1. ISTCGCAP
  2. All Volumes and Issues
  3. Volume 98, 2023
  4. Comparison of modern 3D measurement methods for special tasks of shipbuilding industry

Comparison of modern 3D measurement methods for special tasks of shipbuilding industry

ISTCGCAP.
2023;
Volume 98, 2023, Number 98
: 15-23
https://doi.org/10.23939/istcgcap2023.98.015
Received: September 15, 2023
Authors:
  1. Ivan Brusak
  2. Krzysztof Bakuła
  3. Nataliia Savchuk
1
Department of Higher Geodesy and Astronomy of Lviv Polytechnic National University
2
Warsaw University of Technology
3
Lviv Polytechnic National University

Research presents modern technologies of 3D measurements in shipbuilding production parts. Special template of the keel detail was made for the research. The detail measurements with a laser tracker, laser scanning, industrial photogrammetry and handheld scanning are performed. Leica Absolute Tracker AT960-LR was used for Laser tracker measurements. Laser scanning was performed with Z+F Imager 5010. Nikon D2Xs photo camera was used for Industrial photogrammetry. Handheld scanner DPI-7 from DotProduct was also used for 3D measurements of the details. All collected data were imported into 3DReshaper software for comparison. The accuracy comparison for the specific equipment used in the study is performed. The recommendations for optimal equipment use and software products in this research are also included. The authors also present the assessment of the cost and time spent on the measurements.

3D measurements
laser tracker
laser scanning
industrial photogrammetry
handheld scanning
  1. Abbas, M. A., Lichti, D. D., Chong, A. K., Setan, H., Majid, Z., Lau, C. L., ... & Ariff, M. F. M. (2017). Improvements to the accuracy of prototype ship models measurement method using terrestrial laser scanner. Measurement, 100, 301-310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2016.12.053
  2. Ackermann, S., Menna, F., Scamardella, A., & Troisi, S. (2008, January). Digital photogrammetry for high precision 3D measurements in shipbuilding field. In 6th CIRP International Conference on ICME-Intelligent Computation in Manufacturing Engineering. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Salvatore-Troisi-2/publication/2572...
  3. Ahern, C., & Spring, R., 2015. Handheld 3D Capture. Geoinformatics, 18 (2), pp. 18-19. https://www.proquest.com/openview/d247ae7b800189b4d6edfd799b637679/1?pq-...
  4. Ahmed, M., Guillemet, A., Shahi, A., Haas, C. T., West, J. S., & Haas, R. C. (2011, June). Comparison of point-cloud acquisition from laser-scanning and photogrammetry based on field experimentation. In Proceedings of the CSCE 3rd International/9th Construction Specialty Conference, Ottawa, ON, Canada (pp. 14-17). https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mahmoud-Ahmed-13/publication/274374...
  5. Burdziakowski, P., & Tysiac, P. (2019). Combined close range photogrammetry and terrestrial laser scanning for ship hull modelling. Geosciences, 9(5), 242. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences9050242
  6. Brusak, I. (2018). Geometric inspection of 3D production parts in shipbuilding-comparison and assessment of current optical measuring methods. Master thesis, Neubrandenburg University of Applied Sciences, 50. https://digibib.hs-nb.de/resolve/id/dbhsnb_thesis_0000001931
  7. Ford, D., Housel, T., Hom, S., & Mun, J. (2016). Benchmarking Naval Shipbuilding With 3D Laser Scanning, Additive Manufacturing, and Collaborative Product Lifecycle Management.
  8. Goldan, M., & Kroon, R. J. (2003). As-built product modeling and reverse engineering in shipbuilding through combined digital photogrammetry and CAD/CAM technology. Journal of ship production, 19(02), 98-104. https://doi.org/10.5957/jsp.2003.19.2.98
  9. González-Jorge, H., Riveiro, B., Arias, P., & Armesto, J. (2012). Photogrammetry and laser scanner technology applied to length measurements in car testing laboratories. Measurement, 45(3), 354-363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2011.11.010
  10. Housel, T., Ford, D., Mun, J., & Hom, S. (2015). Benchmarking naval shipbuilding with 3D laser scanning, additive manufacturing, and collaborative product lifecycle management. Acquisition Research Program.
  11. Hexagon Manufacturing Intelligence (2022) Leica Absolute Tracker AT960. http://www.hexagonmi.com/en-GB/products/laser-tracker-systems/leica-abso.... Accessed: 25 Jun 2022
  12. Hoffman, R., Friedman, P., & Wetherbee, D. (2023). Digital Twins in Shipbuilding and Ship Operation. In The Digital Twin (pp. 799-847). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-21343-4_28
  13. Jahraus, A., Lichti, D., & Dawson, P. (2015, June). Self-calibration of a structured light based scanner for use in archeological applications. In Videometrics, Range Imaging, and Applications XIII (Vol. 9528, pp. 116-126). SPIE. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2184607
  14. Kersten, T. P., Przybilla, H. J., Lindstaedt, M., Tschirschwitz, F., & Misgaiski-Hass, M. (2016). Comparative geometrical investigations of hand-held scanning systems. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 41, 507-514. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLI-B5-507-2016
  15. Luhmann, T. (2010). Close-range photogrammetry for industrial applications. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 65(6), 558-569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2010.06.003
  16. Maisano, D. A., Mastrogiacomo, L., Franceschini, F., Capizzi, S., Pischedda, G., Laurenza, D., ... & Manca, G. (2022). Dimensional measurements in the shipbuilding industry: on-site comparison of a state-of-the-art laser tracker, total station and laser scanner. Production Engineering, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11740-022-01170-7
  17. Martorelli, M., Pensa, C., & Speranza, D. (2014). Digital photogrammetry for documentation of maritime heritage. Journal of Maritime Archaeology, 9, 81-93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11457-014-9124-x
  18. Moniuk B (2012). The use of a laser tracker to solve engineering and geodetic tasks. Urban planning and territorial planning, (44), 359-365. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/MTP_2012_44_50
  19. Rieke-Zapp, D., Tecklenburg, W., Peipe, J., Hastedt, H., & Haig, C. (2009). Evaluation of the geometric stability and the accuracy potential of digital cameras – Comparing mechanical stabilisation versus parameterisation. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 64(3), 248-258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2008.09.010