Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
L. C. GRAHAMGoodyear Aerospace Corporation
Litchfield Park, AZ 85340
Flight Planning for Stereo RadarMappingThiS analysis indicates that, with proper selection of flightpaths, available radar systems are adequate formedium-scale stereo mapping.
INTRODUCTION
SINCE THE EARLIEST image-like radar displays of terrain details, various cartog
raphers and photogrammetrists have explored the possibility of using airborne imaging radar data for topographic map compilation in order to obtain the advantages of allweather operation. A special mapping systemwas developed and deployed by the militaryfor this purpose; however, because this system was rather complex and expensive, efforts fo use conventional radar images in the
tion through mensuration of radar images requires that two or more overlapping imagesbe acquired from different flightpaths. Ameasurement of the across-track position ofan imaged feature on a single image corresponds to measurement of the distance fromthe aircraft (flightpath) to the feature. Twosuch measurements "may be combinedthrough trilateration to compute the positionof the feature with respect to points along theflightpaths. This is illustrated in Figure 1 forthe commonly used mode employing parallel
ABSTRACT: Pairs of terrain-imaging radar images may be viewed andmeasured stereoscopically in order to obtain elevation data for topographic mapping. An analysis of the technical and economic considerations in selecting flight parameters for mapping projects ispresented. Both parallel and right-angle flightpaths are considered.The results indicate that systems as presently constituted have thepotential to produce data adequate for original medium-scale mapping, and that the right-angle mode is superior to the parallelflightpath mode under the assumptions made if psychophysical difficulties in image fusion are not encountered.
stereo mode have continued. A system having suitable image detail for medium-scalemapping is now commercially available. TheGoodyear Aerospace owned-and-operatedGEMsa radar is employed in a twin jetCan;l.Velle aircraft owned and operated by theAero Service Corporation, a division ofLittonIndustries. The purpose of this paper is toexplore analytically the use of systems ofthistype in topographic mapping, with particularattention to the relationships between elevation accuracy, cost, and flight parameters.
STEREO MODESTo make a measurement of terrain eleva-
a Goodyear Electronic Mapping System.
paths at the same altitude, an alternate usingparallel paths at different altitudes and a thirdusing paths oriented at right angles but at thesame altitude. Other than purely geometricaccuracy considerations, the advantages anddisadvantages of the three stereo modes willbe discussed next.
CONVERGENCE ANGLESThe convergence angles illustrated are a
prime variation in flightpath selection.Among the important accuracy limitations tobe discussed later are the accuracies ofmeasuring the distances from the flightpathsto the terrain points. As shown in Figure 2,these accuracies combine geometrically toproduce an important contribution to eleva-
PHOTOGRAMMETRIC ENGINEERING AND REMOTE SENSING,Vol. 41, No.9, September 1975, pp.1131-1138.
1131
1132 PHOTOGRAMMETRIC ENGINEERING & REMOTE SENSING, 1975
tion accuracy. Small (weak) convergenceangles cause large elevation uncertainty dueto range measurement accuracy. The smallest elevation uncertainty, and thus the optimum (strongest) convergence angle fromthis standpoint, is 90 degrees.
COMMONLY USED MODE
The mode commonly used employs parallel flightpaths at the same altitude. As shownin the figure, the flightpaths and look direction are ordinarily chosen so that the commonarea is viewed from the same direction. Thishas the disadvantage of resulting in weakerconvergence angles than would result fromchoosing to view the area from opposite di-
rections. However, radar images viewedfrom opposite directions have dissimilaritiesdue to illuminating the terrain from the radar.Highlights and shadows are reversed. Thiscauses psychophysical difficulties in fusingthe two images into a three-dimensionalmodel. Significant improvements in accuracyare expected from the local averaging whichoccurs in visual model formation, and moreefficient data extraction is possible by usingthe anaglyphic technique rather than theanalytic technique. Furthermore, a prime useof the radar imagery is to view the terrainmodel stereoscopically in order to performgeologic terrain analysis. Therefore, it iscommon to use same-side stereo rather than
Fp·I FP·2
~'""".""'----=
TERRAIN I--- COMMON COVERAGE ·1
~TE PARALL:lIGHTPATH MOOE
TERRAIN I COMMON COVERAGE I
RIGHT ANGLE MOOE
FIG. 1. Stereo modes.
elEVATIONACCURACY
_~"'r'-_.L--
SMAll CONVERGENCE ANGLE
FIG. 2.LARGE CONVERGENCE ANGLE
Convergence angles.
