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 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.

Scrutinizing LiDAR Data from Leica’s Single Photon Scanner SPL100 (aka SPL99)

We show how simple reordering and clever remapping of single photon LiDAR data can reduce file size by a whopping 50%. We also show that there is at least one Leica’s SPL100 sensor out there that should be called SPL99 because one of its 100 beamlets (the one with beamlet ID 53) does not seem to produce any data … (-:

Closeup on the returns of two beamlet shots colored by beamlet ID from 1 (blue) to 100 (red). Beamlet ID 53 is missing.

Following up on a recent discussion in the LAStools user forum we take a closer look at some of the single photon LiDAR collected with Leica’s SPL100 sensor made available as open data by the USGS in form of LASzip-compressed tiles in LAS 1.4 format of point type 6. This investigation was sparked by the curiosity of what value was stored to the “scanner channel” field that was added to the new point types 6 to 10 in the LAS 1.4 specification.

lasview -i USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP120310_LAS_2018.laz ^
        -copy_scanner_channel_into_point_source ^

Visualizing this 2 bit number whose value can range from 0 to 3 for the first tile we downloaded resulted in this non-conclusive “magic eye” visualization. What do you see? A sailboat?

Visualizing the “scanner channel” field by mapping its four different values to different colors.

Jason Stoker from the USGS suggested that this is the truncated “beamlet” ID. Leica’s SPL100 sensor uses 100 beamlets rather than one or two laser beams to collect data. Storing the beamlet IDs between 1 and 100 to this 2 bit field that can only hold numbers between 0 and 3 is kind of pointless and should be avoided. LASzip switches prediction contexts based on this field resulting in slower compression speed and lower compression rates. The beamlet ID is also stored in the 8 bit “user data” field, so that we can simply zero the “scanner channel” field. To investigate this further we downloaded these nine tiles from this FTP site of the USGS:

Whenever we download LAZ files we first run laszip with the ‘-check’ option which performs a sanity check to make sure that the files are not truncated or otherwise corrupted. In our case we get nine solid reports of SUCCESS.

laszip -i USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_*_2018.laz -check

A visual inspection with lasview tells us that there are a number of flightlines in the data.

lasview -i USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_*_2018.laz ^
        -points 15000000 ^

We use las2las to extract flightline 2003 and lasinfo to produce a histogram of GPS times which we use in turn to decide on which quarter second of GPS time worth of data we want to extract again with las2las.

las2las -i USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_*_LAS_2018.laz ^
        -merged ^
        -keep_point_source 2003 ^
        -o USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_ps_2002.laz

lasinfo -i USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_ps_2002.laz ^
        -cd ^
        -histo gps_time 1 ^
        -odix _info -otxt

las2las -i USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_ps_2002.laz ^
        -keep_gps_time 176475495 176475495.25 ^
        -o USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_gps176475495_quarter.laz

It always helps to give your LAZ files meaningful names in case you find them again two years later or so. We can nicely see the circular scanning pattern Leica’s SPL100 sensor. With lasview we measure that this single flightline has an extent of about 2000 meters on the ground. The lasinfo report shows a pulse density of around 19 last returns per square meter. We then sort the points by GPS time using lassort. This groups together all the returns that are the result of one “shot” of the laser with 100 beamlets as we can nicely see in the las2txt output below. Each group of returns has slightly below 100 points and there is one group every 0.00002 seconds. This means the SPL100 is firing once every 20 microseconds.

lassort -i USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_gps176475495_quarter.laz ^
        -gps_time ^
        -odix _sorted -olaz

