Static Laser Scanner

Whilst my cave surveying efforts to date have been mostly focused around grovelling around in small passages trying to use a Disto and/ or Gopro and lights to capture data to create accurate models via photogrammetry my mind was slowly turning on how to survey bigger chambers, laser scanning is the obvious answer.

Cut through of GB’s Main Chamber created from a compilation of scans

In 2016 I used a Geoslam Zebrevo to survey a few local show caves and other sites, this worked very well however the cost and chance of damage to the device in real caving situations is not something I would like to risk. I had heard that some people had attempted to create a DIY version as the SLAM code was apparently available open source, this triggered lots on internet searches on the subject. I wrote off the Cave-a-tron type system as it wouldn’t easily fit into a dry tube to be dived through sumps to survey passages beyond which is something I wanted to be able to do.

Sadly I didn’t find anything I felt I could build within my skills or cost means that could recreate a SLAM type scanner, however I did find some people had successfully built tripod scanners using fairly simple and off the shelf components. What was even better was that second hand laser units they had used were readily available on Ebay at quite a cheap price relative to the cost of a new unit.

The base laser unit itself was a Velodyne VLP16, a small compact unit that I had used professionally on a few occasions, a short time ago these retailed at around £5000 new but are now in the region of £2500. I snapped up two used ones on Ebay for: $400 and $250 (I’ve since damaged the $400 one).

At this stage I should give massive credit to the originators of this idea who’s designs and softwares have allowed me to realise my own version of their scanners. The first is Jason Bula’s:

https://github.com/jason-bula/velodyne_tls

His scanner and Matlab based code is quite rudimentary but paved the way for another person to further refine and inspire my device, Donny Mott’s:

https://github.com/Rotoslider/TLS_Pie

So to reiterate, I have simple re-arranged components they have used into a form factor which suits my needs and have used their software /code to process the data, nothing massively clever on my part. The result is a compact tripod based scanner that is far cheaper than any commercial offering, I can carry all components myself readily into dry passages or through sumps without external help as the scanner fits in a small pelicase or a small dry tube. I had recently signed up to CREG journal and partway through this process saw an article showing how a Cave-a-tron had been converted to be used on a tripod like the device I was building at the time, however the laser is very primitive compared to a Velodyne unit.

Laser and dry tube for diving trips

It took quite a few months of trial and error with various components to get data of an accuracy that I was happy with, this was mainly due to the use of a stepper motor with 50:1 ration planetary gearbox. It didn’t quite rotate at a consistent speed meaning that when overlaying two scans from the same location features were not in the same place as they should have been. I replaced it with a different stepper motor with a 30: 1 harmonic drive and finally was happy with the results. Many other things were tried or swapped in this time before the gearbox was identified as the cause such as power supplies, wiring looms and Arduinos so it wasn’t as straight forward as it sounds.

The main components are:

Velodyne VLP16: Laser scanner mounter vertically on a slowly rotating frame

Raspery Pi 4: Logging of Ethernet data from VLP16 using code written by Donny

Arduino: 3 x push button controls of the stepper motor and logging commands to the Pi4

Stepper motor and Harmonic drive: Provides the smooth slow rotation

Lipo battery: Power for all components

Various other DC-DC converters, switches, wires etc necessary to interface the components.

The scanner is mounted to a tribrach bolted onto a tripod and leveled, either button can be pressed to initiated a scan. The scanner then starts to slowly rotate and the Raspberry Pi4 logs the data to a file, no results are visible in realtime. Once the scan has finished the tripod is moved to the next location, leveled again and another scan initiated. In this manner progress through cave passage can be made, usually 7-10 m at a time between scans but this depends on the nature of the passage. Once back at home the raw scans are turned into point cloud files by Donny’s excellent piece of software and can be aligned together using cloud compare’s manual tools initially then its fine align tools. Below is a video taken by Duncan Price of the scanner in use in Wookey Hole.

Time lapse of use in Wookey Hole, video by D Price

Scans have so far been undertake in:

Badger Hole

Wookey Hole Chamber 20/ passages beyond

Wookey Hole Chamber 22

GB cavern (all of the large main passages and Great Chamber)

Numerous tests in my garden

Interested in how accurate my scanner and methods were I surveyed a close loop around a house, the loop was 76 m in length and contained 9 scanner locations, the misclosure was less than 20cm in XYZ between the same point visible in both the first and last scans.