FLIGHT PLANNING FOR STEREO RADAR MAPPING 1133
opposite-side stereo in collecting radar imagery.
ALTERNATE PARALLEL FLIGHTPATH MODE
Figure 1 shows the alternate mode inwhich the parallel paths are flown at differentaltitudes and are not offset. This mode would,in some cases, produce stronger convergenceangles than the commonly used one. However, it suffers from two disadvantages whichpreclude its use for most work. First, thelower depression angles cause greater terrainmasking from elevated terrain, in otherwords, longer shadows. Second, flying at significantly lower altitudes causes the aircraftto encounter much more turbulence incloud-covered areas where the radar hasgreatest utility, which may cause image degradation and danger to flight personnel insevere cases. The alternate mode is nottreated further here but those planning stereoflights should be aware of the possibility ofusing it, or combinations ofthe two, in specialcases. For example, in a low-reliefarea wherethe greatest vertical exaggeration possible isdesired, two flightpaths offset in both altitude and horizontal position may be used.
RIGHT-ANGLE MODE
It has been known for some time that parallax resulting from any two differentflightpaths can be used to create a visual terrain model and to make measurements. Mr.Homer Jensen of Aero Service Corporationhas recently suggested that a special case ofnonparallel flightpaths be used in terrainanalysis and mapping, viz., the case whereoverlapping coverage is obtained fromflightpaths at right angles. This mode has asignificant advantage in that the convergenceangles are stronger.
On the other hand, the right-angle modesuffers from several disadvantages. First,shadows also fall at right angles and highlights are different, causing difficulties in fusion, although probably not so great as in theopposite side case. Second, parallax, and thusvertical exaggeration and measurement accuracy, vary over the overlap area in both horizontal dimensions rather than in only one(range) as in the parallel cases.
Third, and most important, any lack of orthogonality in the image causes an elevationerror. This can be seen in Figure 1 by notingthat a deviation from orthogonality in theangle marked t/J by an amount Bt/J causes anerror in the position of the point at B in theimage of flightpath 2 by an amount RBIjJ. Approximately the same error would be causedby an error of BR in the measured distance
from flightpath 1. Similarly, an error of 06 inflightpath 1 will cause an error equivalent tofiR in distance from flightpath 2. Imagingradars are inherently more accurate in distance measurement than in angular measurement. Thus, there is a tradeoff betweenthe improved strength of the convergenceangle and the loss of accuracy due to orthogonality. This is treated in more detail inthe following sections, where the potentialaccuracy of the 90-degree mode is shown tobe slightly superior to that of the commonlyused mode.
ERROR ESTIMATES
The following sections develop and applyconventional differential calculus estimatesfor the vertical measurement accuracy in thecommonly used parallel flightpath andright-angle modes of radar stereo elevationmeasurements. Horizontal measurement accuracies could be obtained easily in the samemanner. However, vertical measurementsare both more stringent in mapping specifications and more difficult to obtain with radar,so that performance level is dependent onthese values. Therefore, only the verticalcomponents of terrain measurements aretreated, and it can be assumed that horizontalmeasurements are in general more accuratethan the values arrived at here.
ERROR CONTRIBUTIONS
The contributions to vertical measurementaccuracy treated here are the principallimitations to the technique and include locationof the aircraft in the along-track, across-track,and vertical directions, the accuracy ofmeasuring distance from the flightpath to theterrain (range measurement accuracy), and inthe right-angle case, the orthogonality ofeachimage.
HORIZONTAL FLIGHTPATH MEASUREMENT
ACCURACY
The GEMS system employs a SHORANnavigation system for measurement of aircraftposition. In this system, an airborne transmittertransmits pulses of radio frequency (UHF)energy simultaneously to two ground transponders. The transponders amplify and retransmit the signals back to the aircraft. Anairborne receiver and time comparator measure the elapsed time, and thus distance, toeach ground station. The transponders areplaced far enough from the aircraft so that thedifference between ground distances and theslant distance measured are small, and can becorrected, if necessary, by knowing aircraftaltitude as described in the next section.
