Assessment of a Light Unmanned Aircraft Ground Impact Energy

Skobir, Zmago; Magister, Tone

doi:10.7307/ptt.v23i2.136

Cited by 4 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Among different types of UAS, small UASs (sUAS) with the mass less than 5 kg are most commonly used but its impact safety have been less studied. In addition, based on the previous research, the sUAS accidental rate is higher than the rate of larger UAS 3,4 and almost 100 times that of the manned aircraft. 5 Therefore, a thorough study focusing on the crash safety of sUAS is imperative.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

“…Some other studies also show that an object (0.5 kg, with kinetic energy 50 J) could cause 10% possibility of fatality, and the fatality chance will increase to 90% if the energy of this object is 200 J. 3…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Besides the direct impact of sUAS on the human body, after it collides with the ground, the vehicle may bounce back at a considerable speed and hit the human body to cause the secondary injury. 3,7 Therefore, the rebounce distance of sUAS after the ground collision is important to estimate the safe range of personnel on the ground, which is different from the traditional lethal area that is defined as the possible lethal range before the UAS impacts the ground. 8,9…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Modeling the motion of small unmanned aerial system (sUAS) due to ground collision

Dori

Divo

et al. 2017

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G:

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this paper is to develop a modeling method in order to predict the rebounce distance of a small size unmanned aerial system (sUAS) after collision with the ground. This distance would be useful to determine the safe range on the ground when operating the UAS. A two-step strategy is developed to model this procedure. In step one, numerical simulations are performed to model the first impact and predict the rebounce angle and impact velocity. Based on the information obtained, in step two, an analytical model is employed to calculate the rebounce distance without running numerical simulations, to save the computational time. Based on the model predictions, a non-linear function (known as a Meta model) is established to describe the rebounce behavior as a function of impact parameters, i.e. impact velocity, angle, and friction coefficient between the vehicle and ground. A correlation analysis is further performed to analyze the effect of these parameters on the response. The results show that the maximum rebounce range could be greater than 10 m. Compared to impact angle and friction coefficient, impact velocity is the most significant factor influencing the rebounce range. The larger velocity, smaller impact angle, and smaller ground friction coefficient would lead to the large rebounce range. The established Meta model would be useful to estimate safety range when operating sUAS platforms.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Modeling the motion of small unmanned aerial system (sUAS) due to ground collision

Dori

Divo

et al. 2017

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G:

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…CASA (2013) does not provide a value for the drag coefficient. Skobir and Magister (2011) focus on a fixed wing unmanned aircraft, so their formula for the drag coefficient is not relevant to a falling multi-rotor aircraft. Dalamagkidis et al (2008) also focus on a fixed wing aircraft, and avoid specifying a drag coefficient by assuming the impact velocity is 40% higher than the "maximum operating velocity."…”

Section: T V Givesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are limited calculations in the reports of the UAS Task Force (2015) and Micro UAS ARC (2016), but the analysis is somewhat perfunctory when compared to CASA (2013) and Ball et al (2012). Skobir and Magister (2011) calculate the conditions under which the kinetic energy of impact from a fixed wing unmanned aircraft is equal to the kinetic energy of different classes of manned aircraft.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%