Using Open LiDAR to Remove Low Noise from Photogrammetric UAV Point Clouds

We collected drone imagery of the restored “Kance” tavern during the lunch stop of the UAV Tartu summer school field trip (actually the organizer Marko Kohv did that, as I was busy introducing students to SUP boarding). With Agisoft PhotoScan we then processed the images into point clouds below the deck of the historical “Jõmmu” barge on the way home (actually Marko did that, because I was busy enjoying the view of the wetlands in the afternoon sun). The resulting data set with 7,855,699 points is shown below and can be downloaded here.

7,855,699 points produced with Agisoft Photoscan

Generating points using photogrammetric techniques in scenes containing water bodies tends to be problematic as dense blotches of noise points above and below the water surface are common as you can see in the picture below. Especially the low points are troublesome as they adversely affect ground classification which results in poor Digital Elevation Models (DTMs).

Clusters of low noise points nearly 2 meters below the actual surface in water areas.

In a previous article we have described a LAStools workflow that can remove excessive low noise. In this article here we use external information about the topography of the area to clean our photogrammetry points. How convenient that the Estonian Land Board has just released their entire LiDAR archives as open data.

Following these instructions here you can download the available open LiDAR for this area, which has the map sheet index 475681. Alternatively you can download the four currently available data sets here flown in spring 2010, in summer 2013, in spring 2014, and in summer 2017. In the following we will use the one flown in spring 2014.

We can view both data sets simultaneously in lasview. By adding ‘-faf’ to the command-line we can switch back and forth between the two data sets by pressing ‘0’ and ‘1’.

lasview -i Kantsi.laz ^
        -i 475681_2014_tava.laz ^
        -points 10000000 ^
        -faf

We find cut the 1 km by 1 km LiDAR tile down to a 250 m by 250 m tile that nicely surrounds our photogrammetric point set using the following las2las command-line:

las2las -i 475681_2014_tava.laz ^
        -inside_tile 681485 6475375 250 ^
        -o LiDAR_Kantsi.laz

lasview -i Kantsi.laz ^
        -i LiDAR_Kantsi.laz ^
        -points 10000000 ^
        -faf

Scrutinizing the two data sets we quickly find that there is a miss-alignment between the dense imagery-derived and the comparatively sparse LiDAR point clouds. With lasview we investigate the difference between the two point clouds by hovering over a point from one point cloud and pressing <i> and then hovering over a somewhat corresponding point from the other point cloud and pressing <SHIFT>+<i>. We measure displacements of around 2 meters vertically and of around 3 to 3.5 meter in total.

Before we can use the LiDAR points to remove the low noise from the photogrammetric points we must align them properly. For simple translation errors this can be done with a new feature that was recently added to lasview. Make sure to download the latest version (190404 or newer) of LAStools to follow the steps shown in the image sequence below.

las2las -i Kantsi.laz ^
        -translate_xyz 0.89 -1.90 2.51 ^
        -o Kantsi_shifted.laz

lasview -i Kantsi_shifted.laz ^
        -i LiDAR_Kantsi.laz ^
        -points 10000000 ^
        -faf

The result looks good in the sense that both sides of the photogrammetric roof are reasonably well aligned with the LiDAR. But there is still a shift along the roof so we repeat the same thing once more as shown in the next image sequence:

We use a suitable displacement vector and apply it to the photogrammetry points, shifting them again:

las2las -i Kantsi_shifted.laz ^
        -translate_xyz -1.98 -0.95 0.01 ^
        -o Kantsi_shifted_again.laz

lasview -i Kantsi_shifted_again.laz ^
        -i LiDAR_Kantsi.laz ^
        -points 10000000 ^
        -faf

The result is still not perfect as there is also some rotational error and you may find another software such as Cloud Compare more suited to align the two point clouds, but for this exercise the alignment shall suffice. Below you see the match between the photogrammetry points and the LiDAR TIN before and after shifting the photogrammetry points with the two (interactively determined) displacement vectors.

The final steps of this exercise use las2dem and the already ground-classified LiDAR compute a 1 meter DTM, which we then use as input to lasheight. We classify the photogrammetry points using their height above this set of ground points with 1 meter spacing: points that are 40 centimeter or more below the LiDAR DTM are classified as noise (7), points that are between 40 below to 1 meter above the LiDAR DTM are classified to a temporary class (here we choose 8) that has those points that could potentially be ground points. This will help, for example, with subsequent ground classification as large parts of the photogrammetry points – namely those on top of buildings and in higher vegetation – can be ignored from the start by a ground classification algorithm such as lasground.

las2dem -i LiDAR_Kantsi.laz ^
        -keep_class 2 ^
        -kill 1000 ^
        -o LiDAR_Kantsi_dtm_1m.bil
lasheight -i Kantsi_shifted_again.laz ^
          -ground_points LiDAR_Kantsi_dtm_1m.bil ^
          -classify_below -0.4 7 ^
          -classify_between -0.4 1.0 8 ^
          -o Kantsi_cleaned.laz

Below the results we have achieved after “roughly” aligning the two point clouds with some new lasview tricks and then using the LiDAR elevations to classify the photogrammetry points into “low noise”, “potential ground”, and “all else”.

We thank the Estonian Land Board for providing open data with a permissive license. Special thanks also go to the organizers of the UAV Summer School in Tartu, Estonia and the European Regional Development Fund for funding this event. Especially fun was the fabulous excursion to the Emajõe-Suursoo Nature Reserve and through to Lake Peipus aboard, overboard and aboveboard the historical barge “Jõmmu”. If you look carefully you can also find the barge in the photogrammetry point cloud. The photogrammetry data used here was acquired during our lunch stop.

Fun aboard and overboard the historical barge “Jõmmu”.

No Sugarcoating: Sweet LiDAR from RiCOPTER carrying VUX-1UAV over Sugarcane

Recently we saw an interesting LiDAR data set talked about on social media by Chad Netto from Chustz Surveying in New Roads, Louisiana and asked for a copy. It is a LiDAR scan of a sugarcane plantation in Assumption Parish, Louisiana carried out with the VUX-1UAV by RIEGL mounted onto a RiCOPTER and guided by an Applanix IMU and a Trimble base station. That is probably one of the sweetest (but also one of the most expensive) UAV LiDAR system you can buy today. I received this LiDAR file and this trajectory file. In the following we talk a detailed look at this data set.

First we run lasinfo to get an idea of the contents of the data set. We create various histograms as those can often help understand an unfamiliar data set:

lasinfo -i sugarcane\181026_163424.laz ^
        -cd ^
        -histo gps_time 5 ^
        -histo intensity 64 ^
        -histo point_source 1 ^
        -histo z 5 ^
        -odix _info -otxt

You can download the resulting report here. For the 84,751,955 points we notice that

  1. both horizontal and vertical coordinates are stored in US survey feet
  2. with scale factors of 0.00025 this means a resolution of 76 micrometer
  3. there is no explicit flight line information (all point source IDs are zero)
  4. gaps in the GPS time stamp histogram are suggesting multiple lines

First we use las2las to lower the insanely high resolution from 0.00025 US survey feet to something more reasonable for an airborne UAV scan, namely to 0.01 or 1 hundredths of a US survey foot or centi-US-survey-feet:

las2las -i sugarcane\181026_163424.laz ^
        -rescale 0.01 0.01 0.01 ^
        -odix _cft -olaz

I have already done this for you. The file that is online is already in “centi-US-survey-feet” because it reduced the file size from the original 678 MB file that we got from Netto to the 518 MB file that is online, meaning that you had 160 MB less data to download.

