See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/303758731

Comparison of different survey methods data accuracy for road design and
construction

Conference Paper · May 2016

CITATIONS READS

2 1,000

4 authors, including:

Ivana Barišić Sanja Dimter

University of Osijek University of Osijek
37 PUBLICATIONS   79 CITATIONS    32 PUBLICATIONS   93 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Research of River-Port Sediment and its Potential use in Civil Engineering - CLEAR BASIN View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ivana Barišić on 13 January 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Comparison of different survey methods data
accuracy for road design and construction
Vladimir Moser1, Ivana Barišić1, Damir Rajle2 & Sanja Dimter1
1 University of Osijek, Faculty of Civil Engineering Osijek, Croatia
2 Vocational School of Construction and Geodesy Osijek, Croatia

Abstract
For road design and construction, survey data play very important role as a basic
tool and a starting point for the development of the design. In addition to the quality
of project design, accuracy and precision of survey data is also essential for project-
to-field data transferring within road build. In this paper, survey methods and its
precision will be presented in a view of two commonly used methods (GPS and
total station) and some new technology (unmanned aerial system-drone). Special
emphasis will be given to the potential use of drones in survey data for road design
and construction, with presentation of the field research results on the example of
urban roundabout.
Keywords: survey data, accuracy, GPS, drone, total station

1 Introduction
Road design is a complex activity involving the analysis of field conditions and
evaluation of alternative solutions in order to obtain the best possible quality of the
final product - the road. For quality project, accuracy of input data is essential. The
accuracy of survey data will reflect on a road build conditions.
Geodetic survey, as the basic input data for the development of road project is
extremely important in terms of its precision and detail. Therefore, the issues
around its development and content are defined by the relevant laws and
regulations. Within the survey, it is important to know horizontal and vertical
accuracy of provided data, particularly if there are also used for structure stake out.
Geodetic survey consists of two equally important parts whose accuracy equally
affect the overall accuracy of the project: digital map or plan (usually digital
cadastral plan – DCP) and topographic survey.
DCP is usually obtained by digitizing analog cadastral maps and its vectoring [1].
Precision of this process is presented in Figure 1 on the example of the building
from Vodenička Street in Osijek.
Figure 1. Comparison of vectorised DCP and survey data
DCP is supplemented and overlapped by survey data. Points 1 and 2 are derived
from the survey data while points 1' and 2' are within DCP. It can be seen that the
differences in position are not negligible, and they can be 0.5 meters or more. It
should be noted that DCP gained by digitalizing (scanning) of analog cadastral
maps can not be increased by magnification of scanned plan detail or by using
higher resolution [2].
In making surveys for the road design, particularly in urban areas, it is necessary
for parcel boundaries on vectored DCP to be corrected by field survey data which
will greatly increase its precision. Also, DCP does not contain terrain altitude data
nor a sufficient number of detailed points for quality road design. Therefore, it is
necessary to supplement it by field survey so the comparison of commonly used
survey methods (total station and GPS) and new technology (unmanned aerial
system-drone) are presented in this paper.

2 Total station and GPS

The total station is a combination of electromagnetic distance measuring
instrument and electronic theodolite. It can be used to measure horizontal and
vertical angles as well as sloping distance of object to the instrument so it has been
used for many engineering and construction applications. Besides that, it is proven
to be an excellent tool for mapping complicated fault zones in vegetated and cliffy
areas in geologic mapping [3]. Accuracy of this method in positioning detailed
points is within 1 cm which is very important when displaying strictly defined
surfaces on geodetic layers such as asphalt and concrete surfaces or within larger
and more demanding projects. However, there are some external factors affecting
accuracy of this method. As described in [4], for total stations using laser beam,
type and colour of the reflecting surface will substantially affect the energy of the
reflection of the laser beam, increasing the distance between the total station and
the target leads to increase the errors in measuring the slope distances, accuracy
of measured slope distance for the white surface is higher than the accuracy of any
other surface colour and modern electronic surveying instruments may be affected
by the capacity of instrument battery which may be worked for long time in the field.
The use of GPS (Global Positioning System) for surveying begun in the 1980s with
data being post-processed as one of its main disadvantages. But during that time
it was the only way to obtain centimetre-level positioning. In the early 1990s, RTK
(Real-Time Kinematic) methods were used to obtain centimetre-level positioning in
real-time making former GPS survey method very efficient [5]. However, even with
the use of modern instruments, by GPS survey there is a possibility of local
displacement of the entire recording (because of the point of view accuracy) so the
best accuracy can be achieved by using relative relations within the area of one
recording.
As an answer to continues tendencies in geodetic science and practice for a high
accuracy and reliability of data with minimal material costs, GNSS (Global
Navigation Satellite System) system is developed. This concept of networked
reference GNSS stations include GPS - American system (Global Positioning
System), GLONASS - the Russian system (Global Navigation Satellite System) and
the European Galileo system which is still inactive. CROPOS (CROatian
Positioning System) system consists of 33 GNSS reference station at a distance of
70 km distributed in a way to cover the entire Croatian territory for the purpose of
collecting data from satellite measurements and calculating the correction
parameters. This networked reference station systems allows the determination of
points with an accuracy of 2-3 centimetres and for the vast majority of geodetic
measurements, this precision is sufficient. However, accuracy on a level less than
one centimetre can be obtained by a combination of GNSS RTK system with the
use of laser sensors and transmitters.

