Proceedings of the Joint CIB W099 & W123 International Conference 2021:

Changes and innovations for improved wellbeing in construction

Ascending Drones’ Safety Risks in Construction

Mostafa Namian1, Mohammad Khalid1, George Wang1, Sharareh Kermanshachi2

1
East Carolina University, USA, 2University of Texas at Arlington, USA

Correspondence: namianm19@[Link]

ABSTRACT
Drones or Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) have established rapid technological dominance due to
their remarkable efficiency and diverse applications. Drones are capable of being equipped with the
latest cutting-edge technologies to execute tasks that seemed merely impossible by using traditional
methods until now. Contrarily, UAVs can expose construction workers to a new array of safety risks.
Construction is among high injury-prone industries, while the safety risk levels can potentially be
heightened even more by UAVs. The industry lacks an adequate understanding given the scarce
research of drone-associated safety hazards. This study aims to comprehensively identify and
investigate drone-related hazards and the associated safety risks in construction and find the relative
impact of identified hazards. An online questionnaire survey was developed and distributed among
construction experts. The analysis of collected data from an extensive literature review and surveying
54 construction experts revealed a wide range of safety risks, including ‘unauthorized trespassing’
ranked first followed by ‘system malfunction,’ and ‘distraction.’ The research findings can help
practitioners and professionals to mitigate safety risks of using drones in their projects and
incorporate counterpart preventive measures into their safety management programs.

KEYWORDS: construction, drones, safety risk, UAS, UAV.

INTRODUCTION
Drones come with a wide variety of features that can be utilized at their full capacity for a myriad of
purposes and applications in construction, including construction surveying, topographic mapping,
site inspections, equipment tracking, project progress monitoring, laser scanning, photogrammetry,
and thermal image recording (Asadi and Han 2020; Kayhani et al. 2020; Li and Liu 2019; Liu et al. 2014;
Martinez et al. 2020; Oudjehane et al. 20 . In
contrast, drones can potentially expose workers to unfamiliar hazards in the construction job sites,
while construction remains one of the most hazardous industries (OSHA 2018). For example, drone
operation failures can lead to collisions, putting human lives and property at risk (Uhlig et al., 2006).
Research has found them also to be distracting to spectators, and distraction can significantly impede
the safety performance of construction workers (Namian et al., 2018). Despite the necessity to address
the safety risks, research exploring and revealing the concealed safety risks remains scarce (Barr et al.,
2017; Sanz et al., 2015). Therefore, this research study aims to establish an investigative approach to
identify the unknown safety risks in the construction industry. Accordingly, the study's objectives are
to (A) investigate and identify the drone-associated safety risks that may expose the project personnel
and properties to harm, and (B) study the relative importance of each identified hazard associated
with the safety risks. The construction industry is expected to draw practical benefits from this study
by educating the construction workforce on unique drone-related risks, enhancing awareness and
preparation among them, and deploying preventive measures and effective safety management
strategies to mitigate the vulnerability of the project personnel.

224
 Proceedings of the Joint CIB W099 & W123 International Conference 2021:
Changes and innovations for improved wellbeing in construction

LITERATURE REVIEW
Over 1.5 million registered drones, along with 160,000 licensed remote pilots, clearly indicate the
rapid proliferation of drones, according to the Federal Aviation (“Remote Identification of Unmanned
Aircraft Systems” 2019). To mitigate dangerous attributes and make public operations safer, the FAA
has implemented strategies to control the usage of drones. FAA ‘14 C.F.R. Part 107’ regulates the
commercial operation of drones, including using drones in construction. According to these federal
rules, such drones have to be registered in the FAA system along with their ‘remote pilot in command’
(RPIC), who must be issued appropriate license credentials by the FAA. Although there are exams
administered to obtain the pilot license, the drone pilots will be examined on FAA regulations that
have been criticized to significantly address safety concerns (Calandrillo et al. 2020).

