The Commercialization of High Resolution Data for Construction, Design and Planning. Nathan Fischer, PE

Transcription

1 The Commercialization of High Resolution Data for Construction, Design and Planning Nathan Fischer, PE

2 23 Offices across the nation. Woolpert Office Locations: Arlington, VA Atlanta, GA Charleston, SC Charlotte, NC Chesapeake, VA Chicago, IL Cincinnati, OH Cleveland, OH Columbia, SC Columbus, OH Dallas, TX Dayton, OH Denver, CO Fairview Heights, IL Florence, KY Greenville, SC Indianapolis, IN Miami, FL Orlando, FL Pittsburgh, PA Richmond, VA Scottsdale, AZ St. Louis, MO

3 Our areas of expertise.

4 About Woolpert Established in 1911 Over 700 Professionals $12,000,000 invested in new technology in last 5 years First Aerial Mapping Project 1969 Pioneer in Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Mapping since 2012 First survey and mapping firm to receive 333 Exemption from the FAA First to develop metric aerial mapping camera to attach to a UAS

5 Topics Rules and Regulations Types of Systems System Accuracies Sample Projects

6 Rules and Regulations

7 FAA UAS Regulations: Part 107 These rules help define whether or not UAS can be used on a given project Breakthrough set of rules that help define commercial UAS operation Useful changes with Part 107: No pilot requirement No visual observer requirement Can conduct more operations with air traffic control tower (ATCT) permission If higher than 400 ft AGL, UAS is allowed to fly within 400 ft of a structure

8 FAA UAS Regulations: Part 107 Remaining Regulations Unspecific language about direct participants Can signs be placed or authorities notified? Still required to maintain line of sight 1 mile radially from ground control station Certificates of waiver can still be granted

9 Types of Systems

10 Utilizing the Appropriate System Aerial Commander Altitude UAS Fixed Wing Cessna 182 Pod System or Renaissance Cessna 404 Traditional UAS VTOL

11 Considerations for Choosing an Airframe How big is the project area? What spatial resolution do I need? 5cm, 2cm, 1cm, Less? What spectral resolution do I need? RGB, CIR, Thermal? Do I need absolute accuracy or is relative accuracy good enough? Are there other special needs for the project such as oblique or 3D modeling deliverables?

12 Fixed Wing Altavian Nova Block III Platform: Nova Block III Endurance: 90min Cruise Speed 35mph Max Speed 70mph Altitude Max. 1000ft AGL Wing Span: 108 inches (9ft) Length: 67 inches (5.5ft) Weight: 15 lbs. maximum takeoff weight (MTOW) Highly sophisticated flight planning, ground control station and operation 32 MP Metric Payload, 22 MP 4-Band, Hyperspectral

13 Vertical Take-Off and Landing Kespry 1.0 Platform: Kespry Endurance: 25min Speed: 15mph Altitude Max: 400ft Weight: 5.8lbs Payload: Nadir 24MP RGB Completely autonomous rotary wing Self-controlled flight with no joysticks Drone takes off and returns to same location Field-swappable battery for low downtime between flights Built-in camera links to on-board network communication

14 Vertical Take-Off and Landing DJI Phantom 2 Platform: DJI Phantom 2 Endurance: 25min Max. Speed: 30mph Altitude Max: 400ft Weight: 5.8lbs Payload: 12 MP RGB 90 Degree oblique range (Nadir to 90)

15 Vertical Take-Off and Landing DJI Inspire Pro Platform: DJI Inspire Pro Endurance: 20 min Max. Speed: 40mph Altitude Max: 400ft Weight: 7.7lbs Payload: Zenmuse X5-16MP RGB, Flir XT-R...others coming soon 50MP? 135 Degree Oblique Range, Upward Capability (Nadir to 135)

16 Vertical Take-Off and Landing DJI Matrice 210 Platform: DJI Matrice 210 Endurance: 38min Max Speed: 50mph Weight: 10lbs Up to 4.5lb (2kg) Payload capacity RTK Weather/water resistant and capable of flying in sub 0 temps Payload: Zenmuse X5S-21MP RGB, Flir XT-R (Thermal), LiDAR, Upward facing gimbal option for inspections

17 Alternatives RENAISSANCE TM Cessna 182 Renaissance TM System Unaffected by FAA UAS Regulations Provides an alternative for UASchallenged areas Suitable for larger areas

18 Alternatives RENAISSANCE TM A non-traditional Imaging system 6-inch, 3-inch, 2-centimeter products Inexpensive acquisition, low mobility expenses Automated workflow (low processing expenses) FAST Delivery Driven by Affordability Consumer Grade Camera Single-Engine Aircraft Pilot-Only Operation Fly places where UAS can t Computer-Vision Processing

19 System Accuracies

20 RENAISSANCE TM Accuracy Evaluation Plan 1.3 miles The Renaissance Platform Flown over the county road in Dayton Altitude 1,100 ft. AGL GSD = 2 cm Five flight lines 38 ground control and check points used

21 Products from RENAISSANCE TM 2-cm Orthos 40 to 700 pts/m2 point clouds

22 Accuracy Verification: Controls Layout Scenarios B C D E F G 1.3 miles

23 How Accurate are the RENAISSANCE TM Products? Accuracy Term Number of Control Points Number of Check Points RMSE E (ft.) RMSE N (ft.) Horizontal Radial RMSE N,E (ft.) Vertical RMSE Elev. (ft.) Horizontal Accuracy at 95% (ft.) Vertical Accuracy at 95% (ft.) Processing Scenario A B C D E F G The winner: Pair of GCPs every 500 to 700 ft. along the route

