[1]WANG Hongxiao,ZHANG Guanghui,ZHU Pingzong,et al.Comparison of Three Methods to Measure Surface Random Roughness[J].Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2020,27(04):72-77.
Copy
Research of Soil and Water Conservation[ISSN 1005-3409/CN 61-1272/P] Volume:
27
Number of periods:
2020 04
Page number:
72-77
Column:
目次
Public date:
2020-06-20
- Title:
-
Comparison of Three Methods to Measure Surface Random Roughness
- Author(s):
-
WANG Hongxiao1, ZHANG Guanghui1,2, ZHU Pingzong1, ZHANG Baojun3
-
(1.Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China; 2.State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Process and Resource Ecology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China; 3.Institute of Soil and Water Conservation, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Ministry of Water Resources, Yangling, Shaanxi 712100, China)
-
- Keywords:
-
surface roughness; laser scanner; photogrammetry; pin meter method
- CLC:
-
P217; S157
- DOI:
-
-
- Abstract:
-
In order to compare the similarities and differences of three measuring methods on surface random roughness quantitatively, 3D laser scanning, photogrammetry, and pin meter methods were used to measure surface random roughness under gravel cover, litter cover and different agricultural activities. The results of 3D laser scanning method were taken as the control, the differences of three methods were compared by absolute error, relative error and root-mean-square error. The results show that the laser scanning method has the highest accuracy, but the scanner is expensive and should be prevented from the influence of sun light when it is utilized in field conditions; photogrammetry has high accuracy and the measurement is efficient and convenient; the mean absolute error and relative error compared with the scanning method are 0.65 mm and 14.0%, respectively, however, the relative distance between the markers should be measured manually and also should be prevented from the influence of sun light; the pin meter method is easy to be operated and has the lowest cost, but it is time-labor consuming, and has the low accuracy, the mean absolute error and relative error compared with the scanning method are 1.82 mm and 34.1%, respectively. All three methods have both advantages and disadvantages. The appropriate method should be selected according to the actual situation to measure surface random roughness. Photogrammetry is recommended if the requirement of accuracy is not very strict. These results are helpful to select a method to measure surface random roughness and to promote its accuracy.