02-11-2012

1

APPLICATION OF LIGHT DETECTION AND RANGING (LIDAR) TECHNOLOGY

FOR FIELD MONITORING

Safiah Atan, Mohd. Shahir Shamsir, Cheong Siew Chin, Ong Chee Wei, Nor Azira Abu Bakar, Suzanna N. Azmy

International Rubber Conference, India(28.10.12)

Objectives:To compare the accuracy, efficiency and cost effectiveness of two measuring tools in collecting data of wood yield.

Introduction

Major output: Latex – natural rubberWood: discarded– firewoodRenewable commodity– furniture and wood based products

(chipboard, MDF, mouldings)2011 total export value of Hevea wood-based products: RM 7.41 billion

(1.10% of the National Exports; MRB, 2012)

Hevea mapping project– Genetic linkage and quantitative trait loci (QTL) mapsLatex and wood yield – quantifiable traitsQTL requires field data: Latex – measure DRC; wood—measure DBH

02-11-2012

2

MaterialField data required for construction of QTL map PB 5/51 x IAN 873 = 83 progenies (LT clones)4 replicates, 10 plants/clone = 3,320 stands + boundary standsField 115 and 117, Pelepah, Kota Tinggi Expt Stn.10 hectare, slope <45o

Planted in December 2006Replicates 1, 2

Replicate 4Measuring of girth started in 2008, 3 staff (1 person per replicate i.e. 830 trees)

Method

Measuring tool: Digital caliper (Mitutoyo, CD-6” CSX)Range: 0-150mm2008: 3 days to complete data collection for 1 rep.2009: 1 ½ days2010: 1 dayExcel spread sheets- input manually; statistics

2011: Reached maximum limit of caliper Measuring tape? Laser Ace 1000 Range Finder?Estimated time to complete task: 3-4 days; 3 staff; 3 replicates

2012: Needed new method to measure- fast and accurate

Laser/Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) technologyNarrow laser beam used to map physical features with very high resolution; 3D modelApplications: Oil & Gas, Agriculture (topographical map of fields), Forestry (canopy height, biomass measurements), etc…

02-11-2012

3

LIDARposition

Trees

1) Contour

Collaborator:Dr. Mohd. Shahir Shamsir,Faculty of Bioscience and Bioengineering,Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.

Collaborator:Dr. Mohd. Shahir Shamsir,Faculty of Bioscience and Bioengineering,Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.

Collaborator:Dr. Mohd. Shahir Shamsir,Faculty of Bioscience and Bioengineering,Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.

• Pilot study: Jan 2012; Replicate 2

2) Elevation

3) Identify Individual Tree

L

Individual Trees 3D ViewSoil Series of Fld 115 and 117, Pelepah

Eventually will superimpose “girth map” onto soil series/type map-to identify best soil type for best clonesRainfall map

02-11-2012

4

Results- Accuracy

Detected 15 trees- weeds were high; clear area before detectionT-test: p-value = 0.004, significant difference for both methodsDifference between 2 means = 0.04014 m

Method N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

GirthLIDAR 15 .3835 .03740 .00966

Caliper 15 .3434 .03134 .00809

t-test for Equality of Means

t dfSig.

(2-tailed)Mean

DifferenceStd. Error Difference

95% Confidence Interval of the

DifferenceLower Upper

Girth Equal variances assumed

3.186 28 .004 .04014 .01260 .01433 .06595

Means of girth for LIDAR (0.3835 m) > mean of girth for caliper (0.3434 m),

Meter (m)

Results- Accuracy

Clone

Met

er (

m)

Meter (m)

Clone

Control

02-11-2012

5

Hevea~>3 years

Hevea~1 to 2 years

Measurements with a) Caliper

>3 years

b) LIDAR – 3D Detection

Point 1

Point 2

Point 3

Able to measure multiple treesall at once

02-11-2012

6

Measuring ToolNo. of

personnel

Salaried personnel

cost/man hour

Time to complete task (Man-hour)

Total cost (Personnel)

Caliper 3 (Q48, Q22, R4)

RM 46.17 16 hr RM 738.72

LIDAR 3 (Q44) RM 54.06 2 hr RM 108.12

Summary of salaried personnel cost per man hour to complete task in the field. Cost effectiveness of each tool is dependent on time and the number of

personnel needed to complete the task.

Note: Q48, Q44, Q22 and R2 are pay-grade of personnel.Cost does not include travel and milage claims.

Results- Efficiency and Cost effectiveness

Measuring ToolNo. of

personnel

Salaried personnel

cost/man hour

Time to complete task (Man-hour)

Total cost (Personnel)

Caliper1 2 (Q44, Q22) RM 28.72 16 hr RM 459.52

LIDAR2 1 (Q44) RM 18.02 2 hr RM 36.04

Summary of salaried personnel cost per man hour to analyse the data.

Note: Analyses for caliper1 consist of manual input into an excel file and converting data into DBH. Analyses for LIDAR2 consist of processing done using Kubit Point Cloud in AutoCAD

where the DBH extraction was obtained.

Results- Efficiency and Cost effectiveness

02-11-2012

7

Conclusion

Measurements of both instrument types were comparable.LIDAR was found to be more time and cost efficient compared to the digital caliper.Input and analysis from LIDAR can be done automatically using specialise softwares.

To use LIDAR system in plots/areas situated on extreme steep terrain i.e. > 45 degrees e.g. MRB’s two new experimental stations in Bukit Kuantan, Pahang and Sungai Sari, Kedah.To purchase LIDAR system and train MRB personnel in usage of the system and its softwares thus negate the need to rent the equipment and the analysis can be done in-house.To utilise LIDAR’s multiple utilities: Data from LIDAR can be superimposed to data from other field data such as latex yield, soil type and precipitation data.

Recommendations

Terima kasihThank You