold (dp), similar
to that presented in Rabbani et al., 2006. The threshold angle
used specifies the maximum acceptable angle between the
normal of the current seed and its neighbors. The latter are
computed by searching all the centroids that are within distance
dp of the current seed.
2.3 Automatic geometry extraction
When we process the clustered laser scanning data, we still need
to remove some noisy points that clearly do not belong to a
cube face (see Figure 2). To overcome this problem, we adjust a
plane to each cluster, defined by the mean normal vector and its
This contribution has been peer-reviewed. The double-blind peer-review was conducted on the basis of the full paper.
doi:10.5194/isprsannals-II-5-289-2014
290
ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Volume II-5, 2014
ISPRS Technical Commission V Symposium, 23 25 June 2014, Riva del Garda, Italy
(1)
This contribution has been peer-reviewed. The double-blind peer-review was conducted on the basis of the full paper.
doi:10.5194/isprsannals-II-5-289-2014
291
ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Volume II-5, 2014
ISPRS Technical Commission V Symposium, 23 25 June 2014, Riva del Garda, Italy
This contribution has been peer-reviewed. The double-blind peer-review was conducted on the basis of the full paper.
doi:10.5194/isprsannals-II-5-289-2014
292
ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Volume II-5, 2014
ISPRS Technical Commission V Symposium, 23 25 June 2014, Riva del Garda, Italy
Figure 8. Top view of the cuboids 1, 2 and 3 (from left to right) studied in three different epochs. The faces are not grouped in
cuboids at this point.
4. CONCLUSIONS
In order to define their placement in 3D, the linear position and
orientation of the cuboids were computed. Typically, the
reference point chosen is coincident with the centroid of the
rigid body. The cuboid orientation is given by its three
orthogonal vectors.
In the following, the centers of gravity of each cuboid and its
Euler angles were derived. The results only consider the case of
just one cuboid C1, monitored in epochs I, II and III. However,
the procedure can be applied to the whole set of corresponding
cuboid pairs identified by the user.
Table 1. Centers of Gravity and Euler angles for CI1, CII1, CIII1.
Changes were manually applied to the cuboids.
CoG (m)
(0)
(0)
(0)
CI 1
19.89
9.03
19.57
CII1
19.74
10.08
15.31
CIII1
325.9
333.22
18.08
This contribution has been peer-reviewed. The double-blind peer-review was conducted on the basis of the full paper.
doi:10.5194/isprsannals-II-5-289-2014
293
ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Volume II-5, 2014
ISPRS Technical Commission V Symposium, 23 25 June 2014, Riva del Garda, Italy
REFERENCES
Altomare, C., Crespo, A.J.C., Rogers, B.D., Domnguez, J.M.,
Gironella, X. and Gmez-Gesteira, M., 2014. Numerical
modelling of armour block sea breakwater with smoothed
particle hydrodynamics. Computers and Structures, 130, pp.
34-45.
Belton, D. and Lichti, D., 2006. Classification and segmentation
of terrestrial laser scanner point clouds using local variance
information, ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote
sensing, 36(5), pp. 44-49.
Castillo, E. and Zhao, H., 2009. Point cloud segmentation via
constrained non linear least squares surface normal estimates,
Recent UCLA Computational and Applied Mathematics
Reports.
Chiang, M.M.-T and Mirkin, B., 2010. Intelligent choice of the
number of clusters in k-means clustering: An experimental
study with different cluster spreads. Journal of Classification,
27 (1), pp. 3-40.
Corredor, A., Santos, M., Pea, E., Macieira, E.,
Gmez.Martn, M.E., and Medina, J., 2013.Designing and
Constructing Cubipod Armored Breakwaters in the Ports of
Malaga and Punta Langosteira (Spain). In: Proceedings of the
ICE Coasts, Marine Structures and Breakwaters conference,
Edinburgh, Scotland http://www.ice-conferences.com/ICEBreakwaters (17 Feb. 2014).
Del Grosso, A., Lanata, F., Inaudi, D., Posenato, D. and
Pieracci, A., 2003. Breakwater deformation monitoring by
automatic and remote GPS system. In: Proceedings of the 1st
International Conference on Structural Health Monitoring and
Intelligent Infrastructure, Tokyo, Japan, pp. 369-376.
Enckell, M., Glisic, B., Myrvoll, F. and Bergstrand, B., 2011.
Evaluation of a large-scale bridge strain, temperature and crack
monitoring with distributed fibre optic sensors. Journal of Civil
Structural Health Monitoring, 1(1-2), pp.37-46.
Faro, 2013a. Laser Scanner Faro Focus 3D - Users Manual
(Revised version: December 19, 2013)
Faro, 2013b. Laser Scanner Faro Photon 120 - Users Manual
(Revised version: December 19, 2013)
Lindenbergh, R., Pfeifer, N. and Rabbani, T., 2005. Accuracy
analysis of the Leica HDS3000 and feasibility of tunnel
deformation monitoring. In: Proceedings of ISPRS WG III/3,
III/4, V/3 workshop on laser scanning, Enschede, the
Netherlands, pp. 24-29.
Lindenbergh, R.C., 2010. Engineering Applications. In G.
Vosselman and H.-G. Maas (Eds.), Airborne and Terrestrial
Laser Scanning. Whittles Publishing, Dunbeath, Scotland, pp.
237-242.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Authors want to give thanks to the Spanish Ministry of
Economy and Competitiveness and Xunta de Galicia for the
This contribution has been peer-reviewed. The double-blind peer-review was conducted on the basis of the full paper.
doi:10.5194/isprsannals-II-5-289-2014
294
ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Volume II-5, 2014
ISPRS Technical Commission V Symposium, 23 25 June 2014, Riva del Garda, Italy
financial support given; Human Resources programs BES2010-034106 and IPP055-EXP44 and Projects Code No.
EM2015/005 and IN852A2013/29.
This contribution has been peer-reviewed. The double-blind peer-review was conducted on the basis of the full paper.
doi:10.5194/isprsannals-II-5-289-2014
295