Sensors and Measurements for UAV Safety: An Overview
<p>UAV accident and incident causes and flight phases.</p> "> Figure 2
<p>UAV safety solutions proposed classification.</p> "> Figure 3
<p>Data acquisition block diagram to measure force and torque of a blade, adapted from [<a href="#B44-sensors-21-08253" class="html-bibr">44</a>].</p> "> Figure 4
<p>Dual antenna GPS/INS integrated system adapted from [<a href="#B47-sensors-21-08253" class="html-bibr">47</a>].</p> "> Figure 5
<p>Recorded differences between design data (PROJ) and those captured by the Leica Nova MS50 instrument [<a href="#B48-sensors-21-08253" class="html-bibr">48</a>], used with permission under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.</p> "> Figure 6
<p>Recorded quadcopter FDI method algorithm [<a href="#B53-sensors-21-08253" class="html-bibr">53</a>], used with permission under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.</p> "> Figure 7
<p>Collision avoidance system generalized modules presented in [<a href="#B59-sensors-21-08253" class="html-bibr">59</a>], used with permission under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.</p> "> Figure 8
<p>Different types of landing zones adapted from [<a href="#B70-sensors-21-08253" class="html-bibr">70</a>].</p> "> Figure 9
<p>Flow diagram of the system proposed adapted from [<a href="#B82-sensors-21-08253" class="html-bibr">82</a>].</p> "> Figure 10
<p>AIS 3+ head and neck injury risk and summary of concussion risk by UAV model. Head and neck injury risk as well as the risk of concussion were found to increase with increasing UAV mass, used with permission under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License [<a href="#B103-sensors-21-08253" class="html-bibr">103</a>].</p> ">
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. UAV Safety Accident and Incident Causes
- a person is fatally or seriously injured;
- the aircraft sustains damage or structural failure which adversely affects the structural strength, performance, or flight characteristics of the aircraft;
- the aircraft is missing or is completely inaccessible.
3. UAV Safety Research Directions
3.1. UAV in Flight Safety Solutions
3.1.1. Soft and Smart Propeller
3.1.2. Flight Testing
3.1.3. Fault and Damage Detection
3.1.4. Avoid Collisions
3.1.5. UAV Safe Landing
3.2. UAV Safety on Ground Solutions
3.2.1. Ground Test
- A accommodation plane, where the UAV is mounted;
- A video camera to visualize online and record the testing scenario.
3.2.2. Injury and Damage Measurements
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Balestrieri, E.; Daponte, P.; De Vito, L.; Lamonaca, F. Sensors and Measurements for Unmanned Systems: An Overview. Sensors 2021, 21, 1518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ayamga, M.; Akaba, S.; Apotele Nyaaba, A. Multifaceted applicability of UAVs: A review. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2021, 167, 120677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schenkelberg, F. How reliable does a delivery UAV have to be? In Proceedings of the 2016 Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium (RAMS), Tucson, AZ, USA, 25–28 January 2016; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, D.; Liu, H.; Chan, S.; Guizani, M. How to Govern the Non-Cooperative Amateur UAVs? IEEE Netw. 2019, 33, 184–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elands, P.J.M.; de Kraker, J.K.; Laarakkers, J.; Olk, J.G.E.; Schonagen, J.J. Technical Aspects Concerning the Safe and Secure Use of UAVs; TNO 2015 R11721; Final Report, Project 060.18762 Verkenning Technische maatregelen UAVs; TNO: The Hague, The Netherlands, 2016; Available online: https://securitydelta.nl/media/com_hsd/report/89/document/TNO-2015-R11721-Technical-Aspects-Concerning-the-Safe-and-Secure-Use-of-Drones.pdf (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). Safety Management Manual, 4th ed.; Doc 9859; ICAO: Montréal, QC, Canada, 2018; ISBN 978-92-9258-552-5. [Google Scholar]
- International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). Annex 17 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, Security, Safeguarding International Civil Aviation against Acts of Unlawful Interference, 11th ed.; ICAO: Montréal, QC, Canada, 2020; ISBN 978-92-9258-873-1. [Google Scholar]
- Fox, S.J. The ‘risk’ of disruptive technology today (A case study of aviation—Enter the UAV). Technol. Soc. 2020, 62, 101304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fox, S.J. The rise of the UAVs: Framework and governance—Why risk it! J. Air Law Commer. 2017, 82, 683. Available online: https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc/vol82/iss4/2 (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- White, N.D. From ‘9–11’ to the Iraq War 2003: International Law in an Age of Complexity. By Dominic McGoldrick. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2005.xv + 380 pp £ 18 pb. In British Yearbook of International Law; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2005; Volume 76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qu, Z.; Wu, T. Systems and Methods for Operating Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. U.S. Patent US20190179344A1, 13 June 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Hao, L. Water Detection Method and Apparatus, and Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. WO2020114432A1, 11 June 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Longley, R. Concerns over UAV Aircraft Used in the United States. ThoughtCo. 