Like other sectors, the construction industry has also adopted diverse drone applications for
multifarious purposes because of its capability to provide high-quality video and photographic data
(Martinez et al. 2020). Due to the facile accessibility and economic practicality of integrating drones
in construction projects, it has been detected as a leading industry to massively adopt drones
(Oudjehane et al., 2019). However, unlike other industries, construction is suffering from high rates of
occupational accidents, making it considerably more vulnerable to the safety risks of drones in
workplaces. The construction workplace is one of the most complex setups consisting of many
hazards, and adding newer types of hazards can result in compromising the safety management plans
(He et al., 2015). Drones may bring in the possibility of unknown risks comprising multiple operational
challenges, including flight instability, abrupt termination, loss of control and onboard power, the
capability to cope with dynamic nature, and premature autonomous landing (York, Al-Bayati, and Al-
Shabbani, 2020). Drones are quite vulnerable to various operational challenges such as GPS
‘spoofing’(Rao et al. 2016), loss of control from signal interference (Parush 2006), low flight reliability
and susceptibility to harsh weather (Li and Liu 2019), high energy consumption and limited power
storage (Shakhatreh et al. 2019), and most importantly human-generated errors (Neff and Garman
2016).

Moreover, drone integration can enact a newer range of distraction-based unsafe behavior
accountable for catamorphic accidents (Namian et al., 2018). Drones contain the capability of seizing
attention. The flight of drones is proven to be an interesting sight often grasping the interest of the
working personnel involved in carrying out their day-to-day monotonous jobs (Li and Liu 2019;
Martinez et al. 2020). Studies have identified workers to stop their ongoing work because of
distraction during the drone’s fly-by above them(Xu et al. 2020). This can lead to perceptual
misinterpretation of any safety risk, and the consequences can be fatal as the construction jobs are
highly risk-prone in nature.

Despite endless opportunities with drones that are yet to be explored, there is scarce relative research
to realistically identify drone-related hazards and associated safety risks. This research study takes a
unique attempt to investigate the possible hazards associated with drone-related applications in the
construction sector and evaluate their relative impacts in order to develop effective training materials
that the industry can implement. There is a dire need to develop contingency measures for the
personnel to mitigate the potential risks. Moreover, the professionals and practitioners who have
already adopted drone-related technology in their projects can also greatly benefit from the research
findings and take precautionary actions to limit the impact of the safety hazards.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Despite having drone-related experience in construction and the FAA remote pilot license, the
researchers ensured the study be free from any sort of bias. An active ‘UAV Mapping Specialist’ with
FAA pilot license and OSHA 30 training was involved in serving as the research advisor. The research
team conducted a brainstorming session to discuss the details of the research study.

225
 Proceedings of the Joint CIB W099 & W123 International Conference 2021:
Changes and innovations for improved wellbeing in construction

A comprehensive review of the previous literature was carried out from various research database
sources such as ASCE Library, Science Direct, Google Scholar, Mendeley, and Scopus using keywords
such as ‘UAV,’ ‘Unmanned Aerial Vehicle,’ ‘UAS,’ ‘Unmanned Aerial System,’ ‘drone,’ ‘construction,’
‘safety,’ ‘accident,’ and ‘incident.’ Different domains outside of construction were considered for the
literature review followed by extraction of a preliminary list of hazards. Based on experience,
suggestions, and findings, an advanced questionnaire survey was developed targeting specific
construction personnel across the nation. The survey was reviewed and amended according to the
research advisors’ comments and suggestions. Finally, the survey was approved as ‘exempted’ before
mass distribution by the University and Medical Centre Institutional Review Board (UMCIRB) of the
East Carolina University (ECU).

Survey questionnaire
The survey questionnaire for this study was designed to involve assorted questions ranging from
participants’ general demographic information to their open-ended opinions and perceptions on
various risk-related issues of drones in the construction. Upon sharing the demographic information,
the participants were asked about their experiences with drones, either direct or indirect, and if they
had come across any situation that can be described as dangerous. In order to gain a more detailed
understanding of their risk-perceptions on drones, a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (“extremely
low”) to 7 (“extremely high”) was incorporated for the participants to express their ratings. The
participants were asked to list any hazard that was not included in the questionnaire. However, the
results indicated that the participants identified no new hazards apart from the ones already listed.
Moreover, the participants also shared their suggestions for safety measures to mitigate the risk and
predictions on the future of drones.

