RSPEC and Pavement conformance analysis using a photogrammetric mapping system from an UAV

Sansom, Benjamin (2018) RSPEC and Pavement conformance analysis using a photogrammetric mapping system from an UAV. [USQ Project]


Since record keeping began survey technology has been constantly evolving. With this evolution, survey practices, speed and accuracy have also improved. One of these advances in technology has been the use of aerial photogrammetry. Whilst this process has been around for decades the use of an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) is a new concept and with improvements in orthorectification post processing technology as well as advances in camera technology we can look to analyse and determine if the use of a UAV via photogrammetry will achieve the same if not better accuracies than that of traditional survey methods and to whether the formatting output is acceptable for use in RSPEC (Road Specification Survey) and pavement conformance council requirements, also along with these findings if the use of a UAV is quicker or more cost effective than traditional methods.

This research has be undertaken by conducting a survey in the traditional method in line with best survey practises required for the survey application. The survey has then be compared with photogrammetry by the use of a UAV survey. A point cloud/DEM (Digital Elevation Model) and line work file has been generated from the orthorectified images. The point cloud and line work file has then be compared against the survey by traditional methods to see how the UAV photogrammetric survey compares to the survey undertaken by traditional methods for both horizontal positioning and alignment. This will complete the comparison with the RSPEC survey requirements. Elevation differences have also been compared to help understand the differences. This process has been undertaken to analyse and determine if the UAV photogrammetric survey is suitable for the determination of pavement conformances.

From our results we can see that the differences in flying height have resulted in a minor difference in our comparisons from 30m flying height to our 50m flying height. It can be seen that the average error in results of -0.002m for the 30m flying height to the average error of 0.008m for the 50m flying height. This results in a 0.010m differential between the 30m and 50m flying heights.

Additionally it has been found that an average error of 0.037m difference in our horizontal errors for our 30m flying height and an average error of 0.048m for our 50m flying height. These results will be analysed and reported on in more detail throughout this report.

Statistics for USQ ePrint 40647
Statistics for this ePrint Item
Item Type: USQ Project
Item Status: Live Archive
Additional Information: Bachelor of Spatial Science (Honours)(Surveying)
Faculty/School / Institute/Centre: Historic - Faculty of Health, Engineering and Sciences - School of Civil Engineering and Surveying (1 Jul 2013 - 31 Dec 2021)
Supervisors: Gharineiat, Zahra
Date Deposited: 09 Sep 2021 04:52
Last Modified: 09 Sep 2021 04:52

Actions (login required)

View Item Archive Repository Staff Only