Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) based mapping in engineering geological surveys: considerations for optimum results

UAVs have been used in engineering for at least two decades, mainly focusing on structural health monitoring, geological surveys and site inspections, especially at cases where a rapid assessment is required, for example after a natural disaster. While there is a wide range of recognition algorithms for the automatic identification of structural damage, structural geological features etc. from the acquired images, the parameters affecting the resolution of these images are often overlooked. As a result, the UAV technology is not used at its full potential and at times, it is even regarded as leading to poor outcomes. This paper discusses the main parameters affecting the resolution of the images acquired by a UAV. We present a case study of the structural geological mapping of a coastal area carried out using two types of UAVs: a fixed wing and a hexacopter. A comparison between the structural geological maps based on the orthophotos and one produced using conventional techniques shows that the level of detail is the same and the time spent is at least 5 times less when using a UAV. The fixed wing is faster and therefore, can cover large areas while the copter gives better resolution images as it can fly at lower heights. The latter is cost and time effective only if it is used for surveys limited to small areas. The characterization of some structural geological features has not been possible based solely on the orthophotos. We show that in order to achieve the desired accuracy, a ground sample distance of at least half that value is required. We discuss technical aspects, such as the effect of topography and UAV orientation on the overlap value, the camera calibration, number of control points and lighting conditions, that should be taken into account prior to flying a UAV and provide recommendations on how to obtain optimum results, i.e. orthophotos that suit the needs of the project.

[1]  Fabio Remondino,et al.  UAV PHOTOGRAMMETRY FOR MAPPING AND 3D MODELING - CURRENT STATUS AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVES - , 2012 .

[2]  J. Martínez-Martínez,et al.  Stratigraphy, petrophysical characterization and 3D geological modelling of the historical quarry of Nueva Tabarca island (western Mediterranean): Implications on heritage conservation , 2017 .

[3]  Zhengyou Zhang,et al.  A Flexible New Technique for Camera Calibration , 2000, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[4]  Jianhua Wang,et al.  A new calibration model of camera lens distortion , 2008, Pattern Recognit..

[5]  D. Giordan,et al.  Characterization and analysis of a translational rockslide on a stepped-planar slip surface , 2017 .

[6]  WhiteheadKen,et al.  Remote sensing of the environment with small unmanned aircraft systems (UASs), part 1: a review of progress and challenges1 , 2014 .

[7]  Arko Lucieer,et al.  Mapping from an Armchair: Rapid, high-Resolution Mapping using uAV and Computer Vision Technology , 2012 .

[8]  Toby N. Tonkin,et al.  Ground-Control Networks for Image Based Surface Reconstruction: An Investigation of Optimum Survey Designs Using UAV Derived Imagery and Structure-from-Motion Photogrammetry , 2016, Remote. Sens..

[9]  Alexander I. Clayton,et al.  2.1.7. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and their application in geomorphic mapping , 2015 .

[10]  Peter Kovesi,et al.  Image Features from Phase Congruency , 1995 .

[11]  Caterina Balletti,et al.  Calibration of Action Cameras for Photogrammetric Purposes , 2014, Sensors.

[12]  Samuel T. Thiele,et al.  Ground-based and UAV-Based photogrammetry: A multi-scale, high-resolution mapping tool for structural geology and paleoseismology , 2014 .

[13]  Qiang Xu,et al.  Distribution and failure modes of the landslides in Heitai terrace, China , 2017 .

[14]  Jing He,et al.  Research of UAV Flight Planning Parameters , 2012 .

[15]  Peter Kovesi,et al.  Semi-automatic mapping of geological Structures using UAV-based photogrammetric data: An image analysis approach , 2014, Comput. Geosci..

[16]  C. Bond,et al.  LiDAR, UAV or compass-clinometer? Accuracy, coverage and the effects on structural models , 2017 .

[17]  P. L. Raeva,et al.  VOLUME COMPUTATION OF A STOCKPILE – A STUDY CASE COMPARING GPS AND UAV MEASUREMENTS IN AN OPEN PIT QUARRY , 2016 .

[18]  Jochen Teizer,et al.  Mobile 3D mapping for surveying earthwork projects using an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) system , 2014 .

[19]  I. Colomina,et al.  Unmanned aerial systems for photogrammetry and remote sensing: A review , 2014 .

[20]  J. Malet,et al.  Image-based mapping of surface fissures for the investigation of landslide dynamics , 2013 .

[21]  J. Campbell Introduction to remote sensing , 1987 .

[22]  J. Travelletti,et al.  UAV-based remote sensing of the Super-Sauze landslide : evaluation and results. , 2012 .

[23]  CrydermanChris,et al.  EVALUATION OF UAV PHOTOGRAMMETRIC ACCURACY FOR MAPPING AND EARTHWORKS COMPUTATIONS , 2014 .

[24]  J. Lynch,et al.  UAV-based 3-D characterization of rock masses and rock slides in Nepal , 2016 .

[25]  Vincent G. Ambrosia,et al.  Unmanned Aircraft Systems in Remote Sensing and Scientific Research: Classification and Considerations of Use , 2012, Remote. Sens..

[26]  Pascal Fua,et al.  On benchmarking camera calibration and multi-view stereo for high resolution imagery , 2008, 2008 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.