Collecting Built Environment Information Using UAVs: Time and Applicability in Building Inspection Activities

Rachele Grosso, Umberto Mecca, Giuseppe Moglia, Francesco Prizzon and Manuela Rebaudengo
Additional contact information
Rachele Grosso: Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24, 10129 Torino, Italy
Umberto Mecca: Department of Structural, Geotechnical and Building Engineering, Responsible Risk Resilience Centre, Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24, 10129 Torino, Italy
Giuseppe Moglia: Department of Structural, Geotechnical and Building Engineering, Responsible Risk Resilience Centre, Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24, 10129 Torino, Italy
Francesco Prizzon: Interuniversity Department of Regional and Urban Studies and Planning, Responsible Risk Resilience Centre, Politecnico di Torino, Viale Mattioli 39, 10125 Torino, Italy
Manuela Rebaudengo: Interuniversity Department of Regional and Urban Studies and Planning, Responsible Risk Resilience Centre, Politecnico di Torino, Viale Mattioli 39, 10125 Torino, Italy

Sustainability, 2020, vol. 12, issue 11, 1-15

Abstract: The Italian way of thinking about maintenance is too often one-sided. Indeed, it is considered not so much as a useful practice to prevent the occurrence of a fault (ex ante), but as an intervention to solve it (ex post). Analyzing the legislation relating to the construction sector, it can be seen that it does not clearly define the responsibilities, timescales and methods in which maintenance interventions must be planned and carried out. For this reason, this practice is still very weak compared, for example, to the industrial sector, where it is an established practice. Currently, the complexity of reading the maintenance plans drawn up by designers and the considerable costs associated with maintenance operations discourage owners and managers from even carrying out preliminary inspection operations. This research aims to stimulate these stakeholders to carry out inspection operations regularly, highlighting their costs and benefits. In particular, working on a case study in Piedmont, the costs of visual inspections carried out in the traditional way are compared with those that would be incurred if unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) were used. Finally, the collateral benefits of inspections carried out with UAVs are highlighted.

Keywords: maintenance plan; preventive maintenance; buildings inspections; inspection costs; UAV (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/11/4731/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/11/4731/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:11:p:4731-:d:369468

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().