Find in Library

<p>This study aimed to improve the usefulness of 3D scanning as an alternative to the biased measurement method for getting tree trunk geometry using a calliper in sonic tomography for tree health diagnosis. To this end, this study constructed geometry information using PiCUS Calliper and a 3D scanner on an old giant tree located in Buyeo-gun and compared the results with sonic measurements.</p><p>Of the two instruments, the 3D scanner has the advantage of realizing the geometry of the object more closely than the calliper, which uses the principle of three-point surveying. Provided that Section A produced through the 3D scanning is more similar to the actual geometry, and the error range of the data acquired by the 3D scanner is within 1–3cm, the deviation of &minus;0.2 to +0.9% in the perimeter of the two geometries is insignificant, and the section based on 3D scanning is more similar to the actual tree trunk than the calliper. However, while the calliper-based section was not significantly different from the 3D scanning-based section geometry, the problem of exaggeration and distortion in the bumpy parts of the tree was identified. This confirms that 3D scan data can be used as a tool to accurately realize the section geometry of the tree trunk. On the other hand, the sonic tomography results obtained based on the two geometries also showed a difference in the total area and the area where the symptom appeared. However, to accurately calculate the extent of the symptom, a quantitative comparative analysis of the actual sonic velocity value in addition to the area is required, which is a limitation that was not covered in this study.</p>