This I believe to be far more accurate than what can be achieved with a Disto in a cave though it lacks alignment to either magnetic or true north so its accuracy is only in a relative sense. Alignment to a disto based centre survey could be used matching up common reference points in Cloudcompare to align the laser scanner data.

A commercial laser scanner would achieve accuracy far greater than this but the cost would be 15-100x more along with a large sense of paranoia with regard to damaging the unit in the cave environment. The Velodyne laser doesn’t log point colour but is does log intensity so this can be interesting to colour the resulting point clouds by.

The below video shows the data data I collected and aligned from GB cavern, Donny made the fly through after I sent him the data to show him what I had been doing with his ideas and softwares, it starts at the mud run in at the top of the major passage and goes down to the choke just below ladder dig.

At this point I feel I have succeeded in my goals, I have a relatively cheap laser scanner than I can take nearly anywhere (whether I want to is another matter, eg transporting through Daren Entrance crawl..) that produces results accurate to a few centimeters and can scan large chambers or passages with ease, now it is a case of working through suitable sites and producing laser scans of places that otherwise might never be scanned unless someone invested a lot of time or man power or money into carrying in commercially available scanner.

Ravens Well Update

Well its been a little longer than I anticipated updating this page with what I have been working on but rest assured this isn’t due to a lack of activity more a lack of internet at home.

Numerous projects have been going on both on the surface and underground but I thought I would start with some updated data from Ravens Well. For Christmas I treated myself to a small drone (the DJI Mini2) mainly so I could add some surface features to the underground surveys I have been working on though flying it around aimlessly is equally fun !

The learning curve I found to be very easy and by lunch on Christmas day I had produced a model of my house. After a bit more practice and experimentation I was ready to capture the images required to create a surface model of the area above Ravens Well around the three lamps junction of Bristol, ever curious each time I walk/ cycle/ drive over the top as to where the tunnels are exactly beneath this would provide the answer more accurately than just overlaying the underground model/ survey roughly in Google Earth as the Axbridge Caving Group have done.

Ravens well and surface model of the three lamps junction

The flight took about 20 minutes well within the drones ability and Metashape processed the images very efficiently. I used RTK GPS to measure the positions of some prominent features on the ground mainly road marking which were clear and well defined in the point cloud. These were then matched up in CloudCompare resulting in a reasonably accurate surface model of the area. I once again scrambled down to the entrance to the tunnels and to my surprise found that I had fixed RTK status next to the entrance so I marked a temporary point and quickly surveyed from the GPS point to a point marked inside so that the drone data and underground data could be tied to the same reference and overlaid.

Surface point being measured with RTK GPS
Same point in model with tunnels visible underneath

Overall a successful addition to projects, easy to do and gives a better understanding of the relationship between above and underground features.

Three lamps Junction area with tunnel underneath (long shadows from surface features caused by low winter sun)

Laser FAIL !

Just a quick post to say that the underwater Disto didn’t work quite as intended, I made a number of trips to Sump 9 in Porth Yr Ogof this summer with the aim of surveying it accurately. The water is usually crystal clear on entry to this sump however the laser was not able to read the short distances I had hoped it would. For shots that should have been 1 to 2 m in length it was just returning valves of around 0.15 m every time, the bearings will be useful but I need to return and measure the lengths traditionally.

Underwater DistoX2 Housing

I will start by saying that this idea has been copied from other cavers/ divers, this isn’t the the first time someone has wanted to use a Distox2 underwater. My reason for wanting a waterproof Distox2 is allow me to use the same methodology for underwater photogrammetry geo-referencing that I use for above water photogrammetry geo-referencing to preserve accuracy through sumps. Lasers do have limitations underwater, light is attenuated by water quite readily especially red light or red lasers. so the range is going to be very limited even in very clear waters.

