Friday, 2 October 2015
DroneLab Interviewed by Saul from Websand in popular internet "podcast"
Tuesday, 8 September 2015
How drones can deliver tangible benefits to ordinary people in Africa
Following last week's article about drones and how they're being used in conservation programmes in South Africa, here's a broader look at the use of drones in a variety of applications across the continent and the benefits unmanned aircraft can bring to the wider population.
Author :: Thomas Snitch, University of Maryland
They are called unmanned aerial vehicles but are better known as drones. These are small aerial vehicles with fixed wings or small rotors, are usually powered with batteries, and equipped with a high resolution camera.
Drones range in cost from $99 to tens of thousands of dollars. But they are truly a disruptive technology in that they can do what piloted airplanes can but in cheaper, better, and – in many cases – more efficient ways.
In less than five years we will see unmanned aerial vehicles being flown on a myriad of missions doing good. They can be a game-changer on the African continent.
Practical applications
As part of on-going experimentation at the University of Maryland, we have been flying small unmanned aerial vehicles in southern Africa for more than two years. We have found that they can be used in a number of practical ways in the medical field, agriculture, tourism and to protect the environment.
Drones have already shown their effectiveness in combatting rhino and elephant poaching. Equipped with thermal imaging cameras and absolutely silent, drones can see animals and poachers in the bush at night.
But there are a range of uses drones can be put to. They can be used for precision agriculture to help farmers decide when and where to apply fertiliser or irrigate crops. Drones are also great for monitoring the depths of water holes.
We have found that unmanned aerial vehicles can be used to monitor fence lines so that instead of having individuals driving for hours every day to inspect the integrity of a fence, a low-flying unmanned aerial vehicle can videotape and analyse the structure of a fence in under an hour. If there are breaks in the fence, the drone’s computer can geo-tag the exact location.
In one park location we used an unmanned aerial vehicle instead of having two rangers drive the entire length of the fence. This resulted in savings of 51 litres of fuel a day. When calculated over a year the savings in fuel paid for the drone.
An unmanned aerial vehicle can also be dispatched when smoke is sighted in the sky. It can provide live video of a possible fire in minutes when it could take rangers several hours to drive to the location. This use has been exceptionally powerful during the day and at night.
There are also many ways that drones can be used to provide benefits to eco-tourists visiting lodges. Rather than driving around for hours looking for animals, the unmanned aerial vehicles can be dispatched to fly in front of a safari vehicle to scan the area for sightings. Happy tourists are likely to recommend a lodge to future visitors.
Finally, we are working on a project to use longer range unmanned aerial vehicles for flights of up to 30 kilometres to deliver medicines to remote villages. High-value but lightweight medicines are the perfect items for delivery by drones. This could be extraordinarily important to areas that may be cutoff during the rainy season.
Barriers to approval
Like many places around the world, the development of unmanned aerial vehicles technology has unfortunately outpaced the regulatory capability of national governments. As a result it is very difficult to obtain official permission to fly a drone – for any reason – in any African country. For example, the Kenyan government has refused to grant permission to fly unmanned aerial vehicles in the highly threatened Tsavo West National Park.
Where we have tried to fly unmanned aerial vehicles, we have had to get permission from the host nation’s civil aviation authority, the national and local police, the military – usually the air force – and the intelligence community. The ministry of environment or tourism also has to be approached, but is usually the easiest place to obtain clearance to fly.
These efforts require many visits to Africa, countless forms that must be filled in, dozens of meetings with government agencies, and – in most cases – a denial based on an ill-informed understanding of unmanned aerial vehicle technology. Months and years have been wasted while the needs of many remain unmet.
Drones are a tool, nothing more. When used appropriately, they are a valuable tool with tangible benefits. Thirty years ago people feared computers but now the cellphone has become ubiquitous. Drones will soon become just as common for the good of the continent.
Thomas Snitch, Visiting Professor in Advanced Computer Studies, University of MarylandThis article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
Tuesday, 1 September 2015
Satellites, mathematics and drones take down poachers in Africa
In 2014, 1,215 rhinos were killed in South Africa for their horns, which end up in Asia as supposed cures for a variety of ailments. An estimated 30,000 African elephants were slaughtered last year for their tusks to be turned into trinkets. The world loses three rhinos a day and an elephant every 15 minutes. Simply stated, this is an unsustainable situation.