2021. Available online: https://www.thoughtco.com/unmanned-aircraft-used-in-the-united-states-3321822 (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- ISO/CD 4358 Test Methods for Civil Multi-Rotor Unmanned Aircraft System. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/79891.html?browse=tc (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- ISO/AWI TS 4584.2 Improvement in the Guideline for UA Testing/Design of Accelerated Lifecycle Testing (ALT) for UAS/Sub-system/Components. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/80128.html?browse=tc (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- ISO/AWI 5309 Vibration Test Methods for Lightweight and Small Civil UAS. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/81112.html?browse=tc (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- ISO/AWI 5312 Evaluation and Test Method of Rotor Blade Sharp Injury to Human Body for Civil Lightweight and Small UA. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/81113.html?browse=tc (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- Petritoli, E.; Leccese, F.; Ciani, L. Reliability and Maintenance Analysis of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Sensors 2018, 18, 3171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Austin, R. Unmanned Aircraft Systems: UAVS Design, Development and Deployment; Aerospace Series Book 55; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2010; ISBN 978-047005819-0. Available online: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/book/10.1002/9780470664797 (accessed on 4 November 2021). [CrossRef]
- De Francesco, E.; De Francesco, E.; De Francesco, R.; Leccese, F.; Cagnetti, M. A proposal to update LSA databases for an operational availability based on autonomic logistic. In Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE International Workshop on Metrology for Aerospace (MetroAeroSpace 2015), Benevento, Italy, 4–5 June 2015; pp. 38–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Petritoli, E.; Leccese, F.; Ciani, L. Reliability assessment of UAV systems. In Proceedings of the 4th IEEE International Workshop on Metrology for AeroSpace (MetroAeroSpace), Padua, Italy, 21–23 June 2017; pp. 266–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daponte, P.; De Vito, L.; Mazzilli, G.; Picariello, F.; Rapuano, S.; Riccio, M. Metrology for UAV and UAV for metrology: Measurement systems on small civilian UAVs. In Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE Metrology for Aerospace (MetroAeroSpace), Benevento, Italy, 4–5 June 2015; pp. 306–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daponte, P.; De Vito, L.; Mazzilli, G.; Picariello, F.; Rapuano, S. A height measurement uncertainty model for archaeological surveys byaerial photogrammetry. Measurement 2017, 98, 192–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allouch, A.; Koubâa, A.; Khalgui, M.; Abbes, T. Qualitative and Quantitative Risk Analysis and Safety Assessment of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles Missions Over the Internet. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 53392–53410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Waibel, M.; Keays, B.; Augugliaro, F. UAV Shows: Creative Potential and Best Practices; Technical Report; ETH Zurich: Zürich, Switzerland, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Flatley, D. Civilian UAV Safety Incidents Keep Rising. Insur. J. 2017. Available online: https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2017/12/08/473529.htm (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). Regulation (Eu) No 996/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 on the investigation and prevention of accidents and incidents in civil aviation and repealing Directive 94/56/EC. Off. J. Eur. Union 2011, 264, 25–27. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ%3AL%3A2010%3A295%3A0035%3A0050%3AEN%3APDF (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- Ghasri, M.; Maghrebi, M. Factors affecting unmanned aerial vehicles’ safety: A post-occurrence exploratory data analysis of UAVs’ accidents and incidents in Australia. Saf. Sci. 2021, 139, 105273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- International Civil Aviation Organization, ICAO, Aviation Occurrence Categories, Definitions and Usage Notes. 2011. Available online: https://www.icao.int/APAC/Meetings/2012_APRAST/OccurrenceCategoryDefinitions.pdf (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- Basavaraju, S.; Rangan, V.A.; Rajgopal, S. Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Hazard identification, reliability, risk analysis & Range Safety. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Range Technology (ICORT), Balasore, India, 15–17 February 2019; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cole, C. Accidents Will Happen: A review of military UAV crash data as the UK considers allowing large military UAV flights in its airspace. UAV Wars UK, Peace House, 19 Paradise Street Oxford, OX1 1LD 2019. Available online: https://dronewars.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/DW-Accidents-WEB.pdf (accessed on 5 December 2021).
