Capabilities of UAV Photo Technology for Detailed Mapping of Pipelines

Abstract:

Mapping pipeline networks and their support is essential to asset information systems and asset integrity in supporting energy security. Important information from pipeline asset integrity, including pipeline network, support position, and condition, must be monitored well to allow damage to be detected as early as possible. The challenge of mapping the pipeline network and its support is the volume of the pipeline network, which can reach tens or even hundreds of kilometers. The technology often used for mapping pipeline assets is terrestrial surveys with total stations and GNSS-RTK. Alternative rapid mapping that can be an option is UAV LiDAR or UAV photos. Finding alternative pipeline mapping technology for accurate and economical mapping needs to be considered. This research analyzed the capabilities of UAV photos for mapping pipelines and their support in a 3 km-long pipeline area. With its rapid data acquisition, the point cloud extracted from UAV photos is used for pipeline and support location detection and its height. Furthermore, the appropriateness of UAV photo technology for pipeline mapping was tested compared to UAV LiDAR technology and GNSS terrestrial mapping on two practical parameters, namely (1) technical ability to provide results according to standards and expected output with a weight of 70% and (2) cost-effectiveness with a weight of 30%. Each parameter is then detailed and scored. The results of the analysis of the appropriateness of UAV photos compared to UAV LiDAR and the GNSS terrestrial survey found that the highest score was obtained by UAV LiDAR at 21.2, followed by the GNSS terrestrial survey at 15.9. The UAV photo method for pipeline network mapping only scored 12.5, the lowest among the three technologies. The UAV photo method falls on the assessment of technical capabilities, especially the ability to obtain the height of the pipeline and its support to the ground and the height of the surrounding environment. Given that height information is an inseparable part of the results of topographic maps and pipeline alignment that must be produced from pipeline network mapping surveys.

• Periodical: Engineering Headway (Volume 27)
• Pages: 532-554
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/p-EfKJO3
• Online since: October 2025
• Authors: Q. Iwan Himawan*, Listiyo Fitri, Nurrohmat Widjajanti, H. Iqbal Azizi
• Keywords: Appropriateness Scoring, Cost-Effectiveness, Pipeline, UAV LiDAR, UAV-SfM

References

[1] Himawan Q Iwan., Fitri Listiyo., Widjajanti, N., Azizi, H. Iqbal. (2024) Geomatics International Conference 2024 on Pipeline Modeling using UAV LiDAR Technology.

DOI: 10.12962/geoid.v19i3.2271

[2] Westoby, M. J., Brasington, J., Glasser, N. F., Hambrey, M. J., & Reynolds, J. M. (2012). 'Structure-from-Motion'photogrammetry: A low-cost, effective tool for geoscience applications. Geomorphology, 179, 300-314

DOI: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2012.08.021

[3] Jones, C.A. and Church, E. (2020). Photogrammetry is for everyone: Structure-from-motion software user experiences in archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, 30, 102261

DOI: 10.1016/j.jasrep.2020.102261

[4] James, M.R.; Chandler, J.H.; Eltner, A.; Fraser, C.; Miller, P.E.; Mills, J.P.; Noble, T.; Robson, S.; Lane, S.N. Guidelines on the use of structure-from-motion photogrammetry in geomorphic research. Earth Surf. Process. Landf. 2019, 44, 2081–2084

DOI: 10.1002/esp.4637

[5] Štroner, M.; Urban, R.; Seidl, J.; Reindl, T.; Brouˇcek, J. Photogrammetry Using UAV-Mounted GNSS RTK: Georeferencing Strategies without GCPs. Remote Sens. 2021, 13, 1336

DOI: 10.3390/rs13071336

[6] Ruzgien ˙e, B.; Berteška, T.; Geˇcyte, S.; Jakubauskien˙e, E.; Aksamitauskas, V. ˇC. The surface modelling based on UAV Photogrammetry and qualitative estimation. Measurement 2015, 73, 619–627.

DOI: 10.1016/j.measurement.2015.04.018

[7] Nesbit, P.; Hugenholtz, C. Enhancing UAV–SfM 3D Model Accuracy in High-Relief Landscapes by Incorporating Oblique Images. Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 239

DOI: 10.1016/j.measurement.2015.04.018

[8] Aguera-Vega, F.; Ferrer-Gonzalez, E.; Carvajal-Ramirez, F.; Martinez-Carricondo, P.; Rossi, P.; Mancini, F. Influence of AGL flight and off-nadir images on UAV-SfM accuracy in complex morphology terrains. Geocarto Int. 2022, 37, 12892–12912

DOI: 10.1080/10106049.2022.2074147

[9] Dai, W.; Qiu, R.; Wang, B.; Lu, W.; Zheng, G.; Amankwah, S.O.Y.; Wang, G. Enhancing UAV-SfM Photogrammetry for Terrain Modeling from the Perspective of Spatial Structure of Errors. Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4305

DOI: 10.3390/rs15174305

[10] Sanz-Ablanedo, E.; Chandler, J.H.; Rodríguez-Pérez, J.R.; Ordóñez, C. Accuracy of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) and SfM Photogrammetry Survey as a Function of the Number and Location of Ground Control Points Used. Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 1606

DOI: 10.3390/rs10101606

[11] Lenda, G.; Borowiec, N.; Marmol, U. Study of the Precise Determination of Pipeline Geometries Using UAV Scanning Compared to Terrestrial Scanning, Aerial Scanning and UAV Photogrammetry. Sensors 2023, 23, 8257

DOI: 10.3390/s23198257