Implementation and evaluation of an autonomous airborne ultrasound inspection system
Source abstract
Abstract
The mobility of an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) offers significant benefits when deploying remote Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) inspections of large-scale assets. Ultrasonic inspection is primarily a contact-based NDT method, that grants the opportunity to remotely monitor the structural health of an industrial asset with enhanced internal integrity information. Presented in this paper is an implementation of an autonomous UAV system, equipped with an ultrasonic thickness measurement payload. This system is designed to conduct ultrasonic inspections of non-magnetic facilities and industrial infrastructure where surface adhesion cannot be achieved magnetically. Operating within a laboratory environment, this system autonomously positioned the transducer on a vertically mounted, unpainted, aluminium sample and completed an ultrasonic thickness measurement without manual intervention. An onboard laser scanner provided instantaneous UAV alignment and standoff error measurements versus the sample’s surface normal vector. While inspecting a region of the aluminium sample with 12.92 mm nominal thickness, the UAV system demonstrated a measurement error of 0.03 mm. During this process, the standard deviation of the craft’s positional error was recorded to be below 63.26 mm, accompanied by an angular alignment error versus the surface normal vector of below 2.71°. The accuracy of the UAV deployed inspection, including thickness measurement accuracy and positional accuracy, depends on many factors. As such, transducer alignment constraints, electrical noise and UAV stability are investigated and discussed. Findings from this paper may be taken to inform future research regarding autonomous airborne ultrasonic inspection of constructed infrastructure and industrial facilities.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Non-Destructive Testing Techniques · Structural Health Monitoring Techniques · Infrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Centre for Ultrasonic Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK
Funding
ESPRC Autonomous Inspection in Manufacturing & Remanufacturing · Pressure Profile Systems, Inc. · Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
References (33)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.ijepes.2017.12.01610.1016/j.ijepes.2017.12.016 ↗
2. 10.1109/ICICEE.2012.7710.1109/ICICEE.2012.77 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.autcon.2017.06.02410.1016/j.autcon.2017.06.024 ↗
4. 10.1002/rob.2030410.1002/rob.20304 ↗
5. 10.1109/ICUAS.2015.715238910.1109/ICUAS.2015.7152389 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.10994010.1016/j.engstruct.2019.109940 ↗
7. Cyberhawk. UAV inspection surveying. 2018.
8. Vertex Air. Drone thermal imaging. [Online]. 2018 [cited 2018 Dec 30]. Available from: http://vertexaccess.co.uk/vertexair/services/thermal-imaging/
9. FLIR. Inspectahire relies on the FLIR GFx320 optical gas imaging camera for maintenance inspections and hydrocarbon leak detection in the offshore oil and gas industry. [Online]. 2017 [cited 2019 Feb 13]. Available from: http://www.flirmedia.com/inspectahire-relies-on-the-flir-gfx320-optical-gas-imaging-camera-for-maintenance-inspections-and-hydrocarbon-leak-detection-in-the-offshore-oil-and-gas-industry.html
10. 10.1049/iet-rpg.2017.000110.1049/iet-rpg.2017.0001 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2015.08.11910.1016/j.compstruct.2015.08.119 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.autcon.2017.12.00110.1016/j.autcon.2017.12.001 ↗
13. Dobie G. Ultrasonic sensor platforms for non-destructive evaluation. 2010 Feb.
14. Farlow R. Low noise techniques applied to a piezoceramic receiver for gas coupled ultrasonic flaw detection. 1998.
15. 10.3390/drones201000810.3390/drones2010008 ↗
16. 10.1784/insi.2018.60.8.46310.1784/insi.2018.60.8.463 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.autcon.2019.10289510.1016/j.autcon.2019.102895 ↗
18. TexoDrone. UAV integrated UT gauge. [Online]. 2018 [cited 2018 Dec 01]. Available from: https://www.texodroneservices.co.uk/service/uav_integrated_ut
19. Apellix. UT. [Online]. 2018 [cited 2018 Dec 12]. Available from: https://www.apellix.com/ut-probe/
20. Hellier CJ · 2003
21. Ascending Technologies. AscTec Firefly Technical Data. Online Webpage. [Online]. 2015 [cited 2018 Nov 07]. Available from: http://wiki.asctec.de/display/AR/AscTec+Firefly#AscTecFirefly-TechnicalData
22. GB Inspection Systems Ltd. Compression wave 0° probes. [Online]. 2018 [cited 2018 Dec 30]. Available from: https://www.gbinspection.com/products/probes-accessories/compression-wave-0-probes
23. Hokuyo. Scanning laser range finder URG-04LX specifications. Online Webpage. [Online]. 2005 [cited 2018 Oct 31]. Available from: https://www.hokuyo-aut.jp/dl/Specifications_URG-04LX_1513063395.pdf
24. Araki M · Control Syst Rob Autom · 2002
25. Vicon. Go further with Vicon MX T-series. [Online]. 2011. [cited 2018 Dec 30]. Available from: https://www.viconpeak.com/downloads/documentation/go-further-with-vicon-mx-t-series
26. 10.1109/JSEN.2016.260182210.1109/JSEN.2016.2601822 ↗
27. Siegwart R · 2011
28. 10.3390/s1906139410.3390/s19061394 ↗
29. KR AGILUS. KUKA. [Online]. 2015 [cited 2018 Dec 30]. Available from: https://www.kuka.com/en-de/products/robot-systems/industrial-robots/kr-agilus
30. Robinson DC · 2014
31. 10.1007/s10514-012-9280-510.1007/s10514-012-9280-5 ↗
32. 10.1017/S037346330500322X10.1017/S037346330500322X ↗
33. 10.1016/j.ultras.2020.10633010.1016/j.ultras.2020.106330 ↗