1134 PHOTOGRAMMETRIC ENGINEERING & REMOTE SENSING, 1975
Similarly,
F'G. 3. Parallel flightpath measurementgeometry.
doppler signal sensing and an accuracy ofabout one-tenth of the antenna physicalbeam, or 0.1 degree is usually achieved.
PARALLEL FLIGHTPATH ELEVATION ERROR
(3)
",th,
I·
The geometry of an individual stereomeasurement is illustrated in Figure 3. Fromthe figure, the x and z position of the imagedpoint may be determined by simultaneoussolution of equations representing circles ofradius R, andR 2 centered at the flightpaths ofpositions alb, and a2b2' Thus,
R,2 = (x-a 1 )2 + (Z-b,)2R 22 = (X-a2)2 + (z-b 2)2. (1)
The effects ofvertical measurement errors inRt> R 2, at> b" a2, andb 2 may be determined byimplicit partial differentiation of Equations 1with respect to these quantities, and simultaneous solution for dz. Treating range measurement accuracy first:
2R,dR, = 2(x-a 1 ) dx + 2(z-b,)dz,2R 2dR 2 = 2(X-a2) dx + 2(z-b2)dx. (2)
Eliminating dx and lettingx-a, = G"X-a2 =G2,
G 2 -G, = S,z-b, = z-b2 = h,
thend - R,G2 dR R 2G'dRz - hS 1 - hS 2'
Now if the differentials represent errors in R,which are approximately equal in magnitudebut statistically independent,
(G,2R 22 + G 22R,2)a z
2 = aR2 .h 2S 2
2 2G,2G 22
2az = h2s2 an ,
G 12+G 2 2a/= S2 ab2.
The flight parameters for the GEMS system in its normal mode are h =12 km, s =15km so that the overlap is represented by
9 km < G 2 < 31 km,24 km < G, < 46 km.
ORTHOGONALITY
3 Accuracies used here are assumed to be onesigma (lu). The sources do not always state thelevel specified and this assumption will in somecases be conservative.
VERTICAL FLIGHTPATH MEASUREMENT
ACCURACY
Aircraft altitude above the datum plane ismeasured by a differential barometric altimeter calibrated during the flight with a radaraltimeter. In addition to basic instrument accuracy, the accuracy of this technique depends on proximity of available altitudecheck points (seashore, lakes, or plains ofknown elevation) and on the temporal andspatial variation of the isobaric surfaces.Again, accuracies of 30 meters are routinelyobtained and lO-meter accuracy is achievable in special conditions.
From these two measurements, aircraft position is calculated by trilateration every mileor so along the flight track. An inertialnavigator is used to interpolate between theSHORAN "fix" points.
SHORAN system accuracy is a function ofequipment calibration, operator proficiency,and the degree to which the radio transmission paths (propagation velocity) are measured and used to correct the raw data. Accuracies of 30 meters3 or so are routinely obtained and 10-meter accuracy is achievable.
Ground station locations are obtained fromlocal ground control or from Transit satelliteGeoceivers and are, in general, good enoughto be neglected. The error of the inertial system interpolation can also be made smallenough to be neglected.
RADAR RANGE MEASUREMENT ACCURACY
Flightpath-to-terrain distances are measured by scaling the radar imagery. Rangemarks which represent previously determined distances are generated by a crystaloscillator and displayed in the imagery. Terrain features are measured with respect tothis scale, which may be made sufficientlyclosely spaced so that interpolation errors between marks may be neglected. This is abasic time measurement and with sufficientcalibration may be made without difficulty toan accuracy equivalent to the radar's resolution, or about 15 meters in the GEMS case,and to perhaps one-fifth of this value, or 3meters, with special care and calibration.
In the right-angle mode, the largest contributor to elevation error is the lack of complete orthogonality in the imagery, as discussed earlier. The orthogonality is obtained by
FLIGHT PLANNING FOR STEREO RADAR MAPPING 1135
G, -I(M
FIG. 4. Elevation error, normal stereo, S = 15km.
REDUNDANT FLIGHTPATHS
The spacing between flightpaths used ingenerating Figure 4 was chosen to provideabout 60 per cent sidelap. That is, just enough
Using the accuracy estimates stated earlier,we may characterize the values convenientlyachieved as realistic and those achievablewith greater care and calibration as optimistic, as follows:
Error Realistic Optimisticcontribution value value
aR 15 m 3 mau, ab 30 m 10 m
Using these values in Equation 3 and takingthe RMS az (the three contributions to thevariance are summed), the curves in Figure 4are obtained, where a z is plotted as a functionof ground distance to the nearest flightpath,G 2• It may be noted that the realistic valuesproduce an average error of about 200 m andthe optimistic around 70 m. Choosing 100 mas the approximate requirement for mediumscale mapping, the predicted results areprobably too close to the optimistic end toregard this as a capability based on singlestereo measurements. However, no advantage has been taken of accuracy improvements from ground control incorporated asblock adjustments. This improvement,realizing that some of the values used in arriving at Figure 4 are conservative, indicatesthat available equipment is suitable formedium-scale mapping. Possible accuracyimprovement through additional or alternatedata collection and reduction are describedin the following section.
'/
/"REALISTIC!
V/
//
/'//
",.-
",.-"" "o,nrsTlc"
--
to ensure duplicate coverage of terrain withallowance for navigation errors and elevationdisplacement with the 37 km swath available.If the spacing is reduced somewhat, thenmeasurements may be made between alternate flightpaths and the spacing increased toabout two-th irds of the swath rather than half,thus providing a stronger convergence angle.Furthermore, the use of both adjacent andalternate flightpaths provides redundancy toimprove the accuracy even further. If theterrain is imaged n times, the maximumflightpath space is n -lin (swath). approaching the total swath for large n and providingn -1 redundant (but not equally accurate)measurements. More combinations offlightpaths are possible, but such measurements are not independent and no furtherimprovement in accuracy (except for that ofthe final measurement) will result. Therefore, the image from the path nearest theswath, of width lin, should be compared witheach remaining image and the results combined. In combining measurements, the results should be weighted according to theinherent accuracy of each for a maximumlikelihood estimate. If the accuracy of thevarious measurements are ab a2, ... , a ll" theresulting accuracy will be:
1 1 1 1""2 =-2 + -2 +···+-2a al a2 am .
This scheme is illustrated in Figure 5 forn=4.
In order to characterize the advantageswhich may be gained from this procedure,Equations 3 were used to estimate the accuracy attainable with n=2 (minimum stereocoverage), n =3 and n =4. If it is assumed thatdata collection and data reduction costs areabout equal in the normal data collection andreduction mode and calling this value 1, thenTable 1 defines the relationship of cost to n,using either complete data reduction, or onlythe most accurate pair. The average accuracyfor n= 2, 3, and 4 from Equations 3 is givenin Table 2.
As noted in the table, both the optimisticand realistic estimates of error contributionhave been used, and the computations havebeen made for altitudes of both 13 km and 6km. The higher altitude applies to most situations and the lower to mapping ofhigh mountains where the terrain rises to values whicbsignificantly reduce effective convergenceangles .
To provide a graphic interpretation, thesedata have been plotted on Figure 6, alongwith an overall average curve based on arbitrarily selecting the performance parametershalfway between those previously charac-
""..""12
JOO
l20
'00
,..,..
~i
'"o'
12.
..
..
1136
FP-1
PHOTOGRAMMETRIC ENGINEERING & REMOTE SENSING, 1975
FP-4
FLIGHTPATHCOMBINATION
4-1
4-2
S(SPACING)
3W/4
\V/2
s*18.5~ 12.3, 24.6**9.25, 18.5, 27.75**
4-3 W/4
FIG. 5. Multiple flightpaths, n=4.
TABLE 1. RELATIONSHIP OF COST TO n.
Data reduction Total costData collection All Most accurate All Most accurate
n cost data data only data data only
2 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 13 0.75 0.75 0.5 1.5 1.254 1 1 0.5 2 1.5
* For simplicity, no allowance was made here for navigation and elevation displacement.