Next we use lassplit to recover the original flight lines as follows:

lassplit -i sugarcane\181026_163424.laz ^
         -recover_flightlines ^
         -odir sugarcane\0_recovered_strips ^
         -o assumption.laz

This results in 5 strips. We then use lassort to bring the strips back into their original acquisition order by sorting first based on the GPS time stamp (which brings all returns of one pulse together) and second on the return number (which sorts them in ascending order). We do this on 3 cores in parallel with this command:

lassort -i sugarcane\0_recovered_strips\*.laz ^
        -gps_time ^
        -return_number ^
        -odir sugarcane\1_sorted_strips -olaz ^
        -cores 3

We also create a spatial index for each of these strips using lasindex so that any area-of-interest query that we do later will be significantly accelerated. See the README file for the meaning of the parameters:

lasindex -i sugarcane\1_sorted_strips\*.laz ^
         -tile_size 10 -maximum -100 ^
         -cores 3

Then we check for flight line alignment using lasoverlap by comparing – per 2 feet by 2 feet area – the lowest elevation value of points from different strips wherever there is overlap. Cells with an absolute vertical difference of less than a quarter of a foot are mapped to white. Cells with vertical differences of more (or less) than a quarter foot are mapped to an increasingly red (or blue) color that is saturated red (or blue) when one full foot is reached.

lasoverlap -i sugarcane\1_sorted_strips\*.laz ^
           -files_are_flightlines ^
           -step 2.0 ^
           -min_diff 0.25 -max_diff 1.0 ^
           -o sugarcane\2_quality\overlap.png

The resulting image looks dramatic at first glance. But we have to remember that this is sugarcane. The penetration of the laser can vary greatly depending on the direction from which the beam hits the densely standing stalks. Large differences between flight lines can be expected where sugarcane stands tall. We need to focus our visual quality checks on the few open areas, namely the access roads and harvested areas.

Color-mapped highest vertical difference in lowest point per 2 feet by 2 feet area between overlapping flight lines.

We use las2las via its native GUI to cut out several suspicious-looking open areas with overly red or overly blue shading. By loading the resulting image into the GUI these areas-of-interest are easy to target and cut out.

las2las -i sugarcane\1_sorted_strips\*.laz -gui

Overlaying the difference image in the GUI of las2las to cut out suspicious areas for closer inspection.

We cut out four square 100 by 100 meter tiles in open areas that show a suspiciously strong pattern of red or blue colors for closer inspection. The command lines for these four square areas are given below and you can download them here:

  1. assumption_3364350_534950_100.laz
  2. assumption_3365600_535750_100.laz
  3. assumption_3364900_535500_100.laz
  4. assumption_3365500_535600_100.laz
las2las -i sugarcane\1_sorted_strips\*.laz ^
        -merged -faf ^
        -inside_tile 3364350 534950 100 ^
        -o sugarcane\assumption_3364350_534950_100.laz

las2las -i sugarcane\1_sorted_strips\*.laz ^
        -merged -faf ^
        -inside_tile 3365600 535750 100 ^
        -o sugarcane\assumption_3365600_535750_100.laz

las2las -i sugarcane\1_sorted_strips\*.laz ^
        -merged -faf ^
        -inside_tile 3364900 535500 100 ^
        -o sugarcane\assumption_3364900_535500_100.laz

las2las -i sugarcane\1_sorted_strips\*.laz ^
        -merged -faf ^
        -inside_tile 3365500 535600 100 ^
        -o sugarcane\assumption_3365500_535600_100.laz

In the image sequence below we scrutinize these differences which will lead us to notice two things:

  1. There are vertical miss-alignments of around one foot. These big difference can especially be observed between flight lines that cover an area with a very high point density and those that cover the very same area with a very low point density.
  2. There are horizontal miss-alignments of around one foot. Again these differences seem somewhat correlated to the density that these flight lines cover a particular area with.

For the most part the miss-aligned points come from a flight line that has only sparse coverage in that area. In a flat terrain the return density per area goes down the farther we are from the drone as those areas are only reached with higher and higher scan angles. Hence an immediate idea that comes to mind is to limit the scan angle to those closer to nadir and lower the range from -81 to 84 degrees reported in the lasinfo report to something like -75 to 75, -70 to 70, or -65 to 65 degrees. We can check how this will improve the alignment with these lasoverlap command lines:

lasoverlap -i sugarcane\1_sorted_strips\*.laz ^
           -files_are_flightlines ^
           -keep_scan_angle -75 75 ^
           -step 2.0 ^
           -min_diff 0.25 -max_diff 1.0 ^
           -o sugarcane\2_quality\overlap75.png

lasoverlap -i sugarcane\1_sorted_strips\*.laz ^
           -files_are_flightlines ^
           -keep_scan_angle -70 70 ^
           -step 2.0 ^
           -min_diff 0.25 -max_diff 1.0 ^
           -o sugarcane\2_quality\overlap70.png

lasoverlap -i sugarcane\1_sorted_strips\*.laz ^
           -files_are_flightlines ^
           -keep_scan_angle -65 65 ^
           -step 2.0 ^
           -min_diff 0.25 -max_diff 1.0 ^
           -o sugarcane\2_quality\overlap65.png

lasoverlap -i sugarcane\1_sorted_strips\*.laz ^
           -files_are_flightlines ^
           -keep_scan_angle -60 60 ^
           -step 2.0 ^
           -min_diff 0.25 -max_diff 1.0 ^
           -o sugarcane\2_quality\overlap60.png

This simple technique significantly improves the difference image. Based on these images would suggest to only use returns with a scan angle between -70 and 70 degrees for any subsequent analysis. This seems to remove most of the discoloring in open areas without loosing too many points. Note that only using returns with a scan angle between -60 and 60 degrees means that some flight lines are no longer overlapping each other.

Note also that by limiting the scan angle we get suddenly get white areas even in incredible dense vegetation. The more horizontal a laser shoot is the more likely it will only hit higher up sugarcane plants and the less likely it will penetrate all the way to the ground. The white areas coincide with where laser pulses are close to nadir which is in the flight line overlap areas that directly below the drone’s trajectory.

Can we improve alignment further? Not with LAStools, so I turned to Andre Jalobeanu, a specialist on that particular issue, who I have known for many years. Andre has developed BayesStripAlign – a software by his company BayesMap that is quite complementary to LAStools and does exactly what the name suggests: it align strips. I gave Andre the five flight lines and he aligned them for me. Below the new difference images:

We cut out the very same four square areas from the realigned strips for closer inspection and you may investigate them on your own. You can download them here.

  1. assumption_3364350_534950_100_realigned.laz
  2. assumption_3365600_535750_100_realigned.laz
  3. assumption_3364900_535500_100_realigned.laz
  4. assumption_3365500_535600_100_realigned.laz

In the image sequence below we are just looking at the last of the four square areas and you can see that most of the miss-alignment we saw earlier between the flight lines was removed.

We would like to thank Chad Netto from Chustz Surveying to make this data set available to us and Andre Jalobeanu from BayesMap to align the flight lines for us.

City of Guadalajara creates first Open LiDAR Portal of Latin America

Small to medium sized LiDAR data sets can easily be published online for exploration and download with laspublish of LAStools, which is an easy-to-use wrapper around the powerful Potree open source software for which rapidlasso GmbH has been a major sponsor. During a workshop on LiDAR processing at CICESE in Ensenada, Mexico we learned that Guadalajara – the city with five “a” in its name – has recently published its LiDAR holdings online for download using an interactive 3D portal based on Potree.

There is a lot more data available in Mexico but only Guadalajara seems to have an interactive download portal at the moment with open LiDAR. Have a look at the map below to get an idea of the LiDAR holdings that are held in the archives of the Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía (INEGI). You can request this data either by filling out this form or by sending an email to atencion.usuarios@inegi.org.mx. You will need to explain the use of the information, but apparently INEGI has a fast response time. I was given the KML files you see below and told that each letter in scale 1: 50,000 is divided into 6 regions (a-f) and each region subdivided into 4 parts. Contact me if you want the KML files or if you can provide further clarification on this indexing scheme and/or the data license.

