系统评估和选择用于桥梁检查实践的无人机解决方案

SeyyedPooya HekmatiAthar, N. Goudarzi, A. Karimoddini, A. Homaifar, Darshan Divakaran
{"title":"系统评估和选择用于桥梁检查实践的无人机解决方案","authors":"SeyyedPooya HekmatiAthar, N. Goudarzi, A. Karimoddini, A. Homaifar, Darshan Divakaran","doi":"10.1109/AERO47225.2020.9172795","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Unmanned Aerial System (UAS)-enabled bridge inspection technique, as a promising alternative to conventional practices, has drawn more interest in recent years. However, UAS performance metrics requirements imposed by bridge structure (e.g., turbulent flow characteristics around the bridge) and terrain characteristics (e.g., surface roughness, temperature, and humidity), have made the selection of the suitable UAS platform a challenging problem. Currently, there is no verified and comprehensive methodology for UAS-enabled bridge inspection practices; existing case-dependent solutions rely on general-purpose commercially available UAS platforms. There is no study to quantify the gap between the performance metrics of the commercially available UAS platforms to those required for the bridge inspection. The objective of this paper is to initiate the development of a framework to systematically select a commercially available UAS that is the most appropriate choice for bridge inspection. An Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) methodology is adopted for the multiple-criteria decision making (MCDM) and comparing the capabilities of multiple UAS platforms. The AHP methodology is applied to 32 criteria defined under Four major categories including flight performance, situational awareness, payload and sensor capabilities, and communication quality. The developed method is illustrated and applied to a set of UAS platforms. A pairwise comparison approach is conducted in a hierarchical manner at the category level, criterion level, and candidate platform level. The results from comparison tables that meet the required AHP consistency ratio threshold, result in the selection of the most suitable UAS for bridge inspection in the defined scenario.","PeriodicalId":114560,"journal":{"name":"2020 IEEE Aerospace Conference","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A systematic evaluation and selection of UAS-enabled solutions for bridge inspection practices\",\"authors\":\"SeyyedPooya HekmatiAthar, N. Goudarzi, A. Karimoddini, A. Homaifar, Darshan Divakaran\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/AERO47225.2020.9172795\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Unmanned Aerial System (UAS)-enabled bridge inspection technique, as a promising alternative to conventional practices, has drawn more interest in recent years. However, UAS performance metrics requirements imposed by bridge structure (e.g., turbulent flow characteristics around the bridge) and terrain characteristics (e.g., surface roughness, temperature, and humidity), have made the selection of the suitable UAS platform a challenging problem. Currently, there is no verified and comprehensive methodology for UAS-enabled bridge inspection practices; existing case-dependent solutions rely on general-purpose commercially available UAS platforms. There is no study to quantify the gap between the performance metrics of the commercially available UAS platforms to those required for the bridge inspection. The objective of this paper is to initiate the development of a framework to systematically select a commercially available UAS that is the most appropriate choice for bridge inspection. An Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) methodology is adopted for the multiple-criteria decision making (MCDM) and comparing the capabilities of multiple UAS platforms. The AHP methodology is applied to 32 criteria defined under Four major categories including flight performance, situational awareness, payload and sensor capabilities, and communication quality. The developed method is illustrated and applied to a set of UAS platforms. A pairwise comparison approach is conducted in a hierarchical manner at the category level, criterion level, and candidate platform level. The results from comparison tables that meet the required AHP consistency ratio threshold, result in the selection of the most suitable UAS for bridge inspection in the defined scenario.\",\"PeriodicalId\":114560,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2020 IEEE Aerospace Conference\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2020 IEEE Aerospace Conference\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/AERO47225.2020.9172795\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2020 IEEE Aerospace Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/AERO47225.2020.9172795","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

近年来,基于无人机系统(UAS)的桥梁检测技术作为一种很有前途的替代方法,引起了人们的广泛关注。然而,由于桥梁结构(例如,桥梁周围的湍流特性)和地形特征(例如,表面粗糙度、温度和湿度)对无人机性能指标的要求,使得选择合适的无人机平台成为一个具有挑战性的问题。目前,对于支持无人机系统的桥梁检查实践,还没有经过验证的综合方法;现有的案例相关解决方案依赖于通用的商用UAS平台。目前还没有研究量化商用无人机平台与桥梁检查所需平台的性能指标之间的差距。本文的目的是启动一个框架的发展,以系统地选择商业上可用的无人机,这是桥梁检查最合适的选择。采用层次分析法(AHP)进行多准则决策,比较多个无人机平台的性能。AHP方法应用于32个标准,分为四个主要类别,包括飞行性能、态势感知、有效载荷和传感器能力以及通信质量。最后对所开发的方法进行了说明,并应用于一组无人机平台。两两比较方法在类别级别、标准级别和候选平台级别以分层方式进行。比较表的结果满足AHP一致性比率阈值,从而在定义的场景中选择最合适的UAS进行桥梁检查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A systematic evaluation and selection of UAS-enabled solutions for bridge inspection practices
Unmanned Aerial System (UAS)-enabled bridge inspection technique, as a promising alternative to conventional practices, has drawn more interest in recent years. However, UAS performance metrics requirements imposed by bridge structure (e.g., turbulent flow characteristics around the bridge) and terrain characteristics (e.g., surface roughness, temperature, and humidity), have made the selection of the suitable UAS platform a challenging problem. Currently, there is no verified and comprehensive methodology for UAS-enabled bridge inspection practices; existing case-dependent solutions rely on general-purpose commercially available UAS platforms. There is no study to quantify the gap between the performance metrics of the commercially available UAS platforms to those required for the bridge inspection. The objective of this paper is to initiate the development of a framework to systematically select a commercially available UAS that is the most appropriate choice for bridge inspection. An Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) methodology is adopted for the multiple-criteria decision making (MCDM) and comparing the capabilities of multiple UAS platforms. The AHP methodology is applied to 32 criteria defined under Four major categories including flight performance, situational awareness, payload and sensor capabilities, and communication quality. The developed method is illustrated and applied to a set of UAS platforms. A pairwise comparison approach is conducted in a hierarchical manner at the category level, criterion level, and candidate platform level. The results from comparison tables that meet the required AHP consistency ratio threshold, result in the selection of the most suitable UAS for bridge inspection in the defined scenario.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信