DistoX2 in underwater housing

The main body of the housing is made from Acetal, a small cut out sealed with an o ring allows the laser to emit and receive through the front of the box and is covered by 5 mm thick perspex. The lid is 12 mm thick polycarbonate and houses two brass buttons sealed with o rings to actuate the on/ off buttons. The springs have been taken from a Gopro housing and are the most ferrous part, making the bearing swing by 0.2° when they are swept close to the Distox2, all screws are brass. A standoff is fitted to the rear to extend the rear reference point to make it easier to align to the survey station. The gland sticking out the side doesn’t have a function other than to seal the hole present in the side ( the boxes previous life was a waterproof box for an Arduino Mega).

Box ready for testing

Due to the difference in refractive index of water and air the distance readings taken underwater are no longer correct when compared to the same measurements taken in air. The refractive index of air is around 1.00 and approximately 1.33 in the water I would be using the device in.

Button making on the lathe

To prove this I made a test in my bath, I put two pencil marks at either ends of my bath, with the Distox2 in the housing I made a measurement with the marks and device underwater then again with the water drained, I also measured with a tape measure for a sanity check.

The tape read 1.415 m, the dry Distox2 in the box read 1.31 m and the wet shot read 1.70 m.

The distance from the rear of the disto to the reference extension stick needs to be added which is an extra distance of 0.109 m, this added to 1.31 m gives 1.419 m which is very close to the taped measurement.

Converting the underwater shots distance requires the offset from the front of the device to the rear to be subtracted first as this is a fixed offset added by the Disto and doesn’t need to be scaled from water to air. There is also around 0.02 m of air in front of the disto before the laser passes through the housing lense and into the water and this doesn’t need to be scaled either, i’m purposefully ignoring the 5 mm of perspex as this is very small compared to the distance of the shots being taken and probably only accounts for a few millimeters of difference.

So starting with the wet shot distance of 1.70 m we need to subtract 0.134 m which is the length of the disto plus the air gap in front. This gives 1.566 m, which we need to scale by the refractive index of water 1.33, which gives 1.177 m. To this we need to add the length of the disto plus air gap and the extension distance so 1.177 + 0.134 + 0.109 + 1.420 m which is very close to the taped distance and the dry measured distance – Result !

Cat testing

The distoX2 manual available here:

Click to access DistoX2_UserManual.pdf

It states that the wavelength of the laser is 635 nm, using this calculator here we can confirm the refractive index of water is around 1.33xx.

https://www.staff.tugraz.at/manfred.kriechbaum/xitami/java/H2Orindex.html

The next phase is some pressure/ wet testing of the housing without the Disto installed in case it leaks then I can begin to put it into use, sump 9 in Porth Yr Ogof is the first place I have in mind for it so that data collected in Parker Series can be accurately aligned to the rest of the cave.

Daren Entrance Crawl (again…and again … and again…)

Last year I experimented with some photogrammetry in the confines of the Daren Cilau entrance crawl, the section known as the vice to be more specific, details can be found here:

Spurred on by the success in this short bit of passage I convinced myself that it would be a worthwhile project to try and accurately model the entire crawl from the surface to the final rescue box. One could simply video the entire crawl in single trip and use the video to produce a model but it is important to me to make this model accurate and to do this it needs to be surveyed so that the resulting model and can aligned to the survey data. For assessment of accuracy I surveyed both in and out so the loop closure could be examined and any poor data identified and sorted. To make this task more manageable I have broken the cave up into sections between the rescue boxes, these also make handy survey markers that aren’t likely to change location in between trips.

To date I have completed three trips; a trip consists of caving to the rescue box at the far end of the section with a small bag, surveying out from the box to the previous one then surveying back in. Caving slowly out with the Gopro and light trying to get steady footage before turning at the previous box and filming back in to the starting point. I then pack up the gear and cave back out. This involves lots of awkward caving for those familiar with the cave.

Home made ‘filming stick’

The first two of the trips have been successful and a decent model has been created from the surface (box 0) to box 2. On the third trip I found that my Gopro had been switched on prematurely and battery warning was already on before I started but this wasn’t discovered until after complementing the survey so I had a rather rushed trip filming back from box 3 to box 2 before the battery ran out. After some failed attempts at saving the data from the third trip this means I will have to repeat it as I was moving too fast for the image alignment to be successful.

Plan view of disto data from entrance (B0) to box 3 (B3) coloured by section/ date surveyed.