LiDAR available at the Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía (INEGI)

But back to Guadalajara’s open LiDAR. The tile names become visible when you zoom in closer on the map with the tiling overlay as seen below. An individual tile can easily be downloaded by first clicking so that it becomes highlighted and then pressing the “D” button in the lower left corner. We download the two tiles called ‘F08C04.laz’ and ‘F08C05.laz’ and use lasinfo to determine that their average density is 9.0 and 8.9 last returns per per square meter. This means on average 9 laser pulses were fired at each square meter in those two tiles.

lasinfo -i F08C04.laz -cd
lasinfo -i F08C05.laz -cd

Selecting a tile on the map and pressing the “D” button will download the highlighted tile.

The minimal quality check that we recommend doing for any newly obtained LiDAR data is to verify proper alignment of the flightlines using lasoverlap. For tiles with properly populated ‘point source ID’ fields this can be done using the command line shown below.

lasoverlap -i F08C04.laz F08C05.laz ^
           -min_diff 0.1 -max_diff 0.3 ^
           -odir quality -opng ^
           -cores 2

We notice some slight miss-alignments in the difference image (see other tutorials such as this one for how to interpret the resulting color images). We suggest you follow the steps done there to take a closer look at some of the larger strip-like areas that exhibit some systematic disscolorization (compared to other areas) into overly blueish or reddish tones of with lasview. Overlaying one of the resulting *_diff.png files in the GUI of LAStools makes it easy to pick a suspicious area.

We use the “pick” functionality to view only the building of interest.

Unusual are also the large red and blue areas where some of the taller buildings are. Usually those are just one pixel wide which has to do with the laser of one flightline not being able to see the lower area seen by the laser of the other flightline because the line-of-sight is blocked by the structure. We have a closer look at one of these unusual building colorization by picking the building shown above and viewing it with the different visualization options that are shown in the images below.

No. Those are not the “James Bond movie” kind of lasers that burn holes into the building to get ground returns through several floors. The building facade is covered with glass so that the lasers do not scatter photons when they hit the side of the building. Instead they reflect by the usual rule “incidence angle equals reflection angle” of perfectly specular surfaces and eventually hit the ground next to the building. Some of the photons travel back the same way to the receiver on the plane where they get registered as returns. The LiDAR system has no way to know that the photons did not travel the usual straight path. It only measures the time until the photons return and generates a return at the range corresponding to this time along the direction vector that this laser shot was fired at. If the specular reflection of the photons hits a truck or a tree situated next to to building, then we should find that truck or that tree – mirrored by the glossy surface of the building – on the inside of the building. If you look careful at the “slice” through the building below you may find an example … (-:

Some objects located outside the building are mirrored into the building due to its glossy facade.

Kudos to the City of Guadalajara for becoming – to my knowledge – the first city in Latin America to both open its entire LiDAR holdings and also making it available for download in form of a nice and functional interactive 3D portal.

Complete LiDAR Processing Pipeline: from raw Flightlines to final Products

This tutorial serves as an example for a complete end-to-end workflow that starts with raw LiDAR flightlines (as they may be delivered by a vendor) to final classified LiDAR tiles and derived products such as raster DTM, DSM, and SHP files with contours, building footprint and vegetation layers. The three example flightlines we are using here were flown in Ayutthaya, Thailand with a RIEGL LMS Q680i LiDAR scanner by Asian Aerospace Services who are based at the Don Mueang airport in Bangkok from where they are serving South-East-Asia and beyond. You can download them here:

Quality Checking

The minimal quality checks consist of generating textual reports (lasinfo & lasvalidate), inspecting the data visually (lasview), making sure alignment and overlap between flightlines fulfill expectations (lasoverlap), and measuring pulse density per square meter (lasgrid). Additional checks for points replication (lasduplicate), completeness of all returns per pulse (lasreturn), and validation against external ground control points (lascontrol) may also be performed.

lasinfo -i Ayutthaya\strips_raw\*.laz ^
        -cd ^
        -histo z 5 ^
        -histo intensity 64 ^
        -odir Ayutthaya\quality -odix _info -otxt ^
        -cores 3

lasvalidate -i Ayutthaya\strips_raw\*.laz ^
            -o Ayutthaya\quality\validate.xml

The lasinfo report generated with the command line shown computes the average density for each flightline and also generates two histograms, one for the z coordinate with a bin size of 5 meter and one for the intensity with a bin size of 64. The resulting textual descriptions are output into the specified quality folder with an appendix ‘_info’ added to the original file name. Perusing these reports tells you that there are up to 7 returns per pulse, that the average pulse density per flightline is between 7.1 to 7.9 shots per square meter, that the point source IDs of the points are already populated correctly, that there are isolated points far above and far below the scanned area, and that the intensity values range from 0 to 1023 with the majority being below 400. The warnings in the lasinfo and the lasvalidate reports about the presence of return numbers 6 and 7 have to do with the history of the LAS format and can safely be ignored.

lasoverlap -i Ayutthaya\strips_raw\*.laz ^
           -files_are_flightlines ^
           -min_diff 0.1 -max_diff 0.3 ^
           -odir Ayutthaya\quality -o overlap.png

This results in two color illustrations. One image shows the flightline overlap with blue indicating one flightline, turquoise indicating two, and yellow indicating three flightlines. Note that wet areas (rivers, lakes, rice paddies, …) without LiDAR returns affect this visualization. The other image shows how well overlapping flightlines align. Their vertical difference is color coded with while meaning less than 10 cm error while saturated red and blue indicate areas with more than 30 cm positive or negative difference.

One pixel wide red and blue along building edges and speckles of red and blue in vegetated areas are normal. We need to look-out for large systematic errors where terrain features or flightline outlines become visible. If you click yourself through this photo album you will eventually see typical examples (make sure to read the comments too). One area slightly below the center looks suspicious. We load the PNG into the GUI to pick this area for closer inspection with lasview.

lasview -i Ayutthaya\strips_raw\*.laz -gui

Why these flightline differences exist and whether they are detrimental to your purpose are questions that you will have to explore further. For out purpose this isolated difference was noted but will not prevent us from proceeding further. Next we want to investigate the pulse density. We do this with lasgrid. We know that the average last return density per flightline is between 7.1 to 7.9 shots per square meter. We set up the false color map for lasgrid such that it is blue when the last return density drops to 5 shots (or less) per square meter and such that it is red when the last return density reaches 10 shots (or more).

lasgrid -i Ayutthaya\strips_raw\*.laz -merged ^
        -keep_last ^
        -step 2 -density ^
        -false -set_min_max 4 8 ^
        -odir Ayutthaya\quality -o density_4ppm_8ppm.png

The last return density per square meter mapped to a color: blue is 5 or less, red is 10 or more.

The last return density image clearly shows how the density increases to over 10 pulses per square meter in all areas of flightline overlap. However, as there are large parts covered by only one flightline their density is the one that should be considered. We note great variations in density along the flightlines. Those have to do with aircraft movement and in particular with the pitch. When the nose of the plane goes up even slightly, the gigantic “fan of laser pulses” (that can be thought of as being rigidly attached at the bottom perpendicular to the aircraft flight direction) is moving faster forward on the ground far below and therefore covers it with fewer shots per square meter. Conversely when the nose of the plane goes down the spacing between scan lines far below the plane are condensed so that the density increases. Inclement weather and the resulting airplane pitch turbulence can have a big impact on how regular the laser pulse spacing is on the ground. Read this article for more on LiDAR pulse density and spacing.

LiDAR Preparation

When you have airborne LiDAR in flightlines the first step is to tile the data into square tiles that are typically 1000 by 1000 or – for higher density surveys – 500 by 500 meters in size. This can be done with lastile. We also add a buffer of 30 meters to each tile. Why buffers are important for tile-based processing is explained here. We choose 30 meters as this is larger than any building we expect in this area and slightly larger than the ‘-step’ size we use later when classifying the points into ground and non-ground points with lasground.

lastile -i Ayutthaya\strips_raw\*.laz ^
        -tile_size 500 -buffer 30 -flag_as_withheld ^
        -odir Ayutthaya\tiles_raw -o ayu.laz

NOTE: Usually you will have to add ‘-files_are_flightlines’ or ‘-apply_file_source_ID’ to the lastile command shown above in order to preserve the information which points is from which flightline. We do not have to do this here as evident from the lasinfo reports we generated earlier. Not only is the file source ID in the LAS header is correctly set to 2, 3, or 4 reflecting the intended flightline numbering evident from the file names. Also the point source ID of each point is already set to the correct value 2, 3, or 4. For more info see this or this discussion from the LAStools user forum.

