Advertisement

Aerial Platform Reliability for Flood Monitoring Under Various Weather Conditions: A Review

  • Shazrizil ZakariaEmail author
  • Muhammad Razif Mahadi
  • Ahmad Fikri Abdullah
  • Khalina Abdan
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography book series (LNGC)

Abstract

Flood is an annual disaster in Malaysia, especially in the east coast region. Recently, other regions in Malaysia have experienced devastating flood as well. To monitor the flood extent, aerial monitoring approach is considered as one of the best measures. Compared to space borne remote sensing, aerial platforms are more reliable in obtaining real time data with higher spatial resolution. Among the obstacles in using space borne remote sensing approach are cloud coverage and revisit limitations, making it less desirable option for flood monitoring. In this chapter, a review of four types of aerial platforms that perform remote sensing task is presented, namely; rotary wings, fixed wings, blimps and helikites. The main criteria discussed in the review are payload capacity, endurance (flight duration), altitudes, tolerable wind speed, vertical take-off and landing ability, and the ability to perform under adverse weather, such as heavy precipitation and winds. From the findings, there are lack of studies that mentioned about the capability of aerial platform in rough weather conditions. Out of all four types of aerial platforms discussed, helikite is seen to be the most suitable device to fly in adverse weather. Nevertheless, the only drawback in using helikite is that it has mobility issue since it is tethered to the ground. Helikite application is suitable for small area coverage. As for future recommendations, the study to evaluate the helikite’s reliability in performing such task has a great opportunity to be pursued further.

Notes

Acknowledgements

Special thanks and appreciation for the technical staff of the Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Putra Malaysia, for the data, facilities, and expert opinion.

