Reveals improved task coverage and efficiency in UAV inspections, suggesting robust scheduling is essential for extreme weather challenges.
Extreme weather conditions impose significant challenges on distribution network inspection because UAV flight safety, energy consumption, vehicle mobility, and task coverage are strongly coupled under wind disturbances. To improve inspection efficiency and operational robustness, this paper proposes a weather-aware asynchronous vehicle–UAV cooperative scheduling method based on bi-level MODDPG–NSGA-II optimization. First, a dynamic wind field model and a wind-sensitive UAV energy model are established to describe the effects of background wind, vertical wind shear, and local gust disturbances on UAV motion and state-of-charge evolution. Then, an asynchronous vehicle–UAV collaboration mechanism is developed, allowing the vehicle to move toward downstream parking sites after UAV deployment while UAVs perform inspection and cross-site recovery under rendezvous and energy safety constraints. On this basis, a bi-level optimization framework is constructed, in which NSGA-II searches global coordination parameters and MODDPG learns adaptive multi-UAV scheduling policies in continuous decision spaces. Controlled wind-factor experiments show that, with the task scale fixed at 52 inspection tasks, the proposed method maintains 100% task coverage under 0–10 m/s wind conditions. As the reference wind speed increases from 0 m/s to 10 m/s, the mission completion time increases from 40.97 min to 70.24 min, while the minimum residual SOC decreases from 50.32% to 13.82%, which remains above the predefined safety threshold. Repeated stochastic trials and statistical significance analysis further indicate that the proposed method achieves shorter mission time and more stable task coverage than representative baselines under the same experimental conditions. The scope of this study is simulation-level validation; real-world flight tests and hardware-in-the-loop verification will be further investigated in future work.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: