Solar Panels: Edge issues on maps

Hi all,

Apologies if this is a subject that has already been covered. I’m new to the forum and I wasn’t sure what exactly to search for. I’ve been using DD for about a year now, and I work for a construction company that builds Utility-Scale Solar Energy sites.

I’ve mapped DOZENS of sites that we’ve built, in various stages of construction and it seems that whatever I do, I continue to have an issue with the edges of the modules being really messed up when the map is stitched together. Example below:

As you can (hopefully) see, the edges of the modules are not correct and this can be problematic when doing inspections or installation review.

If there is an older forum post that addresses this, and someone can point me in that direction, I’m happy to read the discussion in that location. I’m also happy to provide more details about the equipment and flight parameters that I’m using, if that is relevant (although I’ve seen the same effect with different equipment and parameters)

Thanks in advance.

-Jeff Crabtree

Here’s a thread that is one of many that would help your results, but panels being free-standing structures and pretty small dimensionally in depth that they are going to be tough without allot of images at a low altitude.

Can you describe or share snippets of your flight plan?

Thanks for the reply.

Here’s a screenshot of the most recent flight parameters and settings.

I’ve tried varying altitudes and varying overlap. This particular map was flown at 140 feet because I needed to maximize ground details/resolution for specific reasons.

It seems like most other aspects of the map render properly, but DD really hates the edges of things. The only thing I haven’t attempted is changing the image overlap to the minimum (30%), but like with most other things, my rational has always been “more is better”.

Once I get below 200ft I start running at least 75/75 and by the time I get down to 140ft I would probably be at 80/75 if not 85/75. I think it would help, but I think this map really needs obliques probably from the Enhanced 3D Crosshatch. I don’t think you need the perimeter option included. Keep in mind that the crosshatch option does eliminate nadirs, so an extra flight including them couldn’t hurt and try different methods of processing. IE, obq and nad with one on terrain and another on structure. Then another with just obq on structure. My only reservation is that there has been problem with structure mode processing lately cutting out objects, but it has only been trees and might be limited to that.

How did you process this map?

I processed this particular map (LINK) in Terrain Mode (2D), but I’ve tried both ways, on this and other projects, using crosshatch flights (with and without perimeter shots). The same thing happens on pretty much every map.

My goal would be to eliminate this effect so that visual inspection of modules would be possible. Often debris on the modules that shade a cell or broken modules (rocks from mowing…or, believe it or not: bullet holes (most of these sites are very rural)) are the cause for reduced output. It would be extremely beneficial to be able to fly a site and inspect the modules in a zoomable map, as opposed to doing it in real time.

This effect renders that impossible.

If possible, could you please re-send the link to the former post that you referenced earlier? i don’t see it in your first reply.

What were your settings for the oblique flights? Building a better 3D model helps the appearance of a 2D map. Flying nadirs alone, using terrain mode and doing structure mode with nadirs only probably won’t get the results you need. Flying two missions at different heights can help as well. I wish I had something like that to fly so I could be of more help. Maybe someone will come across this who actually does solar. Here’s a couple of threads dealing with cleaning up 3D models.