** Most accurate data (pair).
TABLE 2. AVERAGE ACCURACY. RIGHT-ANGLE MODE ELEVATION ERROR
Most accurate In assessing the errors of the right-anglen h All data data only mode of Figure 1, the geometry of Figure 7
2 12 km 170 170 defines the measurement problem. As shown
3 12 km 94 115 in the figure, two flightpaths of equal eleva-4 12 km 60 98 tions are assumed to cross at the coordinate2 6km 310 310 system center, Po' When the aircraft is at point3 6km 168 208 Pb an orthogonality error, t!Jb exists and simi-4 6km 106 174 lady when the aircraft is at P2 an orthogonal-2 12 km 53 53 ity error of t!J2 exists. Since the terrain point at3 12 km 29 36 PT exists in both images, it must lie on circles4 12 km 19 30 centered at PI' and P2/. It lies, therefore, on2 6 km 96 96 the circle defined approximately by the cy-3 6km 52 64 linder R I2=X2+Z2 for small t!JI and t!J2, and the4 6 km 33 54
plane Y=y I+mt!JI and also on the circle andplane: Fig
terized as optimistic and realistic, and choosing an average terrain elevation of about 2km. Again, no advantage was taken of possible block adjustments, although to a first approximation this probably could be assumedto be included in the cost basis.
R 22 = y2+Z2,
X = X2+rt!J2'
Combining these
R l 2 = Z2+(X2+Ylt!J2)2,Rl = Z2+(YI+X2t!JI)2,
(4)
(5)
FLIGHT PLANNING FOR STEREO RADAR MAPPING 1137
,.OJ=:;:::;;=;::i;==:::::j:j;======t=======+=1.14
°t,
and combining Equations 7 and 9, droppingthe flightpath subscripts
Uz = ~ [(X2+y2+2h2) UR2+2y2x2u~
+2h2ua2+(x2+y2)Ub2JIf2. (11)
Values for this relation in various terrainpositions, employing the errors and flightparameters previously used, are given inFigure 8. These values are conservative, inthat only one value was used for ulj!; viz., 0.1degree, considered realistic. For cost versusaccuracy considerations, the overall averagesgiven are for n=2. Double coverage (n=4,twice the cost) average error values are thosegiven as 1J4 area coverages, which are simpleaverages of the errors for values ofx and Y upto and includingsw/2 without redundant datareduction, again conservative.
Comparison of the individual values inFigure 8 with the curves in Figure 4 andcomparison of the averages in Figure 8 withthe curves in Figure 7 indicates a significantsuperiority of the right angle mode with respect to the commonly used parallel modeunder the assumptions made here. Actual ex-
FIG. 7. Right-angle mode geometry.
I .•
ACCURACY 01 - METERS
1.9
1.6
ut----\.-----\.--------Pk"---3<o,.------t---'''c----_+-----i
I.J..---+---+--¥----'lr------Jl',-------+--l
1.5
1.1
I.O~---4>--QPo'-- .......-__1~_...... '_-=OOO»-,o ~ ~ ~
1.4t--+----l.--------\:-f\------'~t------_+-----i
1.1t----\--~_+~._____'lr_--t-------"~-_+-----i
FIG. 6. Cost versus accuracy, parallel equal altitudeonly.
where ml/lt =X2lj!1 and rlj!2=Y 1lj!2, neglectingsecond order effects on the errors.
Taking differentials as before with R, lj!,and z as variables:
2R 1dR I = 2z dz+2YI(X2+Yllj!2)dlj!2,2R2dR2 = 2z dz+2x2(YI+X2lj!I)dlj!I' (6)
Combining Equations 64z dz = 2R1dR 1+2R2dR 2
-2Yl (X2+Yllj!2)dlj!2-2x2(YI +X2lj!I)dlj!1' (7)
Figure 7 shows that along-track navigationerrors do not cause an elevation error.Across-track and vertical errors do. Thesemay be projected in the direction of R 1 andR 2 • Thus
dR I =dal Rh
+db l R..!2nav I h
dR2 =da2Rh
+db2 RJl.! (8)nav 2 2'
These contributions to the elevation error ofEquation 7 are thus
dR I =2R 1 (h dal + ..:::..iRX
1 db l )nav \HI
dR2 nav =2R~(;2da2+ t db2) (9)
dR I = 2hdal +2x2db hnav
dR 2 nav = 2hda2+2Yldb2' (10)
Now, assuming all differentials representstatistically independent errors and makingthe following assumptions and approximations,
Yllj!2«X2X2lj!1«YlUll 1= UR 2
ua1=ua2Ub 1=Ub 2
U""1=U""2Z = h, altitude above terrain,
1138 PHOTOGRAMMETRIC ENGINEERING & REMOTE SENSING, 1975
~--.-_.----r--,-_HI_GTH_M_O_UNT"A,-IN_S-,{,6K_M...:,I_,---......_.--_~ • $W'. swn 1SW14 sw ~. .,. sw(Z JSWJ4 sw
• lU JU n.] .4.1 .... 11.1 ... 1... ........" ,U 12.. "1.4 141.1 "" .." '''' '11.J IIU "1.1 m.s..n ." 111.• 151.4 ltl.l ,.u ..n ... 14U "1.2 '''A """"" lU II,", 211.1 ZlU )51.5 """ ,tt. 1.1.1 l4U ]14.4 "U.. ".1 n'.1 "'.. ]51.5 Qt.• .. ,.... "'.. "" "u "',
OVERAll AVERAGE -IN.. OVERAll AVERAGE -1'1.5114 AREA AVERAGE • 111 1'4 AREA Avn"IOE -1...
