Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
186,631 studies31 sourcesUpdated 29 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BYSensors (Basel, Switzerland)

Automated Installation Checking and Hanger Pre-Adjustment for Stone Curtain Walls Based on UAV Photogrammetry and Terrestrial Laser Scanning.

  1. 1China Construction Fifth Division South China Company, Guangzhou 510220, China.
  2. 2Sino-Australia Joint Research Center in BIM and Smart Construction, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518060, China.
  3. 3College of Civil and Transportation Engineering, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518060, China.

Abstract

The installation quality of multi-point attachment unit systems in stone curtain walls depends on the geometric compatibility between unit-side hanger arrays and support-side attachment nodes (SSANs). However, deviations from on-site welding, adapter component installation, and end-connection positioning can accumulate within individual SSANs, affecting hanger seating, synchronized multi-point attachment, and joint-width coordination. Therefore, this study proposes an installation checking and hanger pre-adjustment method based on UAV photogrammetry and terrestrial laser scanning (TLS). First, UAV close-range photogrammetry and TLS are used to acquire complementary point clouds of the installed SSANs and the surrounding curtain wall inspection area. Second, SSANs and their internal components are extracted, and end-connection positioning features are determined using a Point-Line-Plane geometric framework. Third, the measured geometric relationships among SSAN positioning features are converted into target hanger layout parameters to assess installation compatibility and generate hanger pre-adjustment and installation decisions. Finally, the proposed method was evaluated in a real project. The average total installation time per curtain wall unit was 48 min compared with 70 min for the traditional method, while the average number of on-site adjustments per curtain wall unit was 4 compared with 15 for the traditional method. The joint-width range was 18.6-23.1 mm compared with 16.8-27.4 mm. The field comparison showed lower average installation time and adjustment counts and a narrower joint-width range in the proposed-method group.

Related

  1. Blue carbon development and ecosystem services in oligotrophic environments: the case for a shallow coastal installation on the shelf off Tenerife (Canary Islands)
    Juan Usó-Canós, Enrique Isla, Isabelle Peeters +1
    Ocean SciencePeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Oceanography & cryosphereCrossref
  2. Post-installation sustainability of small-scale biogas programs: a mini review conceptual model
    Vhutshilo Nekhubvi
    Frontiers in Sustainable Energy PolicyPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textEnvironmental science & pollutionDOAJ
  3. UAV close-range photogrammetry combined with adaptive octree-based point cloud filtering for rock joint extraction of open-pit mine slopes
    Xiangfeng Jia, Junpeng Huang, Wenqian Li +3
    Scientific ReportsPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textGeology & geochemistryCrossref
  4. Evaluation of Distributed Acoustic Sensing (DAS) Systems with Polarization Diversity for Railway Infrastructure: Effects of Fiber Type and Installation Conditions on System Performance
    Alex Chedid, Ali Kabalan, José Grand +7
    SensorsPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textGeneral earth scienceHALEurope PMC
  5. Photogrammetry and 3D Gaussian Splatting for 4D plant growth capture and greenhouse digital twins
    Toivo Aukusti Ylinampa, Urmas Kõljalg
    Biodiversity Data JournalPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textGeology & geochemistryPMC
BibTeX
@article{lin2026automated,
  title = {{Automated Installation Checking and Hanger Pre-Adjustment for Stone Curtain Walls Based on UAV Photogrammetry and Terrestrial Laser Scanning.}},
  author = {Pengteng Lin and Mayong Cai and Dejun Mo and Xiaoming Luo and Yingjie Wang and Hongzhi Cui and Jinxiang Li and Jiyuan Chen and Shuai Wen and Yi Tan},
  journal = {Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.3390/s26206647},
  url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42944509},
  note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Automated Installation Checking and Hanger Pre-Adjustment for Stone Curtain Walls Based on UAV Photogrammetry and Terrestrial Laser Scanning.
AU  - Pengteng Lin
AU  - Mayong Cai
AU  - Dejun Mo
AU  - Xiaoming Luo
AU  - Yingjie Wang
AU  - Hongzhi Cui
AU  - Jinxiang Li
AU  - Jiyuan Chen
AU  - Shuai Wen
AU  - Yi Tan
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/21
JO  - Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)
DO  - 10.3390/s26206647
UR  - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42944509
AB  - The installation quality of multi-point attachment unit systems in stone curtain walls depends on the geometric compatibility between unit-side hanger arrays and support-side attachment nodes (SSANs). However, deviations from on-site welding, adapter component installation, and end-connection positioning can accumulate within individual SSANs, affecting hanger seating, synchronized multi-point attachment, and joint-width coordination. Therefore, this study proposes an installation checking and hanger pre-adjustment method based on UAV photogrammetry and terrestrial laser scanning (TLS). First, UAV close-range photogrammetry and TLS are used to acquire complementary point clouds of the installed SSANs and the surrounding curtain wall inspection area. Second, SSANs and their internal components are extracted, and end-connection positioning features are determined using a Point-Line-Plane geometric framework. Third, the measured geometric relationships among SSAN positioning features are converted into target hanger layout parameters to assess installation compatibility and generate hanger pre-adjustment and installation decisions. Finally, the proposed method was evaluated in a real project. The average total installation time per curtain wall unit was 48 min compared with 70 min for the traditional method, while the average number of on-site adjustments per curtain wall unit was 4 compared with 15 for the traditional method. The joint-width range was 18.6-23.1 mm compared with 16.8-27.4 mm. The field comparison showed lower average installation time and adjustment counts and a narrower joint-width range in the proposed-method group.
SN  - 1424-8220
ER  -