Data collection and research participants

The study was carried out during the unprecedented difficult times of COVID-19. Therefore, the online
data collection method was adopted instead of the original planning of an in-person survey. A
substantial number of sources from the Internet were scavenged to identify key personnel based on
their relevant experience in the study. Since there was a lack of data in terms of UAV-related
operations in the construction sector, the snowball sampling technique was used to distribute the
questionnaire. Snowball sampling is a common method used in construction safety-related research
(Loosemore and Malouf 2019; Wachter and Yorio 2014). The researchers developed the questionnaire
in Qualtrics and randomly distributed it to the target audience through emails, and the responses were
recorded progressively. The survey concluded with 63 participants from a wide range of construction
organizations and UAV service providers responding over a period of three months. A total of 54
responses were filtered for further consideration as the remaining (nine) responses were discarded
due to insufficiency of completion. The retained responses included detailed demographic
information on the participants’ including their experience (see Table 1), position and specialty (see
Table 2), safety training (see Table 3), and drone pilot credentials (see Table 4).

Table 6. Demographic information of the participants – construction experience (years)

0-5 5-10 10-20 20-30 >30
24 8 9 4 9
(44%) (15%) (17%) (7%) (17%)

226
 Proceedings of the Joint CIB W099 & W123 International Conference 2021:
Changes and innovations for improved wellbeing in construction

Table 7. Demographic information of the participants - position

(Assistant) Project CEO/ Project Safety UAV Other Other
Manager Owner Engineer Specialist Specialist Managerial
5 11 7 3 6 9 13
(9%) (20%) (13%) (6%) (11%) (17%) (24%)

Table 8. The participants’ safety training status

OSHA 30 OSHA 10 None
15* 13* 35
(28%) (24%) (65%)
* 7 (13%) participants had both OSHA 10 and 30

Table 9. The participants’ drone pilot credentials

With License Without License
34 20
(63%) (37%)

The participants were from a diverse range of project types (i.e., commercial, residential, etc.). The
results depicted that more than 70% of the participants reported having direct or indirect experience
with the applications of drones in their respective job sites; ‘progress monitoring and documentation’
followed by ‘site mapping’ and ‘inspection’ were recorded to be the most commonly cited applications
of drone-related usage in the construction.

The recorded dataset was examined carefully to develop categorized accident experiences, drone
applications based on purposes, potential safety risks, and probable preventive measures. The
research team utilized statistical software, namely, XLSTAT 2019, to analyze the data for any significant
differences of perception among the workforce that can help to improve the overall safety
performance.

DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

The associated safety risks of drones
The participants shared their drone-related experience for various activities, projected risk factors,
accidents, and safety measures. They also rated the severity of several drone-associate safety risks,
and the average was calculated accordingly with the Relative Impact Index (RII) using Equation 1 to
prioritize and sort them from the highest to the lowest-rated element (see Table 5).

= (1)
( )

A = maximum possible rating (7);

W = summation of all participants’ ratings for each question;
N = number of recorded responses corresponding to each question.

227
 Proceedings of the Joint CIB W099 & W123 International Conference 2021:
Changes and innovations for improved wellbeing in construction

Table 10. Safety risk questions based on their Relative Impact Index (RII).
# Safety Risk RII Rank
1 Collision with working personnel causing bodily injury 0.407 7
2 Collision with property causing damage to the assets and surrounding personnel 0.457 4
3 Distraction causing loss of concentration and erroneous maneuvers of the
0.474 3
construction equipment resulting in severe accidents
4 Obstruction of the vision during critical lifting or installation operations 0.415 6
5 Interference of radio signal causing communication hazard 0.450 5
6 Rotating blades of drones causing a fire hazard in the controlled environments 0.310 8
7 Drones capable of conducting lifting operations creating the risk of
0.516 2
malfunctioning and crashing, or falling onto a person or property
8 Unauthorized trespassing and collection of sensitive information breaching the
0.534 1
personal property rights

Data analysis suggested that the participants having safety training perceived a higher level of safety
risk compared to the participants with no safety training (see Figure 1). A statistically significant
difference (p-value < 0.1) was found between the two groups for the distraction-related question (Q3)
when the two-sample ‘t-test’ was run. This leads to the proposition that the participants with safety
training may have acquired certain skills from the safety training to evaluate drone-related safety risks
partially. It is good to note that a Shapiro-Wilk test was conducted to determine whether the
differences in two could have been produced by a normal distribution (Razali and Wah 2011). The
results of the Shapiro-Wilk test were not significant based on an alpha value of 0.05, W = 0.94, p =
.235. This result suggests the normality assumption is met. Levene's test was conducted to assess
whether the variances of the two groups were significantly different. The result of Levene's test was
not significant based on an alpha value of 0.05, F(1, 36) = 1.88, p = .179. This result suggests it is
possible that the two groups were produced by distributions with equal variances, indicating the
assumption of homogeneity of variance was met.