LOWLANOS
OnlMISTIC REALISTIC
~ • ..." ...n """ ... X . ..." ...n """ ...• 'H tt. tt, ]I.' m ,u ".1 SJ.J i1l .U..." tt. ,... .... 11.5 ", ..." ".l 55.1 1U 12.' 111,1
...n "., ".1 JU 106.1 112.• ~ 53.3 13.2 n.' ll404 .ou
""" ]I.' 11.& 101.1 lotU 115.1 """ 61.l 'l.' 1l4." lSUi lUI... 4'.' ." 1]1.4 115.5 ZIU ... IU 11].1 ISl.' 111. n1.'
I AID, YAlU(J All( SIVEI HERE '1n_ Of fRAtTlOIAlINSTAlCf ACRQII THE n...."THOVERAll AVERAGE a 10.11/4 AREA AVERAGE a 31.•
OVERAll AVERAGE ·,11.5I!4ARUAVERAU· 51.5
FIG. 8. Elevation error summary, right-angle flightpath case.
5000 ELEVATIONFEET MSL
.'.,;.' .""~.L" I
4000~
,, ., ," I, . ,
'-;/,
I
/."f II , ,
3000 ,..". , , I
;/J , ,
,,~~ // I SIERRA ESTRELLA,
/1 I I Ii~ " MOUNTAINS
ff,~o /~::.:-._._!,;>"~:::::}? I , : II
~-1 1500 .~ , -~••If! DISTANCE FROM REFERENCE~
-- --::;."" . I ---........ REFERENCE POINTI POINT (STATUTE MILES) 2, ,I' I I I
1___.--: I1000 , I I , I
I I , II I I I II I , , , I, ,
500, I , , ,
, I I I I I I I I I II I , , I I I I
1
•2
• • • • • •LEGEND:- MAP PROFILE_n STEREO PROFILE (NO. 1 INTERPRETER)--- STEREO PROFILE (NO.2 INTERPRETER)
• POINT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
FIG. 9. Terrain profile from GEMS imagery.
10
•11 12
• •
perience in collecting and reducing data withboth modes under comparable conditionswill be required to determine whether theorthogonality assumption is valid andwhether adequate fusion for efficient datareduction can be achieved.
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Experimental results of data reductionstudies on radar imagery, using block adjustments was reported separately in the1975 ASP national symposium. Some ratherpreliminary previous results are reportedhere for completeness.
Figure 9 shows a 4-mile profile taken froma map sheet, defined by 12 points along theprofile. Also shown are two profiles obtainedfrom a radar stereo pair by two radar interpreters by using a simple mirror stereoscopeand parallax bar. Since only approximate values ofexternal parameters were available, noabsolute measurements could be made.However, by matching the profiles at an ar-
bitrary point, some idea ofthe potential ofthemethod used with ground control could bemade. The result of comparing the map profile with the average of the two interpretersshows an average error ofabout 40 m over theline which corresponds to that portion ofFigure 4 from about 12 km to 20 km. In thisrange increment, the optimistic curve averages about 50 m.
CONCLUSION
Theory and experiment indicate that currently available terrain-imaging radars havethe potential of producing stereo data adequate to permit compilation of at leastmedium-scale topographic maps. Some versatility exists in choosing imaging modes andflight line spacings. A carefully controlledtest over a well-documented test area shouldbe made to further quantify the economic andtechnical variables and to identify optimumdata collection modes and reduction techniques.