- Gettinger, D.; Holland Michel, A. UAV Sightings and Close Encounters: An Analysis. Center for the Study of the UAV at Bard College. December 11, 2015. Available online: https://dronecenter.bard.edu/projects/other-projects/drone-sightings-and-close-encounters/ (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- Xiang, J.; Liu, Y.; Luo, Z. Flight safety measurements of UAVs in congested airspace. Chin. J. Aeronaut. 2016, 29, 1355–1366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hildmann, H.; Kovacs, E. Review: Using Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) as Mobile Sensing Platforms (MSPs) for Disaster Response, Civil Security and Public Safety. UAVs 2019, 3, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wawrla, L.; Maghazei, O.; Netland, T. Applications of UAVs in Warehouse Operations; Whitepaper; Chair of Production and Operations Management; ETH Zurich, D-MTEC: Zurich, Switzerland, 2019; Available online: https:www.pom.ethz.ch (accessed on 15 July 2021).
- Nouacer, R.; Hussein, M.; Espinoza, H.; Ouhammou, Y.; Ladeira, M.; Castiñeira, R. Towards a framework of key technologies for UAVs. Microprocess. Microsyst. 2020, 77, 103142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cawthorne, D.; Devos, A. Capability caution in UAV design. In Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems (ICUAS), Athens, Greece, 1–4 September 2020; pp. 1572–1581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- la Cour-Harbo, A. Mass threshold for ‘harmless’ UAVs. Int. J. Micro Air Veh. 2017, 9, 77–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Radi, A. Human Injury Model for Small Unmanned Aircraft Impacts; Civil Aviation Safety Authority Technical Report; Monash University: Melbourne, Australia, 2013. Available online: https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/default/files/_assets/main/airworth/papers/human-injury-model-small-unmanned-aircraft-impacts.pdf?acsf_files_redirect (accessed on 15 July 2021).
- Radi, A. Potential Damage Assessment of a Mid-Air Collision with a Small UAV; Civil Aviation Safety Authority Technical Report; Monash University: Melbourne, Australia, 2013. Available online: https://www.casa.gov.au/files/potential-damage-assessment-mid-air-collision-small-rpapdf (accessed on 15 July 2021).
- Pounds, P.E.I.; Deer, W. The Safety Rotor—An Electromechanical Rotor Safety System for UAVs. IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 2018, 3, 2561–2568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sicard, J.; Sirohi, J. Experimental study of an extremely flexible rotor for microhelicopters. J. Aircr. 2012, 49, 1306–1314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sicard, J.; Sirohi, J. Modeling of the large torsional deformation of an extremely flexible rotor in hover. AIAA J. 2014, 52, 1604–1615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jang, J.; Cho, K.; Yang, G.H. Design and Experimental Study of Dragonfly-Inspired Flexible Blade to Improve Safety of UAVs. IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 2019, 4, 4200–4207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nguyen, D.Q.; Loianno, G.; Ho, V.A. Towards Design of a Deformable Propeller for UAV Safety. In Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE International Conference on Soft Robotics (RoboSoft), New Haven, CT, USA, 15 May–15 July 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Walkera. Available online: https://www.walkera.com/index.php/Goods/canshu/id/39.html (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- Huang, S.; Huang, J.; Tang, D.; Chen, F. Research on UAV Flight Performance Test Method Based on Dual Antenna GPS/INS Integrated System. In Proceedings of the IEEE 3rd International Conference on Communication and Information Systems (ICCIS), Singapore, 28–30 December 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ćwiąkała, P. Testing Procedure of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) Trajectory in Automatic Missions. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- DJI A2 Multi-Rotor Stabilization Controller Datasheet. Available online: https://www.dji.com/it/mobile/a2 (accessed on 15 July 2021).
- DJI Spreading Wings S900 Datasheet. Available online: https://www.dji.com/it/mobile/spreading-wings-s900 (accessed on 15 July 2021).
