Hostname: page-component-65f69f4695-bpjsd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-06-26T07:31:49.192Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Optimal flight path planning for micro-UAV-based aerial imaging using the colony-based search algorithm

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 June 2025

P. Civicioglu Open the ORCID record for P. Civicioglu [Opens in a new window]
P. Civicioglu*
Affiliation:
Department of Aircraft Electrics and Electronics, Faculty of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Türkiye
*
Email: civici@erciyes.edu.tr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Micro-UAV systems used for metric purposes are highly capable of capturing relatively high-resolution, chromatically stable aerial images at low altitudes. In micro-UAV-based aerial imaging-based structure-from-motion (a-SfM) applications, the flight mission planning problem can be customised to achieve different objectives. The requirement for minimising the time spent in the air, which is crucial for energy conservation, can be achieved by designing the shortest possible flight path. Spatial resolution in the captured aerial images can be significantly preserved by maintaining the ground sampling distance (GSD) value within a 95${\rm{\% }}$ confidence interval throughout the flight path. Fuel efficiency can be improved by minimising the number of turning manoeuvers required to follow the flight path during the flying mission. In this paper, four distinct flight mission planning processes are delineated to enable the energy-efficient and effective implementation of aerial imaging missions, with their associated parameters optimised using the colony-based search algorithm (CSA). The obtained experimental results demonstrate that the proposed flight mission planning processes are highly successful in the energy-efficient and effective execution of aerial imaging missions.