las2txt -i USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_gps176475495_quarter_sorted.laz ^
        -parse tuxyz ^
        -stdout | more
176475495.000008 4 514408.78 4830989.78 487.79
176475495.000008 9 514410.38 4830987.49 487.70
176475495.000008 47 514411.49 4830987.71 487.70
        [ ... 86 lines deleted ... ]
176475495.000008 39 514408.53 4830991.81 487.80
176475495.000008 50 514407.97 4830991.69 487.80
176475495.000008 16 514409.24 4830991.46 487.85
176475495.000028 55 514413.51 4830985.79 487.61
176475495.000028 97 514411.10 4830990.03 487.74
176475495.000028 72 514411.30 4830989.53 487.74
        [ ... 82 lines deleted ... ]
176475495.000028 45 514410.30 4830986.19 487.70
176475495.000028 3 514409.15 4830987.52 487.73
176475495.000028 96 514411.81 4830985.46 487.67
176475495.000048 66 514411.35 4830985.15 487.67
176475495.000048 83 514411.59 4830984.65 487.61
176475495.000048 64 514413.09 4830983.93 487.61
        [ ... 78 lines deleted ... ]
176475495.000048 4 514407.30 4830984.82 487.70
176475495.000048 34 514408.65 4830983.01 487.70
176475495.000048 21 514408.11 4830982.90 487.70
176475495.000068 13 514408.25 4830981.13 487.66
176475495.000068 92 514410.53 4830984.23 487.68
176475495.000068 44 514407.17 4830980.88 487.67
        [ ... 80 lines deleted ... ]
176475495.000068 76 514408.67 4830984.37 487.71
176475495.000068 47 514409.23 4830980.27 487.67
176475495.000068 87 514412.11 4830981.93 487.61
176475495.000088 97 514408.80 4830982.62 487.70
176475495.000088 33 514407.24 4830980.68 487.64
176475495.000088 30 514407.36 4830981.77 487.68
[ ... ]

Now we can “play back” the returns in acquisition order. We map returns from one group to the same color in lasview with the new ‘-bin_gps_time_into_point_source 0.00002’ option (that will be available in the next LAStools release). For a slower playback we add ‘-steps 5000’. Press the ‘c’ key to switch through the coloring options. Press the ‘s’ key repeatedly to incrementally show the points. To take a step back press <SHIFT>+’s’.

lasview -i USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_gps176475495_quarter_sorted.laz ^
        -bin_gps_time_into_point_source 0.00002 ^
        -scale_user_data 2.5 ^
        -steps 5000 ^
        -win 1024 384

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

The last image colors the points by the values in the user data field (multiplied by 2.5), which essentially maps the beamlet IDs between 1 and 100 to a rainbow color ramp from blue to red. This tells us how the numbering of the beamlets from 1 to 100 corresponds to their layout in space. The next sequence of images takes a closer look at that.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

From a compression point of view it makes sense to (1) zero the meaningless scanner channel, (2) order the points by GPS time stamps to groups beamlet returns together, and (3) order the points with the same time stamp by the user data field. The compression gain is enormous with the 9 tiles going from over 3 GB to under 2 GB:

337,156,981 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP120300_LAS_2018.laz
331,801,150 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP120310_LAS_2018.laz
358,928,274 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP120320_LAS_2018.laz
328,597,628 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP130300_LAS_2018.laz
355,997,013 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP130310_LAS_2018.laz
360,403,079 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP130320_LAS_2018.laz
355,399,781 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP140300_LAS_2018.laz
354,523,659 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP140310_LAS_2018.laz
357,248,968 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP140320_LAS_2018.laz
  3,140,056,533 Bytes

197,641,087 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP120300_LAS_2018_sorted.laz
194,750,096 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP120310_LAS_2018_sorted.laz
210,013,408 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP120320_LAS_2018_sorted.laz
190,687,275 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP130300_LAS_2018_sorted.laz
206,447,730 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP130310_LAS_2018_sorted.laz
209,580,551 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP130320_LAS_2018_sorted.laz
205,827,197 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP140300_LAS_2018_sorted.laz
203,808,113 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP140310_LAS_2018_sorted.laz
206,789,959 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP140320_LAS_2018_sorted.laz
  1,825,545,416 Bytes

Enumerating the 100 beamlets with a geometrically more coherent order would improve compression even more. Can anyone convince Leica to do this? The simple mapping of beamlet IDs shown below that arranges the beamlets into a zigzag order another huge compression gain of 15 percent. Altogether reordering and remapping lower the compressed file size by a whopping 50 percent.

