Cliff Change/Volumetric Calculations
Cliff Change/Volumetric Calculations
[...]
Last edited by cmackSIO on Tue Nov 18, 2025 7:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Cliff Change/Volumetric Calculations
What do you mean by PSR? Poisson Surface Reconstruction?!
Anyway, you could use the 'Tools > Segmentation > Label connected components' to separate all this chunks?
Anyway, you could use the 'Tools > Segmentation > Label connected components' to separate all this chunks?
Daniel, CloudCompare admin
Re: Cliff Change/Volumetric Calculations
[...]
Last edited by cmackSIO on Tue Nov 18, 2025 7:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Cliff Change/Volumetric Calculations
Sadly, the PSR plugin can't be used in command line mode... Someone would have to add the code to make it accessible.
Another option is to change the real plugin so that it ban be applied on multiple clouds at once?
Another option is to change the real plugin so that it ban be applied on multiple clouds at once?
Daniel, CloudCompare admin
Re: Cliff Change/Volumetric Calculations
Hi Connor,
I believe that I'm trying to do a very similar thing as you. I have bitemporal scans of a cliff-face and would like to create a magnitude-frequency plot of the volume of rockfall that the cliff has experienced between my two data sets.
How did you get on with calculating the individual volumes of the blocks, did you end up doing it manually or did you find a way to automate it?
Many thanks,
Matthew
I believe that I'm trying to do a very similar thing as you. I have bitemporal scans of a cliff-face and would like to create a magnitude-frequency plot of the volume of rockfall that the cliff has experienced between my two data sets.
How did you get on with calculating the individual volumes of the blocks, did you end up doing it manually or did you find a way to automate it?
Many thanks,
Matthew
Re: Cliff Change/Volumetric Calculations
Hi,
you do not necessarily need to go through a meshing phase. Since the cliffs seem relatively straight :
(I) first rotate the data : you can fit a plane and apply the transformation that CC gives you to get your data horizontally
(ii) follow a workflow similar to this paper https://esurf.copernicus.org/articles/9/1013/2021/ where you use a raster grid of core points (rather than a spatial subsampling in M3C2 that does not ensure equal spacing), first for detection with M3C2 in 3D (as you did), then a connected component segmentation to create individual rockfall, and then a vertical M3C2 to compute the volume = sum of positive (resp. negative) M3C2 over the grid of core points. Just make sure your grid spacing for the core points is not too coarse.
Note that years ago, Daniel kindly added the possibility to export an entire directory of point clouds with statistics on the scalar fields, including the cumulative sum, for instance of M3C2...et voila, once you have your vertical M3C2 for each of your rockfall, you automatically get a .csv with the positive (resp. negative) volume for each rockfall...
Indeed if you were to mesh the data you could get a slightly more accurate volume estimate, but good luck with making sure that the PSR parameters are systematically and automatically correct whatever the size of the rockfall (believe me I tried ;-))
If you're a bit more adventurous, there is a way to not even rotate initially the data, but it's rather complex (it uses a horizontal M3C2 for the volume calculation with a very large normal scale...but the tricky part is to get a regular grid in the vertical plane). The best, when it's possible is to rotate the data.
you do not necessarily need to go through a meshing phase. Since the cliffs seem relatively straight :
(I) first rotate the data : you can fit a plane and apply the transformation that CC gives you to get your data horizontally
(ii) follow a workflow similar to this paper https://esurf.copernicus.org/articles/9/1013/2021/ where you use a raster grid of core points (rather than a spatial subsampling in M3C2 that does not ensure equal spacing), first for detection with M3C2 in 3D (as you did), then a connected component segmentation to create individual rockfall, and then a vertical M3C2 to compute the volume = sum of positive (resp. negative) M3C2 over the grid of core points. Just make sure your grid spacing for the core points is not too coarse.
Note that years ago, Daniel kindly added the possibility to export an entire directory of point clouds with statistics on the scalar fields, including the cumulative sum, for instance of M3C2...et voila, once you have your vertical M3C2 for each of your rockfall, you automatically get a .csv with the positive (resp. negative) volume for each rockfall...
Indeed if you were to mesh the data you could get a slightly more accurate volume estimate, but good luck with making sure that the PSR parameters are systematically and automatically correct whatever the size of the rockfall (believe me I tried ;-))
If you're a bit more adventurous, there is a way to not even rotate initially the data, but it's rather complex (it uses a horizontal M3C2 for the volume calculation with a very large normal scale...but the tricky part is to get a regular grid in the vertical plane). The best, when it's possible is to rotate the data.