Field Test-Based UAS Operational Procedures and Considerations for Construction Safety Management: A Qualitative Exploratory Study

Abstract

Current studies have focused on the exploration of the unmanned aircraft system (UAS) applications in the construction and infrastructure domains, such as progress monitoring, condition inspections, and particularly safety inspection. While their works have had significant contributions to highlighting the potential of the UAS technology, there are still gaps in the lack of operational considerations and workflows established to integrate the UAS into the current safety management program. To fill this gap, this study conducted field tests at commercial building construction worksite by adopting conceptually developed UAS flight protocol. A total of eight flights were performed to collect visual assets and provide for safety professionals at the jobsite with the insight of how this technology can be utilized in accordance with the developed workflow. A total of eight project personnel participated in the UAS flight test at their jobsite as well as post-flight interview to discuss how this technology can meet their safety management task goals. As the qualitative study, this paper narratively described the conceptual procedures consist of three different decision-making processes for ensuring the safe flight of the UAS: pre-flight, flight, and post-flight decision makings. Based on the potential users’ perceptions obtained during the field testing, this presented study focused on three different operational considerations: involving project-based, UAS’s capability and hardware specifications and UAS and project team-based aspects. The main goal of this study proposes a decision-driven workflow for UAS-integrated safety management that encourages sustainable and continuous improvement and documents the operational considerations related to this application. As the qualitative exploratory study, this research is limited to employ only one test-bed environment and the small number of interviewees. However, this study can contribute to a better understanding of the concerns, processes, and further recommendations to safely and effectively implement the UAS into the construction safety management program.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

References

  1. 1.

    Bureau of Transportation Statistics (2019) Contributions to U.S. gross domestic product (GDP): selected industries. Bur. Transp. Stat. https://www.bts.gov/content/contributions-us-gross-domestic-product-gdp-selected-industries-billions-current-dollars. Accessed 21 Feb 2020

  2. 2.

    U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) (2019) 2018 National occupational employment and wage estimates in the United States. https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm#00-0000. Accessed 21 Feb 2020

  3. 3.

    U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) (2018) National census of fatal occupational Injuries in 2017 (Industry by private sector). Bur. Labor Stat. https://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cfch0016.pdf. Accessed 23 Aug 2019

  4. 4.

    Masoud G, Javier I, Walker BN (2014) UAS4SAFETY: the potential of unmanned aerial systems for construction safety applications. In: Construction research congress 2014, American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), pp 1801–1810. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784413517.1

  5. 5.

    Coifman B, McCord M, Mishalani RG, Iswalt M, Ji Y (2006) Roadway traffic monitoring from an unmanned aerial vehicle. IEEE Proc Intell Transp Syst 153:11–20. https://doi.org/10.1049/ip-its:20055014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Kanistras K, Martins G, Rutherford MJ, Valavanis KP (2013) A survey of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for traffic monitoring. In: 2013 International conference on unmanned aircraft systems, Atlanta, GA, pp 221–234. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICUAS.2013.6564694

  7. 7.

    Saad AM, Tahar KN (2019) Identification of rut and pothole by using multirotor unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). Meas J Int Meas Confed 137:647–654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2019.01.093

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Dobson RJ, Brooks C, Roussi C, Colling T (2013) Developing an unpaved road assessment system for practical deployment with high-resolution optical data collection using a helicopter UAV. In: 2013 International conference on unmanned aircraft systems, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), Atlanta, GA, pp 235–243. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICUAS.2013.6564695

  9. 9.

    Zhang C, Elaksher A (2012) An unmanned aerial vehicle-based imaging system for 3D measurement of unpaved road surface distresses. Comput Civ Infrastruct Eng 27:118–129. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8667.2011.00727.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Metni N, Hamel T (2007) A UAV for bridge inspection: visual servoing control law with orientation limits. Autom Constr 17:3–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2006.12.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Gillins MN, Gillins DT, Parrish C (2016) Cost-effective bridge safety inspections using unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). In: Geotechnical and structural engineering congress 2016, American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), Phoenix, AZ, pp 1931–1940. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784479742.16

  12. 12.

    Freimuth H, König M (2018) Planning and executing construction inspections with unmanned aerial vehicles. Autom Constr 96:540–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2018.10.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Lin J, Han K, Golparvar-Fard M (2015) A framework for model-driven acquisition and analytics of visual data using UAVs for automated construction progress monitoring. In: 2015 International workshop on computing in civil engineering, pp 156–164. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784479247.020

  14. 14.