Next we classify isolated points that are far from most other points with lasnoise into the (default) classification code 7. See the README file for the meaning of the parameters and play around with different setting to get a feel for how to make this process more or less aggressive.

lasnoise -i Ayutthaya\tiles_raw\ayu*.laz ^
         -step_xy 4 -step_z 2 -isolated 5 ^
         -odir Ayutthaya\tiles_denoised -olaz ^
         -cores 4

Especially for ground classification it is important that low noise points are excluded. You should inspect a number of tiles with lasview to make sure the low noise are all pink now if you color them by classification.

lasview -i Ayutthaya\tiles_denoised\ayu*.laz -gui

While the algorithms in lasground are designed to withstand a few noise points below the ground, you will find that it will include them into the ground model if there are too many of them. Hence, it is important to tell lasground to ignore these noise points. For the other parameters used see the README file of lasground.

lasground -i Ayutthaya\tiles_denoised\ayu*.laz ^
          -ignore_class 7 ^
          -city -ultra_fine ^
          -compute_height ^
          -odir Ayutthaya\tiles_ground -olaz ^
          -cores 4

You should visually check the resulting ground classification of each tile with lasview by selecting smaller subsets (press ‘x’, draw a rectangle, press ‘x’ again, use arrow keys to walk) and then switch back and forth between a triangulation of the ground points (press ‘g’ and then press ‘t’) and a triangulation of last returns (press ‘l’ and then press ‘t’). See the README of lasview for more information on those hotkeys.

lasview -i Ayutthaya\tiles_ground\ayu*.laz -gui

This way I found at least one tile that should be reclassified with ‘-metro’ instead of ‘-city’ because it still contained one large building in the ground classification. Alternatively you can correct miss-classifications manually using lasview as shown in the next few screen shots.

This is an optional step for advanced users who have a license. In case you managed to do such a manual edit and saved it as a LAY file using LASlayers (see the README file of lasview) you can overwrite the old file with:

laslayers -i Ayutthaya\tiles_ground\ayu_669500_1586500.laz -ilay ^
          -o Ayutthaya\tiles_ground\ayu_669500_1586500_edited.laz

move Ayutthaya\tiles_ground\ayu_669500_1586500_edit.laz ^
     Ayutthaya\tiles_ground\ayu_669500_1586500.laz

The next step classifies those points that are neither ground (2) nor noise (7) into building (or rather roof) points (class 6) and high vegetation points (class 5). For this we use lasclassify with the default parameters that only considers points that are at least 2 meters above the classified ground points (see the README for details on all available parameters).

lasclassify -i Ayutthaya\tiles_ground\ayu*.laz ^
            -ignore_class 7 ^
            -odir Ayutthaya\tiles_classified -olaz ^
            -cores 4

We  check the classification of each tile with lasview by selecting smaller subsets (press ‘x’, draw a rectangle, press ‘x’ again) and by traversing with the arrow keys though the point cloud. You will find a number of miss-classifications. Boats are classified as buildings, water towers or complex temple roofs as vegetation, … and so on. You could use lasview to manually correct any classifications that are really important.

lasview -i Ayutthaya\tiles_classified\ayu*.laz -gui

Before delivering the classified LiDAR tiles to a customer or another user it is imperative to remove the buffers that were carried through all computations to avoid artifacts along the tile boundary. This can also be done with lastile.

lastile -i Ayutthaya\tiles_classified\ayu*.laz ^
        -remove_buffer ^
        -odir Ayutthaya\tiles_final -olaz ^
        -cores 4

Together with the tiling you may want to deliver a tile overview file in KML format (or in SHP format) that you can easily generate with lasboundary using this command line:

lasboundary -i Ayutthaya\tiles_final\ayu*.laz ^
            -use_bb ^
            -overview -labels ^
            -o Ayutthaya\tiles_overview.kml

The small KML file generated b lasboundary provides a quick overview where tiles are located, their names, their bounding box, and the number of points they contain.

Derivative production

The most common derivative product produced from LiDAR data is a Digital Terrain Model (DTM) in form of an elevation raster. This can be obtained by interpolating the ground points with a triangulation (i.e. a Delaunay TIN) and by sampling the TIN at the center of each raster cell. The pulse density of well over 4 shots per square meter definitely supports a resolution of 0.5 meter for the raster DTM. From the ground-classified tiles with buffer we compute the DTM using las2dem as follows:

las2dem -i Ayutthaya\tiles_ground\ayu*.laz ^
        -keep_class 2 ^
        -step 0.5 -use_tile_bb ^
        -odir Ayutthaya\tiles_dtm -obil ^
        -cores 4

It’s important to add ‘-use_tile_bb’ to the command line which limits the raster generation to the original tile sizes of 500 by 500 meters in order not to rasterize the buffers that are extending the tiles 30 meters in each direction. We used the BIL format so that we inspect the resulting elevation rasters with lasview:

lasview -i Ayutthaya\tiles_dtm\ayu*.bil -gui

To create a hillshaded version of the DTM you can use your favorite raster processing package such as GDAL or GRASS but you could also use the BLAST extension of LAStools and create a large seamless image with blast2dem as follows:

blast2dem -i Ayutthaya\tiles_dtm\ayu*.bil -merged ^
          -step 0.5 -hillshade -epsg 32647 ^
          -o Ayutthaya\dtm_hillshade.png

Because blast2dem does not parse the PRJ files that accompany the BIL rasters we have to specify the EPSG code explicitly to also get a KML file that allows us to visualize the LiDAR in Google Earth.

A a hillshading of the merged DTM rasters produced with blast2dem.

Next we generate a Digital Surface Model (DSM) that includes the highest objects that the laser has hit. We use the spike-free algorithm that is implemented in las2dem that creates a triangulation of the highest returns as follows:

las2dem -i Ayutthaya\tiles_denoised\ayu*.laz ^
        -drop_class 7 ^
        -step 0.5 -spike_free 1.2 -use_tile_bb ^
        -odir Ayutthaya\tiles_dsm -obil ^
        -cores 4

We used 1.0 as the freeze value for the spike free algorithm because this is about three times the average last return spacing reported in the individual lasinfo reports generated during quality checking. Again we inspect the resulting rasters with lasview:

lasview -i Ayutthaya\tiles_dsm\ayu*.bil -gui

For reason of comparison we also generate the DSM rasters using a simple first-return interpolation again with las2dem as follows:

las2dem -i Ayutthaya\tiles_denoised\ayu*.laz ^
        -drop_class 7 -keep_first ^
        -step 0.5 -use_tile_bb ^
        -odir Ayutthaya\tiles_dsm -obil ^
        -cores 4

A few direct side-by-side comparison between a spike-free DSM and a first-return DSM shows the difference that are especially noticeable along building edges and in large trees.

Another product that we can easily create are building footprints from the automatically classified roofs using lasboundary. Because the tool is quite scalable we can simply on-the-fly merge the final tiles. This also avoids including duplicate points from the tile buffer whose classifications are also often less accurate.

lasboundary -i Ayutthaya\tiles_final\ayu*.laz -merged ^
            -keep_class 6 ^
            -disjoint -concavity 1.1 ^
            -o Ayutthaya\buildings.shp

Similarly we can use lasboundary to create a vegetation layer from those points that were automatically classified as high vegetation.

lasboundary -i Ayutthaya\tiles_final\ayu*.laz -merged ^
             -keep_class 5 ^
             -disjoint -concavity 3 ^
             -o Ayutthaya\vegetation.shp

We can also produce 1.0 meter contour lines from the ground classified points. However, for nicer contours it is beneficial to first generate a subset of the ground points with lasthin using option ‘-contours 1.0’ as follows:

lasthin -i Ayutthaya\tiles_final\ayu*.laz ^
        -keep_class 2 ^
        -step 1.0 -contours 1.0 ^
        -odir Ayutthaya\tiles_temp -olaz ^
        -cores 4

We then merge all subsets of ground points from those temporary tiles on-the-fly into one (using the ‘-merged’ option) and let blast2iso from the BLAST extension of LAStools generate smoothed and simplified 1 meter contours as follows:

blast2iso -i Ayutthaya\tiles_temp\ayu*.laz -merged ^
          -iso_every 1.0 ^
          -smooth 2 -simplify_length 0.5 -simplify_area 0.5 -clean 5.0 ^
          -o Ayutthaya\contours_1m.shp

Finally we composite all of our derived LiDAR products into one map using QGIS and then fuse it with data from OpenStreetMap that we’ve downloaded from BBBike. Here you can download the OSM data that we use.