Beamlet ID mapping table to improve spatial coherence.

168,876,666 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP120300_LAS_2018_mapped_sorted.laz
165,241,508 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP120310_LAS_2018_mapped_sorted.laz
176,524,959 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP120320_LAS_2018_mapped_sorted.laz
163,679,216 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP130300_LAS_2018_mapped_sorted.laz
176,086,559 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP130310_LAS_2018_mapped_sorted.laz
178,909,108 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP130320_LAS_2018_mapped_sorted.laz
174,735,634 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP140300_LAS_2018_mapped_sorted.laz
171,679,105 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP140310_LAS_2018_mapped_sorted.laz
174,997,090 USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_14TNP140320_LAS_2018_mapped_sorted.laz
  1,550,729,845 Bytes

Once this is done a final space-filling sort into a Hilbert-curve or a Morton-order with lassort or lasoptimize would improve spatial coherence for efficient spatial indexing with lasindex.

Oh yes … the SPL100 was not firing on all cylinders. The beamlet ID 53 that would have mapped to 61 in our table was not present in any of the 9 tiles with 355,047,478 points that we had downloaded as the lasinfo histogram below shows.

lasinfo -i USGS_LPC_SD_MORiver_Woolpert_B1_2016_*_2018.laz -merged -histo user_data 1
lasinfo (180911) report for 9 merged files
reporting all LAS header entries:
  file signature:             'LASF'
  file source ID:             0
  global_encoding:            17
  project ID GUID data 1-4:   194774FA-35FE-4591-D484-010AFA13F6D9
  version major.minor:        1.4
  system identifier:          'Woolpert LAS'
  generating software:        'GeoCue LAS Updater'
  file creation day/year:     332/2017
  header size:                375
  offset to point data:       1376
  number var. length records: 1
  point data format:          6
  point data record length:   30
  number of point records:    0
  number of points by return: 0 0 0 0 0
  scale factor x y z:         0.01 0.01 0.01
  offset x y z:               0 0 0
  min x y z:                  512000.00 4830000.00 286.43
  max x y z:                  514999.99 4832999.99 866.81
  start of waveform data packet record: 0
  start of first extended variable length record: 0
  number of extended_variable length records: 0
  extended number of point records: 355047478
  extended number of points by return: 298476060 52480771 3929583 157365 3699 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
variable length header record 1 of 1:
  reserved             0
  user ID              'LASF_Projection'
  record ID            2112
  length after header  943
  description          'OGC WKT Coordinate System'
    COMPD_CS["NAD83(2011) / UTM zone 14N + NAVD88 height - Geoid12B (metre)",PROJCS["NAD83(2011) / UTM zone 14N",GEOGCS["NAD83(2011)",DATUM["NAD83_National_Spat
ial_Reference_System_2011",SPHEROID["GRS 1980",6378137,298.257222101,AUTHORITY["EPSG","7019"]],AUTHORITY["EPSG","1116"]],PRIMEM["Greenwich",0,AUTHORITY["EPSG","
SG","9001"]],AXIS["Easting",EAST],AXIS["Northing",NORTH],AUTHORITY["EPSG","6343"]],VERT_CS["NAVD88 height - Geoid12B (metre)",VERT_DATUM["North American Vertica
l Datum 1988",2005,AUTHORITY["EPSG","5103"]],UNIT["metre",1,AUTHORITY["EPSG","9001"]],AXIS["Gravity-related height",UP],AUTHORITY["EPSG","5703"]]]
the header is followed by 4 user-defined bytes
LASzip compression (version 3.1r0 c3 50000): POINT14 3
reporting minimum and maximum for all LAS point record entries ...
  X            51200000   51499999
  Y           483000000  483299999
  Z               28643      86681
  intensity        3139      12341
  return_number       1          5
  number_of_returns   1          5
  edge_of_flight_line 0          0
  scan_direction_flag 0          1
  classification      1         10
  scan_angle_rank  -127        127
