Lidar-derived Navigational Geofences for Low Altitude Flight Operations

Safe Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) operations near the ground require navigation methods that avoid fixed obstacles such as buildings, power lines and trees. Aerial lidar surveys of ground structures are available with the precision and accuracy to geolocate obstacles, but the high volume of raw survey data can exceed the compute power of onboard processors and the rendering ability of ground-based flight planning maps. Representing ground structures with bounding polyhedra instead of point clouds greatly reduces the data size and can enable effective obstacle avoidance, as long as the bounding geometry envelopes the structures with high spatial fidelity. This report describes in detail four methods to compute bounding geometries of ground obstacles from lidar point clouds. The four methods are: 1) 2.5D Maximum Elevation Box, 2) 2.5D Ground Map Extrusion, 3) 3D Bounding Cylinder, and 4) 3D Bounding Box. The methods are applied to five point cloud datasets from lidar surveys of UAV flight research sites in Georgia and Virginia with an average point spacing that ranges from 0.1m to 0.6m. The methods are assessed using survey areas with geometrically heterogeneous ground structures: buildings, vegetation, power lines, and submeter structures such as road signs and guy wires. The 2.5D Maximum Elevation Box method is useful for simple structures. The 2.5D Ground Map Extrusion method efficiently encloses vegetation, but requires hand-drawn ground footprints. The 3D Bounding Cylinder method excels at enclosing linear structures such as power lines and fences. The 3D Bounding Box method excels at enclosing planar structures such as buildings. The methods are compared on the basis of data compression and boundary fidelity on selected areas. The 2.5D methods yield the highest data compression but the polyhedra produced by them enclose significant amounts of empty space. Boundary fidelity is superior for the 3D methods, though this fidelity comes at the cost of a roughly thirtyfold lower data compression ratio than the 2.5D Maximum Elevation Box method. A mix of these output geometries is proposed for autonomous UAV navigation with limited on-board computing. Both the accuracy and spatial detail of emerging satellite-based survey technology lower than that of aerial lidar scanning survey technology. Sub-meter structures and thin linear structures are not reliably mapped at present by satellitebased surveys.

[1]  Francisco Javier Ariza López,et al.  El nuevo estándar: "ASPRS Positional Accuracy Standards for Digital Geospatial Data" , 2016 .

[2]  Nicholas Rymer,et al.  UAV Inspection of Electrical Transmission Infrastructure with Path Conformance Autonomy and Lidar-Based Geofences NASA Report on UTM Reference Mission Flights at Southern Company Flights November 2016 , 2017 .

[3]  Richard A. Fournier,et al.  The structural and radiative consistency of three-dimensional tree reconstructions from terrestrial lidar , 2009 .

[4]  Maria Consiglio,et al.  ICAROUS: Integrated configurable algorithms for reliable operations of unmanned systems , 2016, 2016 IEEE/AIAA 35th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC).

[5]  C. Briese,et al.  Extraction and Modeling of Power Lines from ALS Point Clouds , 2004 .

[6]  Manuel A. Aguilar,et al.  Assessing geometric accuracy of the orthorectification process from GeoEye-1 and WorldView-2 panchromatic images , 2013, Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinformation.

[7]  Nicholas Rymer,et al.  Autonomous Inspection of Electrical Transmission Structures with Airborne UV Sensors and Automated Air Traffic Management , 2018 .

[8]  N. Pfeifer,et al.  Neighborhood systems for airborne laser data , 2005 .

[9]  Kelly J. Hayhurst,et al.  SAFEGUARD: Progress and test results for a reliable independent on-board safety net for UAS , 2017, 2017 IEEE/AIAA 36th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC).

[10]  Nicholas Rymer,et al.  Technologies and Operations for High Voltage Corona Detection with UAVs , 2018, 2018 IEEE Power & Energy Society General Meeting (PESGM).

[11]  Soon-Wook Kwon,et al.  Fitting range data to primitives for rapid local 3D modeling using sparse range point clouds , 2004 .

[12]  Andrew J. Moore,et al.  Inexpensive, Lightweight Method of Detecting Coronas with UAVs , 2018, 2018 International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems (ICUAS).

