A four-property comparison of iPad Pro 11-inch (M4) LiDAR with the Hilti PD-E reference workflow, with emphasis on assessor judgement and independent verification.
Download the full case study (PDF)Four residential BER surveys were compared across floor area, gross wall area, living area, and combined window-and-door openings. The Hilti PD-E workflow was the practical comparison reference, not independently established ground truth.
In this limited sample, the overall mean absolute percentage difference was 4.37% across those four metrics. This does not establish universal device accuracy or replace professional checks.
An internal LiDAR scan cannot independently determine the structural floor thickness between storeys. BER storey-height inputs must be checked using the appropriate building information. The heights were corrected to the Hilti reference before comparing wall areas.
The study combined windows and doors into total openings area because LiDAR captures geometry, not BER-specific classification. Assessor interpretation of opening types remains necessary.
Living area and combined openings showed greater variation than floor and wall areas in this small sample. Check ambiguous boundaries and dimensions with an appropriate verification method, including a laser meter when needed.
Only four dwellings were included, the roof was excluded, and survey technique and conditions can influence the results. The study makes no population-wide accuracy claim.
The full eight-page case study documents the September 2026 workflow, per-project comparisons, methodology and limitations. It is a historical study, not a specification of the current software release.