  user_data           1        100
  point_source_ID  1061       2005
  gps_time 176475467.194000 176496233.636563
  extended_return_number          1      5
  extended_number_of_returns      1      5
  extended_classification         1     10
  extended_scan_angle        -21167  21167
  extended_scanner_channel        0      3
number of first returns:        298476060
number of intermediate returns: 6282
number of last returns:         355000765
number of single returns:       298435629
overview over extended number of returns of given pulse: 298435629 52515017 3935373 157750 3709 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
histogram of classification of points:
       138382030  unclassified (1)
       207116732  ground (2)
         9233160  noise (7)
          310324  water (9)
            5232  rail (10)
 +-> flagged as withheld:  9233160
 +-> flagged as extended overlap: 226520346
user data histogram with bin size 1.000000
  bin 1 has 3448849
  bin 2 has 3468566
  bin 3 has 3721848
  bin 4 has 3376990
  bin 5 has 3757996
  bin 6 has 3479546
  bin 7 has 3799930
  bin 8 has 3766887
  bin 9 has 3448383
  bin 10 has 3966036
  bin 11 has 3232086
  bin 12 has 3686789
  bin 13 has 3763869
  bin 14 has 3847765
  bin 15 has 3659059
  bin 16 has 3666918
  bin 17 has 3427468
  bin 18 has 3375320
  bin 19 has 3222116
  bin 20 has 3598643
  bin 21 has 3108323
  bin 22 has 3553625
  bin 23 has 3782185
  bin 24 has 3577792
  bin 25 has 3063871
  bin 26 has 3451800
  bin 27 has 3518763
  bin 28 has 3845852
  bin 29 has 3366980
  bin 30 has 3797986
  bin 31 has 3623477
  bin 32 has 3606798
  bin 33 has 3762737
  bin 34 has 3861023
  bin 35 has 3821228
  bin 36 has 3738173
  bin 37 has 3902190
  bin 38 has 3726752
  bin 39 has 3910989
  bin 40 has 3771132
  bin 41 has 3718437
  bin 42 has 3609113
  bin 43 has 3339941
  bin 44 has 3003191
  bin 45 has 3697140
  bin 46 has 2329171
  bin 47 has 3398836
  bin 48 has 3511882
  bin 49 has 3719592
  bin 50 has 2995275
  bin 51 has 3673925
  bin 52 has 3535992
  bin 54 has 3799430
  bin 55 has 3613345
  bin 56 has 3761436
  bin 57 has 3296831
  bin 58 has 3810146
  bin 59 has 3768464
  bin 60 has 3520871
  bin 61 has 3833149
  bin 62 has 3639778
  bin 63 has 3623008
  bin 64 has 3581480
  bin 65 has 3663180
  bin 66 has 3661434
  bin 67 has 3684374
  bin 68 has 3723125
  bin 69 has 3552397
  bin 70 has 3554207
  bin 71 has 3535494
  bin 72 has 3621334
  bin 73 has 3633928
  bin 74 has 3631845
  bin 75 has 3526502
  bin 76 has 3605631
  bin 77 has 3452006
  bin 78 has 3796382
  bin 79 has 3731841
  bin 80 has 3683314
  bin 81 has 3806024
  bin 82 has 3749709
  bin 83 has 3808218
  bin 84 has 3634032
  bin 85 has 3631015
  bin 86 has 3712206
  bin 87 has 3627775
  bin 88 has 3674966
  bin 89 has 3231151
  bin 90 has 3780037
  bin 91 has 3621958
  bin 92 has 3623264
  bin 93 has 3853536
  bin 94 has 3623380
  bin 95 has 3418309
  bin 96 has 3374827
  bin 97 has 3464734
  bin 98 has 3562560
  bin 99 has 3078686
  bin 100 has 3426924


Estonia leads in Open LiDAR: nationwide & multi-temporal Point Clouds now Online

At the beginning of July 2018 the Baltic country of Estonia – with an area of 45 thousand square kilometers inhabited by around 1.3 million people – opened much of their geospatial data archives and is now offering easy and free download of LiDAR point clouds nationwide via a portal of the Estonian Land Board. What is even more exciting is that multi-temporal data sets flown in different years and seasons are available. Raw LiDAR point clouds collected either during a “regular flight in spring” or during a “forestry flight in summer” can be obtained for multiple years. The 1 km by 1 km tile with map sheet index 377650, for example, is available for four different LiDAR surveys carried out in spring 2011, summer 2013, spring 2015 and summer 2017. This offers incredible potential for studying temporal changes of man-made or natural environments. The screenshot sequence below shows how to navigate to the download site starting from this page.

