After testing the UAV performance in Svalbard in March, I realised the original ‘tripod’ landing assembly was not going to cut it for work in the Arctic. To prevent damage from landing in cryoconite holes and to spread the drone’s weight when landing on snow, I have added some ski’s modified from off-the-shelf landing gear for RC helicopters. This also has the added advantage that if one attachment point fails, the UAV is still landable, which is not the case for the tripod design.
As well as the ski’s, I have now added the Red-Edge camera’s down-welling light sensor to the top of the casing. This will automatically correct the images for changes in the ambient light field in each wavelength.
Our new discussion paper, led by Black and Bloom PDRA Andrew Tedstone, examines in detail why there is a stripe of dark, fast-melting ice on the Greenland Ice Sheet, particularly in the south-west. This ‘dark zone’ is clearly visible in satellite imagery of the Greenland Ice Sheet and is important because darker ice melts faster. It is crucial to understand what causes the ice to be dark there because if it grows or darkens in a warming climate then we can expect the deglaciation of Greenland to accelerate more than is currently predicted. There are two main competing hypotheses that could explain the presence of the dark zone: 1) dust melting out from ancient ice is darkening the ice; 2) algae are growing on the ice sheet and changing its colour.
The paper shows that the dark zone changes its shape, size and duration each year. This appears to be most strongly controlled by the sensible heat flux (air temperature) between June and August, number of days with air temperatures above zero, and timing of the snow-line retreat.
These findings provide some insights into which surface processes are most likely to explain the dynamics of the dark zone. The spatial distribution of the dark ice is best explained by the melting out of dust particles from ancient ice, although these particles are not dark enough to explain the colour change of the dark zone. However, these dusts may be crucial nutrients and substrates for ice algae, suggesting that the dusts control where the dark zone is, and the algae determine how dark it gets. Our other recent TCD paper showed how algae can darken ice and snow; however, there are also meteorological conditions required for algal growth including sufficient sunlight and liquid water. We suggest in the paper that the most likely hypothesis is that dust melts out from ancient ice and stimulates the growth of algae when meteorology allows it. Algae need the dust to grow, and the dust is not dark without the algae.
I’m very pleased to report our new paper is now in open discussion in The Cryosphere. The paper presents a new model for predicting the spectral bioalbedo of snow and ice, which confirms that ice algae on ice surfaces can change its colour and by doing so enhance its melt rate (“bioalbedo”). We also used the model to critique the techniques used to measure bioalbedo in the field. The model is based on the SNow ICe and Atmosphere Radiative model (SNICAR), but adapted to interface with a mixing model for pigments in algal cells. We refer to the coupled models as BioSNICAR.
The model uses Mie theory to work out the optical properties of individual algal cells with refractive indices calculated using a pigment mixing model. The user can decide how much of each pigment the cell contains, the cell size, the biomass concentration in each of n vertical layers, the snow/ice optical properties, angle and spectral distribution of incoming sunlight and the mass concentration, optical properties and distribution of inorganic impurities including mineral dusts and black carbon (soot). From this information, the model predicts the albedo of the surface for each wavelength in the solar spectrum. This can then be used to inform an energy balance model to see how much melt results from changes to any of the input values, including growth or pigmentation of algae.
The model shows that smaller cells with photoprotective pigments have the greatest albedo-reducing effect. The model experiments suggest that in most cases algal cells have a greater albedo-reducing effect than mineral dusts (depending upon optical properties) but less than soot.
As well as making predictions about albedo change, the modelling is useful for designing field experiments, as it can quantify the error resulting from certain practises, such as using devices with limited wavelength ranges, or neglecting to characterise the vertical distribution of cells. I’ll cover this in some further posts. The most important thing is metadata collection, since standardising this enables the measurement conditions to be as transparent as possible and encourages complementarity between different projects. Importantly, following a protocol for albedo measurements and collecting sufficient metadata will make it easier to couple ground measurements to satellite data. We outline two key procedures: hemispheric albedo measurement, and hemispherical-conical reflectance factor measurement. To accompany the discussion in our paper, we’ve produced some metadata collection sheets that might be useful to other researchers making albedo measurements in the field (download here: metadata sheets) and made our code and data available in an open repository.
Peter Sinclair and Yale Climate Connections have released an excellent video detailing the role of microbial life in driving Greenland Ice Sheet melt, featuring several researchers from the Dark Snow Project and Black and Bloom. We were lucky enough to have Peter with us for a couple of days at the beginning of our trip in 2016.
Here are a few things I learned after ten days of field testing the UAV multispectral data acquisition in Svalbard…
Video showing take off in stabilize mode, switch to loiter mode at about 5 m, quick control test then into automatic mission.
1. The UAV is surprisingly robust.
The aircraft was transported to the sites on a sled on the back of a snowmobile, hitting sastrugi and general lumps and bumps in the landscape, was hold baggage on three flights, launched and landed in snow, flown in winds and operated at temperatures down to -25 degrees. It is still is perfect working order and flew every mission without issue. I’m now pretty confident in the flight case and arrangement of kit inside, and trust that there won’t be significant flight issues in Greenland in summer.