It’s in particular interesting to compare the building footprints that were automatically derived from our LiDAR processing pipeline with those mapped by OpenStreetMap volunteers. We immediately see that there is a lot of volunteering work left to do and the LiDAR-derived data can assist us in directing those mapping efforts. A closer look reveals the (expected) quality difference between hand-mapped and auto-generated data.

The OSM buildings are simpler. These polygons are drawn and divided into logical units by a human. They are individually verified and correspond to actual buildings. However, they are less aligned with the Google Earth satellite image. The LiDAR-derived buildings footprints are complex because lasboundary has no logic to simplify the complicated polygonal chains that enclose the points that were automatically classified as roof into rectilinear shapes or to break directly adjacent roof points into separate logical units. However, most buildings are found (but also objects that are not buildings) and their geospatial alignment is as good as that of the LiDAR data.

New Step-by-Step Tutorial for Velodyne Drone LiDAR from Snoopy by LidarUSA

The folks from Harris Aerial gave us LiDAR data from a test-flight of one of their drones, the Carrier H4 Hybrid HE (with a 5kg maximum payload and a retail price of US$ 28,000), carrying a Snoopy A series LiDAR system from LidarUSA in the countryside near Huntsville, Alabama. The laser scanner used by the Snoopy A series is a Velodyne HDL 32E that has 32 different laser/detector pairs that fire in succession to scan up to 700,000 points per second within a range of 1 to 70 meters. You can download the raw LiDAR file from the 80 second test flight here. As always, the first thing we do is to visualize the file with lasview and to generate a textual report of its contents with lasinfo.

lasview -i Velodyne001.laz -set_min_max 680 750

It becomes obvious that the drone must have scanned parts of itself (probably the landing gear) during the flight and we exploit this fact in the later processing. The information which of the 32 lasers was collecting which point is stored into the ‘point source ID’ field which is usually used for the flightline information. This results in a psychedelic look in lasview as those 32 different numbers get mapped to the 8 different colors that lasview uses for distinguishing flightlines.

The lasinfo report we generate computes the average point density with ‘-cd’ and includes histograms for a number of point attributes, namely for ‘user data’, ‘intensity’, ‘point source ID’, ‘GPS time’, and ‘scan angle rank’.

lasinfo -i Velodyne001.laz ^
        -cd ^
        -histo user_data 1 ^
        -histo point_source 1 ^
        -histo intensity 16 ^
        -histo gps_time 1 ^
        -histo scan_angle_rank 5 ^
        -odir quality -odix _info -otxt

You can download the resulting report here and it will tell you that the information which of the 32 lasers was collecting which point was stored both into the ‘user data’ field and into the ‘point source ID’ field. The warnings you see below have to do with the fact that the double-precision bounding box stored in the LAS header was populated with numbers that have many more decimal digits than the coordinates in the file, which only have millimeter (or millifeet) resolution as all three scale factors are 0.001 (meaning three decimal digits).

WARNING: stored resolution of min_x not compatible with x_offset and x_scale_factor: 2171988.6475160527
WARNING: stored resolution of min_y not compatible with y_offset and y_scale_factor: 1622812.606925504
WARNING: stored resolution of min_z not compatible with z_offset and z_scale_factor: 666.63504345017589
WARNING: stored resolution of max_x not compatible with x_offset and x_scale_factor: 2172938.973065129
WARNING: stored resolution of max_y not compatible with y_offset and y_scale_factor: 1623607.5209975131
WARNING: stored resolution of max_z not compatible with z_offset and z_scale_factor: 1053.092674726669

Both the “return number” and the “number of returns” attribute of every points in the file is 2. This makes it appear as if the file would only contain the last returns of those laser shots that produced two returns. However, as the Velodyne HDL 32E only produces one return per shot we can safely conclude that those numbers should all be 1 instead of 2 and that this is just a small bug in the export software. We can easily fix this with las2las.

reporting minimum and maximum for all LAS point record entries ...
[...]
 return_number 2 2
 number_of_returns 2 2
[...]

The lasinfo report lacks information about the coordinate reference system as there is no VLR that stores projection information. Harris Aerial could not help us other than telling us that the scan was near Huntsville, Alamaba. Measuring certain distances in the scene like the height of the house or the tree suggests that both horizontal and vertical units are in feet, or rather in US survey feet. After some experimenting we find that using EPSG 26930 for NAD83 Alabama West but forcing the default horizontal units from meters to US survey feet gives a result that aligns well with high-resolution Google Earth imagery as you can see below:

lasgrid -i flightline1.laz ^
        -i flightline2.laz ^
        -merged ^
        -epsg 26930 -survey_feet ^
        -step 1 -highest ^
        -false -set_min_max 680 750 ^
        -o testing26930usft.png

Using EPSG code 26930 but with US survey feet instead of meters results in nice alignment with GE imagery.

We use the fact that the drone has scanned itself to extract an (approximate) trajectory by isolating those LiDAR returns that have hit the drone. Via a visual check with lasview (by hovering with the cursor over the lowest drone hits and pressing hotkey ‘i’) we determine that the lowest drone hits are all above 719 feet. We use two calls to las2las to split the point cloud vertically. In the same call we also change the resolution from three to two decimal digits, fix the return number issue, and add the missing geo-referencing information:

las2las -i Velodyne001.laz ^
        -rescale 0.01 0.01 0.01 ^
        -epsg 26930 -survey_feet -elevation_survey_feet ^
        -set_return_number 1 ^
        -set_number_of_returns 1 ^
        -keep_z_above 719 ^
        -odix _above719 -olaz

las2las -i Velodyne001.laz ^
        -rescale 0.01 0.01 0.01 ^
        -epsg 26930 -survey_feet -elevation_survey_feet ^
        -set_return_number 1 ^
        -set_number_of_returns 1 ^
        -keep_z_below 719 ^
        -odix _below719 -olaz

We then use the manual editing capabilities of lasview to change the classifications of the LiDAR points that correspond to drone hits from 1 to 12, which is illustrated by the series of screen shots below.

lasview -i Velodyne001_above719.laz

The workflow illustrated above results in a tiny LAY file that is part of the LASlayers functionality of LAStools. It only encodes the few changes in classifications that we’ve made to the LAZ file without re-writing those parts that have not changed. Those interested may use laslayers to inspect the structure of the LAY file:

laslayers -i Velodyne001_above719.laz

We can apply the LAY file on-the-fly with the ‘-ilay’ option, for example, when running lasview:

lasview -i Velodyne001_above719.laz -ilay

To separate the drone-hit trajectory from the remaining points we run lassplit with the ‘-ilay’ option and request to split by classification with this command line:

lassplit -i Velodyne001_above719.laz -ilay ^
         -by_classification -digits 3 ^
         -olaz

This gives us two new files with the three-digit appendices ‘_001’ and ‘_012’. The latter one contains those points we marked as being part of the trajectory. We now want to use lasview to – visually – find a good moment in time where to split the trajectory into multiple flightlines. The lasinfo report tells us that the GPS time stamps are in the range from 418,519 to 418,602. In order to use the same trick as we did in our recent article on processing LiDAR data from the Hovermap Drone, where we mapped the GPS time to the intensity for querying it via lasview, we first need to subtract a large number from the GPS time stamps to bring them into a suitable range that fits the intensity field as done here.

lasview -i Velodyne001_above719_012.laz ^
        -translate_gps_time -418000 ^
        -bin_gps_time_into_intensity 1
        -steps 5000

The ‘-steps 5000’ argument makes for a slower playback (press ‘p’ to repeat) to better follow the trajectory.

