Bridge Inspection with UAVs

Buzz_Roavr

Buzz_Roavr

Member
We have done extensive trials for this application but have not gone commercial yet as we are waiting on our PFAW.

As Droider said. It's all very possible and achievable BUT the pilot must be able to fly manually. Also worth mentioning is a camera that can look up.

There are some great high end machines capable of this built in Europe. They are very expensive though.

Best, Matt.
 


H

Holger

Member
I second that you need a copter which can look up and down.
I can also say that it is by far not as easy as it sounds.
A camera with a good zoom helps (sony 790)..
The problem is that you need to come close, but you can't count on GPS. Under the concrete bridge you have lots of turbulence which makes staying stationary very difficult.
We also had compass problems with all the steel and electrical cables running through a bridge.
I know a company who is developing a copter for this application, with all sorts of sensors on it, from ultrasound to lidar and a differential GPS system.
Can't say more as it is still in the testing phase.
Possible yes, but far more complicated than you might imagine to do an autonomous bridge inspection.
 

R

rtreharne

New Member
Our camera looks up; that is not the problem. Our camera can sit on the UAS, but we have another craft that rides on a cable - hence, no FAA concerns.
 


bridgeinspector

bridgeinspector

Member
I have not checked this forum in quite sometime. I have learned that this is a daunting task and flight skills are essential. I have started learning to fly first with a nano QX and have since started flying an H-quad and planes from FliteTest to help with my tx skills. Time is short and training is slow to say the least.

I still believe there is the potential for use in bridge inspection and am interested to see what these multirotors are capable of performing. I do not expect these to replace inspections only supplement as you still need to hit things with a hammer to evaluate.

If someone wants to send me something to review or send me to your research facility, I am willing.:)
 

R

Ronan

Member
I have done 3 bridge inspections so far. Mostly for testing setups.

Atti works fine, GPS doesn't. Camera is moved to the top as are strong projecting LED lights.

Honestly its MUCH easier to do top and side inspections, underside is a bit daring and i'm not a fan of it. Bridges are usually pretty thick and have a lot of metal, so it really downgrades the signal of both the remote and the video quite a lot.
 

bridgeinspector

bridgeinspector

Member
Ronan said:
I have done 3 bridge inspections so far. Mostly for testing setups.

Atti works fine, GPS doesn't. Camera is moved to the top as are strong projecting LED lights.

Honestly its MUCH easier to do top and side inspections, underside is a bit daring and i'm not a fan of it. Bridges are usually pretty thick and have a lot of metal, so it really downgrades the signal of both the remote and the video quite a lot.
Click to expand...

What is your platform? Do you have any video links of your experience?
 

R

Ronan

Member
bridgeinspector said:
What is your platform? Do you have any video links of your experience?
Click to expand...

800m hex (which is overkill yeah, but LONG flight time with lightweight payloads!).

No video's, most of my work i am not allowed to use to promote myself and/or show the public saddly...

Actually starting to gather some personal footage to have a 'general reel' to show.
 

J

jdennings

Member
Sure will not rank high on the "pro look" factor scale but ...

Why not a lowly Phantom 2 with prop guards and vtx of your choice, flown in manual, Gopro set at 4k/15 fps on Zenmuse?
Definitely will require superior FPV flying skills. Add Lightbridge for better precision.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

S

SkyFalcon

Member
Hi Brigeinspector

For me, video is not the way to do inspections on bridges or on any other structures. Its ok for a first look, but if you want to really see whats going on, you must have pictures, High res pictures and not pictures from "sports cams". Also forget the Sony 780/790 and look alike. its a very good camera its a 24 megapixel sensor, i have one. But its better to have a full size sensor or a APS-C with lower resolution to take pictures.


Second; for bridges, you must have a UAV that can "look up" and as Buzz_Roavr said... you have the falcon 8 UAV

Third... there is no way of you do a inspection on a bridge if you don´t have flight skills. Bridge are the worst structures to work. You have the turbulence, you may fly very stable, and 1 meeter to the left you may have strong winds. And you may have problems with all the iron and cables inside the bridge. They may affect the compass.

But, UAV are the way to do it most of the times with very good results.

This bridge is 108 meters high from water level to the top

attachment.php


As see under the bridge

attachment.php


At the top
attachment.php


For this bridge were taken 2750 Photos
 

Attachments

  • DSC00851.jpg
    DSC00851.jpg
    143.5 KB · Views: 406
  • IMG_6116.jpg
    IMG_6116.jpg
    137.5 KB · Views: 273
  • DSC00999.jpg
    DSC00999.jpg
    146.4 KB · Views: 456

R

Ronan

Member
SKyFalcon, i own a PJ810 and it's perfectly fine to take photos. Just extract a single frame from the full resolution video. They come out sharp and clear. Or switch to manual focus and the photos are sharp/clear (in auto focus, the focus seems to 'wonder' on some images).

Or swap it for a Micro Four Third camera if it's a photo job. In my case, the zoom capability for inspection is a must have. Never had a client complain about 24MP stills from the recorded footage.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

S

SkyFalcon

Member
Ronan, don´t get me wrong... I have a PJ780 and i love it for video. I don´t want another camera for video shooting. (10X and 24 Mpix)
I also in inspections shoot with the TZ61 from Lumix and its also a great camera and with an incredible zoom (30X and 18.1 Mpix)
But i prefer to have my sony nex 5 with a smaller optical zoom factor, but i can zoom in digitally with clear images that any of the others (16 Mpix but with a APS-C sensor)
2 months ago, i was doing an inspection. And i show the client the same photo from the 3 different cameras, and he chose the nex5....
 

R

Ronan

Member
SkyFalcon said:
Ronan, don´t get me wrong... I have a PJ780 and i love it for video. I don´t want another camera for video shooting. (10X and 24 Mpix)
I also in inspections shoot with the TZ61 from Lumix and its also a great camera and with an incredible zoom (30X and 18.1 Mpix)
But i prefer to have my sony nex 5 with a smaller optical zoom factor, but i can zoom in digitally with clear images that any of the others (16 Mpix but with a APS-C sensor)
2 months ago, i was doing an inspection. And i show the client the same photo from the 3 different cameras, and he chose the nex5....
Click to expand...

Do you also shoot video's? 90% of my inspections require live footage + recorded footage for their archives. Photos are pulled from 1080P footage and come out clear and sharp.

When i do 3D mapping i simply stick a camera that takes a few hundred (or thousand) photos for a 3D rendering.
 

S

SkyFalcon

Member
Yes i do videos, but only for a first view. Then almost all the times, photos.
For 3D mapping i have first a flight plan and then the uav take the pictures exactly were i want (less than 2 meters variations)
 

R

Ronan

Member
SkyFalcon said:
Yes i do videos, but only for a first view. Then almost all the times, photos.
For 3D mapping i have first a flight plan and then the uav take the pictures exactly were i want (less than 2 meters variations)
Click to expand...

Yes same here for the 3D Mapping. MUCH easier with a automated flight plan (i use ground station by DJI, works great). I'm experimenting with a dual camera setup, for imaging + thermal. Did some work for a farm and it was pretty nefty. Farmer loved that he was instantly able to tell hot spots where the crops needed more water.
 



You must log in or register to reply here.
Top