Possible Multirotor Application in Underground Mines?

[Sterlingz]

Hey guys,

First post here, so take it easy! I had a brainwave the other day and wanted to bounce some ideas off you guys.

I work in the underground mining industry. We run often run into problems where there's no way to explore/map out areas because they're too dangerous. I'm thinking multirotors could be a great solution to this problem. For example;

1. When equipment gets stuck while boring vertical tunnels, multirotors could be sent in to figure out what's going on (or to check where there's water inflow, etc etc).

2. Mines often abandon old workings and need to go back decades later. These areas are considered unsafe - you have to support the ground on your way in, which costs a TON of money. Multirotors could be sent out to scope out potential dangers.

3. Speaking of old workings, they're rarely surveyed properly. Multirotors could survey these, though I'm not sure how yet (GPS doesn't work underground... remember).

That's just scratching the surface. I think there would be several more applications underground. The question is; does the technology allow for this? I saw a post about obstacle avoidance, that would be a start. Could a multirotor autonomously explore areas without human input?

Either way, any input is appreciated. Thanks in advance.

 

[filmfly]

Hi Sterlingz, that's really interesting, thanks for posting the question.
I understand that a variety of companies, big and small, are currently working on obstacle avoidance technology as well as 3D mapping, so I wouldn't be surprised if we see use in mines in the future.

The current problem is primarily that the FAA doesn't "authorize" any commercial uses of small unmanned aircraft systems. Applying the FAA's jurisdiction to the air underground, however, would be quite a stretch in my opinion!

 

[cootertwo]

Neat idea, but you'd still have to send in a tracked/wheeled robot, to retrieve the multirotor, after it smacks a wall!

 

[eskil23]

It is an intresting idea indeed. However, there are a lot of problems flying underground.

The first is darkness. I regular FPV system probably won't see further than a few meters. A LIDAR would be better but is more difficult to use.

The second is transmission. I think it will be difficult to maintain contact with the drone after a few turns. On the other hand, you could probably get away with using more power than on the surface.

The third is range. You can not fly fast in confined space, so you won't get far before your batteries are out.

 

[Old Man]

If the flight unit was physically "tethered" to a comm link this could be done. Line of sight in a mine would be hard to depend on. If tethered for comms why not also run power through the tether? Such has already been done with MR's with great success.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[maxwelltub]

It be cool if it had treads and vtol abilities. The ground unit could carry the bulk of the tethered com/ power wires and then a smaller tethered MR could detach and fly on if terrain becomes unsuitable for the terrestrial robot.

 

[dazzab]

I don't remember the details but I'll try and get more info later. I have been told that this is being researched and tested somewhere in Australia. I think it was being done at a University.

 

[Sterlingz]

Thanks for the responses so far guys. Very thought-provoking.

Hi Sterlingz, that's really interesting, thanks for posting the question.
I understand that a variety of companies, big and small, are currently working on obstacle avoidance technology as well as 3D mapping, so I wouldn't be surprised if we see use in mines in the future.

The current problem is primarily that the FAA doesn't "authorize" any commercial uses of small unmanned aircraft systems. Applying the FAA's jurisdiction to the air underground, however, would be quite a stretch in my opinion!

What sort of 3d mapping tech are they working on? Does it rely on GPS coords? Even without GPS, so long as the starting point is known, you could survey underground workings.

I'm thinking the unit would be fully autonomous and programmed to map out areas, even if non-intelligently, like those silly household vacuum robots.

Not too concerned about FAA (or any authority really). Most rules don't apply underground, and I'm not saying we don't follow them, they just don't apply. Fire codes are different, labor laws are different, transportation codes are different, all that jazz.

Neat idea, but you'd still have to send in a tracked/wheeled robot, to retrieve the multirotor, after it smacks a wall!

The first question I'm asked usually is "why not just used a track/wheel unit?". The answer is simple; all mines produce water. Lots of it. Old workings are either partially flooded, or have huge obstacles in them from cave-ins.

It is an intresting idea indeed. However, there are a lot of problems flying underground.

The first is darkness. I regular FPV system probably won't see further than a few meters. A LIDAR would be better but is more difficult to use.

The second is transmission. I think it will be difficult to maintain contact with the drone after a few turns. On the other hand, you could probably get away with using more power than on the surface.

The third is range. You can not fly fast in confined space, so you won't get far before your batteries are out.

Could a fancy unit not carry a light? Are there other sensory methods that don't rely on lighting at all? Regarding transmission, an autonomous unit could simply store the data onboard, no?

I don't remember the details but I'll try and get more info later. I have been told that this is being researched and tested somewhere in Australia. I think it was being done at a University.

It would be wicked if you could find that. The university is probably looking for places to test these things, and I work for one of the biggest mining companies worldwide; I know places where we could put test units to work immediately.

 

[eskil23]

Could a fancy unit not carry a light?

It could of course. But a powerfull light will not only consume a lot of power, it will also be heavier.

Are there other sensory methods that don't rely on lighting at all?

LIDAR (laser radar) technically depends on light, altough not neccesary visible light, infrared works just fine. Ultrasound is another option. The problem is to produce usable imaging from such systems.

Regarding transmission, an autonomous unit could simply store the data onboard, no?

Yes, but how do you make sure it goes where you want it to go if you don't have transmission? Normaly an autonomus drone would use GPS waypoints with open air between them, but underground you have neiter GPS nor open air.

To me it sounds like what you mostly need is a tetherd, amphibious, tracked vehicle.

 

[Fibinotchi]

Avoidance technology would be ideal. Friend of mine has a nice Flir with another camera aboard his big ship for thermal work. Complete night shots are possible, but get your wallet out. Lights would not be needed.

Light bridge would be a must for better resolution FPV with forward and backward camera.

The big question is how wide and tall are mines. Are we talking 8' square or 10' square? This would really dictate how much you have to work with.

433 like Dragon link control, and 900mhz/ 1.2 dialed in transmission would be a must. Strength of transmission feedback would be needed.


-Cody

 

[keensg]

I was thinking along the same lines for inspection of confined spaces/hazardous environments. What is MR?

The issues seem to be:

• Navigation without GPS (indoor)
• Need for some kind of 3D proximity sensor/avoidance system
• Communication limitations when going out of LOS (how robust is a radio signal/video?)
• Lighting (for camera/video)
• Propeller protection in case you clipped something

Could you fly with a 100' tether for communications and power (for lights)?

- Stephen.