3 Unmanned aerial system - drone

Photogrammetric method is very cost-effective for producing survey maps of long
and narrow objects such as roads. Altitude component accuracy obtained by this
survey method is about 10 cm. However, the basis for achieving desired accuracy
level is carefully performed survey. Survey should be carried out within low
vegetation season, when the ground and all objects are clearly visible, survey
measure should be adjusted to the required accuracy and to make ground
preparation for aerial survey by setting fotosignals (crosses) or clearly marking
defined details and measuring and calculating their coordinates [6].
Today, in photogrammetric survey, unmanned aerial systems (UAS) or drones are
increasingly used [7] from simple drones with elevation accuracy of approximately
10 cm to unmanned aircraft equipped with GNSS RTK system with elevation
accuracy around 2-3 cm.
UAS were developed when navigation and mapping sensors were integrated onto
radio-controlled platforms to acquire low-altitude, high-resolution imagery for
military purposes [8]. Today, UAS have a range of potential environmental or
commercial applications (emergency response, pollution detection, crop spraying,
etc.), they can be deployed in surveillance applications against civilians, such as
applications in policing and border surveillance or as a weapons [9]. Due to the low
cost, fast speed, high manoeuvrability, and high safety of UAS systems for
collecting images [10], there is also possibility for its various use in civil engineering.
Investigating potential use of UAS for surveying earthwork projects, Siebert and
Teizer [10] described different influences on UAS performance and its
characteristics. According to their research, UAS required only 3% of the
conventional RTK GPS-based data acquisition time but evaluation of the UAS-
generated photos for errors (blur and obstructions) required more time and the UAS
photogrammetric mapping approach required about one third of the time a RTK
GPS survey. The main advantage of an orthophoto from the UAS is a geometrically
corrected aerial photograph that is projected similarly to a topographical map,
displaying true ground position with a constant scale throughout the image. This
can be very helpful for field engineers for the direct measurement of distances,
areas, and positions, and in particular when creating cross-sectional views or other
terrain map information. There are also some issues within UAS survey. Stronger
thermal winds can cause air turbulences for the UAS resulting in some blurred
photos. Finally, UAS operation in highly populated areas can be unsafe or unsecure
for any bystanders (pedestrians or other traffic).

4 Field measurement
Within this research, UAS type Phantom 2 Vision+ (Figure 2) equipped with 14MP
camera was used in order to obtain photogrammetric images and to evaluate
accuracy of different survey methods. It is a Class 1 aircraft system according to
valid Croatian regulations [11] with total weight about 1,3 kg.

Figure 2. UAS Type Phantom 2 Vision+

Survey was conducted on roundabout in Trpimirova Street in Osijek. On the curbs
on all four roundabout legs and on central island, 50 detailed point was marked and
determined by four methods: a) survey by total station; b) survey by GPS RTK
method using two satellite receiver TOPCON HIPER V type; c) survey by GPS
CROPOS method using one satellite receiver TOPCON HIPER V type and d)
survey by UAS photogrammetry with 60 m flight level. For aerial images
processing, Quantum GIS software was used and four control points. Areal image
with marked control points is presented in Figure 3 while resulting digital terrestrial
model (DTM) is presented in Figure 4.
Figure 3. Aerial photo with marked control points taken by UAS

Figure 4. DTM obtained by UAS images processing

5 Comparison of survey results
In order to compare accuracy of different survey methods and potential use of UAS
for survey, results of UAS, GPS RTK and GPS CROPOS methods are analysed in
terms of total station method. Elevation of detailed points obtained by a total station
method are determined by trigonometric method with an accuracy of about 5 mm.
Due to the fact that this method is the most accurate one, results of other used
methods are compared in terms of total stations results. Results of UAS, GPS RTK
and GPS CROPOS survey are presented in Figure 5 in terms of total station results.
As it can be seen, the highest deviation is obtained for UAS method. GPS RTK and
GPS COPOS methods presented similar deviations. However, GPS RTK method
seems to have more reliable results due to continues values of deviations for all
measured points.