We found out about this open data release during our hands-on workshop on LiDAR and photogrammetry point cloud processing with LAStools that was part of the UAV remote sensing summer school in Tartu, Estonia. See our calendar for upcoming events or contact us for holding a similar event at your university, agency, company, or conference. 

The LiDAR data provided on the download portal is compressed with LASzip and provided as 1km by 1km LiDAR tiles in LAZ format. You can search for these tiles via their Estonian 1:2000 map sheet indices. To find out which map sheet index corresponds to the tile you are interested in you can overlay the maps sheet indices over an online map. However, you will need to zoom in before you can see the indices as illustrated in the screenshot sequence below. Here a zoom to the map sheet indices for the area that we visited during the social event of the summer school.

One thing we noticed is that the tiles contain only a single layer of points. The overlaps between flightlines were removed which results in a more uniform point density but strips the user of the possibility to do their own flightline alignment checks with lasoverlap. Below you see the spring 2014 acquisition for the tile with map sheet index 475861 colored by classification, elevation, return type, flightline ID and intensity.

The license for the open data of the Estonian Land Board is very permissive and can be found here. Agreeing to the licence gives the licence holder the rights to use data free of charge for an unspecified term, to good purpose in accordance with law and best practice. Licence holder may produce derivatives of data, combine data with its own products or services, use data for commercial or non-commercial purposes and redistribute data. The licence holder obliges to refer to the origin of data when publishing and redistributing data. The reference must include the name of the licensor, the title of data, the age of data (or the date of data extraction).

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 ^

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 ^

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

First Look with LAStools at LiDAR from Hovermap Drone by CSIRO

Last December we had a chance to visit the team of Dr. Stefan Hrabar at CSIRO in Pullenvale near Brisbane who work on a drone LiDAR system called Hovermap. This SLAM-based system is mainly developed for the purpose of autonomous flight and exploration of GPS-denied environments such as buildings, mines and tunnels. But as the SLAM algorithm continuously self-registers the scan lines it produces a LiDAR point cloud that in itself is a nice product. We started our visit with a short test flight around the on-site tower. You can download the LiDAR data and the drone trajectory of this little survey here:

The Hovermap system is based on the Velodyne Puck Lite (VLP-16) that is much cheaper and more light-weight than many other LiDAR systems. One interesting tidbit in the Hovermap setup is that the scanner is installed such that the entire Puck is constantly rotating as you can see in this video. But  the Velodyne Puck is also known to produce somewhat “fluffy” surfaces with a thickness of a few centimeters. In a previous blog post with data from the YellowScan Surveyor system (that is also based on the Puck) we used a “median ground” surface to deal with the “fluff”. In the following we will have a look at the LiDAR data produced by Hovermap and how to process it with LAStools.

LiDAR data of CSIRO tower acquired during test flight of Hovermap system.

As always we start with a lasinfo report that computes the average density ‘-cd’ and histograms for the intensity and the GPS time:

lasinfo -i CSIRO_Tower\results.laz ^
        -cd ^
        -histo intensity 16 -histo gps_time 2 ^
        -odir CSIRO_Tower\quality -odix _info -otxt