Keywords

micro-UAVflight mission planningcolony-search algorithmground-sample distance

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , First View , pp. 1 - 16
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Aeronautical Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Dancila, B.D. and Botez, R.M. Vertical flight path segments sets for aircraft flight plan prediction and optimisation, Aeronaut J, 2018, 122, (1255), pp 1371–1424.10.1017/aer.2018.67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guo, A., Anderson, D. and Botez, R.M. Vector field path following of a full-wing solar-powered Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) landing based on Dubins path: a lesson from multiple landing failures, Aeronaut J, 2021, 125, (1290), pp 1283–1312.10.1017/aer.2021.26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutierrez-Martinez, M.A., et al. Genetic algorithm-based path planning of quadrotor UAVs on a 3D environment, Aeronaut J, 129, (1334), 2025, pp 902–938.10.1017/aer.2024.132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, J. and Anderson, D. Reactive route selection from pre-calculated trajectories – application to micro-UAV path planning, Aeronaut J, 2011, 115, (1172), pp 635–640.10.1017/S0001924000006321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hameed, R.U., et al. Reinforcement learning-based radar-evasive path planning: a comparative analysis, Aeronaut J, 2022, 126, (1297), pp 547–564.10.1017/aer.2021.85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thoma, A., et al. Prioritising paths: An improved cost function for local path planning for UAV in medical applications, Aeronaut J, 2023, 127, (1318), pp 2125–2142.10.1017/aer.2023.68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hao, G.Q., et al. UAV path planning based on improved artificial potential field method, Aerospace, 2023, 10, (6), p 562.10.3390/aerospace10060562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, J.H., et al. A practical interlacing-based coverage path planning method for fixed-wing UAV photogrammetry in convex polygon regions, Aerospace, 2022, 9, (9), p 521.10.3390/aerospace9090521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, J.C., et al. Coverage path planning method for agricultural spraying UAV in arbitrary polygon area, Aerospace, 2023, 10, (9), p 755.10.3390/aerospace10090755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chai, X.Z., et al. Multi-strategy fusion differential evolution algorithm for UAV path planning in complex environment, Aerosp Sci Technol, 2022, 121, p 107287.10.1016/j.ast.2021.107287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, Y., Wang, H.L. and Yao, P. Energy-optimal path planning for Solar-powered UAV with tracking moving ground target, Aerosp Sci Technol, 2016, 53, pp 241–251.10.1016/j.ast.2016.03.024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pehlivanoglu, Y.V., Baysal, O. and Hacioglu, A. Path planning for autonomous UAV via vibrational genetic algorithm, Aircr Eng Aerosp Technol, 2007, 79, (4), pp 352–359.10.1108/00022660710758222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, G.L., et al. Path Planning of UAV Using Levy Pelican Optimization Algorithm In Mountain Environment, Appl Artif Intell, 2024, 38, (1), pp 2368343.10.1080/08839514.2024.2368343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simoes, D.P., Oliveira, H.C. and Garcia, M.V.Y. UAV 3-D Path Planning Based on High-Resolution DSM, DTM, and True Orthomosaic, IEEE Geosci Remote Sens Lett, 2022, 19, pp 1–5.10.1109/LGRS.2022.3219733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salach, A., et al. Accuracy assessment of point clouds from LiDAR and dense image matching acquired using the UAV platform for DTM creation, ISPRS Int J Geo-Inf, 2018, 7, (9), p 342.10.3390/ijgi7090342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maguya, A.S., Junttila, V. and Kauranne, T. Adaptive algorithm for large scale DTM interpolation from lidar data for forestry applications in steep forested terrain, ISPRS J Photogramm Remote Sens, 2013, 85, pp 74–83.10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2013.08.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cabo, C., et al. Influence of the number and spatial distribution of ground control points in the accuracy of UAV-SfM DEMs: An approach based on generalized additive models, IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens, 2021, 59, (12), pp 10618–10627.10.1109/TGRS.2021.3050693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, K., et al. An enhanced multi-view vertical line locus matching algorithm of object space ground primitives based on positioning consistency for aerial and space images, ISPRS J Photogramm Remote Sens, 2018, 139, pp 241–254.10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2018.03.017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Y.X., et al. 6-DOF UAV Path planning and tracking control for obstacle avoidance: a deep learning-based integrated approach, Aerosp Sci Technol, 2024, 151, pp 109320.10.1016/j.ast.2024.109320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puente-Castro, A., et al. UAV swarm path planning with reinforcement learning for field prospecting, Appl Intell, 2022, 52, (12), pp 14101–14118.10.1007/s10489-022-03254-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feng, R.H., et al. Resource allocation and path planning for RSMA-enabled UAV-VLC networks considering UAV jitter, Appl Opt, 2025, 64, (8), pp 1809–1820.10.1364/AO.543238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cong, W.Y., et al. An improved pied kingfisher optimizer for maritime UAV path planning, Appl Sci-Basel, 2024, 14, (24), p 11816.10.3390/app142411816CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, J., et al. RJA-star algorithm for UAV path planning based on improved R5DOS model, Appl Sci-Basel, 2023, 13, (2), p 1105.10.3390/app13021105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ortiz-Sanz, J., Bastos, G. and Gil-Docampo, M. Deformation measurement of twisted timber beam using UAV SfM photogrammetry and a new feature extraction algorithm, Eur J Wood Wood Prod, 2025, 83, (2), p 88.10.1007/s00107-025-02245-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martínez-Fernández, A., et al. The influence of image properties on high-detail SfM photogrammetric surveys of complex geometric landforms: The application of a consumer-grade UAV camera in a rock glacier survey, Remote Sens, 2022, 14, (15), p 3528.10.3390/rs14153528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