Figure 5. Survey results from different methods in term of total station method
In order to compare accuracy of different survey methods, in Figure 6 average and
mean values of elevation deviation in term of total station results is presented. For
GPR CROPOS method, mean value of deviations is -1 mm (measured elevations
are in average lover for 1mm compared to elevations determined by total station
method). This result presents very high compatibility with total station
measurements. However, average value of deviations is slightly higher, 8 mm
meaning that average deviation of this method comparing to total station is 8 mm.
For GPS RTK method, average and mean values of deviations are the same, 16
mm meaning that this method gives the most uniform deviations. UAS method
results have the highest deviations comparing it to total station results making this
method the least accurate one. Average and mean elevation deviation is 54 mm
and 57 mm respectively also presenting very reliable result. Even thou this is
significant loos of accuracy, it presents the potential of using UAS as alternative,
relatively cheap and fast survey method with applicability in projects which do not
require highly accurate measures. In order to increase accuracy of any
photogrammetric survey, it is necessary to select level of desired accuracy and on
that basis, we can define survey parameters such as flight level, image overlapping
and ground sampling distance (GSD) which defines recording resolution.
Particularly, flight level adjustment could be used in increasing UAS survey
accuracy but the safety issue must be addressed since UAS operation in highly
populated areas can be unsafe or unsecure for any bystanders (pedestrians or
other traffic) or for the UAV equipment itself.
Figure 6. Average and mean deviations in term of total station method

6 Concluding remarks
For road design and construction, survey data play very important role as a basic
tool and starting point for design development. Accuracy and precision of survey
data is also essential for project-to-field data transferring. So, in order to define
accuracy of different survey methods and defining its potential application,
comparison of the results of four different survey methods were used.
Results of this field study has shown that GPS RTK and GPS COPOS methods
presented similar deviations from the total station results taken to be referent one.
However, GPS RTK method seems to have more reliable results due to continues
values of deviations for all measured points. On the other hand, UAS method
results have the highest deviations comparing it to total station results making this
method the least accurate one. Even thou this is significant loos of accuracy, it
presents the potential of using UAS as alternative, relatively cheap and fast survey
method. UAS are growing new technology with increase market for small
photogrammetric and remote sensing projects to which it offers an unbeatable
price-performant service and product.

References
[1] Ljutić, K., Deluka-Tibljaš, A., Babić, S.: Mogućnosti unapređenja planiranja i projektiranja
cesta uporabom računala, Zbornik radova Građevinskog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Rijeci XI,
Rijeka, pp. 189.-205, 2008.
[2] Paar, R., Marendić, A., Zrinjski, M.: Metoda određivanja visina kombinacijom GNSS-a i
laserskog sustava, Ekscentar, 12, pp. 64-68, 2010.
[3] Lavine, A., Gardner, J.N., Reneau, S.L.: Total station geologic mapping: an innovative
approach to analyzing surface-faulting hazards, Engineering Geology, 70 (2003), pp. 71-
91, doi:10.1016/S0013-7952(03)00083-8
 [4] Beshr, A.A.A., Abo Elnaga, I.M.: Investigating the accuracy of digital levels and
reflectorless total stations for purposes of geodetic engineering, Alexandria Engineering
Journal, 50 (2001), pp. 399–405, doi:10.1016/j.aej.2011.12.004
[5] RTK (Real Time Kinematic) Basics for Surveying,
http://www.resourcesupplyllc.com/pdfs/RTKBasics_SurveyGradeGPS.pdf, 13.4.2016.
[6] Brajković, D., Bušelić, Lj., Remeta,I.: MX Road u projektiranju, Prometnice Nove
tehnologije i materijali, Dani prometnica 2010, Zagreb, 2010., pp. 241-272
[7] Kolarek, M.: Bespilotne letjelice za potrebe fotogrametrije, Ekscentar, 12, pp.70-73, 2010.
[8] Colomina, I., Molina, P.: Unmanned aerial systems for photogrammetry and remote
sensing: A review, ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 92 (2014),
pp. 79–97, doi: 10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2014.02.013
[9] Finn, R. L., Wright, D.: Unmanned aircraft systems: Surveillance, ethics and privacy in
civil applications, Computer law & security review, 28 (2012), pp. 184-194,
doi:10.1016/j.clsr.2012.01.005
[10] Siebert, S., Teizer, J.: Mobile 3D mapping for surveying earthwork projects using an
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) system, Automation in Construction, 41 (2014), pp. 1–
14, doi: 10.1016/j.autcon.2014.01.004
[11] Ordinance on unmanned aircraft systems (in Croatian), Official Gazette NN 49/15

View publication stats