A few excerpts of the resulting lasinfo report that you can download here are below:

lasinfo (180409) report for 'CSIRO_Tower\results.laz'
 number of point records: 16668904
 number of points by return: 0 0 0 0 0
 scale factor x y z: 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001
 offset x y z: -5.919576153930379 22.785394470724583 9.535698734939086
 min x y z: -138.6437 -125.2552 -34.1510
 max x y z: 126.8046 170.8260 53.2224
WARNING: full resolution of min_x not compatible with x_offset and x_scale_factor: -138.64370561381907
WARNING: full resolution of min_y not compatible with y_offset and y_scale_factor: -125.25518631070418
WARNING: full resolution of min_z not compatible with z_offset and z_scale_factor: -34.150966206894068
WARNING: full resolution of max_x not compatible with x_offset and x_scale_factor: 126.80455330595831
WARNING: full resolution of max_y not compatible with y_offset and y_scale_factor: 170.82597525215334
WARNING: full resolution of max_z not compatible with z_offset and z_scale_factor: -34.150966206894068
 gps_time 121.288045 302.983110
WARNING: 2 points outside of header bounding box
covered area in square units/kilounits: 51576/0.05
point density: all returns 323.19 last only 318.40 (per square units)
 spacing: all returns 0.06 last only 0.06 (in units)
WARNING: for return 1 real number of points by return is 16424496 but header entry was not set.
WARNING: for return 2 real number of points by return is 244408 but header entry was not set.
real max z larger than header max z by 0.000035
real min z smaller than header min z by 0.000035

Most of these warnings have to do with poorly chosen offset values in the LAS header that have many decimal digits instead of being nice round numbers. The points are stored with sub-millimeter resolution (scale factors of 0.0001) which is unnecessarily precise for a UAV flying a Velodyne Puck where the overall system error can be expected to be on the order of a few centimeters. Also the histogram of return numbers in the LAS header was not populated. We can fix these issues with one call to las2las:

las2las -i CSIRO_Tower\results.laz ^
        -rescale 0.01 0.01 0.01 ^
        -auto_reoffset ^
        -odix _fixed -olaz

If you create another lasinfo report on the fixed file you will see that all the warnings have gone. The file size is now also only 102 MB instead of 142 MB because centimeter coordinate compress much better than sub-millimeter coordinates.

The average density of 318 last return per square meter reported by lasinfo is not that useful for a UAV survey because it does account for the highly varying distribution of LiDAR returns in the area surveyed. With lasgrid we can get a much more clear picture of that.

lasgrid -i CSIRO_Tower\results_fixed.laz ^
        -last_only ^
        -step 0.5 -use_bb -density ^
        -false -set_min_max 0 1500 ^
        -o CSIRO_Tower\quality\density_0_1500.png

LiDAR density: blue is close to zero and red is 1500 or more last returns / sqr mtr

The red dot in the point density indicated an area with over 1500 last returns per square meter. No surprise that this is the take-off and touch-down location of the copter drone. Naturally this spot is completely over-scanned compared to the rest of the area. We can remove these points with the help of the timestamps by cutting off the start and the end of the recording.

The total recording time including take-off, flight around the tower, and touch-down was around 180 seconds or 3 minutes as the lasinfo report tells us. Note that the recorded time stamps are neither “GPS Week Time” nor “Adjusted Standard GPS Time” but an internal system time. By visualizing the trajectory of the UAV with lasview while binning the timestamps into the intensity field we can easily determine what interval of timestamps describes the actual survey flight. First we convert the drone trajectory from the textual ASCII format to the LAZ format with txt2las:

txt2las -i CSIRO_Tower\results_traj.txt ^
        -skip 1 ^
        -parse txyz ^
        -set_classification 12 ^

lasview -i CSIRO_Tower\results_traj.laz ^
        -bin_gps_time_into_intensity 1

Binning timestamps into intensity allows visually determining start and end of survey.

Using lasview and pressing <i> while hovering over those points of the trajectory that appear to be the survey start and end we determine visually that the timestamps between 164 to 264 correspond to the actual survey flight over the area of interest with the take-off and touch-down maneuvers excluded. We use las2las to cut out the relevant part and re-run lasgrid:

las2las -i CSIRO_Tower\results_fixed.laz ^
        -keep_gps_time 164 264 ^
        -o CSIRO_Tower\results_survey.laz

lasgrid -i CSIRO_Tower\results_survey.laz ^
        -last_only ^
        -step 0.5 -use_bb -density ^
        -false -set_min_max 0 1500 ^
        -o CSIRO_Tower\quality\density_0_1500_survey.png

LiDAR density after removing take-off and touch-down maneuvers.

