Review article: the use of remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPASs) for natural hazards monitoring and management

Abstract

Abstract. The number of scientific studies that consider possible applications of remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPASs) for the management of natural hazards effects and the identification of occurred damages strongly increased in the last decade. Nowadays, in the scientific community, the use of these systems is not a novelty, but a deeper analysis of the literature shows a lack of codified complex methodologies that can be used not only for scientific experiments but also for normal codified emergency operations. RPASs can acquire on-demand ultra-high-resolution images that can be used for the identification of active processes such as landslides or volcanic activities but can also define the effects of earthquakes, wildfires and floods. In this paper, we present a review of published literature that describes experimental methodologies developed for the study and monitoring of natural hazards. IntroductionIn the last three decades, the number of natural disasters showed a positive trend with an increase in the number of affected populations. Disasters not only affected the poor and characteristically more vulnerable countries but also those thought to be better protected. The Annual Disaster Statistical Review describes recent impacts of natural disasters on the population and reports 342 naturally triggered disasters in 2016 (Guha-Sapir et al., 2017). This is less than the annual average disaster frequency observed from 2006 to 2015 (376.4 events). However, natural disasters are still responsible for a high number of casualties (8733 death). In the period 2006-2015, the average number of causalities caused annually by natural disasters is 69 827. In 2016, hydrological disasters (177) had the largest share in natural disaster occurrence (51.8 %), followed by meteorological disasters (96; 28.1 %), climatological disasters (38; 11.1 %) and geophysical disasters (31; 9.1 %) (Guha-Sapir et al., 2017). To face these disasters, one of the most important solutions is the use of systems able to provide an adequate level of information for correctly understanding these events and their evolution. In this context, surveying and monitoring natural hazards gained importance. In particular, during the emergency phase it is very important to evaluate and control the phenomenon of evolution, preferably operating in near real time or real time, and consequently, use this information for a better risk assessment scenario. The available acquired data must be processed rapidly to support the emergency services and decision makers.Recently, the use of remote sensing (satellite and airborne platform) in the field of natural hazards and disasters has become common, also supported by the increase in geospatial technologies and the ability to provide and process up-to-date imagery (Joyce et al., 2009;Tarolli, 2014). Remotely sensed data play an integral role in predicting hazard events such as floods and landslides, subsidence events and other ground instabilities. Because of their acquisition mode and capabilPublished by Copern...

The use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for engineering geology applications

“…The most common use for UAV is acquisition of images and videos for monitoring (Gonzalez et al 2016), photogrammetry (Eisenbeiß 2009), filming, security (Mademlis et al 2018), and any kind of documentation (Nageli et al 2017), also for geological applications (Bemis et al 2014;Giordan et al 2018). Different categories of cameras are now available for this kind of applications: professional, semi-professional, and action cams.…”

“…The use of UAV has progressively increased in the last decade and nowadays started to be considered a standard research instrument for the acquisition of images and other information on demand over an area of interest. The possible field of activity of these systems has progressively expanded and now ranges from archaeological applications (Rinaudo et al 2012;Nex and Remondino 2014;Nikolakopoulos et al 2017b), to smart farming (Zhang and Kovacs 2012), to the management of natural hazards (Gomez and Purdie 2016;Giordan et al 2018). It is possible to find different names or acronyms to describe the same object: an aerial drone.…”

Volcanological applications of unoccupied aircraft systems (UAS): Developments, strategies, and future challenges

“…In some scientific disciplines, UAS use might be considered more developed than in volcanology, and several general and subject-specific reviews contain relevant insight for volcanological applications [e.g. Bhardwaj et al 2016;Colomina and Molina 2014;Dering et al 2019;Giordan et al 2018;Nex and Remondino 2014;Turner et al 2016;Villa et al 2016;Zhang and Kovacs 2012]. Here, we build on a recent review of the use of small UAS in volcanic landscapes [Jordan 2019], to explore the wider application of UAS in volcanology, and detail the procedures involved.…”

Monitoring Alpine Glaciers From Close-Range to Satellite Sensors

“…Thanks to development of terrestrial laser scanning (TLS -Vosselman and Maas, 2010) and the success of Structure-from-Motion (SfM - Granshaw, 2018b), in the latest 20 years this sector of photogrammetric 3D modelling (also called Terrestrial Photogrammetry) has significantly expanded. With the diffusion of drones (Giordan et al, 2018;Granshaw, 2018a), the possibility of reconstructing the terrain topography and the objects located on its surface by using high-resolution digital photos has impressively grown up. Mostly, the approach adopted to process the images acquired by drones is still based on SfM, which also allows to deal with less regular block geometry than in the case of standard aerial blocks (Barazzetti et al, 2010).…”