References

  1. Abdul Kadir H, Arshad MR, Husaini AB (2012) Modeling and control analysis of URRG monohull blimp. Proced Eng 41:216–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abu Talib IF, Takim R, Mohammad MF, Hassan PF (2018) Community empowerment through rehabilitation and reconstruction in social sector of Kuala Krai, Kelantan, Malaysia. Proced Eng 212:294–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Agüera-vega F, Carvajal-ramírez F, Martínez-carricondo P, López JS, Mesas-carrascosa FJ, García-ferrer A, Pérez-porras FJ (2018) Reconstruction of extreme topography from UAV structure from motion photogrammetry. Measurement 121:127–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aishah TS, Wok S, Maznina A, Manaf A, Ismail R (2015) Exploring the use of social media during the 2014 flood in Malaysia. Proced Soc Behav Sci 211:931–937CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ajayi OG, Palmer M, Salubi AA (2018) Modelling farmland topography for suitable site selection of dam construction using unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) photogrammetry. Remote Sens Appl Soc Environ 11:220–230Google Scholar
  6. Al-Halbouni D, Holohan EP, Saberi L, Alrshdan H, Sawarieh A, Closson D, Walter T, Dahm T (2017) Sinkholes, subsidence and subrosion on the eastern shore of the Dead Sea as revealed by a close-range photogrammetric survey. Geomorphology 285:305–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Al-Jarrah R, Jellal RA, Roth H (2013) Blimp based on embedded computer vision and fuzzy control for following ground vehicles. In: 3rd IFAC symposium on telematics applications, Seoul, 11–13 November 2013Google Scholar
  8. Auynirundronkool K, Chen N, Peng C, Yang C, Gong J, Silapathong C (2012) Flood detection and mapping of the Thailand central plain using RADARSAT and MODIS under a sensor web environment. Int J Appl Earth Observ Geoinf 14:245–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Basset P, Tremolet A, Lefebvre T (2014) Rotary wing UAV pre-sizing: past and present methodological approaches at Onera. Aerospace Lab(8):1–12Google Scholar
  10. Brezoescu A, Lozano R, Castillo P (2015) Lyapunov-based trajectory tracking controller for a fixed wing unmanned aerial vehicle in the presence of wind. Int J Adapt Control Signal Process 29:372–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brouwer R, Schipper M, Rynne P, Graham F, Reniers J, MacMahan J (2014) Surfzone monitoring using rotary wing unmanned aerial vehicles. J Atmos Ocean Technol 32:855–863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chao H, Cao Y, Chen Y (2010) Autopilots for small unmanned aerial vehicles: a survey. Int J Control Autom Syst 8(1):36–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chen D, Liu Z, Wang L, Dou M, Chen J, Li H (2013) Natural disaster monitoring with wireless sensor networks: A case study of data-intensive applications upon low-cost scalable systems. Mobile Netw Appl 18(5):651–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Conniff R, McClaran R (2011) Drones are ready for takeoff. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/drones-are-ready-for-takeoff-160062162/. Accessed 12 July 2017
  15. Connor DT, Martin PG, Smith NT, Payne L, Hutton C, Payton OD, Yamashiki Y, Scott TB (2018) Application of airborne photogrammetry for the visualisation and assessment of contamination migration arising from a Fukushima waste storage facility. Environ Pollut 234:610–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Coppa U, Guarnieri A, Pirotti F, Vettore A (2009) Accuracy enhancement of unmanned helicopter positioning with low-cost system. Appl Geomat 1(3):85–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Daakir M, Pierrot-deseilligny M, Bosser P, Pichard F, Thom C, Rabot Y, Martin O (2017) Lightweight UAV with on-board photogrammetry and single-frequency GPS positioning for metrology applications. ISPRS J Photogramm Remote Sens 127:115–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Delacourt C, Allemand P, Grandjean P, Deschamps A, Ammann J, Cuq V, Suanez S (2009) DRELIO: an unmanned helicopter for imaging coastal areas. J Coast Res 56:1489–1493Google Scholar
  19. Díaz-Vilariño L, González-Jorge H, Martínez-Sánchez J, Bueno M, Arias P (2016) Determining the limits of unmanned aerial photogrammetry for the evaluation of road runoff. Measurement J Int Measurement Confed 85:132–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Erdelj M, Król M, Natalizio E (2017) Wireless sensor networks and multi-UAV systems for natural disaster management. Comput Netw 124:72–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fan YM, Ding M, Cao YF (2017) Vision algorithms for fixed-wing unmanned aerial vehicle landing system. Sci China Technol Sci 60(3):434–443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Feng Q, Liu J, Gong J (2015) Urban flood mapping based on unmanned aerial vehicle remote sensing and random forest classifier: a case of Yuyao, China. Water 7:1437–1455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Filippo S, Gennaro D, Matese A, Gioli B, Toscano P, Zaldei A, Palliotti A, Genesio L (2017) Multisensor approach to assess vineyard thermal dynamics combining high- resolution unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) remote sensing and wireless sensor network (WSN) proximal sensing. Sci Hortic 221:83–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gabrlik P (2015) The use of direct georeferencing in aerial photogrammetry with micro UAV. IFAC-PapersOnLine 48(4):380–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Giustarini L, Vernieuwe H, Verwaeren J, Chini M, Hostache R, Matgen P, Verhoest NEC, de Baets B (2015) Accounting for image uncertainty in SAR-based flood mapping. Int J Appl Earth Observ Geoinf 34:70–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gonçalves JA, Henriques R (2015) UAV photogrammetry for topographic monitoring of coastal areas. ISPRS J Photogramm Remote Sens 104:101–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hemmelder S, Marra W, Markies H, Jong SM (2018) Monitoring river morphology and bank erosion using UAV imagery—A case study of the river Buëch, Hautes-Alpes, France. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 73:428–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hong S, Jeong J, Kim S, Suk J, Jung, JI (2013) Longitudinal flight dynamics of a single tilt-wing unmanned aerial vehicle. In: 19th IFAC symposium on automatic control in aerospace, Würzburg, 2–6 September 2013Google Scholar