24 RENAISSANCE TM : Can we meet DOTs Vertical Accuracy Specs? Radial RMSE N,E (ft.) RMSE Elev. (ft.) DTM Accuracy Class Ohio DOT Specifications Recommended Use Maximum Allowable Average Dz (feet) Maximum Allowable RMSE (feet) Class A Paved areas ± Class B Vegetated areas outside of pavement that are maintained at a minimum biannual frequency (i.e.: farm fields, residential yards, roadside R/W, etcetera) ± Class C Vegetated areas that are not maintained ± Class D Areas where vertical accuracy is not critical or warranted (i.e.: planning engineering projects) ±

25 RENAISSANCE TM : Can we meet DOTs Horizontal Accuracy Specs? Radial RMSE N,E (ft.) RMSE Elev. (ft.) Ohio DOT Specifications Planimetric Accuracy Class Class I Recommended Use Projects that require Class I planimetric features listed in Appendix A to be identified and mapped (ie: design engineering projects) Maximum Allowable RMSE (ft) 0.3 Class II Projects that require Class II planimetric features listed in Appendix A to be identified and mapped (ie: planning studies) 1.0

26 Woolpert UAS: Accuracy Evaluation Plan Used Woolpert s Kespry Flown from 350 ft. AGL GSD = 2.7 cm Five flight lines 49 control and check points

27 Accuracy Verification Two surveys 49 control/check points

28 Woolpert UAS Program: Accuracy Evaluation Plan A v A C D E F G

29 Accuracy Term Number of Control Points Number of Check Points RMSE E (ft.) RMSE N (ft.) Horizontal Radial RMSE N,E (ft.) Vertical RMSE Elev. (ft.) Horizontal Accuracy at 95% (ft.) Vertical Accuracy at 95% (ft.) How Accurate are the UAS-derived Products? Imagery GSD = 2.7 cm Altitude 350 ft. AGL Processing Scenario A B C D E F G Can we obtain < 0.2 ft. vertical accuracy? Perhaps if we fly it from an altitude of 150 to 200 ft. AGL

30 UAS: Can we meet DOTs Vertical Accuracy Specs? Radial RMSE N,E (ft.) RMSE Elev. (ft.) DTM Accuracy Class Ohio DOT Specifications Recommended Use Maximum Allowable Average Dz (feet) Maximum Allowable RMSE (feet) Class A Paved areas ± Class B Vegetated areas outside of pavement that are maintained at a minimum biannual frequency (i.e.: farm fields, residential yards, roadside R/W, etcetera) ± Class C Vegetated areas that are not maintained ± Class D Areas where vertical accuracy is not critical or warranted (i.e.: planning engineering projects) ±

31 UAS: Can we meet DOTs Horizontal Accuracy Specs? Radial RMSE N,E (ft.) RMSE Elev. (ft.) Ohio DOT Specifications Planimetric Accuracy Class Class I Recommended Use Projects that require Class I planimetric features listed in Appendix A to be identified and mapped (ie: design engineering projects) Maximum Allowable RMSE (ft) 0.3 Class II Projects that require Class II planimetric features listed in Appendix A to be identified and mapped (ie: planning studies) 1.0

32 Processing Session E: Horizontal RMSE: ft Vertical RMSE: ft All specs but DTM paved area appear to have been met 1 foot contours appear to be attainable Planimetric specifications are achieved Perfect site, with minimal obstacles Trying other platforms and/or camera systems Pair the system with other methods of collection, Mobile Lidar. Quantifying the Accuracy Do we feel that the Kespry can meet ODOT specs?

33 Sample Projects

34 UAS Deliverables One collect = multiple datasets 1 cm GSD Orthos DSM/DTM Colorized Point Cloud

35 Portsmouth Bypass, Scioto County, Ohio Joint venture effort to develop a 17 mi, 4 lane, limited access highway bypass Collected with our Renaissance TM system Project area was too complex to rely on standard UAS: Size of project Limited visibility Dynamic construction

36 Portsmouth Bypass, Scioto County, Ohio

37 Portsmouth Bypass, Scioto County, Ohio

38 Portsmouth Bypass, Scioto County, Ohio

39 Portsmouth Bypass, Scioto County, Ohio

40 Portsmouth Bypass, Scioto County, Ohio

41 Portsmouth Bypass, Scioto County, Ohio

42 Portsmouth Bypass, Scioto County, Ohio

43 Portsmouth Bypass, Scioto County, Ohio

44 Portsmouth Bypass, Scioto County, Ohio

45 Portsmouth Bypass, Scioto County, Ohio

46 Senecaville Well Pad, Noble County, Ohio Collected with our Altavian fixed wing platform Dynamic terrain presented challenges for fixed wing operation Overall accuracies were greater than comparable sites flown with VTOLs

47 Senecaville Well Pad, Noble County, Ohio

48 Senecaville Well Pad, Noble County, Ohio

49 Senecaville Well Pad, Noble County, Ohio

50 Senecaville Well Pad, Noble County, Ohio

51 Senecaville Well Pad, Noble County, Ohio

52 Senecaville Point Cloud, Noble County, Ohio

53 US-79 in Clarendon Historical Bridge Preservation, Monroe County, Arkansas

54 Slope Failure, Wetzel County, West Virginia

55 Slope Failure, Wetzel County, West Virginia

56 Petersburg and Overman Road Highland County, Ohio

57 Petersburg and Overman Road Highland County, Ohio

58 Petersburg and Overman Road Highland County, Ohio

59 Petersburg and Overman Road Highland County, Ohio

60 Thank you!