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.
3种地表随机糙率测量方法比较
- Title:
- Comparison of Three Methods to Measure Surface Random Roughness
- 文章编号:
- 1005-3409(2020)04-0072-06
- Keywords:
- surface roughness; laser scanner; photogrammetry; pin meter method
- 分类号:
- P217; S157
- 文献标志码:
- A
- 摘要:
- 为定量比较3种地表随机糙率测量方法的异同,采用砾石覆盖、枯落物覆盖及不同农事活动3种下垫面条件,分别利用三维激光扫描法、照相法和测针法测量了不同处理下的地表随机糙率,以激光扫描法测量结果为基准值,通过绝对误差、相对误差和均方根误差比较了3种测量方法的差异。结果表明:激光扫描法测量精度最高,但仪器价格昂贵,且用于野外测量时需要注意光照影响; 照相法精度较高,测量快捷方便,与扫描法的平均绝对误差为0.65 mm,平均相对误差为14.0%,但需手动测量各控制点间的相对距离,也需要避免光照影响; 测针法易于操作、成本最低,但费时费力、精度不高,与扫描法的平均绝对误差为1.82 mm,平均相对误差为34.1%。因此,3种方法各有利弊,需根据实际情况选择合适的测量方法测定地表随机糙率,当精度要求不是非常严格时,推荐优先使用照相法。研究结果对随机糙率测量方法的正确选择,提高地表糙率测量精度,具有重要的指导意义。
- 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.
参考文献/References:
[1] 王占礼.中国土壤侵蚀影响因素及其危害分析[J].农业工程学报,2000,16(4):32-36.
[2] Thomsen L M, Baartman J E M, Barneveld R J, et al. Soil surface roughness:comparing old and new measuring methods and application in a soil erosion model[J]. Soil Discussions, 2015,1(1):399-410.
[3] Römkens M J M, Wang J Y. Effect of tillage on surface roughness[J]. Transactions of the Asae, 1986,29(2):429-433.
[4] Hairsine P B, Moran C J, Rose C W. Recent developments regarding the influence of soil surface characteristics on overland flow and erosion[J]. Australian Journal of Soil Research, 1992,30(3):249-264.
[5] 朱良君,张光辉.地表微地形测量及定量化方法研究综述[J].中国水土保持科学,2013,11(5):114-122.
[6] 江冲亚,方红亮,魏珊珊.地表粗糙度参数化研究综述[J].地球科学进展,2012,27(3):292-303.
[7] 李泉,程效军.自定位手持式三维激光扫描仪精度测试与分析[J].测绘通报,2016(10):65-68,96.
[8] 徐加盼,王秋霞,邓羽松,等.基于三维激光扫描技术的花岗岩风化土体侵蚀表面特征研究[J].水土保持学报,2016,30(2):14-19.
[9] Zhang G, Xie Z. Soil surface roughness decay under different topographic conditions[J]. Soil and Tillage Research, 2019,187:92-101.
[10] 岳鹏,史明昌,杜哲,等.激光扫描技术在坡耕地土壤侵蚀监测中的应用[J].中国水土保持科学,2012,10(3):64-68.
[11] 张利超,杨伟,李朝霞,等.激光微地貌扫描仪测定侵蚀过程中地表糙度[J].农业工程学报,2014,30(22):155-162.
[12] 蔡祥,孙宇瑞,林剑辉,等.基于激光反射的土壤表面粗糙度测量装置设计与试验[J].农业机械学报,2010,41(1):68-71.
[13] 李晓洁,赵凯,郑兴明.基于激光三角法的地表粗糙度测试仪的研制[J].农业工程学报,2012,28(8):116-121.
[14] Abd Elbasit M A M, Anyoji H, Yasuda H, et al. Potential of low cost close-range photogrammetry system in soil microtopography quantification[J]. Hydrological Processes, 2009,23(10):1408-1417.
[15] Rieke-Zapp D H, Nearing M A. Digital close range photogrammetry for measurement of soil erosion[J]. The Photogrammetric Record, 2005,20(109):69-87.
[16] 丁文峰,张平仓,王爱娟,等.几种坡面土壤侵蚀测量方法的比较研究[J].长江科学院院报,2015,32(11):14-18.
[17] 张鹏,郑粉莉,王彬,等.高精度GPS,三维激光扫描和测针板3种测量技术监测沟蚀过程的对比研究[J].水土保持通报,2008,28(5):11-15.
[18] Burwell R E, Allmaras R R, Amemiya M. A field measurement of total porosity and surface microrelief of soils[J]. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 1963,27(6):697-700.
[19] Currence H D, Lovely W G. The analysis of soil surface roughness[J]. Transactions of the Asae, 1970,13(6):710-714.
[20] Jester W, Klik A. Soil surface roughness measurement: methods, applicability, and surface representation[J]. CATENA, 2005,64(2/3):174-192.
[21] Podmore T H, Huggins L F. An automated profile meter for surface roughness measurements[J]. Transactions of the Asae, 1981,24(3):663-665.
[22] 陶浩然,陈权,李震,等.近景摄影测量提高裸露地表粗糙度测量精度[J].农业工程学报,2017,33(15):162-167.
-----------------------------------------------
备注/Memo
收稿日期:2019-06-06 修回日期:2019-10-17
资助项目:国家自然科学基金重点项目(41530858); 国家自然科学基金创新研究群体项目(41621061)
第一作者:王洪晓(1995—),女,山东泰安人,硕士研究生,研究方向为土壤侵蚀。E-mail:201821051020@mail.bnu.edu.cn
通信作者:张光辉(1969—),男,甘肃静宁人,教授,博士生导师,主要从事土壤侵蚀和水土保持研究。E-mail:ghzhang@bnu.edu.cn