Both Mission Planner and DroidPlanner have recently added features for simplifying aerial survey. These tools help take the guesswork out of mission planning with cameras onboard, taking pictures to be stitched into a mosaic. Rather than manually specifying a grid flight pattern, you can instead specify you camera, desired operational altitude, and triggering method. The survey tool takes care of the rest, and allows you to see the expected coverage as well as estimates of ground resolution, required number of pictures, and other statistics.
Survey is completely airframe independent and works for both copter and plane. By framing the mission planning problem in terms of aircraft operation and desired result, rather than the means to that result, planning is vastly simplified, repeatable, and easy to do in the field.
Fly the camera, not the plane!
The current version of DroidPlanner now supports the following features in Survey:
- Simple user interface
- Multiple supported cameras
- Real-time visualization of the flight plan
- Projected camera footprint visualization
- Calculated statistics, such as coverage area and mission length
The current version of Mission Planner now supports the following features in Survey:
- Both simple and advanced user interfaces
- Multiple supported cameras and custom camera definition
- Automatic camera parameter identification by photo upload
- Real-time visualization of the flight plan
- Projected camera footprint visualization
- Calculated statistics, such as coverage area and mission length
- Trigger type selection and auto population of the distance-based trigger, CAM_TRIGG_DIST
This is the first of a series of posts explaining the end-to-end process of aerial survey, from planning to stitching. The wiki will be updated with tutorials on 1) mission planning, 2) aircraft setup and operation, 3) camera control and 4) post-processing. And new features are always being added, so stay tuned!
Comments
Hi,
Great work!
I am new with the drones and I would appreciate if someone please guide to what autopilot I need for an autonomous take off and Landing for aerial surveying
I have found the Panda 2, APM 2.6 and PX4 FMU
Thank you in advance
Brandon,
I'm trying to create a mission over a mine with very deep terrain. I want to plan the mission at a constant MSL altitude. I don't think I can do this with the survey tool. Any advice?
What is the altitude in reference to in the tool? Is this off of the Home altitude? It should probably be labeled. Can the Absolute Alt or Verify Height function on the Flight Plan page work with this tool?
Also I found a bug. The survey tool only uses metric. When I enter 100m altitude and then press "Accept", it enters 100 in the flight plan even though the Mission Planner is set to Imperial. So the plane will end up flying at 100ft rather than 100m which could be dangerous. There are no labels in the flight plan to assist in knowing what the units are.
I'll add to the Phantom love here. Handles high winds and is super resilient. Gets the job done. I've flown the techpod as well, and it's now sitting on the shelf being cannibalized for parts.
I'm just glad to hear that it can fly in 30 m/s winds, because that's been a concern of mine. I was interested in the techpod until I heard it cruises at 10 m/s. That just won't work for me.
I need something that flies in real weather conditions. Super long duration isn't as important as cruising speed, IMO.
Ok, good to know. Yeah, my main gripe with the X5 is the dividers in the payload compartment--I removed all of them because they make it really hard to lay out components. I'd say the phantom is a bit more aggressive in flight and can bank harder/quicker. They're both about the same in terms of stability. I dont have too much data off the X5, but i'd guess that it's roll dynamics are a bit slower and therefore generates less blurry pictures.
We fly a Skywalker, Skyhunter, Phantom, X5 Bormatec Camflyer, and a few other standard wings. I like the X5 too, but wasnt aware there is a new model. The one I have is a bit tough to place components in, and the lid isn't as nice as on the Phantom, but otherwise it is great. The servo horns mounted on the top are a nice touch and add some robustness.
Has anyone flown both?
Hi Rob! Are you talking about this video?
http://3drobotics.com/2013/10/drones-wine-how-uavs-can-help-farmers...
The Phantom is an absolutely stellar plane. In terms of dollars spent per minute of flight, it's approaching zero. The airframe is incredibly robust (crashed it many many times), has a nicely sized payload bay, and handles excellently in wind (up to 30kts).
Right now I run the following: 900Kv, 8x6, 4S 2800. I can get about 30 minutes of flight time out of that with no wind, maybe more, I haven't pushed it too much.
4S 5000 would be big I think, but it fits--just tried. It's a bit of a juggling act to get the CG right with the camera placement. I have the camera all the way up front, which is where the battery wants to be too. If I had to do it again, I'd put the camera more on the CG and have more room for the battery up front. Happy to send you pictures of my build. I also have a 3D printed camera case/mount the fits nicely in the nose but would work in middle as well I think. Happy to send you the stl.
Nice videos Brandon, thanks.
There's a video posted on Facebook that goes with this I think. Looks like you're using a Phantom FX-6? What has been your experience with that airplane?
I'm going to be looking for something for mapping like this. I'd like to be able to fit a 4S 5000 battery as that's my main pack that I use. I think that's a bit big for that airframe though?
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
of 4 Next