The other set of point we are less interested in are those occasional hits far from the scanner that sample the area too sparsely to be useful for anything. We use lastrack to reclassify points as noise (7) that exceed a x/y distance of 50 meters from the trajectory and then use lasgrid to create another density image without the points classified as noise..

lastrack -i CSIRO_Tower\results_survey.laz ^
         -track CSIRO_Tower\results_traj.laz ^
         -classify_xy_range_between 50 1000 7 ^
         -o CSIRO_Tower\results_xy50.laz

lasgrid -i CSIRO_Tower\results_xy50.laz ^
        -last_only -keep_class 0 ^
        -step 0.5 -use_bb -density ^
        -false -set_min_max 0 1500 ^
        -o CSIRO_Tower\quality\density_0_1500_xy50.png

LiDAR density after removing returns farther than 50 m from trajectory.

We process the remaining points using a typical tile-based processing pipeline. First we run lastile to create tiling of 200 meter by 200 meter tiles with 20 buffers while dropping the noise points::

lastile -i CSIRO_Tower\results_xy50.laz ^
        -drop_class 7 ^
        -tile_size 200 -buffer 20 -flag_as_withheld ^
        -odir CSIRO_Tower\tiles_raw -o eta.laz

Because of the high sampling we expect there to be quite a few duplicate point where all three coordinate x, y, and z are identical. We remove them with a call to lasduplicate:

lasduplicate -i CSIRO_Tower\tiles_raw\*.laz ^
             -unique_xyz ^
             -odir CSIRO_Tower\tiles_unique -olaz ^
             -cores 4

This removes between 12 to 25 thousand point from each tile. Then we use lasnoise to classify isolated points as noise:

lasnoise -i CSIRO_Tower\tiles_unique\*.laz ^
         -step_xy 0.5 -step_z 0.1 -isolated 5 ^
         -odir CSIRO_Tower\tiles_denoised_temp -olaz ^
         -cores 4

Aggressive parameters assure most noise point below ground are found.

This classifies between 13 to 23 thousand point from each tile into the noise classification code 7. We use rather aggressive settings to make sure we get most of the noise points that are below the terrain. Getting a correct ground classification in the next few steps is the main concern now even if this means that many points above the terrain on wires, towers, or vegetation will also get miss-classified as noise (at least temporarily). Next we use lasthin to classify a subset of points with classification code 8 on which we will then run the ground classification. We classify each point that is closest to the 5th percentile in elevation per 25 cm by 25 cm grid cell given there are at least 20 non-noise points in a cell. We then repeat this while increasing the cell size to 50 cm by 50 cm and 100 cm by 100 cm.

lasthin -i CSIRO_Tower\tiles_denoised_temp\*.laz ^
        -ignore_class 7 ^
        -step 0.25 -percentile 5 20 -classify_as 8 ^
        -odir CSIRO_Tower\tiles_thinned_025 -olaz ^
        -cores 4

lasthin -i CSIRO_Tower\tiles_thinned_025\*.laz ^
        -ignore_class 7 ^
        -step 0.50 -percentile 5 20 -classify_as 8 ^
        -odir CSIRO_Tower\tiles_thinned_050 -olaz ^
        -cores 4

lasthin -i CSIRO_Tower\tiles_thinned_025\*.laz ^
        -ignore_class 7 ^
        -step 1.00 -percentile 5 20 -classify_as 8 ^
        -odir CSIRO_Tower\tiles_thinned_100 -olaz ^
        -cores 4


Then we ground classify the points that were classified into the temporary classification code 8 in the previous step using lasground.

lasground -i CSIRO_Tower\tiles_thinned_100\*.laz ^
          -ignore_class 7 0 ^
          -town -ultra_fine ^
          -odir CSIRO_Tower\tiles_ground -olaz ^
          -cores 4