[13]  P. Tymków,et al.  VEGETATION MODELLING BASED ON TLS DATA FOR ROUGHNESS COEFFICIENT ESTIMATION IN RIVER VALLEY , 2010 .

[14]  Jonathan P. Dash,et al.  Comparison of high-density LiDAR and satellite photogrammetry for forest inventory , 2018, ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing.

[15]  J. Demantké,et al.  DIMENSIONALITY BASED SCALE SELECTION IN 3D LIDAR POINT CLOUDS , 2012 .

[16]  Nicholas Rymer,et al.  Inspection of electrical transmission structures with UAV path conformance and lidar-based geofences , 2018, 2018 IEEE Power & Energy Society Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference (ISGT).

[17]  Lisa Patrick Bentley,et al.  An empirical assessment of tree branching networks and implications for plant allometric scaling models. , 2013, Ecology letters.

[18]  Hiroshi Masuda,et al.  Reconstruction of polygonal prisms from point-clouds of engineering facilities , 2016, J. Comput. Des. Eng..

[19]  J. Franklin Predictive vegetation mapping: geographic modelling of biospatial patterns in relation to environmental gradients , 1995 .

[20]  R. Reulke,et al.  Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences , 2005 .

[21]  César Muñoz,et al.  Testing Enabling Technologies for Safe UAS Urban Operations , 2018 .

[22]  W. Cohen,et al.  Lidar Remote Sensing for Ecosystem Studies , 2002 .

[23]  Przemyslaw Prusinkiewicz,et al.  The Algorithmic Beauty of Plants , 1990, The Virtual Laboratory.

[24]  H. Nakahara Computer-aided interconnection routing: General survey of the state-of-the-art , 1972, Networks.

[25]  Aloysius Wehr,et al.  Airborne laser scanning—an introduction and overview , 1999 .

[26]  Corey Ippolito,et al.  Preliminary results of powerline reconstruction from airborne LiDAR for safe autonomous low-altitude urban operations of small UAS , 2016, 2016 IEEE SENSORS.

[27]  Richard M. Karp,et al.  The traveling-salesman problem and minimum spanning trees: Part II , 1971, Math. Program..

[28]  C. Muñoz,et al.  A Path Planning Algorithm to Enable Well-Clear Low Altitude UAS Operation Beyond Visual Line of Sight , 2017 .

[29]  B. Jutzi,et al.  3D semantic labeling of ALS point clouds by exploiting multi-scale, multi-type neighborhoods for feature extraction , 2016 .

[30]  Juha Hyyppä,et al.  Remote sensing methods for power line corridor surveys , 2016 .

[31]  Lubos Mitas,et al.  Simultaneous spline approximation and topographic analysis for lidar elevation data in open-source GIS , 2005, IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters.

[32]  Nicholas Rymer,et al.  Autonomous Inspection of Electrical Transmission Structures with Airborne UV Sensors - NASA Report on Dominion Virginia Power Flights of November 2016 , 2017 .

[33]  S. J. Oude Elberink,et al.  Multiple-entity based classification of airborne laser scanning data in urban areas , 2014 .

[34]  Manuel A. Aguilar,et al.  Geometric Accuracy Assessment of QuickBird Basic Imagery Using Different Operational Approaches , 2007 .

[35]  F. Nex,et al.  UAV for 3D mapping applications: a review , 2014 .

[36]  J. Hyyppä,et al.  International Archives of Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Vol.XXXVI, Part 3 / W52 , 2007 .

[37]  G. Hagen,et al.  Algorithms for Collision Detection Between a Point and a Moving Polygon, with Applications to Aircraft Weather Avoidance , 2016 .

[38]  Xrin –Xe,et al.  DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration , 2017 .

[39]  Kelly J. Hayhurst,et al.  SAFEGUARD: An assured safety net technology for UAS , 2016, 2016 IEEE/AIAA 35th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC).

[40]  Marc Pollefeys,et al.  PIXHAWK: A system for autonomous flight using onboard computer vision , 2011, 2011 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.