Hovering with the mouse over a point that – visually – seems to be one of the turning points of the drone and pressing ‘i’ on the keyboard shows an intensity value of 548 which corresponds to the GPS time stamp 418548, which we then use to split the LiDAR point cloud (without the trajectory) into two flightlines:

las2las -i Velodyne001_below719.laz ^
        -i Velodyne001_above719_001.laz ^
        -merged ^
        -keep_gps_time_below 418548 ^
        -o flightline1.laz

las2las -i Velodyne001_below719.laz ^
        -i Velodyne001_above719_001.laz ^
        -merged ^
        -keep_gps_time_above 418548 ^
        -o flightline2.laz

Next we use lasoverlap to check how well the LiDAR points from the flight out and the flight back align vertically. This tool computes the difference of the lowest points for each square foot covered by both flightlines. Differences of less than a quarter of a foot are mapped to white, differences of more than half a foot are mapped to saturated red or blue depending on whether the difference is positive or negative:

lasoverlap -i flightline1.laz ^
           -i flightline2.laz ^
           -faf ^
           -min_diff 0.25 -max_diff 0.50 -step 1 ^
           -odir quality -o overlap_025_050.png

We then use a new feature of the LAStools GUI (as of version 180429) to closer inspect larger red or blue areas. We want to use lasmerge and clip out any region that looks suspect for closer examination with lasview. We start the tool in the GUI mode with the ‘-gui’ command and the two flightlines pre-loaded. Using the new PNG overlay roll-out on the left we add the ‘overlap_025_050_diff.png’ image from the quality folder created in the last step and clip out three areas.

lasmerge -i flightline1.laz -i flightline2.laz -gui

You can also clip out these three areas using the command lines below:

lasmerge -i flightline1.laz -i flightline2.laz ^
         -faf ^
         -inside 2172500 1623160 2172600 1623165 ^
         -o clip2500_3160_100x005.laz

lasmerge -i flightline1.laz -i flightline2.laz ^
         -faf ^
         -inside 2172450 1623450 2172550 1623455 ^
         -o clip2450_3450_100x005.laz

lasmerge -i flightline1.laz -i flightline2.laz ^
         -faf ^
         -inside 2172430 1623290 2172530 1623310 ^
         -o clip2430_3290_100x020.laz

A closer inspection of the three cut out slices explains the red and blue areas in the difference image created by lasoverlap. We find a small systematic error in two of the slices. In slice ‘clip2500_3160_100x005.laz‘ the green points from flightline 1 are on average slightly higher than the red points from flightline 2. Vice-versa in slice ‘clip2450_3450_100x005.laz‘ the green points from flightline 1 are on average slightly lower than the red points from flightline 2. However, the error is less than half a foot and only happens near the edges of the flightlines. Given that our surfaces are expected to be “fluffy” anyways (as is typical for Velodyne LiDAR systems), we accept these differences and continue processing.

The strong red and blue colors in the center of the difference image created by lasoverlap is easily explained by looking at slice ‘clip2430_3290_100x020.laz‘. The scanner was “looking” under a gazebo-like open roof structure from two different directions and therefore always seeing parts of the floor in one flightline that were obscured by the roof in the other.

While working with this data we’ve also implemented a new feature for lastrack that computes the 3D distance between LiDAR points and the trajectory and allows storing the result as an additional per point attribute with extra bytes. Those can then be visualized with lasgrid. Here an example:

lastrack -i flightline1.laz ^
         -i flightline2.laz ^
         -track Velodyne001_above719_012.laz ^
         -store_xyz_range_as_extra_bytes ^
         -odix _xyz_range -olaz ^
         =cores 2

lasgrid -i flightline*_xyz_range.laz -merged ^
        -drop_attribute_below 0 1 ^
        -attribute0 -lowest ^
        -false -set_min_max 20 200 ^
        -o quality/closest_xyz_range_020ft_200ft.png

lasgrid -i flightline*_xyz_range.laz -merged ^
        -drop_attribute_below 0 1 ^
        -attribute0 -highest ^
        -false -set_min_max 30 300 ^
        -o quality/farthest_xyz_range_030ft_300ft.png

Below the complete processing pipeline for creating a median ground model from the “fluffy” Velodyne LiDAR data that results in the hillshaded DTM shown here. The workflow is similar to those we have developed in earlier blog posts for Velodyne Puck based systems like the Hovermap and the Yellowscan.

Hillshaded DTM with a resolution of 1 foot generated via a median ground computation by the LAStools processing pipeline detailed below.

lastile -i flightline1.laz ^
        -i flightline2.laz ^
        -faf ^
        -tile_size 250 -buffer 25 -flag_as_withheld ^
        -odir tiles_raw -o somer.laz

lasnoise -i tiles_raw\*.laz ^
         -step_xy 2 -step 1 -isolated 9 ^
         -odir tiles_denoised -olaz ^
          -cores 4

lasthin -i tiles_denoised\*.laz ^
        -ignore_class 7 ^
        -step 1 -percentile 0.05 10 -classify_as 8 ^
        -odir tiles_thinned_1_foot -olaz ^
        -cores 4

lasthin -i tiles_thinned_1_foot\*.laz ^
        -ignore_class 7 ^
        -step 2 -percentile 0.05 10 -classify_as 8 ^
        -odir tiles_thinned_2_foot -olaz ^
        -cores 4

lasthin -i tiles_thinned_2_foot\*.laz ^
        -ignore_class 7 ^
        -step 4 -percentile 0.05 10 -classify_as 8 ^
        -odir tiles_thinned_4_foot -olaz ^
        -cores 4

lasthin -i tiles_thinned_4_foot\*.laz ^
        -ignore_class 7 ^
        -step 8 -percentile 0.05 10 -classify_as 8 ^
        -odir tiles_thinned_8_foot -olaz ^
        -cores 4

lasground -i tiles_thinned_8_foot\*.laz ^
          -ignore_class 1 7 ^
          -town -extra_fine ^
          -odir tiles_ground_lowest -olaz ^
          -cores 4

lasheight -i tiles_ground_lowest\*.laz ^
          -classify_between -0.05 0.5 6 ^
          -odir tiles_ground_thick -olaz ^
          -cores 4

lasthin -i tiles_ground_thick\*.laz ^
        -ignore_class 1 7 ^
        -step 1 -percentile 0.5 -classify_as 2 ^
        -odir tiles_ground_median -olaz ^
        -cores 4

las2dem -i tiles_ground_median\*.laz ^
        -keep_class 2 ^
        -step 1 -use_tile_bb ^
        -odir tiles_dtm -obil ^
        -cores 4

blast2dem -i tiles_dtm\*.bil -merged ^
          -step 1 -hillshade ^
          -o dtm_hillshaded.png

We thank Harris Aerial for sharing this LiDAR data set with us flown by their Carrier H4 Hybrid HE drone carrying a Snoopy A series LiDAR system from LidarUSA.