The distances between boxes is as follows:

Box 0 to Box 1: 79 m

Box 1 to Box 2: 41 m

Box 2 to Box 3: 51 m

Pictures, model and videos to follow……………..

Ravens Well Part 3

Its has taken some time (a bit longer then planned) but i’m pleased to say that the entirety of Ravens Well has been surveyed and photographed resulting in a complete and accurate (to the disto data) model. The same techniques and equipment that were previously mentioned have been used, some sections proved tricky for the software to understand so I have introduced the coded Metashape markers to provide visual and spatial reference, this seems to have solved the issues in certain sections of passages where the alignment was struggling.

Coded Metshape Target

There are some ferrous areas inside as the disto data shows some larger than expected loop closures in certain areas despite careful practice. Metal girders are visible in the far downstream area which is the bit which shows the greatest variation when overlaying my data with the previous survey performed by Axbridge Caving Group.

Plan view of the Distox2 data in Survex

I’m working on a video walk through of the whole site like the previous version so I will upload this when its complete, here is a quick video overview for now, below is low resolution model uploaded to Sketchfab which you can explore with your mouse/ phone.

Video Overview of Model
Low resolution Sketchfab upload (Due to free account limits)

Broken Aquazepp :(

After a successful two hour dive following Marcus around Vobster whilst he photographed the walls around the 22 m area the afternoons dive didn’t go so smoothly. Feeling a bit scootered out after the mornings dive we jumped back in anyway and whizzed around this time unencumbered by camera equipment . Nearing the end of the dive my scooter started to make strange noises, the normal Aquazepp racket had taken a turn for the worse and didn’t sound healthy at all so I swam it the short distance back to the entrance point, pondering what might be causing it. I initially suspected that the motor might have come loose on its mounts and the gears might not have been meshing optimally.

Once back at home I had a look in the tail cone but found the motor still firmly bolted into place, instead I could see that the large drive gears teeth had partially stripped. No prop jams or other issues had been encountered on the dives so why this happened is a bit of a mystery, old age perhaps ? The drive gear attached to the motor shaft was fine, this is only a few years old.

Lower portion of teeth stripped

This happened in February 2022 and writing this is June I still haven’t bought a replacement part, I have been busy with other things and the scooter doesn’t get much use over the summer when the caves are a better proposition for diving than Vobster. I think I might take this as an excuse to rid the scooter of the noisy drive train and go with a direct drive motor, at the moment replacement motors for the CUDA are on sale and are suitable for direct driving a scooter.

It seems recently that someone has taken over ownership of what was left of the Aquazepp brand, more information can be found in this video below:

Drill Bag

The humble battery powered SDS drill is largely responsible for the modern exploration of Mendip caves, either through drilling holes for various rock splitting/ removal methods or for faster bolt/ aid climbing where the easy ‘just the follow the open passage’ phase of exploration has long passed. The ability to transport a drill through a sump opens up more opportunities where climbing or passage enlargement may not have been possible before.

A dry tube would be an obvious choice for some but to fit a powerful drill it would have to be big, and thus require a lot of weight to sink and this would complicate the transport element in the dry passage to the actual work site, dry tubes also tend to be quite expensive but on the plus side are usually capable of passing very deep sumps.

A previously well known/ used method is simply to get a large section of inner tube, put the drill inside and methodically roll and fold the ends over, this works in shallow sumps but for me posed too much risk of flooding and requires lots of faffing to seal properly.

Drill, drybag and inner tube with clamps

I chose to create my own version of this, still using a section of inner tube but instead of relying on folding I made two sets of metal clamps which are used to seal each end. This has proved very reliable and is often bone dry inside even after passing multiple sumps up to 20 m depth. the metal clamps are 8mm thick stainless steel closed by M8 bolts and wingnuts, one end is clamped very tightly and never removed and the other end is used to open and close the inner tube, a spanner or bolting hammer is useful to help tighten and loosen the bolts. The drill is packaged in a sturdy drybag in case it does flood.

Drill in drybag ready to go into sleeve, as much air removed as possible

The packaged drill doesn’t require any additional lead to sink, if care is taken and all the air is removed from both the drybag and inner tube sleeve before sealing its about 2 kg negative near the surface but this increases slightly with depth due to further compression. I use this as part of my weighting system, combined with some climbing gear its more than enough to sink me in a wetsuit.

