15 Dec 2020
15 Dec 2020
Magnetic interference mapping of four types of unmanned aircraft systems intended for aeromagnetic surveying
- 1Dept. of Earth Sciences, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Dr., Ottawa, ON, Canada K1S 5B6
- 2Dept. of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1S 5B6
- 1Dept. of Earth Sciences, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Dr., Ottawa, ON, Canada K1S 5B6
- 2Dept. of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1S 5B6
Abstract. Magnetic interference source identification is a critical preparation step for magnetometer-mounted unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) used for high-sensitivity geomagnetic surveying. A magnetic field scanner was built for mapping the interference that is produced by a UAS. It was used to compare four types of electric-powered UAS capable of carrying an alkali-vapour magnetometer: (1) a single-motor fixed-wing, (2) a single-rotor helicopter, (3) a quad-rotor helicopter, and (4) a hexa-rotor helicopter. The scanner’s error was estimated by calculating the root-mean-square deviation of the background total magnetic intensity over the mapping duration; averaged values ranged between 3.1–7.4 nT. Each mapping was performed above the UAS with the motor(s) engaged and with the UAS facing in two orthogonal directions; peak interference intensities ranged between 21.4–574.2 nT. For each system, the interference is a combination of both ferromagnetic and electrical current sources. Major sources of interference were identified such as servo(s) and the cables carrying direct current between the motor battery and the electronic speed controller. Magnetic intensity profiles were measured at various motor current draws for each UAS and a change in intensity was observed for currents as low as 1 A.
Loughlin E. Tuck et al.


-
RC1: 'Reviewer comments', Anonymous Referee #1, 11 Jan 2021
-
SC1: 'Reply on RC1', Loughlin Edward Tuck, 02 Feb 2021
-
SC1: 'Reply on RC1', Loughlin Edward Tuck, 02 Feb 2021
-
RC2: 'Comments', Anonymous Referee #2, 28 Jan 2021
-
SC2: 'Reply on RC2', Loughlin Edward Tuck, 02 Feb 2021
-
SC2: 'Reply on RC2', Loughlin Edward Tuck, 02 Feb 2021
-
SC3: 'Comment on gi-2020-38', Loughlin Edward Tuck, 03 Feb 2021
-
AC1: 'Comment on gi-2020-38', Loughlin Edward Tuck, 16 Feb 2021


-
RC1: 'Reviewer comments', Anonymous Referee #1, 11 Jan 2021
-
SC1: 'Reply on RC1', Loughlin Edward Tuck, 02 Feb 2021
-
SC1: 'Reply on RC1', Loughlin Edward Tuck, 02 Feb 2021
-
RC2: 'Comments', Anonymous Referee #2, 28 Jan 2021
-
SC2: 'Reply on RC2', Loughlin Edward Tuck, 02 Feb 2021
-
SC2: 'Reply on RC2', Loughlin Edward Tuck, 02 Feb 2021
-
SC3: 'Comment on gi-2020-38', Loughlin Edward Tuck, 03 Feb 2021
-
AC1: 'Comment on gi-2020-38', Loughlin Edward Tuck, 16 Feb 2021
Loughlin E. Tuck et al.
Loughlin E. Tuck et al.
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
629 | 57 | 4 | 690 | 4 | 4 |
- HTML: 629
- PDF: 57
- XML: 4
- Total: 690
- BibTeX: 4
- EndNote: 4
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1