Site Assessment of Multiple-Sensor Approaches for Buried Utility Detection

Abstract

The successful operation of buried infrastructure within urban environments is fundamental to the conservation of modern living standards. Open-cut methods are predominantly used, in preference to trenchless technology, to effect a repair, replace or install a new section of the network. This is, in part, due to the inability to determine the position of all utilities below the carriageway, making open-cut methods desirable in terms of dealing with uncertainty since the buried infrastructure is progressively exposed during excavation. However, open-cut methods damage the carriageway and disrupt society's functions. This paper describes the progress of a research project that aims to develop a multi-sensor geophysical platform that can improve the probability of complete detection of the infrastructure buried beneath the carriageway. The multi-sensor platform is being developed in conjunction with a knowledge-based system that aims to provide information on how the properties of the ground might affect the sensing technologies being deployed. The fusion of data sources (sensor data and utilities record data) is also being researched to maximize the probability of location. This paper describes the outcome of the initial phase of testing along with the development of the knowledge-based system and the fusing of data to produce utility maps.

3D Buried Utility Location Using A Marching-Cross-Section Algorithm for Multi-Sensor Data Fusion

“…Some examples of sensor data and their hypothesized detections are shown in Figure 1. The techniques for sensor data interpretation are briefly introduced in this section, for more details, please refer to [7,11,20,21,22].

GPR is one of the most used techniques to locate both metallic and non-metallic buried utilities.

…”

“…For example, the Vibro-Acoustics (VA) of ground excitation works better for detecting assets under grass-covered areas than assets under tarmac, whereas on the other hand, GPR works better on tarmac than on grass-covered areas as the ground could be wetter under grass and, thus, have a higher conductivity, reducing the transmission of radar waves. Passive Magnetic Fields (PMF) are used to detect buried cables with electric current passively, and Low Frequency Electromagnetic Fields (LFEM) can be used to detect both pipes and cables [11]. If these multi-sensor data could be integrated appropriately, a more complete and accurate buried utility network could be reconstructed.…”

“…A key component of buried utility location is how to connect those individual hypothesized detections from different sensors to generate utility segments in 3D [11]. In practice, locations with high responses from a detecting sensor are marked on the ground surface with colour-coded paint, then connected by hand by experts to estimate the buried utility lines.…”

Measurement of Wave Attenuation in Buried Plastic Water Distribution Pipes

“…Recently, a survey about the costs of installation/repair work of buried infrastructure in the UK has estimated that street works cost about £7bn in losses for the government annually; Social costs account for about £5.5bn and damage costs are about £1.5bn [1]. The social and environmental effects due to leakage problems are also a matter of concern.…”

Enhancing mindful coordination in fragmented utility construction practices : by developing, implementing and evaluating virtual design and construction models

“…Such reconstructions predominantly involve open-cut methods. These methods progressively expose buried infrastructure, damage roadways and disrupt society's functions of public space (Royal, Atkins et al 2011). Municipalities often put tight deadlines on reconstruction works to minimise this disturbance.…”