I have a point cloud (data set) (3D) representing an urban terrain consisting of flat roof surfaces (of buildings) . My aim is to figure out the flat surfaces , waterbodies from the given data set .The data set is a text file consisting of the number of points followed by their individual x , y , z co-ordinates. As a trial attempt , I have generated the 2D-Delaunay triangulation of the given data set to get the triangulated surface. Henceforth, I plan to execute a graph-traversal over the faces of the triangulation to look for neighbourhood points with nearly the same z-coordinate value and treat them as a flat surface . I am using CGAL libraries to accomplish the same in C++. Is there a better approach for identifying flat surface or my method seems decent enough ?
You might get inspiration (or just run) Advancing Front Reconstruction
No idea how your point cloud looks, but maybe Point Set Shape Detection
might help you to identify flat areas.
Related
I'm trying to use a VectorNav VN100 IMU to map a path through an underground tunnel (GPS denied environment) and am wondering what is the best approach to take to do this.
I get lots of data points from the VN100 these include: orientation/pose (Euler angles, quaternions), and acceleration and gyroscope values in three dimensions. The acceleration and gyro values are given in raw and filtered formats where filtered outputs have been filtered using an onboard Kalman filter.
In addition to IMU measurements I also measure GPS-RTK coordinates in three dimensions at the start and end-points of the tunnel.
How should I approach this mapping problem? I'm quite new to this area and do not know how to extract position from the acceleration and orientation data. I know acceleration can be integrated once to give velocity and that in turn can be integrated again to get position but how do I combine this data together with orientation data (quaternions) to get the path?
In robotics, Mapping means representing the environment using perception sensor (like 2D,3D laser or Cameras).
Once you got the map, it can be used by robot to know its location(Localization). Map is also used for find a path between locations to move from one place to another place(Path planning).
In your case you need a perception sensor to get the better location estimation. With only IMU you can track the position using Extended Kalman filter(EKF) but it drifts quickly.
Robot Operating System has EKF implementation you can refer it.
Ok so I came across a solution that gets me somewhat closer to my goal of finding the path travelled underground, although it is by no means the final solution I'm posting my algorithm here in the hopes that it helps someone else.
My method is as follows:
Rotate the Acceleration vector A = [Ax, Ay, Az] output by the VectorNav VN100 into the North, East, Down frame by multiplying by the quaternion VectorNav output Q = [q0, q1, q2, q3]. How to multiply a vector by a quaternion is outlined in this other post.
Basically you take the acceleration vector and add a fourth component on to the end of it to act as the scalar term, then multiply by the quaternion and it's conjugate (N.B. the scalar terms in both matrices should be in the same position, in this case the scalar quaternion term is the first term, so therefore a zero scalar term should be added on to the start of the acceleration vector) e.g. A = [0,Ax,Ay,Az]. Then perform the following multiplication:
A_ned = Q A Q*
where Q* is the complex conjugate of the quaternion (i, j, and k terms are negated).
Integrate the rotated acceleration vector to get the velocity vector: V_ned
Integrate the Velocity vector to get the position in north, east, down: R_ned
There is substantial drift in the velocity and position due to sensor bias which causes drift. This can be corrected for somewhat if we know the start and end velocity and start and end positions. In this case the start and end velocities were zero so I used this to correct the drift in the velocity vector.
Uncorrected Velocity
Corrected Velocity
My final comparison between IMU position vs GPS is shown here (read: there's still a long way to go).
GPS-RTK data vs VectorNav IMU data
Now I just need to come up with a sensor fusion algorithm to try to improve the position estimation...
thanks for reading this question. My title is basically what I'm trying to achieve. I did a poisson surface mesh generation using Poisson_surface_reconstruction_3(cgal). I can't figure out how to map the node identities of my resulting surface mesh into my starting point sets?
The output of my poisson surface generation is produced by the following lines:
CGAL::facets_in_complex_2_to_triangle_mesh(c2t3, output_mesh);
out << output_mesh;
In my output file, there are some x y z coordinates, followed by a set of 3 integers each line, I think they indicates which nodes form a delaunay triangle. The problem is that the output points do not correspond to my initial point set, since not any x y z value match to any of my original points. Yet I'm trying to figure out which points are forming a delaunay triangles in my original point set.
Could someone suggest me how can I do this in cgal?
Many thanks.
The poisson recontruction algorithm consist in meshing an implicit function that somehow fits you input points. In practice, it means that you input point will no belong to the set of points of the output surface, and won't even lie exactly on triangles of the output surface. However, they should not be too far from the output surface (except if you have some really sparse sampling parts).
What you can do to locate your input points with the output surface is to use the function closest_point_and_primitive() from the AABB-tree class.
Here is an example of how to build the tree from a mesh.
I've been struggling for some time to find a way in Meshlab to include or transfer UV’s onto a poisson model from source meshes. I will try to explain more of what I’m trying to accomplish below.
My source meshes have uv’s along with texture data. I need to build a fused model and include the texture data. It is for facial expression scan data reconstruction for a production pipeline which ultimately builds a facial rig for animation. Our source scan data includes marker information which we use to register, build a fused scan model which is used to generate a retopologized mesh for blendshapes.
Previously, we were using David3D. http://www.david-3d.com/en/support/downloads
David 3D used poisson surface reconstruction to create a fused model. The fused model it created brought along the uvs and optimized the source textures into 1 uv tile. I'll post a picture of the result below that I'm looking to recreate in MeshLab.
My need to find this solution in meshlab is to build tools to help automate this process. David3D version 5 does not have an development kit to program around.
