FAA UAS Center of Excellence task A4: UAS ground collision severity evaluation, revision 2.
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

For very narrow results

When looking for a specific result

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Dates

to

Document Data
Library
People
Clear All
Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page

i

FAA UAS Center of Excellence task A4: UAS ground collision severity evaluation, revision 2.

Filetype[PDF-7.35 MB]


Select the Download button to view the document
This document is over 5mb in size and cannot be previewed
English

Details:

  • Alternative Title:
    Final Report for the FAA UAS Center of Excellence Task A4: UAS Ground Collision Severity Evaluation Revision 2.
  • Creators:
  • Corporate Creators:
  • Corporate Contributors:
  • Subject/TRT Terms:
  • Resource Type:
  • Geographical Coverage:
  • Corporate Publisher:
  • Abstract:
    The UAS Ground Collision Severity Evaluation Final Report documents the UAS platform characteristics related to the severity of UAS ground collision based upon the literature search of over 300 publications from the automotive industry, consumer battery market, toy standards, and other fields. The literature search included existing standards from a variety of industries and applications as well as methods of analysis and criteria currently in use by other civil and federal agencies. Space debris casualty models were evaluated and extended for proposed use with UAS to determine their viability for ground collision severity assessments and metrics. Parametric analysis, summary data and modified methods are presented to provide insight on the most significant UAS characteristics and how such characteristics are related to the ground collision severity problem. Qualitative characteristics as well as quantitative metrics are presented. Data and Analysis developed during the Task A11 research is also included to update data collected in the early phases of Task A4. Where needed, knowledge gaps are identified for topics outside the scope of the current research.

    The literature search included the evaluation of various criteria developed for human blunt force trauma injuries, penetration injuries and laceration injuries. These injury types represent the most significant threats to the non-participating public and crews operating mUAS and sUAS platforms. The kinetic energy for the worst case terminal velocity or maximum cruise airspeed, energy density, and rotor diameter are the most significant UAS characteristics contributing to blunt force trauma penetration and laceration injuries, respectively.

    Two impact kinetic energy methodologies are presented to provide a risk and scenario based approach to determining kinetic energy thresholds for safe UAS operations. Parachute mitigations and the application of area weighted kinetic energy methodology for two scenarios are presented to outline thresholds for a broader range of vehicle weights to conduct flight over people than is currently possible with the unmitigated vehicle designs currently available. An initial investigation of energy transfer based on crash testing and dynamic modeling was conducted along with finite element analysis for human head and torso impacts. The crash test results and subsequent analysis strongly suggest that RCC-based thresholds are overly conservative because they do not accurately represent the collision dynamics of elastically-deformable sUAS with larger contact areas in comparison to the metallic debris analysis methods for high speed missiles on the national test ranges. Dynamic modeling is necessary to improve the assessment of UAS failure modes and associated impact energy, to establish appropriate standoff distances, to model impact footprints for severity analysis and to conduct probability assessments as part of an applicant’s submission for waiver or certification.

    Lithium Polymer batteries dominate the mUAS and sUAS market as the principle energy source for these platforms. While many of the manufacturers state they test their batteries in accordance with Lithium Ion battery testing methods for consumer electronics, the batteries are rarely marked to show compliance with these standards and many of the test methods are not consistent with the forces and energy levels associated with ground collision impact energy. More research is required to address the fire hazard and impact hazard presented by the broad spectrum of batteries and battery chemistries used in mUAS and sUAS platforms.

    Twenty-three knowledge gaps were identified during the execution of the literature search and are recommended for future research efforts.

  • Format:
  • Collection(s):
  • Main Document Checksum:
  • Download URL:
  • File Type:

Supporting Files

  • No Additional Files
More +

You May Also Like

Checkout today's featured content at rosap.ntl.bts.gov