Three Videos from Full Day Workshop on LiDAR at IIST Trivandrum in India

Three videos from a full day workshop on LiDAR processing at the Department of Earth and Space Sciences of the Indian Institute of Space Science and Technology (IIST) in Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India held in October 2017 that was organized by Dr. A. M. Ramiya who we thank very much for the invitation and for being such a kind host. After our usual introduction to LiDAR and LAStools we use three raw flightlines from Ayutthaya, Thailand as example data to perform a complete LiDAR workflow including

  1. LiDAR quality checking such as pulse density, coverage, and flightline alignment
  2. LiDAR preparation (compressing, tiling, denoising, classifying)
  3. LiDAR derivative creation (DTM and DSM rasters, contours, building and vegetation footprints)

You can download the three flightlines used in the tutorial here (line2, line3, line4) to follow along.

morning video

after lunch video

after tea video

Plots to Stands: Producing LiDAR Vegetation Metrics for Imputation Calculations

Some professionals in remote sensing find LAStools a useful tool to extract statistical metrics from LiDAR that are used to make estimations about a larger area of land from a small set of sample plots. Common applications are prediction of the timber volume or the above-ground biomass for entire forests based on a number of representative plots where exact measurements were obtained with field work. The same technique can also be used to make estimations about animal habitat or coconut yield or to classify the type of vegetation that covers the land. In this tutorial we describe the typical workflow for computing common metrics for smaller plots and larger areas using LAStools.

Download these six LiDAR tiles (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6) from a Eucalyptus plantation in Brazil to follow along the step by step instructions of this tutorial. This data is courtesy of Suzano Pulp and Paper. Please also download the two shapefiles that delineate the plots where field measurements were taken and the stands for which predictions are to be made. You should download version 170327 (or higher) of LAStools due to some recent bug fixes.

Quality Checking

Before processing newly received LiDAR data we always perform a quality check first. This ranges from visual inspection with lasview, to printing textual content reports and attribute histograms with lasinfo, to flight-line alignment checks with lasoverlap, pulse density and pulse spacing checks with lasgrid and las2dem, and completeness-of-returns check with lassort followed by lasreturn.

lasinfo -i tiles_raw\CODL0003-C0006.laz ^
        -odir quality -odix _info -otxt

The lasinfo report tells us that there is no projection information. However, we remember that this Brazilian data was in the common SIRGAS 2000 projection and try for a few likely UTM zones whether the hillshaded DSM produced by las2dem falls onto the right spot in Google Earth.

las2dem -i tiles_raw\CODL0003-C0006.laz ^
        -keep_first -thin_with_grid 1 ^
        -hillshade -epsg 31983 ^
        -o epsg_check.png

Hillshaded DSM and Google Earth imagery align for EPSG code 31983

The lasinfo report also tells us that the xyz coordinates are stored with millimeter resolution which is a bit of an overkill. For higher and faster LASzip compression we will later lower this to a more appropriate centimeter resolution. It further tells us that the returns are stored using point type 0 and that is a bit unfortunate. This (older) point type does not have a GPS time stamp so that some quality checks (e.g. “completeness of returns” with lasreturn) and operations (e.g. “resorting of returns into acquisition order” with lassort) will not be possible. Fortunately the min-max range of the ‘point source ID’ suggests that this point attribute is correctly populated with flightline numbers so that we can do a check for overlap and alignment of the different flightlines that contribute to the LiDAR in each tile.

lasoverlap -i tiles_raw\*.laz ^
           -min_diff 0.2 -max_diff 0.4 ^
           -epsg 31983 ^
           -odir quality -opng ^
           -cores 3

We run lasoverlap to visualize the amount of overlap between flightlines and the vertical differences between them. The produced images (see below) color code the number of flightlines and the maximum vertical difference between any two flightlines as seen below. Most of the area is cyan (2 flightlines) except in the bottom left where the pilot was sloppy and left some gaps in the yellow seams (3 flightlines) so that some spots are only blue (1 flightline). We also see that two tiles in the upper left are partly covered by a diagonal flightline. We will drop that flightline later to create a more uniform density.across the tiles. The mostly blue areas in the difference are mostly aligned with features in the landscape and less with the flightline pattern. Closer inspection shows that these vertical difference occur mainly in the dense old growth forests with species of different heights that are much harder to penetrate by the laser than the uniform and short-lived Eucalyptus plantation that is more of a “dead forest” with little undergrowth or animal habitat.

Interesting observation: The vertical difference of the lowest return from different flightlines computed per 2 meter by 2 meter grid cell could maybe be used a new forestry metric to help distinguish mono cultures from natural forests.

lasgrid -i tiles_raw\*.laz ^
        -keep_last ^
        -step 2 -point_density ^
        -false -set_min_max 10 20 ^
        -epsg 31983 ^
        -odir quality -odix _d_2m_10_20 -opng ^
        -cores 3

lasgrid -i tiles_raw\*.laz ^
        -keep_last ^
        -step 5 -point_density ^
        -false -set_min_max 10 20 ^
        -epsg 31983 ^
        -odir quality -odix _d_5m_10_20 -opng ^
        -cores 3

We run lasgrid to visualize the pulse density per 2 by 2 meter cell and per 5 by 5 meter cell. The produced images (see below) color code the number of last return per square meter. The impact of the tall Eucalyptus trees on the density per cell computation is evident for the smaller 2 meter cell size in form of a noisy blue/red diagonal in the top right as well as a noisy blue/red area in the bottom left. Both of those turn to a more consistent yellow for the density per cell computation with larger 5 meter cells. Immediately evident is the higher density (red) for those parts or the two tiles in the upper left that are covered by the additional diagonal flightline. The blueish area left to the center of the image suggests a consistently lower pulse density whose cause remains to be investigated: Lower reflectivity? Missing last returns? Cloud cover?

The lasinfo report suggests that the tiles are already classified. We could either use the ground classification provided by the vendor or re-classify the data ourselves (using lastilelasnoise, and lasground). We check the quality of the ground classification by visually inspecting a hillshaded DTM created with las2dem from the ground returns. We buffer the tiles on-the-fly for a seamless hillshade without artifacts along tile boundaries by adding ‘-buffered 25’ and ‘-use_orig_bb’ to the command-line. To speed up reading the 25 meter buffers from neighboring tiles we first create a spatial indexing with lasindex.

lasindex -i tiles_raw\*.laz ^
         -cores 3

las2dem -i tiles_raw\*.laz ^
        -buffered 25 ^
        -keep_class 2 -thin_with_grid 0.5 ^
        -use_orig_bb ^
        -hillshade -epsg 31983 ^
        -odir quality -odix _dtm -opng ^
        -cores 3

hillshaded DTM tiles generated with las2dem and on-the-fly buffering

The resulting hillshaded DTM shows a few minor issues in the ground classification but also a big bump (above the mouse cursor). Closer inspection of this area (you can cut it from the larger tile using the command-line below) shows that there is a group of miss-classified points about 1200 meters below the terrain. Hence, we will start from scratch to prepare the data for the extraction of forestry metrics.

las2las -i tiles_raw\CODL0004-C0006.laz ^
        -inside_tile 207900 7358350 100 ^
        -o bump.laz

lasview -i bump.laz

bump in hillshaded DTM caused by miss-classified low noise

Data Preparation

Using lastile we first tile the data into smaller 500 meter by 500 meter tiles with 25 meter buffer while flagging all points in the buffer as ‘withheld’. In the same step we lower the resolution to centimeter and put nicer a coordinate offset in the LAS header. We also remove the existing classification and classify all points that are much lower than the target terrain as class 7 (aka noise). We also add CRS information and give each tile the base name ‘suzana.laz’.

lastile -i tiles_raw\*.laz ^
        -rescale 0.01 0.01 0.01 ^
        -auto_reoffset ^
        -set_classification 0 ^
        -classify_z_below_as 500.0 7 ^
        -tile_size 500 ^
        -buffer 25 -flag_as_withheld ^
        -epsg 31983 ^
        -odir tiles_buffered -o suzana.laz

With lasnoise we mark the many isolated points that are high above or below the terrain as class 7 (aka noise). Using two tiles we played around with the ‘step’ parameters until we find good parameter settings. See the README of lasnoise for the exact meaning and the choice of parameters for noise classification. We look at one of the resulting tiles with lasview.

lasnoise -i tiles_buffered\*.laz ^
         -step_xy 4 -step_z 2 ^
         -odir tiles_denoised -olaz ^
         -cores 3

lasview -i tiles_denoised\suzana_206000_7357000.laz ^
        -color_by_classification ^
        -win 1024 192

noise points shown in pink: all points (top), only noise points (bottom)