    Siebert S, Teizer J (2014) Mobile 3D mapping for surveying earthwork projects using an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) system. Autom Constr 41:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2014.01.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Kim S, Irizarry J (2019) Human performance in UAS operations in construction and infrastructure environments. J Manag Eng 35:4019026. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000715

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Jenkins D, Vasigh B (2013) The economic impact of unmanned aircraft systems integration in the United States, Arlington, VA. https://higherlogicdownload.s3.amazonaws.com/AUVSI/958c920a-7f9b-4ad2-9807-f9a4e95d1ef1/UploadedImages/New_EconomicReport2013Full.pdf. Accessed 30 Nov 2019

  17. 17.

    de Melo RS, Costa DB, Álvares JS, Irizarry J (2017) Applicability of unmanned aerial system (UAS) for safety inspection on construction sites. Saf Sci 98:174–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.06.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Kim S, Irizarry J, Costa DB (2016) Potential factors influencing the performance of unmanned aerial system (UAS) integrated safety control for construction worksites. In: Construction research congress 2016. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), San Juan, Puerto Rico, pp 2614–2623. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784479827.260

  19. 19.

    Gheisari M, Esmaeili B (2019) Applications and requirements of unmanned aerial systems (UASs) for construction safety. Saf Sci 118:230–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2019.05.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Jazayeri E, Dadi GB (2017) Construction safety management systems and methods of safety performance measurement: a review. J Saf Eng 6:15–28. https://doi.org/10.5923/j.safety.20170602.01

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Robson LS, Clarke JA, Cullen K, Bielecky A, Severin C, Bigelow PL, Irvin E, Culyer A, Mahood Q (2007) The effectiveness of occupational health and safety management system interventions: a systematic review. Saf Sci 45:329–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2006.07.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Choudhry RM, Dongping F, Sherif M (2007) Developing a model of construction safety culture. J Manag Eng 23:207–212. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(2007)23:4(207)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Hasanzadeh S, Esmaeili B, Dodd MD (2017) Impact of construction workers’ hazard identification skills on their visual attention. J Constr Eng Manag 143:4017070. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    O’Toole M (2002) The relationship between employees’ perceptions of safety and organizational culture. J Saf Res 33:231–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4375(02)00014-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Woodcock K (2014) Model of safety inspection. Saf Sci 62:145–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2013.08.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Toole TM (2002) Construction site safety roles. J Constr Eng Manag 128:203–210. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2002)128:3(203)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Zhou Z, Irizarry J, Li Q (2013) Applying advanced technology to improve safety management in the construction industry: a literature review. Constr Manag Econ 31:606–622. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2013.798423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Zhang M, Cao T, Zhao X (2017) Applying sensor-based technology to improve construction safety management. Sensors (Basel) 17:1841. https://doi.org/10.3390/s17081841

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Kim S, Woo S, Lee S (2014) Identification of IT application areas and potential solutions for perception enhancement to improve construction safety. KSCE J Civ Eng 18:365–379. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-014-0173-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Zou Y, Kiviniemi A, Jones SW (2017) A review of risk management through BIM and BIM-related technologies. Saf Sci 97:88–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.12.027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Teizer J, Allread BS, Fullerton CE, Hinze J (2010) Autonomous pro-active real-time construction worker and equipment operator proximity safety alert system. Autom Constr 19:630–640. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2010.02.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Li H, Chan G, Skitmore M (2013) Integrating real time positioning systems to improve blind lifting and loading crane operations. Constr Manag Econ 31:596–605. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2012.756144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Zhong D, Lv H, Han J, Wei Q (2014) A practical application combining wireless sensor networks and internet of things: safety management system for tower crane groups. Sensors 14:13794–13814. https://doi.org/10.3390/s140813794

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Khadka G, Hwang S-S (2017) Tag-to-tag interference suppression technique based on time division for RFID. Sensors 17:78. https://doi.org/10.3390/s17010078

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Wu W, Yang H, Chew DAS, Yang S, Gibb AGF, Li Q (2010) Towards an autonomous real-time tracking system of near-miss accidents on construction sites. Autom Constr 19:134–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2009.11.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Bansal VK (2011) Application of geographic information systems in construction safety planning. Int J Proj Manag 29:66–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.01.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Irizarry J, Costa DB (2016) Exploratory study of potential applications of unmanned aerial systems for construction management tasks. J Manag Eng 32:05016001. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Austin R (2010) Unmanned aircraft systems: UAVs design, development and deployment. Wiley, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) (2011) ICAO Cir 328, Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS), Montréal, Quebec, Canada. https://www.icao.int/Meetings/UAS/Documents/Circular328_en.pdf. Accessed 30 Nov 2019

  40. 40.

