e
1:12 000
2
model 1 r= (0, 606% 0 012)-(0.933% 0. 334)Z; - (0.087% 0.039)Y
al
b b?
* + : nat + 2
model 2 r = (0 675- 0.010)«(0.593* 0.051)X,- (2. 668- 0 835)Z. + (0 096- 0 028)Y,.
N E. A
b b b
2-] r= 0.069 + 0,593 X. SZ. ^ 0,188 Y^.
i
ss =
b b F^
All scales
+ + + 2 + 2
model 1 r-(0,649- 0 008)-(3 170- 0. 35'DZ, «(0 127- 0. 021)X .+(4 458- 0 866)Z i
1 lod d
b^ b? "
2 9
model 2 r=(1.009% 0 013)+(0 3667 0 042)X. -(10 3547 0 B69)Z. - (0 292” 0 037)X'. «(85 913- 4 54)z^.-(2 001* 0. 481))X .Z
-l Ni al 61 iT
b b
2-1 r= 0 360+0 366X.- 7 184 Z. - 0. 419, + 30 805 Z7 952001 X. Z.
NT I 2 pat
b
10, SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
Section 1. We will study the accuracy of good every -day international photogrammetry from the consumers point
of view.
The errors are stated as the differences (xyz) between geodetic coordinates (XY Z) and photogrammetric coordina -
v1 4 : im hi : ;
tes (X y Z ). They are total errors, Some partial errors are constant in this Experiment and other partial errors
stochastic, The influence of constant partial errors has been estimated by us, We made use of some information
given by Hothmer (Compare page 7 in the Report of the Experiment Reichenbach 1962-1964).
Table 10.1. Influence of constant partial errors (radial).
Source of error Constant partial errors, cm in the field
1:3 500 1:6 000 1:12 000
Geodetic survey 2.8 2.8 2.8
Signalization 1.4 1.4 1.4
Curvature of earth - - 7.0
Refraction - - 1.0
Calibration of objective 0.5 0.9 1.8
Radial distortion of different ob- 6 .5 9.0
jectives of the same type
Asymmetric distortion 1.9 9.1 4,9
Different wave -lengths ].4 2.4 4.8
Unevenness of film pressure plate 1.6 9 5.4
Irregular film distortion 1,8 3.0 6.0
Image motion 4,0 7.9 11.9
Vibration of aeroplane 0.5 1.1 3.6
SQ. R, of the sum of squares 6.3 10. 3 20,0
Mean stand.dev. of the Experiment
Pecny 12,0 24.0 32.0
Total error(constant and stochastic
artial errors) 13.6 26.2 37.8
Error of the Experiment Pecnÿ in
per cent of total error.
2
b
2
p^