3.5

3.4

3.3
Average Risk Rating

3.2

3.1

2.9

2.8

2.7
No OSHA Training OSHA10/30

Figure 9. Average risk rating responses based on safety training.

Similarly, the risk rating responses were analyzed statistically between two groups based on having
the FAA remote pilot license, which revealed a statistically significant difference (p-value<0.0001), as
shown in Figure 2. Therefore, each question was individually tested for the statistical difference, which
resulted in the display of five questions based on safety risks in terms of distraction, fire hazard,

228
 Proceedings of the Joint CIB W099 & W123 International Conference 2021:
Changes and innovations for improved wellbeing in construction

visibility, lifting failure, and unauthorized trespassing that had significant statistical difference
perception of the respondents (see Table 6).

3.5

3
Average Risk Rating

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
Without FAA License With FAA License

Figure 10. Average risk rating responses based on the FAA remote pilot licensure.

Table 11. Statistical analysis results (licensed vs. non-licensed).

Questions p-value
Q1. Collision with Personnel 0.157
Q2. Collision with Property 0.246
Q3. Distraction 0.056**
Q4. Visibility Obstruction 0.038*
Q5. Radio Signal Interference 0.229
Q6. Fire Hazard 0.051**
Q7. Failure of Lifting 0.011*
Q8. Unauthorized Trespassing 0.028*
* p-value < 0.05
** p-value < 0.10

The researchers also classified and analyzed the responses based on the factor of having any drone-
related experience or not as well as having direct or indirect experience. The results showed a clear
difference in their risk perception between the participants who had associated experiences. In both
cases, participants with drone-related experience perceived a higher level of the safety risk, and so
did the participants who had direct experience with the drone compared who did not have it (see
Table 7).

Table 12. Statistical analysis results (direct vs. no-direct experience).

Questions p-value
Q1. Collision with Personnel 0.037*
Q2. Collision with Property 0.364
Q3. Distraction 0.094**
Q4. Visibility Obstruction 0.038*
Q5. Radio Signal Interference 0.095**
Q6. Fire Hazard 0.016*
Q7. Failure of Lifting 0.177

229
 Proceedings of the Joint CIB W099 & W123 International Conference 2021:
Changes and innovations for improved wellbeing in construction

Q8. Unauthorized Trespassing 0.163

* p-value < 0.05
** p-value < 0.10

Preventive safety measures

The survey also encompassed the suggestions from participants about the preventive measures of the
drones, where 29 out of 54 participants expressed their recommendations. Their recommendations
reveal that among a wide range of preventive measures, ‘engagement of qualified and competent
flight crew,’ ‘proper model selection and maintenance of drones,’ and communication and awareness’
were the most popular of all (see Table 8).

Table 13. Preventive measures recommended by the surveyed experts.

# Recommended Preventive Measures Frequency
1 Engagement of qualified and competent flight crew 10
2 Proper model selection and maintenance of drones 10
3 Awareness and communication 7
4 Drone operation during off-time 6
5 Following standard regulations 6
6 Flying proximity/No-fly zone 5
7 Pre-flight checklist 5
8 No flight over people 5
9 Automated pre-programmed flights 3
10 Avoidance of interference and trespassing 3

DISCUSSION
Even if UAV applications are apparently perceived to be harmless, this study explored and identified
an array of potential safety risks that can impose a great degree of danger to people and properties in
construction. The participants perceived all of the eight identified hazards to impose the extent of
safety risks on construction projects. A substantial difference in safety perception was detected
between the participants based on their safety training and FAA remote pilot license status. On the
other hand, personnel with prior drone usage experience tend to perceive lower levels of safety risks
which can be attributed to becoming desensitized to the associated safety risks (Perlman et al., 2014).
A substantial number of participants (16%) reported having experienced drone-related accidents,
while 17% of the total participants reported that they have heard about drone-related mishaps from
their professional peers. The discovered safety problems and subjective perceptions of UAVs in
construction show how the rapid UAV integration rate may present many new intrinsic hazards to
unprotected construction employees, inflicting considerable impact. Relatedly, stakeholders may
proactively provide the workforce with necessary training and equipment, which would not
otherwise be conceivable without identifying such safety concerns. The suggested preventive
measures from the participants open up an outstanding possibility to explore and develop an
appropriate safety management system that can successfully mitigate the safety risks. In addition to
the engagement of expert and experienced flight crews, the participants also advocated selection of
specific and appropriate drone models, timely maintenance, promulgation, and general awareness of
drone usage, flying during off-hours, and strict adherence to mandated regulations.

LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RECOMMENDATIONS

The study unveils a paradigm of drone-related safety issues present in the construction. However, the
research team was limited to certain factors, especially being obligated to conduct the interview in
the virtual form with a relatively small sample size due to the unprecedented situation of COVID-19.
This study does not validate and/or justify the identified risks in detail for the purpose of developing
specialized safety management systems. The lack of empirical results barred replicating potential

230
 Proceedings of the Joint CIB W099 & W123 International Conference 2021:
Changes and innovations for improved wellbeing in construction

scenarios to carry out simulations for the construction professionals. Future research should
overcome the limitations by focusing on conducting practical experiments with the aid of advanced
data extraction mechanisms (i.e., eye-tracking) in real or simulated construction environments.

CONCLUSIONS
The world is on the verge of mass integration of drone technologies in every other commercial sector,
including construction, due to the remarkable benefits and applications. However, the concealed
safety challenges of the drones remain uncharted until the fate of the workforce becomes heavily
endangered without necessary safety management strategies. The construction sector is widely
known for suffering from high rates of occupational accidents that may possibly increase with the
implantation of additional sources of hazards such as drones. With emerging proliferation, drones can
become a potential medium of threats to people or properties present in construction workplaces.
With a lack of pro-active education, training, and management based on this emerging drone
technology, the unidentified workplace hazards can potentially claim invaluable lives and putting a
halt to regular productivity. This study aims first to investigate and identify the drone-associated safety
risks and then examine the relative importance of each identified hazard and the associated safety
risks. To achieve the objectives, 54 construction experts across the United States were surveyed to
solicit their experience and expertise. The participants with FAA remote pilot licenses appeared to
perceive lower levels of risks associated with drones. On the other hand, the surveyed experts who
had received safety training expressed more concerns than those who did not have such formal
training. The results reveal robust information on the identified adverse safety outcomes of drones,
including eight critical threats, among which ‘unauthorized trespassing,’ ‘system malfunction,’ and
‘distraction’ are the most vital. Construction sites are stuffed with essential operations imposing a
certain extent of a safety risk to the workforce. Therefore, it is necessary to deploy significant safety
management schemes with adequate knowledge of this new technology to efficiently mitigate the
dynamic range of such safety hazards. To address this necessity, the results of this study suggest
‘engagement of qualified and competent flight crew,’ ‘proper model selection and maintenance of
drones,’ and ‘awareness and communication’ as effective safety measures along with several other
recommendations to mitigate the safety risks of drones in construction. The professionals and
practitioners who aim to adopt drones in their construction projects can benefit from this research
study to properly train their employees and implement effective safety measures to prevent
occupational accidents.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors appreciate the immense support from the Susan Harwood Training Grant Program for
providing funding for the project. East Carolina University, at the time of initial publication of this
document (03/2021), is funded by a grant of $75,000 federal funds, which constitutes 100 percent of
the program budget. The consultation and information received from Kevin Capps (S. T. Wooten
Corporation) are acknowledged.

REFERENCES
Asadi, K., and Han, K. (2020). “An Integrated Aerial and Ground Vehicle (UAV-UGV) System for
Automated Data Collection for Indoor Construction Sites.”
Barr, L. C., Newman, R., Ancel, E., Belcastro, C. M., Foster, J. V., Evans, J., and Klyde, D. H. (2017).
“Preliminary Risk Assessment for Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems.” 17th AIAA Aviation Technology,
Integration, and Operations Conference, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
Calandrillo, S., Oh, J., and Webb, A. (2020). “Deadly Drones: Why FAA Regulations Miss the Mark on
Drone Safety.” Stanford Technology Law Review, 23(1), 182–251.
He, Q., Luo, L., Hu, Y., and Chan, A. P. C. (2015). “Measuring the complexity of mega construction
projects in China-A fuzzy analytic network process analysis.” Pergamon Press.

