Unknown User (joaoff) will ensure that we have a better user interface to the drone and control of the waypoint. We do not have sideways overlap of the HSI images - we want this in the next test.
Next tests
Want to qualify the camera
Gimbal
Calibrated instrument
Closer lines with overlap
Geometric correction software work
Want to do more coordinated tests
Also with TBS
Deeper water measurements
During the discussions at NASA Ames it was concluded that remote sensing is not sufficient to determine if the algal bloom is harmful or not
If you have the in-situ conditions, salinity, and temperature - you can make a correlation to conclude if the algal bloom is harmful or not
However, you can get an idea of it or not there is an algal bloom
What we want to do is to classify algae
Review of Test Proceedings
There was a plan of doing measurements at the same time between the different instruments.
The water was clear
2um chlorophyll/liter - not typical for coastal areas. Prior to the bloom
The planning was not that relevant to our instrument.
The planner was Mariusz - but Joao executing it.
Joao had a plan for the test before the test plan.
Mariusz made a plan in parallel, but it was not necessary perhaps.
Mapping with and without the camera is not necessary.
Stable conditions, although the poor conditions made it difficult.
Difficult to ensure visibility from the drone due to the interface to the drone (waypoint planning was not precise)
A different drone control would have helped where you could plot GPS or waypoints in a different way.
Can see some of the frames in the hyperspectral images, we think. Not really easy to see.
Mapping the seafloor - not much about the water column.
Relevant to the biologists.
Sun conditions might have helped.
White reference
Outside of water, the camera was saturated because it was calibrated to looking in the water (too bright).
The goal was to get the white solar radiance above and underwater to get the effect of water.
Maritime Robotics kept forgetting things - things took longer than planned.
Camera parameters procedure
Worked (see test report).
Reducing binning factor gives a higher spectral resolution.
Didn't get good data for calibration in the middle of the sensor and around the green wavelength.
Analysis of Results
Got 4.5 GB of data, but a lot of it was too dark.
Possible to see 3 relevant signatures.
Green
Coralline
Brown
Publications
Compare measurements from the drone and the ECOTONE camera (air and in water)
Hyperspectral processing and de-shadowing
Fitting data to a strict model vs. using statistical data to finding interesting things
Non-Conformances
Problems with timing cable connected to the SenTiBoard
Haven't fixed the cable yet
Overall cabling and electronics must be worked on
The drone did not function well (had to be turned on and off - and the payload as well)
Conclusion
Use gimbal for improved performance
What should be on the gimbal?
Would it also need a separate IMU? Or a different solution?
Check all cabling and plan ahead of mechanical assembly
Light conditions were not good
Able to detect good signatures where the bottom is visible
In deeper water, there were no measurements of chlorophyll - and no signatures of interest
Communication between Maritime Robotics and NTNU was not ideal