Is it possible in Meshlab to apply the uvs from the regions used from the source mesh onto the poison model? Could I use a filter to transfer them? Reproject them?
Or is there another reconstruction method/ process from within Meshlab that will keep the uv’s?
Here is an image of what the resulting uv parameter looks like from David. The uvs are white on the left half of the image.
Thank You,David3D UV Layout Result
Dan
No, in MeshLab there is no direct way to transfer UV mapping between two layers.
This is because UV transfer is not, in the general case, a trivial task. It is not simply a matter of assigning to the new surface the "closest" UV of the original mesh: this would not work on UV discontinuities, which are present in the example you linked. Additionally, the two meshes should be almost coincident, otherwise you would also have problems also in defining the "closest" UV.
There are a couple ways to do it, but require manual work and a re-sampling of the texture:
create a UV mapping of the re-meshed model using whatever tool you may have, then resample the existing texture on the new parametrization using "transfer: vertex attributes to Texture (1 or 2 meshes)", using texture color as source
load the original mesh, and using the screenshot function, create "virtual" photos of the model (turn off illumination and do NOT use ortho views), adding them as raster layers, until the model surface has been fully covered. Load the new model, that should be in the same space, and texture-map it using the "parametrization + texturing " using those registered images
In MeshLab it is also possible to create a new texture from the original images, if you have a way to import the registered cameras...
TL;DR: UV coords to color channels → Vertex Attribute Transfer → Color channels back to UV coords
I have had very good results kludging it through the color channels, like this (say you are transfering from layer A to layer B):
Make sure A and B are roughly aligned with eachother (you can use the ICP filter if needed).
Select layer A, then:
Texture → Convert Per Wedge UV to Per Vertex UV (if you've got wedge coords)
Color Creation → Per Vertex Color Function, and transfer the tex coords to the color channels (assuming UV range 0-1, you'll want to tweak these if your range is larger):
func r = 255.0 * vtu
func g = 255.0 * vtv
func b = 0
Sampling → Vertex Attribute Transfer, and use this to transfer the vertex colors (which now hold texture coordinates) from layer A to layer B.
source mesh = layer A
target mesh = layer B
check Transfer Color
set distance large enough to not miss any spots
Now select layer B, which contains the mapped vertex colors, and do the opposite that you did for A:
Texture → Per Vertex Texture Function
func u = r / 255.0
func v = g / 255.0
Texture → Convert Per Vertex UV to Per Wedge UV
And that's it.
The results aren't going to be perfect, but in practice I often find them sufficient. In particular:
If the texture is not continuously mapped to layer A (e.g. maybe you've got patches of image mapped to certain areas, etc.), it's very possible for the attribute transfer to B (especially when upsampling) to have some vertices be interpolated across patch boundaries, which will probably lead to visual artifacts along patch boundaries.
UV coords may be quantized by conversion to a color channel and back. (You could maybe eliminate this by stretching U out over all three color channels, then transferring U, then repeating for V -- never tried it though.)
That said, there's a lot of cases it works in.
I may or may not add images / video to this post another day.
PS Meshlab is pretty straightforward to build from source; it might be possible to add a UV coordinate option to the Vertex Attribute Transfer filter. But, to make it more useful, you'd want to make sure that you didn't interpolate across boundary edges in the mapped UV projection. Definitely a project I'd like to work on some day... in theory. If that ever happens I'll post a link here.
I am currently creating a feature and patterning it across a flat plane to get the maximum number of features to fit on the plane. I do this frequently enough to warrant building some sort of marcro for this if possible. The issue that I run into is I still have to manually set the spacing between the parts. I want to be able to create a feature and have it determine "best" fit spacing given an area while avoiding overlaps. I have had very little luck finding any resources describing this. Any information or links to potentially helpful resources on this would be much appreciated!
Thank you.
Before, you start the linear pattern bit:
Select the face2 of that feature2, get the outer most loop2 of edges. You can test for that using loop2.IsOuter.
Now:
if the loop has one edge: that means it's a circle and the spacing must superior to the circle's radius
if the loop has more that one edge, that you need to calculate all the distances between the vertices and assume that the largest distance is the safest spacing.
NOTA: If one of the edges is a spline, then you need a different strategy:
You would need to convert the face into a sketch and finds the coordinates of that spline to calculate the highest distances.
Example: The distance between the edges is lower than the distance between summit of the splines. If the linear pattern has the a vertical direction, then spacing has to be superior to the distance between the summit.
When I say distance, I mean the distance projected on the linear pattern direction.
I (relatively new to CGAL and not a C++ expert) am trying to extract the index of the nearest-neighbor 3D points returned from CGAL's surface_neighbor_coordinates_3 (which searches a 2D mesh comprised of 3D points to find natural-neighbors of a provided query-point) in this CGAL example. In other examples (3D interpolation with 3D meshes), I have been able to do this by adding info to vertex handles in the triangulation data structure. In the linked example, I simply wish to retrieve the indices of returned coords with respect to where the points in coords reside index-wise within the input list of points.
The other call-options for surface_neighbor_coordinates_3 seem to suggest this may be possible by passing-in an existing triangulation (with perhaps its info-augmented triangulation-data-structure). However, I'm not sure how to specify the info-augmented Delaunay_triangulation_3 for the case of a 2D mesh consisting of 3D points. I'm experimenting with it (using advancing-front triangulations to 2D-mesh my 3D points) but would like to know if there's some easier way to use the native capabilities of surface_neighbor_coordinates_3 if one only seeks to also have an info field associated with the returned points.
Any help would be greatly appreciated ... this has stumped me for a week.