A A A Ц Ц Ц Ц

ШРИФТ:

Arial Times New Roman

ИНТЕРВАЛ:

х1 х1.5 х2

КЕРНИНГ:

Обычный Средний Большой

ИЗОБРАЖЕНИЯ:

Черно-белые Цветные
For the visually impaired Standard Version
Scientific, Technological and Production Journal
ISSN 2079–3332 (print)
ISSN 3034-6835 (online)
founded in 2001

Analysis and prospects for the integration of modern methods of remote geodetic monitoring of man-made structures

Original articles: 2026 No 3

Analysis and prospects for the integration of modern methods of remote geodetic monitoring of man-made structures

DOI: 10.56195/20793332-2026-26-3-68-73

Read in pdf E. V. Kaygorodova1,2, M. S. Tutanova1,2, О. V. Starostina2, A. M. Kapshuk2
  1. Siberian State University of Geosystems and Technologies, Novosibirsk, Russian Federation
  2. Abylkas Saginov Karaganda Technical University, Karaganda, Republic of Kazakhstan
p. 68-73, No.3/2026
Abstract:
The increasing scale of mining operations and anthropogenic impact on the geological environment make it necessary to ensure the safety of complex engineering structures such as open pits and spoil heaps. Deformation processes at these sites are highly dynamic and require rapid and accurate monitoring of their spatial position. Therefore, improving geodetic monitoring methods remains a priority research and practical task. This study aims to analyses the current state of remote geodetic monitoring methods for technogenic objects, identify their limitations, and determine promising directions for further development. A review and comparative analysis of domestic and international publications was carried out for satellite technologies, ground-based laser scanning (GLS), unmanned aerial systems, and satellite radar interferometry. The analysis showed that each method has specific advantages and limitations. GNSS provides high accuracy but is limited to discrete observation points. GLS delivers high-precision digital data for the visible surface of an object but is constrained by measurement range and survey conditions. UAS provide detailed areal information but are limited by observation frequency and accuracy. InSAR enables retrospective deformation analysis but is affected by atmospheric and geometric distortions. None of the considered methods is universal; therefore, their integrated application is the most promising direction.
Keywords:
technogenic object, geodetic monitoring, remote sensing methods, comprehensive integration, satellite interferometry, unmanned aerial vehicles, laser scanning, digital data
For citation:
Kaygorodova E.V., Tutanova M.S., Starostina О.V., Kapshuk A.M. Analysis and prospects for the integration of modern methods of remote geodetic monitoring of man-made structures. Mine Surveying аnd Subsurface Use. 2026; 26 (3): 68-73. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.56195/20793332-2026-26-3-68-73.
Information about the authors:
  1. Yevgeniya V. Kaigorodova – PhD student, Department of Engineering Geodesy and Mine Surveying, Siberian State University of Geosystems and Technologies, Novosibirsk, Russian Federation; M.Sc., teacher Department of Mine Surveying and Geodesy, Abylkas Saginov Technical University, Karaganda, Republic of Kazakhstan, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.;
  2. Miruert S. Tutanova – PhD student, Department of Engineering Geodesy and Mine Surveying, Siberian State University of Geosystems and Technologies, Novosibirsk, Russian Federation; M.Sc., teacher, Head of Department of Mine Surveying and Geodesy, Abylkas Saginov Technical University, Karaganda, Republic of Kazakhstan;
  3. Olga V. Starostina – Cand. Sci. (Eng.), Associate Professor, Department of Mine Surveying and Geodesy Abylkas Saginov Technical University, Karaganda, Kazakhstan; This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.; https//orcid.org/0000-0003-4030-0748
  4. Asiya M. Kapshuk – M.Sc., teacher Department of Mine Surveying and Geodesy, Abylkas Saginov Technical University, Karaganda, Republic of Kazakhstan;