You, G.P., et al. Mixed-strategy Harris Hawk optimization algorithm for UAV path planning and engineering applications, Appl Sci-Basel, 2024, 14, (22), p 10581.10.3390/app142210581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yu, Y. and Lee, S.H. Efficient multi-UAV path planning for collaborative area search operations, Appl Sci-Basel, 2023, 13, (15), p 8728.10.3390/app13158728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, N., et al. A UAV coverage path planning method based on a diameter-height model for mountainous terrain, Appl Sci-Basel, 2025, 15, (4), p 1988.10.3390/app15041988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guo, C., Huang, L. and Tian, K. Combinatorial optimization for UAV swarm path planning and task assignment in multi-obstacle battlefield environment, Appl Soft Comput, 2025, 171, p 112773.10.1016/j.asoc.2025.112773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Civicioglu, P. and Besdok, E. A plus Evolutionary search algorithm and QR decomposition based rotation invariant crossover operator. Exp Syst Appl, 2018, 103, pp 49–62.10.1016/j.eswa.2018.03.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ouyang, J., et al. Optimization of beamforming and path planning for UAV-assisted wireless relay networks, Chin J Aeronaut, 2014, 27, (2), pp 313–320.10.1016/j.cja.2014.02.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gong, C., et al. Energy-efficient task migration and path planning in UAV-enabled mobile edge computing system, Complexity, 2022, 2022, p 269102.10.1155/2022/4269102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, N., et al. Large-area coverage path planning method based on vehicle-UAV collaboration, Applied Sciences-Basel, 2025, 15, (3), p 1247.10.3390/app15031247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, J.Q., et al. Hybrid chaos game and grey wolf optimization algorithms for UAV path planning, Appl Math Modell, 2025, 142, p 115979.10.1016/j.apm.2025.115979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pan, S.H., et al. Optimal coverage path planning for UAV-assisted multiple USVs: Map modeling and solutions, Drones, 2025, 9, (1), p 30.10.3390/drones9010030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Konar, M., Cam, O. and Aktas, M.O. BSO algorithm and artificial neural network aided emission optimisation for gas turbine engine, Aeronaut J, 2024, 129, pp 107–122.10.1017/aer.2024.96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Konar, M., Hatipoglu, S.A. and Akpinar, M. Improvement of UAV thrust using the BSO algorithm-based ANFIS model, Aeronaut J, 2024, 128, (1328), pp 2364–2373.10.1017/aer.2024.30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gunen, M.A., et al. Camera calibration by using weighted differential evolution algorithm: a comparative study with ABC, PSO, COBIDE, DE, CS, GWO, TLBO, MVMO, FOA, LSHADE, ZHANG and BOUGUET, Neural Comput Appl, 2020, 32, (23), pp 17681–17701.10.1007/s00521-020-04944-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dhruva, A., et al. Effective UAV photogrammetry for forest management: New insights on side overlap and flight parameters, Forests, 2024, 15, (12), p 2135.10.3390/f15122135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Domingo, D., et al. Effects of UAV image resolution, camera type, and image overlap on accuracy of biomass predictions in a tropical woodland, Remote Sens, 2019, 11, (8), p 948.10.3390/rs11080948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, P., et al. Improved adaptive snake optimization algorithm with application to multi-UAV path planning, Trans Inst Meas Control, 2024, 47, (8), pp 1639–1650. https://doi.org/10.1177/01423312241263637 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, J., et al. Agricultural UAV path planning based on a differentiated creative search algorithm with multi-strategy improvement, Machines, 2024, 12, (9), p 591.10.3390/machines12090591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, B., et al. A hybrid ARO algorithm and key point retention strategy trajectory optimization for UAV path planning, Drones, 2024, 8, (11), p 644.10.3390/drones8110644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liang, H.J., et al. Solving UAV 3D path planning based on the improved lemur optimizer algorithm, Biomimetics, 2024, 9, (11), p 654.10.3390/biomimetics9110654CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhu, Z.F., Hu, J.L., Wen, J.J. Evaluation of quantitative accuracy of obstacle status for substation UAV inspection, Comput. Simul., 2022, 39, p 387–391.Google Scholar
Fu, S.W., et al. Red-billed blue magpie optimizer: A novel metaheuristic algorithm for 2D/3D UAV path planning and engineering design problems, Artif Intell Rev, 2024, 57, (6), p 134.10.1007/s10462-024-10716-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zheng, J.B., et al. Distributed stochastic algorithm based on enhanced genetic algorithm for path planning of multi-UAV cooperative area search, IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst, 2023, 24, (8), pp 8290–8303.10.1109/TITS.2023.3258482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, W., et al. Cooperative localisation of UAV swarm based on adaptive SA-PSO algorithm, Aeronaut J, 2023, 127, (1307), pp 57–75.10.1017/aer.2022.54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, H.Y., et al. UAV swarm collaborative coverage control using GV division and planning algorithm, Aeronaut J, 2023, 127, (1309), pp 446–465.10.1017/aer.2022.78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yao, J.Y., et al. IHSSAO: An improved hybrid Salp swarm algorithm and aquila optimizer for UAV path planning in complex terrain, Appl Sci-Basel, 2022, 12, (11), p 5634.10.3390/app12115634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Civicioglu, P. and Besdok, E. Colony-based search algorithm for numerical optimization, Appl Soft Comput, 2024, 151, p 111162.10.1016/j.asoc.2023.111162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Civicioglu, P. and Besdok, E. Bernstein-Levy differential evolution algorithm for numerical function optimization, Neural Comput Appl, 2023, 35, (9), pp 6603–6621.10.1007/s00521-022-08013-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Civicioglu, P. Backtracking Search Optimization Algorithm for numerical optimization problems, Appl Math Comput, 2013, 219, (15), pp 8121–8144.Google Scholar
Civicioglu, P. Artificial cooperative search algorithm for numerical optimization problems, Inform Sci, 2013, 229, pp 58–76.10.1016/j.ins.2012.11.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, Y.N., et al. GSDDet: Ground Sample Distance-Guided Object Detection for Remote Sensing Images, IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens, 2024, 62, p 5626012.Google Scholar
Lee, Y., Son, J., Kim, T. Determination of optimal ground sampling distance for matching GCP chips and satellite images, In 24th ISPRS Congress On Imaging Today, Foreseeing Tomorrow, Nice, France, 2022.Google Scholar
Peng, A.S., et al. Design of a ground sampling distance graphical user interface for an unmanned aerial vehicle system, In 53rd Annual Conference on Information Sciences and Systems (CISS), Baltimore, MD, 2019.10.1109/CISS.2019.8692786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, J.H. and Sull, S. Regression tree CNN for estimation of ground sampling distance based on floating-point representation, Remote Sens, 2019, 11, (19), pp 2276.10.3390/rs11192276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turef, 2022, https://www.tusaga-aktif.gov.tr/ Google Scholar
https://asterweb.jpl.nasa.gov/gdem.asp Google Scholar