2. Very low temperatures rapidly deplete the LiPo batteries
One noticeable, and unsurprising, effect of flying in these conditions was that the battry ran down very quickly. The toughest day was about -19 but with strong winds, and we only managed a 2.5 minute automated flight before the battery voltage dropped low enough for me to get twitchy and land the UAV manually.
3. A dGPS and ground control points will be essential for ground truthing the UAV imagery
It was impossible to accurately pinpoint ground sampling locations using handheld GPS and ground feature ID. This was especially true in Svalbard because of the homogenous snow cover, but will also be an issue in Greenland in the summer. This is not really surprising, but the need for an accurate dGPS location lock has been reinforced by the test flights.
4. The workflow for geotagging multispectral images using Photoscan is not as straightforward as I originally thought.
The red-edge camera does not output GeoTIFFs – they have to be postprocessed with ground control point data before they can be stacked and aligned. This is not a big problem, but good to know in advance of summer data collection.
5. New landing gear needed
The three-leg solution currently used on the UAV is better than I expected, but there is still the real problem that the legs sink into soft ground (e.g. snow) which risks pushing the camera lenses and the internal electronics into the snow. This could scratch the lenses or soak the electronics when the snow melts. Also, with the current model, a problem with any one of the three legs compromises the whole UAV because it becomes impossible to land flat. I’m going to develop something new before Greenland.
Video showing manual landing on a patch of compacted snow after an auto mission. It would be more stable on soft ground with a skid-type landing gear rather than the three legs. Includes heckling by Tedstone…!
6. Some a priori knowledge of image area can be useful
High resolution imagery is not available for all locations – for some of our field sites there was not sufficient google earth coverage to orient ourselves or draw a polygon by eye in Mission Planner. It is possible to estimate using the compass and the map scale, but with some existing knowledge of the GPS coordinates of the grid perimeter would help to plan an accurate mission.
7. It’s amazing how small the UAV looks, even when flying quite close by
Even flying the UAV at 30 or 40 m elevation, it quickly becomes difficult to keep track of its orientation when it flies a hundred metres or so on a mission. This does have implications for the length of mission I’d be comfortable flying, since I want to be able to rescue it manually if there are any GPS or autopilot issues – maybe I’m soft but my comfortable range is less than the CAA ‘dronecode’ distance limits- even though these do not currently apply in Svalbard/Greenland. Of course, the conditions (esp. visibility) affect what feels comfortable.
8. The controller is awkward in gloves
At -25 C gloves were pretty essential, but it is also difficult to have fine control over the switches and sticks on the controller. I was flying in a very thin pair of gloves or gloveless, which meant my fingers quickly went numb, especially when there was any wind. This will be less of a problem in Greenland in summer, but I will still get some warmer, thinner gloves with rubber finger pads to help with the UAV control in the cold.
9. Pre-flight checklists are invaluable
It’s so easy to overlook or forget something in harsh conditions or when rushed or excited. The written checklists developed before we went out to Svalbard were extremely useful for making sure everything went smoothly. These are a condition of CAA compliant flights in the UK and our experience in Svalbard demonstrates why! I will probably add a few additional checks or reorder a few things before our Greenland deployment – site specific things like take off and landing zone preparation (in Svalbard it was often a compacted snow platform, in Greenland I intend to use plyboard to avoid melt ponds and cryoconite holes).
Having made successful UAV test flights at home in the Peak District, we have relocated to Svalbard for a week to test the equipment in the most challenging possible conditions. We are flying in temperatures as low as -10 C, in gusty wind and after pulling the UAV to the field site in its flight case on a sled behind a snow scooter. It is taking off and landing on platforms of compacted snow.
Nevertheless, so far it has performed magnificently. There has been no damage even to the delicate props during transport, suggesting the flight case is sufficient, and the autopilot seems to be deftly dealing with the gusty wind. It interfaces quickly with the laptop and it is easy to load a preprogrammed flight, even in these very cold conditions. It was quite difficult to take of and land in ‘stabilize’ mode with the wind though.
A few modifications I’d still like to make include a new landing gear design. The three legs are OK for flat, hard ground, but for ice and snow I think it would be much better to have something with skids, or possibly a circular base, as this would protect it from landing with a leg in a cryoconite hole and prevent the camera touching the snow if the legs sink. Also, at the moment any problem with a single leg compromises the UAV’s ability to land, whereas a unit that joins to the UAV in more than one place would give more redundancy.
The battery life is also significantly reduced in these temperatures. That’s to be expected, but I’m wondering if there are more mods we can make to extend the flight time for surveying big areas in Greenland.
This performance gives me hope for a successful mapping mission in Greenland, where the UAV will be used to map the ice surface in much less demanding conditions than we are experiencing here, but will be worked on more ambitious missions (higher, further, more frequent). We are continuing to test the UAV protocol in the field for a few more days, but will now focus on our methodology for pairing UAV flights with ground sampling rather than flight tech and UAV control.
As a bonus, we were treated to a spectacular aurora on the way in…