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) (2016) Summary of small unmanned aircraft rule (Part 107), Washington DC. https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/Part_107_Summary.pdf. Accessed 21 Feb 2020

  41. 41.

    Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) (2016) Advisory circular: small unmanned aircraft systems AC 107-2. https://www.faa.gov/documentlibrary/media/advisory_circular/ac_107-2.pdf. Accessed 21 Feb 2020

  42. 42.

    Michele H (2019) Unmanned aerial vehicles in construction: an overview of current and proposed rules. In: Construction research congress 2016. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), San Juan, Puerto Rico, pp 588–596. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784479827.060

  43. 43.

    Puri A, Valavanis KP, Kontitsis M (2007) Statistical profile generation for traffic monitoring using real-time UAV based video data. In: 2007 Mediterranean conference on control and automation. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), Athens, Greece, pp 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/MED.2007.4433658

  44. 44.

    Kim S, Paes D, Lee K, Irizarry J, Johnson EN (2019) UAS-based airport maintenance inspections: lessons learned from pilot study implementation. In: ASCE International Conference on Computing in Civil Engineering 2019. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), Atlanta, GA, pp 382–389. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784482445.049

  45. 45.

    Omar T, Nehdi ML (2017) Remote sensing of concrete bridge decks using unmanned aerial vehicle infrared thermography. Autom Constr 83:360–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2017.06.024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. 46.

    Liu J, Jennesse M, Holley P (2016) Utilizing light unmanned aerial vehicles for the inspection of curtain walls: a case study. In: Construction research congress 2016. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), San Juan, Puerto Rico, pp 2651–2659. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784479827.264

  47. 47.

    Sampaio ÁJ, Costa DB (2018) Exploratory study of using unmanned aerial system imagery for construction site 3D mapping. Constr Innov 18:301–320. https://doi.org/10.1108/CI-05-2017-0049

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. 48.

    Alizadehsalehi S, Yitmen I, Celik T, Arditi D (2018) The effectiveness of an integrated BIM/UAV model in managing safety on construction sites. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2018.1504487

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. 49.

    Irizarry J, Gheisari M, Walker BN (2012) Usability assessment of drone technology as safety inspection tools. J Inf Technol Constr 17:194–212

    Google Scholar 

  50. 50.

    Howard J, Murashov V, Branche CM (2018) Unmanned aerial vehicles in construction and worker safety. Am J Ind Med 61:3–10. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.22782

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. 51.

    DJI (2017) DJI phantom 3 professional. https://www.dji.com/phantom-3-pro. Accessed 21 Feb 2020

  52. 52.

    Cavaignac A, Uchoa J (2018) Obtaining FMEA’s indices for occupational safety in civil construction: a theoretical contribution. Braz J Oper Prod Manag. https://doi.org/10.14488/bjopm.2018.v15.n4.a9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. 53.

    Zarei E, Khakzad N, Cozzani V, Reniers G (2019) Safety analysis of process systems using Fuzzy Bayesian Network (FBN). J Loss Prev Process Ind 57:7–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2018.10.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by Unilever Inc., Grant No. 4956643. The research team acknowledges the valuable participation of the project owner (Unilever Inc.) and general contractor (Whiting-Turner Contractor Company).

Funding

The content of this paper includes (1) field testing protocol to simulate the UAS-based safety management process in the construction worksite, (2) conceptual procedures (workflow) for UAS-integrated construction safety management, as well as (3) test-based operational considerations for sustainable and continuous improvement of the application. The findings are very significant contributions because the previous studies have only focused on the proof of concept of the UAS safety inspection or exploring the applicability or feasibility of this concept as a safety inspection tool. Based on the field testing and interview with industry experts who participated in the test process, this study presented three main considerations; (1) project background-based; (3) UAS capability-based; (3) project and UAS team-based considerations. This research presented a conceptual decision-making loop for UAS-integrated safety management. Also, lessons learned (implications), limitations of the study, further ideas, and recommendations are documented in this paper. This study can contribute to a better understanding of the researchers and practitioners to strengthen and broaden the body of knowledge and practices surrounding UAS applications in construction safety and health.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sungjin Kim.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kim, S., Irizarry, J. & Costa, D.B. Field Test-Based UAS Operational Procedures and Considerations for Construction Safety Management: A Qualitative Exploratory Study. Int J Civ Eng 18, 919–933 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-020-00512-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • Unmanned aircraft system (UAS)
  • Construction safety management
  • Safety inspection
  • Field test
  • Operational considerations
  • Procedures