Automatic Alignment of 3D Multi-Sensor Point Clouds

Automatic 3D point cloud alignment is a major research topic in photogrammetry, computer vision and computer graphics. In this research, two keypoint feature matching approaches have been developed and proposed for the automatic alignment of 3D point clouds, which have been acquired from different sensor platforms and are in different 3D conformal coordinate systems. The first proposed approach is based on 3D keypoint feature matching. First, surface curvature information is utilized for scale-invariant 3D keypoint extraction. Adaptive non-maxima suppression (ANMS) is then applied to retain the most distinct and well-distributed set of keypoints. Afterwards, every keypoint is characterized by a scale, rotation and translation invariant 3D surface descriptor, called the radial geodesic distance-slope histogram. Similar keypoints descriptors on the source and target datasets are then matched using bipartite graph matching, followed by a modified-RANSAC for outlier removal. The second proposed method is based on 2D keypoint matching performed on height map images of the 3D point clouds. Height map images are generated by projecting the 3D point clouds onto a planimetric plane. Afterwards, a multi-scale wavelet 2D keypoint detector with ANMS is proposed to extract keypoints on the height maps. Then, a scale, rotation and translation-invariant 2D descriptor referred to as the Gabor, Log-Polar-Rapid Transform descriptor is computed for all keypoints. Finally, source and target height map keypoint correspondences are determined using a bi-directional nearest neighbour matching, together with the modified-RANSAC for outlier removal. Each method is assessed on multi-sensor, urban and non-urban 3D point cloud datasets. Results show that unlike the 3D-based method, the height map-based approach is able to align source and target datasets with differences in point density, point distribution and missing point data. Findings also show that the 3D-based method obtained lower transformation errors and a greater number of correspondences when the source and target have similar point characteristics. The 3D-based approach attained absolute mean alignment differences in the range of 0.23m to 2.81m, whereas the height map approach had a range from 0.17m to 1.21m. These differences meet the proximity requirements of the data characteristics and the further application of fine co-registration approaches.