  29. Iersel W, Straatsma M, Addink E, Middelkoop H (2018) Monitoring height and greenness of non-woody floodplain vegetation with UAV time series. ISPRS J Photogramm Remote Sens 141:112–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kedzierski M, Wierzbicki D (2015) Radiometric quality assessment of images acquired by UAV’s in various lighting and weather conditions. Measurement J Int Measurement Confed 76:156–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Klemas V (2011) Remote sensing of wetlands: Case studies comparing practical techniques. J Coast Res 27(3):418–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Klemas V (2013) Airborne remote sensing of coastal features and processes: an overview. J Coast Res 29(2):239–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kushida K, Yoshino K, Nagano T, Ishida T (2009) Automated 3D forest surface model extraction from balloon stereo photographs. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 75(1):25–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lechner AM, Fletcher A, Johansen K, Erskine P (2012) Characterising upland swamps using object-based classification methods and hyper-spatial resolution imagery derived from an unmanned aerial vehicle. In: ISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences, Melbourne, 25 August–01 September 2012Google Scholar
  35. Li Y, Nahon M, Sharf I (2011) Airship dynamics modeling: A literature review. Prog Aerosp Sci 47:217–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Liao L, Pasternak I (2009) A review of airship structural research and development. Prog Aerosp Sci 45:83–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Liu P, Chen AY, Huang YN, Han JY, Lai JS, Kang SC, Wu TH, Wen MC, Tsai MH (2014) A review of rotorcraft unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) developments and applications in civil engineering. Smart Struct Syst 13(6):1065–1094CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ludeno G, Catapano I, Renga A, Rodi A, Fasano G, Soldovieri F (2018) Assessment of a micro-UAV system for microwave tomography radar imaging. Remote Sens Environ 212:90–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Marris E (2013) Fly, and bring me data: Unmanned aerial vehicles are poised to take off as popular tools for scientific research. Nature 498:156–158Google Scholar
  40. Martínez-carricondo P, Agüera-vega F, Carvajal-ramírez F, Mesas-carrascosa F, García-ferrer A, Pérez-porras F (2018) Assessment of UAV-photogrammetric mapping accuracy based on variation of ground control points. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 72:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Milstein M (2011) Unmanned aerial vehicles redefine the term non stop flight. https://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today/distance-runners-41727425/. Accessed 27 November 2017
  42. Mishra V, Fuloria S, Bisht SS (2012) Enhancing disaster management by mapping disaster proneness and preparedness. Disasters 36(3):382–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mogili UR, Deepak BBVL (2018) Review on application of drone systems in precision agriculture. Proced Comput Sci 133:502–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mohammed N, Edwards R, Gale A (2018) Optimisation of flooding recovery for Malaysian universities. Proced Eng 212:356–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mohammed TA, Al-Hassoun S, Ghazali AH (2011) Prediction of flood levels along a stretch of the langat river with insufficient hydrological data. Pertanika J Sci Technol 19(2):237–248Google Scholar
  46. Mohd T, Saraf MHM, Pin SFBC, Hasbullah MN (2016) Designing the invention house assessment form for Kuala Krai, Malaysia. Proced Social Behav Sci 234:317–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mozas-Calvache AT, Pérez-García JL, Cardenal-Escarcena FJ, Mata-Castro E, Delgado-García J (2012) Method for photogrammetric surveying of archaeological sites with light aerial platforms. J Archaeol Sci 39(2):521–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Mustaffa CS, Marzuki NA, Ariffin MT, Salleh NA, Rahaman NH (2014) Relationship between social support, impression management and well-being among flood victims in Malaysia. Proced Soc Behav Sci 155:197–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Nitta Y, Inai S, Matsumura K, Ishida M, Onai T, Nishitani A (2017) The visual inspection methodology for ceiling utilizing the blimp. Proced Eng 188:256–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Nonami K, Kendoul F, Suzuki S, Wang W, Nakazawa D (2010) Fundamental modeling and control of small and miniature unmanned helicopters. Autonomous Fly Robots Unmanned Aer Vehicles Micro Aer Vehicles 17:33–61Google Scholar