Drybag sealed inside inner tube, as much air is removed as possible

I use a very well worn tackle bag that has half the bottom missing, this makes for easy drainage when standing up to get out of the water fully kitted up, other gear goes in another bag without a massive hole in. The bag is side mounted over the top of diving gear, the drill bag on one side and climbing gear on the other balances out quite nicely underwater.

Inner tube bag inside an old tackle sack, sidemounted for easy transport

Using this method this drill was carried to Chamber 24 in Wookey Hole on numerous trips and was used to forge the dry link from Chamber 20 so that dry cavers can now visit without the need for diving. It occasionally gets a small pin hole sized leak, because of the inner dry bag this doesn’t really matter but its easy enough to patch them with bike repair kit bits. I’m not sure how deep this would work but it has been great in the UK for shallow sumps, it would probably be fine to 30 m, if I intended to take it deeper I would trial it with a block of wood inside to represent the shape of the drill as I did when originally testing it.

Downwards at Rickford

A few friends have been working at Rickford Rising removing large boulders and making progress downwards from where the previous protagonist left off some years ago. I have always fancied a dive here but had never got round to it for various reasons. It usually has good visibility so I thought I would attempt to create an accurate photogrammetry model of the site as a snap shot of progress at this point in time, and hope to go back and update the model as progress towards the Burrington Master Cave is made !

A video has been put together by the digging team and gives a rough overview of the site:

I made four short dives on my visit, facing head first slowly filming the descent from surface to dig face allowing sufficient time for the visibility to clear each time and a survey dive (after having planted the yellow builders square on the first dive).

The builders square was used to provide a scale reference (the lipped edge is 12″ or 0.31m long) and also to provide a fixed straight edge along which I could repeatedly align the edge of my survey box with to make foresights and backsights against to allow the model to be orientated correctly. Accurate depth of the square was also measured, 6.8 m to the yellow surface on the day but this will vary with flow and water level effects.

End of the dig and planted builders square (krab is ali)

I have setup the survey box so that it logs data continuously, this allows the diver to retreat whilst measurements are taken minimising any magnetic effects of steel cylinders or other dive gear, this is apparent in the good agreement between foresights and backsights taken, they are no worse than what I have measured on land away from ferrous materials. The upper part of the dig is festooned with scaffold and other metal things.

Survey results

The survey data was input to Survex and corrected for local magnetic deviation, a resulting bearing of 161° to was calculated for the lipped edge of the plastic square.

The model was processed without issue and was manually scaled, rotated aligned and translated with the survey data measured and the entrance location provided by the cave registry in CloudCompare.

The video from one of the dives can be seen here, attempting to slowly film the waters surface from underneath, down the rift to the current dig face.

A flythrough of the model is available to view below:

More Porth….

The image above shows progress so far, colour coded by area

Over the summer months this year (2021) I continued to visit, survey and video various parts of the cave upstream of Upper Cave Water Chamber. The results are very pleasing because not only is the level of detail being captured far in excess of any survey that has been conducted before (at this site) but this detailed data (the models produced by photogrammetry) is also matching well with the Distox2 data which gives real world scale and orientation meaning its not just pretty pictures which I prefer to avoid.

This area of the cave lends itself very well to my process as each section is short and clearly divided by short sumps giving nice workable areas to focus on. The below image shows a comparison with the UBSS survey in plan view.

Historical comparison (UBSS on left)
Plan view, blue line where visible is the DistoX2 centreline data
Side view, blue line where visible is the DistoX2 centreline data
UCWC looking downstream from Sump 8 (textured model)
Cobley crawl looking downstream into Sump 8 (textured model)
High level muddy tube (textured model)
Sump 9 looking upstream (textured model)

Where to go next ? I would like to improve the alignment of Sump 9 relative to the rest of the model as so far this has just been best fitted to the other data and I would prefer to link it directly. After this then adding the passages in Parker Series is the next logical step but perhaps this will have to wait until next summer.

I have uploaded the models of the three dry sections to Sketchfab, its low resolution due to the limits on the free account.

Upstream Porth Yr Ogof by cave-dive-make on Sketchfab