SIAD-AERO: A New Methodology for the Inspection of Energy Assets

  • Alexandre DominiceEmail author
  • Fernando Teixeira AbrahãoEmail author
  • Ricardo Augusto TavaresEmail author
  • Alexandre BarretoEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 598)


This paper aims to present the SIAD-AERO Project. The Project has the objective to develop a semiautonomous system for energy assets inspection, capable to deploy embedded sensors in an aerial platform, to capture and process images in the visible, infrared and ultraviolet bands, detecting anomalies automatically and presenting an optimal plan of action. A better quality of service and operational efficiency were the premises guiding the project. The initial requirements for the system have been included and described, as well as a description of the designed system, which includes its four subsystems and its development methodology using Feature Driven Development (FDD). The achieved results are presented, discussing the paradigms broken during the project’s development.


Remotely piloted aircraft Inspection Energy assets 



Authors and researchers would like to thank stakeholders for their trust and partnership in the development of this Project, especially for ANEEL, EDP Brazil Group, ITA and ENERGIAS.


  1. 1.
    France, R., Rumpe, B.: Model-driven development of complex software: a research roadmap. In: 2007 Proceeding of Future of Software Engineering, FOSE 2007, pp. 37–54. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC., ISBN 0-7695-2829-5
  2. 2.
    Highsmith, J., Cockbur, A.: Agile software development: the business of innovation. IEEE Comput. 34(9) (2001)., ISSN 0018-9162
  3. 3.
    Schmidt, D.C.: Model-driven engineering. IEEE Comput. 39(2), 25–31 (2006). ISSN 0018-9162Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Palmer, S.R., Felsing, M.: A Practical Guide to Feature-Driven Development. Pearson Education (2001). ISBN 0130676152Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Eden, C., Ackermann, F.: Group decision and negotiation in strategy making. Group Decis. Negot. 10, 119–140 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Eden, C., Ackermann, F.: SODA: the principles. In: Rosenhead, J., Mingers, J. (eds.) Rational analysis for a problematic world revisited: problem-structuring methods for uncertainty and conflict, pp. 21–41. Wiley, Chichester (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    United States of America. Test and Evaluation Management Guide, 6th edn. Department of Defense, Washington (2012). Accessed 15 Jan 2017Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sargent, R.G.: Verification and validation of simulation models. In: 2007 Proceedings of Winter Simulation Conference, Syracuse, pp. 124–137. IEEE, Syracuse (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Montgomery, D.C.: Design and Analysis of Experiment, 7th edn. Wiley, Hoboken (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kleijnen, J.P.C., et al.: A user’s guide to the brave new world of designing simulation experiments: state-of-the-art review. In-forms: J. Comput., 263–289 (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Huang, J., Rathod, V., Sun, C., Zhu, M., Korattikara, A., Fathi, A., Fischer, I., Wojna, Z., Song, Y., Guadarrama, S., Murphy, K.: Speed/accuracy trade-offs for modern convolutional object detectors. In: IEEE CVPR, vol. 4, July 2017Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ren, S., He, K., Girshick, R., Sun, J.: Faster R-CNN: towards real-time object detection with region proposal networks. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pp. 91–99 (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.EDP BrazilSão PauloBrazil
  2. 2.ITA, Technological Institute of AeronauticsSão José dos CamposBrazil
  3. 3.Energias Energy EfficiencySão José dos CamposBrazil
  4. 4.George Mason UniversityFairfaxUSA

Personalised recommendations