The resulting ground points are a lower envelope of the “fluffy” sampled surfaces produced by the Velodyne Puck scanner. We use lasheight to thicken the ground by moving all points between 1 cm below and 6 cm above the TIN of these “low ground” points to a temporary classification code 6 representing a “thick ground”. We also undo the overly aggressive noise classifications above the ground by setting all higher points back to classification code 1 (unclassified).

lasheight -i CSIRO_Tower\tiles_ground\*.laz ^
          -classify_between -0.01 0.06 6 ^
          -classify_above 0.06 1 ^
          -odir CSIRO_Tower\tiles_ground_thick -olaz ^
          -cores 4

Profile view for 25 centimeter wide strip of open terrain. Top: Green points are low ground. Orange points are thickened ground with 5 cm drop lines. Middle: Brown points are median ground computed from thick ground. Bottom: Comparing low ground points (in green) with median ground points (in brown).

From the “thick ground” we then compute a “median ground” using lasthin in a similar fashion as we used it before. A profile view for a 25 centimeter wide strip of open terrain illustrates the workflow of going from “low ground” via “thick ground” to “median ground” and shows the slight difference in elevation between the two.

lasthin -i CSIRO_Tower\tiles_ground_thick\*.laz ^
        -ignore_class 0 1 7 ^
        -step 0.25 -percentile 50 10 -classify_as 2 ^
        -odir CSIRO_Tower\tiles_ground_median_025 -olaz ^
        -cores 4

lasthin -i CSIRO_Tower\tiles_ground_median_025\*.laz ^
        -ignore_class 0 1 7 ^
        -step 0.50 -percentile 50 10 -classify_as 2 ^
        -odir CSIRO_Tower\tiles_ground_median_050 -olaz ^
        -cores 4

lasthin -i CSIRO_Tower\tiles_ground_median_050\*.laz ^
        -ignore_class 0 1 7 ^
        -step 1.00 -percentile 50 10 -classify_as 2 ^
        -odir CSIRO_Tower\tiles_ground_median_100 -olaz ^
        -cores 4

Then we use lasnoise once more with more conservative settings to remove the noise points that are sprinkled around the scene.

lasnoise -i CSIRO_Tower\tiles_ground_median_100\*.laz ^
         -step_xy 1.0 -step_z 1.0 -isolated 5 ^
         -odir CSIRO_Tower\tiles_denoised -olaz ^
         -cores 4

While we classify the scene into building roofs, vegetation, and everything else with lasclassify we also move all (unused) classifications to classification code 1 (unclassified). You may play with the parameters of lasclassify (see README) to achieve better a building classification. However, those buildings the laser can peek into (either via a window or because they are gazebo-like structures) will not be classified correctly. unless you remove the points that are under the roof somehow.

lasclassify -i CSIRO_Tower\tiles_denoised\*.laz ^
            -ignore_class 7 ^
            -change_classification_from_to 0 1 ^
            -change_classification_from_to 6 1 ^
            -step 1 ^
            -odir CSIRO_Tower\tiles_classified -olaz ^
            -cores 4

A glimpse at the final classification result is below. A hillshaded DTM and a strip of classified points. Of course the tower was miss-classified as vegetation given that it looks just like a tree to the logic used in lasclassify.

The hillshaded DTM with a strip of classified points.

Finally we remove the tile buffers (that were really important for tile-based processing) with lastile:

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

And publish the LiDAR point cloud as version 1.6 of Potree using laspublish:

laspublish -i CSIRO_Tower\tiles_final\*.laz ^
           -i CSIRO_Tower\results_traj.laz ^
           -only_3D -elevation -overwrite -potree16 ^
           -title "CSIRO Tower" ^
           -description "HoverMap test flight, 18 Dec 2017" ^
           -odir CSIRO_Tower\tiles_portal -o portal.html -olaz

Note that we also added the trajectory of the drone because it looks nice and gives a nice illustration of how the UAV was scanning the scene.

Via Potree we can publish and explore the final point cloud using any modern Web browser.

We would like to thank the entire team around Dr. Stefan Hrabar for taking time out of their busy schedules just a few days before Christmas.