Case study 16: Recording UNESCO World Heritage Sites at Ayuthaya and Sukhothai, Thailand

  • By alexturner | 
  • 1st January, 2008 | 
  • 12:00 pm #
Dr Derek Lichti and Jochen Franke - The Wat Mahathat precinct within the Sukhothai site
This was a collaborative project involving the National Electronics and Computer Technology Center (NECTEC), Bangkok, Thailand, and The Department of Spatial Sciences at Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Australia. The aim was to create a realistic and accurate 3D model of this culturally and architecturally significant heritage precinct and to make it accessible over the WWW, thereby providing the archaeological as well as heritage management community, and the general public with the opportunity to examine and visit it remotely.

Introduction This was a collaborative project involving the National Electronics and Computer Technology Center (NECTEC), Bangkok, Thailand, and The Department of Spatial Sciences at Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Australia. The aim was to create a realistic and accurate 3D model of this culturally and architecturally significant heritage precinct and to make it accessible over the WWW, thereby providing the archaeological as well as heritage management community, and the general public with the opportunity to examine and visit it remotely. Two sites were recorded: Wat Mahathat in Ayuthaya in March 2003 and Wat Mahathat in Sukhothai in November 2003. The project tasks were divided between the two groups. The Curtin group were responsible for:

· laser scanning;

 · control surveys for scan cloud integration;

· data management.

While the NECTEC group undertook:

 · surface modelling;

· texture mapping;

· web publishing (including the required multimedia functionality).

  Instruments and software For the scanning, Curtin’s Riegl LMS-Z210 was selected since, at the time of project’s initiation, it was among the faster instruments offering a nearly-complete horizontal field of view. Rapid and complete data capture was very important since both sites are popular tourist destinations and it was required that our activities would not be a disruption. The I-SiTE software was used for data acquisition, point cloud editing and registration. Geomagic Studio was used for subsequent surface modelling and texture mapping Software developed by the Curtin University group was used for network adjustment of the surveying data to control point cloud registration.

 Why was scanning selected? Scanning was selected basically for its ability to rapidly capture very dense, accurate 3D datasets.

 What problems were encountered? Problems encountered in the field and during processing included: · providing adequate battery power for the scanner and laptop;

 · the design of a network to maximise data coverage and minimise data shadows due to occlusions caused by the many structures on site, e.g., chedi, prangs etc;

· planning work around the activities of the tourists on site; ·

 during processing, handling of the merged point cloud of dozen or so scans in the I-SiTE software (which was limited at the time).

 What were the final deliverables? A texture mapped 3D model of each site was the final deliverable.