References:
  1. 1. Zhang K.A., Chen Y. Review of remote sensing technologies for monitoring the deformation of civil engineering structures. Remote Sensing. 2021; 13 (5): 950. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13050950.
  2. 2. Lechner A.M., Muir M. Remote sensing technologies for monitoring subsurface infrastructure: A review. Journal of Infrastructure Systems. 2021; 27 (3): 04021024. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)IS.1943-555X.0000590.
  3. 3. Хромов Д.В. Инновационные подходы к геодезическому мониторингу. Научные и практические исследования в геодезии. 2023; 17 (3): 89-96. Khromov D.V. Innovative approaches to geodetic monitoring. Scientific and Practical Research in Geodesy. 2023; 17 (3): 89-96. (In Russ.).
  4. 4. Huang Y., Lee C. Monitoring the deformation of urban infrastructure using combined GNSS and InSAR techniques. Journal of Urban Technology. 2022; 29 (4): 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2021.2005003.
  5. 5. Смирнов В.А., Иванова Е. П. Наземное лазерное сканирование для мониторинга техногенных объектов. Геодезия и картография. 2023; 12 (1): 67-75. Smirnov V.A., Ivanova E.P. Terrestrial laser scanning for monitoring of technogenic objects. Geodesy and Cartography. 2023; 12 (1): 67-75. (In Russ.).
  6. 6. Павлов А.И. Геодезический мониторинг объектов энергетики: современные подходы. Энергетические технологии и системы. 2022; 10 (1): 33-39. Pavlov A.I. Geodetic monitoring of energy facilities: modern approaches. Energy Technologies and Systems. 2022; 10 (1): 33-39. (In Russ.).
  7. 7. Федоров С.Л. Применение 3D-лазерного сканирования для мониторинга инфраструктурных объектов. Горные науки и технологии. 2021; 17 (2): 95-102. Fedorov S.L. Application of 3D laser scanning for monitoring of infrastructure objects. Mining Sciences and Technologies. 2021; 17 (2): 95-102. (In Russ.).
  8. 8. Obermeier S., Döllner J. Integrating 3D laser scanning and UAV data for structural health monitoring. Structural Control and Health Monitoring. 2023; 30 (2): 3046. https://doi.org/10.1002/stc.3046.
  9. 9. Böhm J., Huber J. Laser scanning and UAV technology for the monitoring of historical buildings. Journal of Cultural Heritage. 2023; 23: 123-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2023.04.001.
  10. 10. Петров Д.С., Сидоров К.А. БПЛА в мониторинге инфраструктурных объектов. Научные исследования в геодезии. 2024; 10 (2): 123-130. Petrov D.S., Sidorov K.A. UAVs in monitoring of infrastructure objects. Scientific Research in Geodesy. 2024; 10 (2): 123-130. (In Russ.).
  11. 11. Иванова Е.Н. Использование БПЛА для мониторинга экологических изменений. Экология и геодезия. 2023; 14 (1): 78-85. Ivanova E.N. Use of UAVs for monitoring of environmental changes. Ecology and Geodesy. 2023; 14 (1): 78-85. (In Russ.).
  12. 12. Григорьев В.А. Эффективность применения БПЛА для геодезического мониторинга. Вестник геодезии и картографии. 2022; 15 (2): 36-42. Grigoriev V.A. Efficiency of using UAVs for geodetic monitoring. Bulletin of Geodesy and Cartography. 2022; 15 (2): 36-42. (In Russ.).
  13. 13. Иванова Е.Н., Петров С.И. БПЛА в мониторинге крупных инфраструктурных проектов. Технологии и инновации в строительстве. 2022; 11 (3): 58-66. Ivanova E.N., Petrov S.I. UAVs in monitoring of large infrastructure projects. Technologies and Innovations in Construction. 2022; 11 (3): 58-66. (In Russ.).
  14. 14. Müller H., Scherer H. The role of remote sensing in the monitoring of industrial facilities: A review. Sensors. 2022; 22 (7): 2582. https://doi. org/10.3390/s22072582.
  15. 15. Gonzalez A., Pacheco J. Remote monitoring of ground subsidence using UAV and satellite data. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical. 2024; 123:112-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sna.2024.112123.

 

Теплоэнергетика России 2026

New materials