Viability assessment of terrestrial LiDAR for retaining wall monitoring

Debra Laefer, Donal Lennon

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Abstract

The decreased cost and increased processing speed for terrestrial laser scanners have made this remote sensing procedure much more attractive. The approach has two major advantages over traditional surveying: (1) a registration of the survey instrument independent of any physical benchmarks. Thus, if the entire area is experiencing subsidence, the quality of the final results will not be compromised as they will be absolute measurements, as opposed to relative ones because they are based on a global positioning registration; (2) the ability of the technologies to highlight cracks in masonry. Unfortunately, despite major advances in the equipment and software, the technology is arguably not fully ready for the task of automated retaining wall monitoring. This paper will outline the challenges that remain with respect to registration and displacement monitoring. Copyright ASCE 2008.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationProceedings of session of GeoCongress 2008 - GeoCongress 2008
Subtitle of host publicationGeosustainability and Geohazard Mitigation, GSP 178
Pages247-254
Number of pages8
Edition178
DOIs
StatePublished - 2008
EventGeoCongress 2008: Geosustainability and Geohazard Mitigation - New Orleans, LA, United States
Duration: Mar 9 2008Mar 12 2008

Other

OtherGeoCongress 2008: Geosustainability and Geohazard Mitigation
CountryUnited States
CityNew Orleans, LA
Period3/9/083/12/08

Fingerprint

Retaining walls
retaining wall
viability
Monitoring
Subsidence
Surveying
monitoring
Remote sensing
masonry
Cracks
scanner
surveying
positioning
Lasers
crack
subsidence
Processing
laser
remote sensing
software

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Architecture
  • Civil and Structural Engineering
  • Building and Construction
  • Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology

Cite this

Laefer, D., & Lennon, D. (2008). Viability assessment of terrestrial LiDAR for retaining wall monitoring. In Proceedings of session of GeoCongress 2008 - GeoCongress 2008: Geosustainability and Geohazard Mitigation, GSP 178 (178 ed., pp. 247-254) https://doi.org/10.1061/40971(310)31

Viability assessment of terrestrial LiDAR for retaining wall monitoring. / Laefer, Debra; Lennon, Donal.

Proceedings of session of GeoCongress 2008 - GeoCongress 2008: Geosustainability and Geohazard Mitigation, GSP 178. 178. ed. 2008. p. 247-254.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Laefer, D & Lennon, D 2008, Viability assessment of terrestrial LiDAR for retaining wall monitoring. in Proceedings of session of GeoCongress 2008 - GeoCongress 2008: Geosustainability and Geohazard Mitigation, GSP 178. 178 edn, pp. 247-254, GeoCongress 2008: Geosustainability and Geohazard Mitigation, New Orleans, LA, United States, 3/9/08. https://doi.org/10.1061/40971(310)31
Laefer D, Lennon D. Viability assessment of terrestrial LiDAR for retaining wall monitoring. In Proceedings of session of GeoCongress 2008 - GeoCongress 2008: Geosustainability and Geohazard Mitigation, GSP 178. 178 ed. 2008. p. 247-254 https://doi.org/10.1061/40971(310)31
Laefer, Debra ; Lennon, Donal. / Viability assessment of terrestrial LiDAR for retaining wall monitoring. Proceedings of session of GeoCongress 2008 - GeoCongress 2008: Geosustainability and Geohazard Mitigation, GSP 178. 178. ed. 2008. pp. 247-254
@inproceedings{3c3cded50b064c658e5d97c7ad0f9eb4,
title = "Viability assessment of terrestrial LiDAR for retaining wall monitoring",
abstract = "The decreased cost and increased processing speed for terrestrial laser scanners have made this remote sensing procedure much more attractive. The approach has two major advantages over traditional surveying: (1) a registration of the survey instrument independent of any physical benchmarks. Thus, if the entire area is experiencing subsidence, the quality of the final results will not be compromised as they will be absolute measurements, as opposed to relative ones because they are based on a global positioning registration; (2) the ability of the technologies to highlight cracks in masonry. Unfortunately, despite major advances in the equipment and software, the technology is arguably not fully ready for the task of automated retaining wall monitoring. This paper will outline the challenges that remain with respect to registration and displacement monitoring. Copyright ASCE 2008.",
author = "Debra Laefer and Donal Lennon",
year = "2008",
doi = "10.1061/40971(310)31",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "9780784409718",
pages = "247--254",
booktitle = "Proceedings of session of GeoCongress 2008 - GeoCongress 2008",
edition = "178",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Viability assessment of terrestrial LiDAR for retaining wall monitoring

AU - Laefer, Debra

AU - Lennon, Donal

PY - 2008

Y1 - 2008

N2 - The decreased cost and increased processing speed for terrestrial laser scanners have made this remote sensing procedure much more attractive. The approach has two major advantages over traditional surveying: (1) a registration of the survey instrument independent of any physical benchmarks. Thus, if the entire area is experiencing subsidence, the quality of the final results will not be compromised as they will be absolute measurements, as opposed to relative ones because they are based on a global positioning registration; (2) the ability of the technologies to highlight cracks in masonry. Unfortunately, despite major advances in the equipment and software, the technology is arguably not fully ready for the task of automated retaining wall monitoring. This paper will outline the challenges that remain with respect to registration and displacement monitoring. Copyright ASCE 2008.

AB - The decreased cost and increased processing speed for terrestrial laser scanners have made this remote sensing procedure much more attractive. The approach has two major advantages over traditional surveying: (1) a registration of the survey instrument independent of any physical benchmarks. Thus, if the entire area is experiencing subsidence, the quality of the final results will not be compromised as they will be absolute measurements, as opposed to relative ones because they are based on a global positioning registration; (2) the ability of the technologies to highlight cracks in masonry. Unfortunately, despite major advances in the equipment and software, the technology is arguably not fully ready for the task of automated retaining wall monitoring. This paper will outline the challenges that remain with respect to registration and displacement monitoring. Copyright ASCE 2008.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=66549093753&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=66549093753&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1061/40971(310)31

DO - 10.1061/40971(310)31

M3 - Conference contribution

AN - SCOPUS:66549093753

SN - 9780784409718

SP - 247

EP - 254

BT - Proceedings of session of GeoCongress 2008 - GeoCongress 2008

ER -