Paper Titles
Modeling and Analysis of Hydrodynamics in Filtration Systems
p.215
Results of Research into the Physical and Mechanical Properties of Biopolymer Gravel Composite Block Filters for Hydrogeological Wells
p.226
Trolley Trucks in the Mining Industry: Analysis of Current Experience and Prospects for Development in Ukraine
p.241
Synthesis of a Complex of Mathematical Models of Excavator Use Processes over Time
p.248
Development of a Methodology for the Integrated Use of RTK and Non-RTK Drones to Optimize Surveying Monitoring
p.257
Mixed Electromagnetic Crack-Face Conditions in a Piezoelectric/Piezomagnetic Bimaterial under Antiplane Mechanical Loading and In-Plane Electric Fields
p.267
Application of Canonical Polynomials for Describing the Stress-Strain State of Rotating Disks
p.276
Analysis of the Design of Filter Cartridge Covers for Respirators against Dust
p.286
Development of a Software-Hardware Complex for Continuous Monitoring of Drilling Fluid Rheology
p.300

Development of a Methodology for the Integrated Use of RTK and Non-RTK Drones to Optimize Surveying Monitoring

Article Preview

Abstract:

This study presents integrated methodology for using RTK and non-RTK UAV systems in open-pit mining surveying. Three experiments were performed using DJI Mavic 3E RTK and DJI Mini 3 Pro drones at an altitude of 61.5 m with an overlap of 80%×75% over identical sites. A network of 12 precisely located control points allowed for a comparative assessment of the accuracy between RTK+GCP, non-RTK+GCP, and RTK-only configurations. Statistical analysis using multivariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) confirmed the significance of the positioning technology for survey accuracy. The RTK system achieved RMS errors of 2.88-5.23 cm versus 17.27-22.94 cm for non-RTK systems, representing a 5-6-fold increase in accuracy. This comparison demonstrates that RTK without ground control points maintains comparable accuracy (5.23 cm) to RTK with control points (4.45 cm), while reducing operating costs by 84%. Analysis of camera position accuracy showed an accuracy of 2.04-2.06 cm RMS regardless of the use of control points. These results confirm that RTK methodology is cost-effective for standard surveying, achieving geodetic-grade accuracy without traditional field support infrastructure. The methodology allows for continuous monitoring of mining operations while reducing costs and increasing accuracy.

You might also be interested in these eBooks
International Conference: Challenges of Ensuring Ukraine's Mineral Resources in the Context of Post-War Reconstruction (CEUMR) View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Advances in Science and Technology (Volume 172)

Pages:

257-264

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/p-3cOOtb

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

January 2026

Authors:

Oleksandr Yanovych*, Volodymyr Levytskyi, Oleg Shapochnikov

Keywords:

DEM(Digital Elevation Models), Drone Positioning Accuracy, GCP(Ground Control Points), Measurements, Open-Pit Surveying, Processing, RTK Technology, UAV Photogrammetry

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Request Permissions

Permissions PLS:

Request Permissions

Сopyright:

© 2026 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Share:

Citation:

* - Corresponding Author

References

[1] State Construction Standards of Ukraine, DBN V.1.3-2:2010. A system for ensuring the accuracy of geometric parameters in construction. Geodetic works in construction, Minregionbud of Ukraine, Kyiv, 2010.

Google Scholar

[2] DSTU-N B V.1.3-1:2009. System for ensuring the accuracy of geometric parameters in construction. Measurements, calculation and control of the accuracy of geometric parameters. Guideline, Minregionbud of Ukraine, Kyiv, 2009.

Google Scholar

[3] Instruction on topographic survey at scales of 1:5000, 1:2000, 1:1000 and 1:500, GKNTA-2.04-02-98, Main Department of Geodesy, Cartography and Cadastre, Kyiv, 1998.

Google Scholar

[4] P. Martínez-Carricondo, F. Agüera-Vega, F. Carvajal-Ramírez, Accuracy assessment of RTK/PPK UAV-photogrammetry projects using differential corrections from multiple GNSS fixed base stations, Geocarto Int. 38 (2023) 2197507.

DOI: 10.1080/10106049.2023.2197507

Google Scholar

[5] C. Stöcker, F. Nex, M. Koeva, M. Gerke, Accuracy assessment of real-time kinematics (RTK) measurements on unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) for direct geo-referencing, Geo-spatial Inf. Sci. 23 (2020) 165–181.

DOI: 10.1080/10095020.2019.1710437

Google Scholar

[6] Y. Taddia, F. Stecchi, A. Pellegrinelli, Assessment of accuracy in unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) pose estimation with the REAL-time kinematic (RTK) method on the example of DJI Matrice 300 RTK, Sensors 23 (2023) 2092.

DOI: 10.3390/s23042092

Google Scholar

[7] S. He, X. Chen, Z. Wang, D. Chen, X. Yang, J. Peng, A review of UAV monitoring in mining areas: current status and future perspectives, Int. J. Coal Sci. Technol. 6 (2019) 320–333.

DOI: 10.1007/s40789-019-00264-5

Google Scholar

[8] S. Park, Y. Choi, Applications of unmanned aerial vehicles in mining from exploration to reclamation: a review, Minerals 10 (2020) 663.

DOI: 10.3390/min10080663

Google Scholar

[9] P. Rossi, F. Mancini, M. Dubbini, F. Mazzone, A. Capra, Combining nadir and oblique UAV imagery to reconstruct quarry topography: methodology and feasibility analysis, Eur. J. Remote Sens. 50 (2017) 211–221.

DOI: 10.1080/22797254.2017.1313097

Google Scholar

[10] G. Esposito, G. Mastrorocco, R. Salvini, M. Oliveti, P. Starita, Application of UAV photogrammetry for the multi-temporal estimation of surface extent and volumetric excavation in the Sa Pigada Bianca open-pit mine, Sardinia, Italy, Environ. Earth Sci. 76 (2017) 103.

DOI: 10.1007/s12665-017-6409-z

Google Scholar

[11] X. Zhan, J. Liu, X. Lian, B. Wang, Comparative analysis of surface deformation monitoring in a mining area based on UAV-lidar and UAV photogrammetry, Photogramm. Rec. 39 (2024) 89–112.

DOI: 10.1111/phor.12490

Google Scholar

[12] M.V. Peppa, J. Hall, J. Goodyear, J.P. Mills, Photogrammetric assessment and comparison of DJI phantom 4 pro and phantom 4 RTK small unmanned aircraft systems, Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci. 42 (2019) 503–509.

DOI: 10.5194/isprs-archives-xlii-2-w13-503-2019

Google Scholar

[13] G. Söğütcü, Ş. Kaya, Monitoring slope stability: a comprehensive review of UAV applications in open-pit mining, Land 14 (2024) 1193.

DOI: 10.3390/land14061193

Google Scholar

[14] V. Glotov, A. Gunina, Development and research of UAVs for aerial photography, Geodesy, Cartography and Aerial Photography 87 (2018) 68–80.

DOI: 10.23939/istcgcap2018.01.065

Google Scholar

[15] V. Hlotov, Y. Shylo, Y. Yatskivskyi, N. Kablak, M. Nychvyd, Study of karst manifestations in Solotvyno based on aerial photography from a UAV, Rep. Geod. Geoinformatics 113 (2023) 47–54.

DOI: 10.2478/rgg-2023-0004

Google Scholar