231
 Proceedings of the Joint CIB W099 & W123 International Conference 2021:
Changes and innovations for improved wellbeing in construction

Kayhani, N., McCabe, B., Abdelaal, A., Heins, A., and Schoellig, A. (2020). “Tag-based Indoor
Localization of UAVs in Construction Environments: Opportunities and Challenges in Practice.”
Construction Research Congress 2020.
Li, Y., and Liu, C. (2019). “Applications of multirotor drone technologies in construction management.”
International Journal of Construction Management, Taylor & Francis, 19(5), 401–412.
Liu, P., Chen, A. Y., Huang, Y.-N., Han, J.-Y., Lai, J.-S., and Kang, S.-C. (2014). “A review of rotorcraft
unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) developments and applications in civil engineering.”
Loosemore, M., and Malouf, N. (2019). “Safety training and positive safety attitude formation in the
Australian construction industry.” Safety Science, 113, 233–243.
Martinez, J. G., Gheisari, M., and Alarcón, L. F. (2020). “UAV Integration in Current Construction Safety
Planning and Monitoring Processes: Case Study of a High-Rise Building Construction Project in Chile.”
Journal of Management in Engineering, 36(3), 05020005.
Namian, M., Albert, A., and Feng, J. (2018). “Effect of distraction on hazard recognition and safety risk
perception.” Journal of construction engineering and management, 144(4), 04018008.
Neff, Peter, and Karl E. Garman. 2016. “Identifying and Mitigating Human Factors Errors in Unmanned
Aircraft Systems.” In 16th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference.
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Accessed November 12, 2020.
[Link]
OSHA. (2018). “Commonly Used Statistics | Occupational Safety and Health Administration.”
<[Link] (May 28, 2020).
Oudjehane, A., Baker, T., and Moeini, S. (2019). “THE ROLE AND VALUE OF INTEGRATING AI, DRONES
AND ASSOCIATE TECHNOLOGIES IN CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS.”
Parush, A. (2006). “7. Human Errors in UAV Takeoff and Landing: Theoretical Account and Practical
Implications.” 91–103.
Perlman, A., Sacks, R., and Barak, R. (2014). “Hazard recognition and risk perception in construction.”
Safety Science, 64, 22–31.
Rao, B., Gopi, A. G., and Maione, R. (2016). “The societal impact of commercial drones.” Technology
in Society, 45, 83–90.
Razali, N. M., and Wah, Y. B. (2011). “Power comparisons of Shapiro-Wilk, Kolmogorov-Smirnov,
Lilliefors and Anderson-Darling tests.” 14.
“Remote Identification of Unmanned Aircraft Systems.” (2019). Federal Register,
<[Link]
unmanned-aircraft-systems> (Nov. 30, 2020).
Sanz, D., Valente, J., del Cerro, J., Colorado, J., and Barrientos, A. (2015). “Safe operation of mini UAVs:
a review of regulation and best practices.” Advanced Robotics, 29(19), 1221–1233.
Shakhatreh, H., Sawalmeh, A. H., Al-Fuqaha, A., Dou, Z., Almaita, E., Khalil, I., Othman, N. S., Khreishah,
A., and Guizani, M. (2019). “Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs): A survey on civil applications and key
research challenges.” IEEE Access, 7, 48572–48634.
.” Selected
Scientific Papers-Journal of Civil Engineering, 14(1), 27–37.
Uhlig, D., Bhamidipati, K., and Neogi, N. (2006). “Safety and reliability within UAV construction.” IEEE,
1–9.
Wachter, J. K., and Yorio, P. L. (2014). “A system of safety management practices and worker
engagement for reducing and preventing accidents: an empirical and theoretical investigation.”
Accident; Analysis and Prevention, 68, 117–130.

232
 Proceedings of the Joint CIB W099 & W123 International Conference 2021:
Changes and innovations for improved wellbeing in construction

Xu, Y., Turkan, Y., Karakhan, A. A., and Liu, D. (2020). “Exploratory Study of Potential Negative Safety
Outcomes Associated with UAV-Assisted Construction Management.” American Society of Civil
Engineers, 1223–1232.
York, David D., Ahmed Jalil Al-Bayati, and Zamaan Y. Al-Shabbani. 2020. “Potential Applications of UAV
Within the Construction Industry and the Challenges Limiting Implementation.”

233