Our team at the University of Maryland’s Institute for Advanced Computer Studies has created a new multifaceted approach to combat poaching in Africa and Asia. We devise analytical models of how animals, poachers and rangers simultaneously move through space and time by combining high resolution satellite imagery with loads of big data – everything from moon phases, to weather, to previous poaching locations, to info from rhinos' satellite ankle trackers – and then applying our own algorithms. We can predict where the key players are likely to be, so we can get smart about where to deploy rangers to best protect animals and thwart poachers.
The real game changer is our use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) or drones, which we have been flying in Africa since May 2013. We’ve found that drones, combined with other more established technology tools, can greatly reduce poaching – but only in those areas where rangers on the ground are at the ready to use our data.
Scope of the problem
In the past 10 years, the poaching of elephants and rhinos has increased exponentially, primarily because it’s a very lucrative criminal business. Rhino horns can fetch more than US$500,000 or over $50,000 per kilogram – this is more than the cost of any illegal narcotic – and a pair of elephant tusks can reach US$125,000. Most of these illegal activities are run by Asian criminal syndicates and there are well-founded beliefs that some of these proceeds are being funneled to political extremists in Africa.
Being smart about deploying technology
Technology is a marvelous tool but it must be the right solution for a particular problem. Engineering solutions that might work with the US military looking for people planting IEDs in Afghanistan will not necessarily work in the African bush, at night, searching for poachers. The most challenging question about how UAVs are used in Africa is when and where to fly them.
Africa is too big to be simply launching small drones into the night sky with the hope of spotting rhinos or poachers by chance. This is where the analytical models come into play. Based on our models, we know, with near 90% certainty, where rhinos are likely to be on a particular night between 6:30 and 8:00, prime time for killings. At the same time, by mathematically recreating the environment when previous poachings have occurred, we have a very good idea of when and where poachers are likely to strike.
We don’t have to find poachers, we just need to know where the rhinos are likely to be.
For example, a large proportion of poachings occur on the days around a full moon; it makes sense since that’s when poachers can easily see their prey. In one area where we have months of experience, we discovered that nearly every poaching occurred with 160 meters of a road. It’s simple. The poachers are driving the perimeter of the park in the late afternoon spotting animals near the park fence; they return just after sundown, kill the animal and drive away. We pile on the data, and the algorithms do the rest.
Data informs on-the-ground rangers
The key is that the satellites, the analytics and math, and the UAVs are integrated into a solutions package. We crunch the data, and the model tells us precisely where we should deploy our rangers, on any specific night, so they will be in front of the rhinos and can intercept the poachers before they reach the target animal. After all, there’s no value in rangers patrolling parts of the park that these animals are unlikely to ever visit. Consider that South Africa’s Kruger National Park is the size of the state of New Jersey. Like a bank robber who robs banks because that’s where the money is, we want our rangers to be near the rhinos because that’s where the poaching is.
On our first UAV flight in South Africa, the UAV flew to our pre-determined spot and immediately found a female rhino and her calf; they were within 30 meters of a major road. We decided to circle the drone over the rhinos and within minutes a vehicle stopped at the park’s fence. Three individuals exited the car and began to climb the fence to kill the rhinos. Our rangers had been pre-deployed to the area; they arrested the three poachers in under 3 minutes. This episode has been repeated dozens of times over the past 20 months.
The most critical issue is not how far or how long a UAV can fly but how fast can a ranger be moved, in the bush at night, to successfully intercept poachers. The UAVs are simply our eyes in the night sky. Watching their live infrared video streams, we move our rangers as if they were chess pieces. Even with great math, we have some variance and that means we might be 200 meters off a perfect positioning. The UAVs can see poachers at least 2 kilometers from the rhinos. So we have 45 minutes to move our people into the most optimal position – based on our real world trials on how quickly they can move through the bush at night.
We’ve had hundreds of night flights with over 3,000 flight hours in the past 20 months and here is what we’ve learned. First, on the first few days after we begin operating in a new area, we arrest a number of poachers and they’re being prosecuted to the fullest extent of local laws.
Second, our models are heuristic in that they are constantly learning and self-correcting, on the lookout for changes in the patterns they’ve identified. This is critical since poachers will try to change their behavior once they learn that they are at an extremely high risk of apprehension. The sheer number of animals being killed shows us that, up until the UAVs take to the air, most poachers have been able to operate with impunity.
The most important finding is that in every area where we have put our solutions package to work and the UAVs are flying, poaching stops with 5 to 7 days. Period – it stops. Tonight we are flying in a very challenging area in southern Africa – we don’t identify our flight operations so as not to alert the poachers – and over the past 90 days, there has not been one single poaching incident. Four months ago, this region was losing several rhinos a week.
