International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Vol XXXV, Part BI. Istanbul 2004 
  
RMS of check 
  
  
  
  
  
Approach Check. points [cm] 
points m X Y Z 
System cal. from app. 
ain UTM 49 21.20]... 7.1 4.9 .| 28.5 
System cal. from app. 
a in TAN. 49 12120! 71 S0 | 122 
System cal. from app. 
cin UTM 49 |2454| 6.1 8.5.1 19.4 
System cal. from app. 
cin TAN. 49 254 7.7 10.0 | 9.4 
  
System cal. from app. 
c in UTM with 
corrected f, Xo, yo 49 20.6 6.6 4.0 8.6 
  
System cal. from app. 
c in TAN. with 
corrected f, Xo. yo 49 18:03 | 6:7 4.6 8.7 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Table 2. Results of combined intersection using different 
system calibration parameters 
In Table 2, from line 1 to line 4 interior orientation parameters 
from calibration certificate were used. In line 1 and line 2, 
boresight misalignment from approach a bundle block 
adjustment were used. From line 3 to line 6, boresight 
misalignments from approach c bundle block adjustment were 
used. The results of combined intersections in tangential system 
are better then UTM system because of the scaling effect of 
UTM system. In last two lines in Table 2, boresight 
misalignment from approach c and corrected interior orientation 
parameters were used. The effect of interior orientation on 
direct sensor orientation can be seen comparing the results of 
combined intersection in line 3 and line 5 or line 4 and line 6 
especially in Z. The results of combined intersection in last two 
lines are approximately same in UTM system and tangential 
system using optimal system calibration parameters. 
4. CONCLUSIONS 
The direct georeferencing is extrapolation from image 
projection center ground surface. Because of this, it is sensitive 
for system calibration and precise data handling. The system 
calibration is cover the determination of  boresight 
misalignment, GPS antenna offsets and time synchronization 
errors as well as the actual interior orientation of imaging 
sensor. The individual sensor calibration is done after 
production and also some parameters can be checked 
integration process of GPS and IMU measurement. GPS 
antenna offset is measured by conventional survey method. 
The determination of boresight misalignment is major 
importance in direct sensor orientation because it defines the 
relation between IMU and imaging sensor. Any discrepancies 
or a systematic error in this definition is cause error in object 
space. Similarly actual interior orientation parameter of imaging 
sensor is directly effect the direct sensor orientation since the 
chance of focal length corresponds to scale factor for height. 
The national coordinate system is used many map production 
projects but do not orthogonal coordinal system. The national 
coordinate system has scale factor and this scale factor causes 
affinity deformation. The boresight misalignment and actual 
interior orientation parameters can be determined by using 
calibration flight over reference area in two different scales. If 
the local scale chance is respected by change of focal length, 
the data handling can be done directly in national coordinate 
system. 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 
I would like to give thanks to the staff members of the Institute 
for Photogrammetry and Geolnformation, University of 
Hannover for their contributions and cooperation. 
REFERENCES 
Colomina L, 1999. GPS, INS and aerial triangulation: what is 
the best way for the operational determination of 
photogrammetric image orientation? In: The International 
Archives of the Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 
München, Germany, Vol. XXXII, Part 3-2W5, pp. 121-130. 
Cramer M., 1999, Direct geocoding — is aerial triangulation 
absolute ? Photogrammetric Week 99, pp 59-70 
Heipke C., Jacobsen K., Wegmann H., 2001. The OEEPE test 
on integrated senor orientation. OEEPE Workshop "Integrated 
Sensor Orientation", Hannover, on CD-ROM 20 p. 
Jacobsen K., 1999. Combined bundle block adjustment with 
attitude data. ASPRS Annual Convention 1999, Portland 
Jacobsen K., Wegmann H., 2001. Dependencies and problems 
of direct sensor orientations. OEEPE Workshop “Integrated 
Sensor Orientation”, Hannover, on CD-ROM 11 p 
Mostafa M.M.R., Schwarz K.P, 2001. Digital image 
georeferencing from a multiple camera system by GPS/INS. 
ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry & Remote Sensing, 56(11), 
pp. 1625-1632 
Schwarz K.P., Chapman M.E., Cannon E., Gong P., 1993. An 
Integrated INS/GPS approach to the georeferencing of remotely 
sensed data. Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing, 
59(11), pp. 1667-1674 
Schwarz K.P., 1995. Integrated airborne navigation systems for 
photogrammetry, Photogrammetric Week 95, Wichmann, 
Heidelberg, pp. 139-153 
Scherzinger B. M., 2001. History of inertial navigation systems 
in survey applications. Photogrammetric Engineering & 
Remote Sensing, 67(11), pp. 1225-1227 
Skaloud L, Cramer M., Schwarz K.P, 1996. Exterior 
orientation by direct measurement of camera and position. In: 
The International Archives of the Photogrammetry and Remote 
Sensing, Vienna, Austria, Vol. XXXI, Part B3, pp. 125-130. 
Skaloud J. 1999. Problems in sensor orientation by INS/DGPS 
in the airborne environment, Proceedings, ISPRS Workshop 
“Direct versus indirect methods of sensor orientation", 
Barcelona, pp. 7-15 
Schwarz K.P., Wei M., Van Gelderen M., 1994. Aided Versus 
Embedded- A Comparison of Two approaches to GPS/INS 
Integration, IEEE PLANS 1994, Las Vegas, pp. 314-322 
Meier, H.-K., 1978. The Effect of Environmental Conditions on 
Distortion, Calibrated Focal Length and Focus of Aerial Survey 
Cameras, ISP Symposium, Tokyo 1978 
   
Intei 
Nils: 
for ' 
Wor 
Phot 
Sept 
43p