  51. Othman AZ, Dahlan A, Borhani SN, Rusdi H (2016) Post-traumatic stress disorder and quality of life among flood disaster victims. Proced Soc Behav Sci 234:125–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Paneque-Gálvez J, McCall MK, Napoletano BM, Wich SA, Koh LP (2014) Small drones for community-based forest monitoring: An assessment of their feasibility and potential in tropical areas. Forests 5:1481–1507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pereira E, Bencatel R, Correia J, Félix L, Gonçalves G, Morgado J, Sousa J (2009) Unmanned air vehicles for coastal and environmental research. J Coast Res 56:1557–1561Google Scholar
  54. Perks MT, Russell AJ, Large ARG (2016) Technical note: Advances in flash flood monitoring using unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Hydrology Earth Syst Sci 20(10):4005–4015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Pregnolato M, Ford A, Wilkinson SM, Dawson RJ (2017) The impact of flooding on road transport: A depth-disruption function. Transp Res Part D: Transp Environ 55:67–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rakha T, Gorodetsky A (2018) Review of unmanned aerial system (UAS) applications in the built environment: Towards automated building inspection procedures using drones. Autom Constr 93:252–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Rancangan Malaysia Kesebelas (2015) Pursuing Green Growth for Sustainability and Resilience. PutrajayaGoogle Scholar
  58. Rollason E, Bracken LJ, Hardy RJ, Large ARG (2018) The importance of volunteered geographic information for the validation of flood inundation models. J Hydrol 562:267–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Roosli R, Collins AE (2016) Key lessons and guidelines for post-disaster permanent housing provision in Kelantan, Malaysia. Proced Eng 145:1209–1217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Ruiz Estrada MA, Koutronas E, Tahir M, Mansor N (2017) Hydrological hazard assessment: The 2014–15 Malaysia floods. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 24:264–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Shen D, Rui Y, Wang J, Zhang Y, Cheng L (2015) Flood inundation extent mapping based on block compressed tracing. Comput Geosci 80:74–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Silva LDO, De Mello Bandeira RA, Gouvêa Campos VB (2017) The use of UAV and geographic information systems for facility location in a post-disaster scenario. Transp Res Proced 27:1137–1145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Smith MW, Carrivick JL, Hooke J, Kirkby MJ (2014) Reconstructing flash flood magnitudes using structure-from-motion: a rapid assessment tool. J Hydrol 519:1914–1927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Tanguy M, Chokmani K, Bernier M, Poulin J, Raymond S (2017) River flood mapping in urban areas combining Radarsat-2 data and flood return period data. Remote Sens Environ 198:442–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Tonkin TN, Midgley NG, Graham DJ, Labadz JC (2014) The potential of Ssmall unmanned aircraft systems and structure-from-motion for topographic surveys: A test of emerging integrated approaches at Cwm Idwal, North Wales. Geomorphology 226:35–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Tuna G, Mumcu TV, Gulez K, Gungor VC, Erturk H (2012) Unmanned aerial vehicle aided wireless sensor network deployment system for post-disaster monitoring. Commun Comput Inf Sci 304:298–305Google Scholar
  67. Turner IL, Harley MD, Drummond CD (2016) UAVs for coastal surveying. Coast Eng 114:19–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Uysal M et al (2015) DEM generation with UAV photogrammetry and accuracy analysis in Sahitler Hill. Measurement J Int Measurement Confed 73:539–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Verhoeven GJJ, Loenders J, Vermeulen F, Docter R (2009) Helikite aerial photography—A versatile means of unmanned, radio controlled, low-altitude aerial archaeology. Archaeol Prospec 16(2):125–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Visser F, Wallis C, Sinnott AM (2013) Optical remote sensing of submerged aquatic vegetation: opportunities for shallow clearwater sreams. Limnologica 43(5):388–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. White SM, Madsen EA (2016) Tracking tidal inundation in a coastal salt marsh with helikite airphotos: influence of hydrology on ecological zonation at Crab Haul Creek, South Carolina. Remote Sens Environ 184:605–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Xiao Y, Yi S, Tang Z (2017) Integrated flood hazard assessment based on spatial ordered weighted averaging method considering spatial heterogeneity of risk preference. Sci Total Environ 599–600:1034–1046CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Xiongkui H, Bonds J, Herbst A, Langenakens J (2017) Recent development of unmanned aerial vehicle for plant protection in East Asia. Int J Agric Biol Eng 10(3):18–30Google Scholar
  74. Xu Z, Yang J, Peng C, Wu Y, Jiang X, Li R, Zheng Y, Gao Y, Liu S, Tian B (2014) Development of an UAS for post-earthquake disaster surveying and its application in Ms7.0 Lushan Earthquake, Sichuan. China. Comput Geosci 68:22–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Zhang D, Quan J, Zhang H, Wang F, Wang H, He X (2015) Flash flood hazard mapping: A pilot case study in Xiapu River Basin. China. Water Sci Eng 8(3):195–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Zoccatelli D, Borga M, Zanon F, Antonescu B, Stancalie G (2010) Which rainfall spatial information for flash flood response modelling? A numerical investigation based on data from the Carpathian Range, Romania. J Hydrol 394:148–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shazrizil Zakaria
    • 1
    Email author
  • Muhammad Razif Mahadi
    • 1
  • Ahmad Fikri Abdullah
    • 1
  • Khalina Abdan
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering, Department of Biological and Agricultural EngineeringUniversiti Putra, MalaysiaSerdangMalaysia

Personalised recommendations