The good news is that we have proof of concept and proof on the ground that UAVS can make a tremendous difference. The bad news is that the poachers are moving to regions where we are not operating. To really address the challenges of poaching in the region, all the nations in southern Africa should be willing at least to test our system in their most critically endangered areas.
Our solution to the poaching problem lies in the combination of satellite monitoring, great math, properly positioned rangers and UAVS flying precise flight paths. It works.
Thomas Snitch is Visiting Professor in Advanced Computer Studies at University of Maryland
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
Monday, 24 August 2015
Electric aircraft – the future of aviation or just wishful thinking?
Electric aircraft – the future of aviation or just wishful thinking?
Peter Wilson, University of BathSince the dawn of aviation, planes have primarily been powered by carbon-based fuels such as gasoline or kerosene. These contain a lot of energy for their weight, providing the vast power required to lift large commercial airliners on journeys across the globe. But with oil resources declining and penalties on greenhouse gas emissions increasing, the future of aviation is dependent on finding an alternative power source. Is electricity the answer?
A first step is to develop “more electric aircraft” – jet-powered planes that maximise the use of electricity for all the other aircraft systems. The idea is to significantly reduce fuel consumption by improving overall energy efficiency. In practice, this means reducing the weight of the aircraft, reducing drag with improved aerodynamics and optimising the flight profile to use less fuel.
But though these improvements can save on fuel, that alone isn’t enough. The shift to more sustainable aircraft requires major, longer-term solutions.
Such significant innovations have often been driven by military requirements. The jet turbine engine was developed during World War II and the US Air Force’s Chuck Yaeger first broke the sound barrier in the Bell X-1 as part of the Cold War race to achieve supersonic speeds. The drive for new technologies led to massive improvements in performance and reliability, which has since filtered through to commercial aviation and made mass intercontinental air travel a reality.
Concorde was the ultimate expression of this transformation from military to high-performance commercial aircraft, but despite its phenomenal performance it was plagued by complaints of excessive noise and pollution. Modern jet air travel still consistently raises such environmental concerns and, while the military has an obvious incentive to design the fastest aircraft, its motivation to go green is less obvious. We may need to look elsewhere for the next big innovation.
Cleaning up the skies?
Solar-powered endurance aircraft have received a lot of attention recently, with the Solar Impulse team attempting to make the first round-the-world flight. But solar power, while an interesting technical challenge, is not a particularly realistic option for mass transit of passengers. As can be seen from the Solar Impulse aircraft, the power output from the Solar Panels on a very wide wingspan is able to transport only the aircraft and the pilot for any significant distance.
Battery storage is the key limiting factor for electric aircraft. If electric aircraft are held back by either weight or fuel restrictions, it’s probably down to the battery. Aircraft typically have a longer fuelling time than a car, so rapid recharging is possible and effective, as current jet aircraft take about the same time to refuel (and also for passenger and cargo turnaround) so electric charging of about 1hr is reasonable, however the critical problem is energy density – how much energy does the battery provide for its weight?
Typical lithium-ion batteries in use today have a maximum energy density of around 1,000,000 joules of energy per kilogram, and while newer research promises the possibility of higher densities, these are not available commercially. A million joules sounds like a lot. However, compare this with 43 million joules per kilogram for aviation fuel. Swapping the fuel tanks for a battery weighing 43 times as much isn’t a viable option – clearly there’s a significant storage problem to be solved before electricity can power large aircraft over long distances.
The future for electric air travel
So where does electric power fit in the long-term vision for consumer air travel? Despite the obvious technical challenges, The Airbus prototype E-Fan aircraft is due to be put into production by 2017. The E-fan is a very light two-seater plane powered by two electric motors, with a relative speed and carrying capacity far lower than those required by commercial carriers. However,
Within the next decade, this technology may extend to short-range commuter and business aircraft – especially targeting routes that still use conventional propeller propulsion. Airbus has medium-term plans for such an aircraft, with a target capacity of perhaps 60 passengers – making it a suitable platform for short-haul commuter flights.
Safety and reliability must be addressed before electric aircraft are adopted by commercial airlines. Much as the electric car still has to achieve a critical level of public confidence, perceived reliability will have a significant impact on consumer trust in new aircraft.
If prototypes such as the E-Fan can build public confidence, this may mark a “tipping point” in overcoming the technical challenges inherent in any new form of transportation, especially in aviation which has a track record of rapid innovation. Advances – particularly in new materials, storage and power electronics technology – may offer the prospect of purely electric commercial aircraft within the next two decades.
Peter Wilson is Professor of Electronics & Systems Engineering at University of Bath
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.