At McSteen, we see innovation and the use of cutting edge technology as a core fundamental that is driving the growth of our company. As a result, we are always on the lookout for new technologies that can help us do our jobs better and more efficiently on behalf of our clients.
We recently tested AirWorks, which is an AI-powered software that turns remote sensing data (i.e., Drone Orthomasic photos and LiDar scans) into pixel-accurate basemaps. This is actually the second time we have tested the Airworks platform, the first time being when it first came out, around 2018. At that time, we tested the software’s functionality and ultimately decided that the product was not mature enough to incorporate into our workflow.
Fast forward to the present day, and we heard enough rumblings about the product throughout the industry that we decided it was time to give it another chance. But first, a little backstory …
Tell us about your initial interest in using drones for ALTA Surveys
While obtaining my B.S. in Mapping and Surveying at the University of Akron, I was part of a team called 3 Alarm Mapping that participated in a competition aimed at Surveyors. The challenge was to complete an ALTA Survey at a self-storage facility at a significant cost decrease, turnaround, and drafting time. We presented a case that demonstrated a concept of how an ALTA Survey could be completed cheaper, faster, and more efficiently, although the technologies weren’t quite there yet.
Essentially, we presented that an ALTA could be done by completing a Boundary Survey using traditional survey equipment and then supplementing that work by flying a drone over the site to capture aerial perspective photos using PIX4D and then translating that into a point cloud that could be put into AutoCAD to draw the survey lines.
We won the competition but quickly realized that it would be very expensive to develop the technology. But wanting to help drive the industry forward, we posted our paper detailing the concept online encouraging others to explore the possibility. Three years later I heard about AirWorks and what they were doing. That is when we did our first case study with them. Although they were unaware of our previous work in this area, it felt good to see our concept come to life.
Why did you decide to test AirWorks for a second time?
While the software was not mature enough to incorporate into our workflow after our first case study, we understand that technologies improve as they get more data and usage. We made a commitment to keep tabs on AirWorks and were open to considering them again as the platform matured. I recently heard that a surveyor in Arizona was using Airworks for ALTA Surveys and we decided to test the product again.
Tell us about the most recent case study utilizing Airworks
Once we decided to test AirWorks again, we tagged the next ALTA project in our workflow to use in the case study. We decided to test it by using both the traditional method as well as the new AirWorks method to enable us to compare the cost and time savings between the two. The project we identified for the case study was a 2D ALTA Survey that included about 5 acres of improvements.
How did your team feel about using AirWorks?
Honestly, our team was skeptical at first and worried about the accuracy of the product and the quality of the deliverable. Those two things are extremely important to us at McSteen and we are not willing to sacrifice either for speed.
But at the end of the case study, everyone agreed that it produced a high-quality product and saved us time. So now our goal is to see if AirWorks can help us grow our ALTA business and we are considering hiring a specialty crew dedicated to ALTA work to get turnaround time down to 2-3 weeks.
Were benefits realized from utilizing AirWorks?
We recognized from the results that using AirWorks was a little bit faster in the field in terms of data collection, with the traditional methods requiring about 1 ½ days as compared to 45 minutes using the drone. However, utilizing the drone then required some processing time in the backend at the office. All in all we saw an overall savings of a few hours in terms of data collection.
Drafting time using AirWorks was pretty quick – 3 to 4 days – which provided some savings over having to do it in-house. Again, the net result was that using Airworks saved a little bit of money, but the biggest factor was the time savings. The timeline looked like this
Award of project
Day 1: Fly the site
Day 2: Process the data
Day 3: Send to AirWorks
Days 4-7: Map a large percentage of the improvements in AutoCAD and give to the field crew doing the Boundary Survey to allow them to walk the site and ensure nothing was missed
Day 8: Receive back from Airworks
From a turnaround perspective, using Airworks was significantly faster, even on a 5-acre project. Other parts of the survey didn’t really change depending on how data was collected. But we have determined that it makes sense from both a time and cost perspective to utilize AirWorks moving forward and we expect those savings to grow quite a bit when scaled to larger projects.
How do you see McSteen using Airworks in the future?
We have signed up with and purchased Acres with Airworks and look forward to incorporating them on all larger acres for drone data collection and processing. At this point, we will likely continue to use traditional methods for smaller projects, primarily under 10 acres. While this is a niche product at present, we think it is going to save dollars from a project perspective but more importantly, help turnaround time. Our goal is to decrease our current turnaround time of about 35 business days to 15 to 20 days on larger projects using AirWorks.