Titelzusatz bis 05 (2019): das Magazin der Volkssolidarität Elbtalkreis-Meißen Titelzusatz bis 09 (2021): das Magazin des Regionalverbands Volkssolidarität Elbtalkreis-Meißen e.V.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Detta är en fallstudie där två olika Laserskannrar jämförs. Dessa skannrar skiljer sig då de använder två skilda metoder för punktmolnsregistrering. Dessa två metoder är: SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Mapping) -baserad punktmolnsregistrering och punktmolnsregistrering med den indirekta två-stegs-metoden. Målet med projektet var således att granska den statiska SLAM-baserade skannern Leica RTC 360 3D och jämföra den med den mer traditionsenliga terrestra laserskannern Leica Scanstation P40. Denna undersökning är relevant eftersom det finns en tydlig skillnad mellan dessa laserskannrar både ur en planerings- och en effektivitetssynpunkt. Den statiska SLAM skannern RTC 360 har möjligheten att vara väldigt tidseffektiv då den använder sig av SLAM algoritmen VIS (Visual Inertial System) för punkmolnsregistrering i fält, samt att skannern använder en IMU (Inertial Measurement Unit) som möjliggör skanningar med hög kvalitet utan att instrumentet är ordentligt horisonterat. Vilket är en förutsättning för att kunna genomföra en skanning med P40. Punktmolnen från dessa två laserskannrar jämförs med varandra och granskas visuellt för att analysera vilka skillnader som finns mellan dem. Samma punktäthet används och skanningarna genomförs från samma positioner med båda instrumenten. Utöver detta görs en statistisk undersökning med hjälp av kontrollpunkter och RMS-värden beräknas med hjälp av dessa. För att tillåta denna statistiska analys, georefererades båda punktmolnen med indirekt georeferering till referenssystemet SWEREF 99 16 30 i plan samt RH 2000 i höjd. Just denna process var något enklare att genomföra med P40 än med RTC 360. Då P40 data var något bättre anpassat för bearbetning i Leica Cyclone. Vilket var de program som främst användes för bearbetning av data. RTC 360 använder två pulser för att skanna in varje punkt, vilket resulterade i att den skannade in något fler punkter. Framförallt märktes denna funktion på områden som traditionellt är svåra att skanna med en laserskanner, främst blanka, svarta områden. Det visade sig av kontrollpunkterna att det fanns en liten variation mellan punktmolnenskvalitet där lasersdata från P40 höll 1–2 millimeters kvalitet. Ur detta resultat kunde slutsatsen dras att Leica Scanstation P40 är något bättre för geodetiska ändamål med mycket höga krav på georefereringen. I det flesta andra sammanhang är RTC 360 att rekommendera. Leicas RTC 360 är ett bra exempel på hur SLAM-algoritmen kan användas för att förenkla många laserskanningsprojekt. Även i de projekten med höga krav på detaljrikedom. / This is a case study which aims to compare two different laser scanners. The main difference between these two scanners is that they use different solutions for registration of point clouds. These two solutions are SLAM (Simultaneous Localization and Mapping) as well as the indirect two-step approach. The thesis aims at comparing the static SLAM-based scanner Leica RTC 360 with the more traditional scanner Leica Scanstation P40. This is a relevant study due to the big differences between these two scanners, in the aspect of both how much preparation that is need and how effective both scanners are. The static SLAM scanner RTC 360 has the possibility to be very time efficient due to use of the SLAM-algorithm called VIS (Visual Inertial System) that are used for alignment of different point clouds as early as in the fieldwork. The RTC 360 also uses an IMU (Inertial Measurement Unit) that allows the laser scanner to do complete and detailed scans without the need to be perfectly levelled. The P40 on the other hand do need to be precisely levelled to be able to complete a scan. The point clouds from these two laser scanners are compared with each other by reviewing the visual features of the two clouds and finding differences between the point clouds. The same point density was used in both clouds and the scans took place from the same positions with both scanners. A statistical comparison was also made. This statistical analysis was made with use of control points and RMS values that were established with the help of these. This statistical analysis was made possible by the fact that both point clouds were georeferenced to the reference system SWEREF 99 16 30 as well the system RH 2000 for height. This process of georeferencing both clouds was easier to perform with the P40 than the RTC 360. Because the laser data from P40 were slightly better suited for the program Leica Cyclone, which were the program that was used for most of the data processing. RTC 360 uses two individual laser-pulses for each scanned point. This resulted in that the RTC 360 scanned some more points compared to the P40. This difference was extra noticeable on surfaces that usually are difficult for laser scanners to scan, such as plain, black surfaces. The control points showed that quality of both point clouds was very similar to each other. The P40 showed slightly higher accuracy, about 1-2millimeter, relative to the RTC 360 scanner. This resulted in the conclusion that P40 were slightly better for geodic purposes with very high demands on the georeferencing. In most of the other cases RTC 360 is the recommended scanner. Leica RTC 360 is a good example of how the SLAM-algorithm can be used to make many laser scanning projects easier and more efficient.

Thesis (MPhil)--Stellenbosch University, 2015. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Giving regular performance feedback for improvement and indicating good performance is essential for individuals to function optimally in the work environment. Managers often avoid the task of giving feedback, especially negative feedback. This avoidant behaviour is manifested in different ways, including delegating the task of giving feedback, suppressing the information which managers believe is negative, avoiding giving feedback or not giving feedback at all. This study was aimed at answering the following questions: What are the factors contributing to the phenomenon of managers’ reluctance to give feedback? What are the factors contributing to the discomfort managers experience when faced with the task of giving feedback? Can coaching, as a development tool, contribute to enhancing managerial skills for executing the task of giving feedback? A qualitative study, using a case study approach, was conducted to determine the experiences, feelings and perceptions of managers when having to engage in giving feedback. The study design comprised individual coaching for participants, followed by semi-structured interviews to evaluate the learnings, changed perceptions and feelings and giving feedback, following the coaching process. The findings provided an in-depth understanding of the managers’ experiences and the contributory factors influencing the manner in which the task of giving feedback was executed. Recommendations were made on how coaching as a development tool can be utilized to enhance managerial skills for the task of giving feedback. Recommendations were made for future studies relating to managers having to engage in giving feedback.

On April 7, 2009, IBM celebrated the mainframe’s 45th year. Drawing on its roots in punch-card tabulators, the machine has come a long way to become many customers’ preferred e-business solution. Throughout its lifetime, IBM’s strategy adapted the machine to the changing market. During the late 1960s, the introduction of the System/360 provided customers with compatibility and scalability across various computer lines. Popularity of the system began to suffer during the client/server era of the 1990s but it quickly recovered as the z Series server line was developed to support e-business solutions. IBM’s strategy made the mainframe successful but continued improvements are still necessary to ensure its future success. / text

.

.