Next we use lasground to classify the last returns into ground (2) and non-ground (1). It is important to ignore the noise points with classification 7 to avoid the kind of bump we saw in the vendor-delivered classification. We again check the quality of the computed ground classification by producing a hillshaded DTM with las2dem. Here the las2dem command-line is sightly different as instead of buffering on-the-fly we use the buffers stored with each tile.

lasground -i tiles_denoised\*.laz ^
          -ignore_class 7 ^
          -nature -extra_fine ^
          -odir tiles_ground -olaz ^
          -cores 3

las2dem -i tiles_ground\*.laz ^
        -keep_class 2 -thin_with_grid 0.5 ^
        -hillshade ^
        -use_tile_bb ^
        -odir quality -odix _dtm_new -opng ^
        -cores 3

Finally, with lasheight we compute how high each return is above the triangulated surface of all ground returns and store this height value in place of the elevation value into the z coordinate using the ‘-replace_z’ switch. This height-normalizes the LiDAR in the sense that all ground returns are set to an elevation of 0 while all other returns get an elevation relative to the ground. The result are height-normalized LiDAR tiles that are ready for producing the desired forestry metrics.

lasheight -i tiles_ground\*.laz ^
          -replace_z ^
          -odir tiles_normalized -olaz ^
          -cores 3
Metric Production

The tool for computing the metrics for the entire area as well as for the individual field plots is lascanopy. Which metrics are well suited for your particular imputation calculation is your job to determine. Maybe first compute a large number of them and then eliminate the redundant ones. Do not use any point from the tile buffers for these calculations. We had flagged them as ‘withheld’ during the lastile operation, so they are easy to drop. We also want to drop the noise points that were classified as 7. And we were planning to drop that additional diagonal flightline we noticed during quality checking. We generated two lasinfo reports with the ‘-histo point_source 1’ option for the two tiles it was covering. From the two histograms it was easy to see that the diagonal flightline has the number 31.

First we run lascanopy on the 11 plots that you can download here. When running on plots it makes sense to first create a spatial indexing with lasindex for faster querying so that only those tiny parts of the LAZ file need to be loaded that actually cover the plots.

lasindex -i tiles_normalized\*.laz ^
         -cores 3

lascanopy -i tiles_normalized\*.laz -merged ^
          -drop_withheld ^
          -drop_class 7 ^
          -drop_point_source 31 ^
          -lop WKS_PLOTS.shp ^
          -cover_cutoff 3.0 ^
          -cov -dns ^
          -height_cutoff 2.0 ^
          -c 2.0 999.0 ^
          -max -avg -std -kur ^
          -p 25 50 75 95 ^
          -b 30 50 80 ^
          -d 2.0 5.0 10.0 50.0 ^
          -o plots.csv

The resulting ‘plots.csv’ file you can easily process in other software packages. It contains one line for each polygonal plot listed in the shapefile that lists its bounding box followed by all the requested metrics. But is why is there a zero maximum height (marked in orange) for plots 6 though 10? All height metrics are computed solely from returns that are higher than the ‘height_cutoff’ that was set to 2 meters. We added the ‘-c 2.0 999.0’ absolute count metric to keep track of the number of returns used in these calculations. Apparently in plots 6 though 10 there was not a single return above 2 meters as the count (also marked in orange) is zero for all these plots. Turns out this Eucalyptus stand had recently been harvested and the new seedlings are still shorter than 2 meters.

more plots.csv
index,min_x,min_y,max_x,max_y,max,avg,std,kur,p25,p50,p75,p95,b30,b50,b80,c00,d00,d01,d02,cov,dns
0,206260.500,7358289.909,206283.068,7358312.477,11.23,6.22,1.91,2.26,4.71,6.01,7.67,9.5,26.3,59.7,94.2,5359,18.9,41.3,1.5,76.3,60.0
1,206422.500,7357972.909,206445.068,7357995.477,13.54,7.5,2.54,1.97,5.32,7.34,9.65,11.62,26.9,54.6,92.2,7030,12.3,36.6,13.3,77.0,61.0
2,206579.501,7358125.909,206602.068,7358148.477,12.22,5.72,2.15,2.5,4.11,5.32,7.26,9.76,46.0,73.7,97.4,4901,24.8,28.7,2.0,66.8,51.2
3,206578.500,7358452.910,206601.068,7358475.477,12.21,5.68,2.23,2.64,4.01,5.14,7.18,10.04,48.3,74.1,95.5,4861,25.7,26.2,2.9,68.0,50.2
4,206734.501,7358604.910,206757.068,7358627.478,15.98,10.3,2.18,2.64,8.85,10.46,11.9,13.65,3.3,27.0,91.0,4946,0.6,32.5,44.5,91.0,77.5
5,207043.501,7358761.910,207066.068,7358784.478,15.76,10.78,2.32,3.43,9.27,11.03,12.49,14.11,3.2,20.7,83.3,4819,1.5,24.7,51.0,91.1,76.8
6,207677.192,7359630.526,207699.760,7359653.094,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.0,0.0,0.0,0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0
7,207519.291,7359372.366,207541.859,7359394.934,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.0,0.0,0.0,0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0
8,207786.742,7359255.850,207809.309,7359278.417,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.0,0.0,0.0,0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0
9,208159.017,7358997.344,208181.584,7359019.911,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.0,0.0,0.0,0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0
10,208370.909,7358602.565,208393.477,7358625.133,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.0,0.0,0.0,0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0

Then we run lascanopy on the entire area and produce one raster per tile for each metric. Here we remove the buffered points with the ‘-use_tile_bb’ switch that also ensures that the produced rasters have exactly the extend of the tiles without buffers. Again, it is imperative that you download the version 170327 (or higher) of LAStools for this to work correctly.

lascanopy -version
LAStools (by martin@rapidlasso.com) version 170327 (academic)

lascanopy -i tiles_normalized\*.laz ^
          -use_tile_bb ^
          -drop_class 7 ^
          -drop_point_source 31 ^
          -step 10 ^
          -cover_cutoff 3.0 ^
          -cov -dns ^
          -height_cutoff 2.0 ^
          -c 2.0 999.0 ^
          -max -avg -std -kur ^
          -p 25 50 75 95 ^
          -b 30 50 80 ^
          -d 2.0 5.0 10.0 50.0 ^
          -odir tile_metrics -oasc ^
          -cores 3

The resulting rasters in ASC format can easily be previewed using lasview for some “sanity checking” that our metrics make sense and to get a quick overview about what these metrics look like.

lasview -i tile_metrics\suzana_*max.asc
lasview -i tile_metrics\suzana_*p95.asc
lasview -i tile_metrics\suzana_*p50.asc
lasview -i tile_metrics\suzana_*p25.asc
lasview -i tile_metrics\suzana_*cov.asc
lasview -i tile_metrics\suzana_*d00.asc
lasview -i tile_metrics\suzana_*d01.asc
lasview -i tile_metrics\suzana_*b30.asc
lasview -i tile_metrics\suzana_*b80.asc

The maximum height rasters are useful to inspect more closely as they will immediately tell us if there was any high noise point that slipped through the cracks. And indeed it happened as we see a maximum of 388.55 meters for of the 10 by 10 meter cells. As we know the expected height of the trees we could have added a ‘-drop_z_above 70’ to the lascanopy command line. Careful, however, when computing forestry metrics in strongly sloped terrains as the terrain slope can significantly lift up returns to heights much higher than that of the tree. This is guaranteed to happen for LiDAR returns from branches that are extending horizontally far over the down-sloped part of the terrain as shown in this paper here.

We did not use the shapefile for the stands in this exercise. We could have clipped the normalized LiDAR points to these stands using lasclip as shown in the GUI below before generating the raster metrics. This would have saved space and computation time as many of the LiDAR points lie outside of the stands. However, it might be better to do that clipping step on the rasters in whichever GIS software or statistics package you are using for the imputation computation to properly account for partly covered raster cells along the stand boundary. This could be subject of another blog article … (-:

not all LiDAR was needed to compute metrics for