- Grimm, D.E.; Zogg, H.M. Leica Nova MS50 White Paper; Leica Geosystems AG: Heerbrugg, Switzerland, 2013; Available online: https://w3.leica-geosystems.com/downloads123/zz/tps/nova_ms50/white-tech-paper/leica_nova_ms50_tpa_en.pdf (accessed on 15 July 2021).
- Leica Geosystems, A.G. Leica Nova MS50—User Manual; Leica Geosystems AG: Heerbrugg, Switzerland, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, X.; Zhao, Z.; Wang, Z.; Wang, X. Fault Detection and Identification Method for Quadcopter Based on Airframe Vibration Signals. Sensors 2021, 21, 581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yan, J.; Zhao, Z.; Liu, H.; Quan, Q. Fault detection and identification for quadrotor based on airframe vibration signals: A datadriven method. In Proceedings of the 34th Chinese Control Conference (CCC), Hangzhou, China, 28–30 July 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Ghalamchi, B.; Jia, Z.; Mueller, M.W. Real-Time Vibration-Based Propeller Fault Diagnosis for Multicopters. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 2020, 25, 395–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Crazyflie 2.0 Datasheet, Bitcraze. Available online: https://www.bitcraze.io/documentation/hardware/crazyflie_2_0/crazyflie_2_0-datasheet.pdf (accessed on 15 July 2021).
- Bondyra, A.; Gasior, P.; Gardecki, S.; Kasiński, A. Fault diagnosis and condition monitoring of UAV rotor using signal processing. In Proceedings of the 2017 Signal Processing: Algorithms, Architectures, Arrangements, and Applications (SPA), Poznan, Poland, 20–22 September 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bondyra, A.; Gardecki, S.; Gąsior, P.; Kasiński, A. Falcon: A Compact Multirotor Flying Platform with High Load Capability. In Progress in Automation, Robotics and Measuring Techniques. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing; Szewczyk, R., Zieliński, C., Kaliczyńska, M., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; Volume 351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yasin, J.N.; Mohamed, S.A.S.; Haghbayan, M.; Heikkonen, J.; Tenhunen, H.; Plosila, J. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs): Collision Avoidance Systems and Approaches. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 105139–105155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pham, H.; Smolka, S.; Stoller, S.; Phan, D.; Yang, J. A survey on unmanned aerial vehicle collision avoidance systems. arXiv 2015, arXiv:abs/1508.07723. Available online: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1508/1508.07723.pdf (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- Choi, Y.; Jimenez, H.; Mavris, D.N. Two-layer obstacle collision avoidance with machine learning for more energy-efficient unmanned aircraft trajectories. Robot. Auton. Syst. 2017, 98, 158–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bin Ramli, M.F.; Shamsudin, S.S.; Legowo, A. Safe Avoidance Path Detection Using Multi Sensor Integration for Small Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. In Proceedings of the 5th IEEE International Workshop on Metrology for AeroSpace (MetroAeroSpace), Rome, Italy, 20–22 June 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bay, H.; Tuytelaars, T.; Van Gool, L. SURF: Speeded up robust features. In Computer Vision—ECCV 2006, Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision, Graz, Austria, 7–13 May 2006; Lecture Notes in Computer Science Series; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2006; Volume 3951, pp. 404–417. [Google Scholar]
- Oyallon, E.; Rabin, J. An Analysis of the SURF Method. Image Process. Line 2015, 5, 176–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- LIDAR Lite v3 Operation Manual and Technical Specifications. Available online: https://static.garmin.com/pumac/LIDAR_Lite_v3_Operation_Manual_and_Technical_Specifications.pdf (accessed on 15 July 2021).
- Denzel Nyasulu, T.; Du, S.; van Wyk, B.; Tu, C. Comparison study of low-cost obstacle sensing solutions for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles in wildlife scenery. In Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE International Conference on Computer and Communications (ICCC), Chengdu, China, 13–16 December 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Catelani, M.; Ciani, L.; Mangiarotti, L.; Zanobini, A. Metrological characterization of infrared sensor and application on UAV anti-collision system. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Metrology for Aerospace (MetroAeroSpace), Florence, Italy, 22–23 June 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Opromolla, R.; Fasano, G.; Accardo, D. Perspectives and Sensing Concepts for Small UAS Sense and Avoid. In Proceedings of the IEEE/AIAA 37th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC), London, UK, 23–27 September 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patterson, T.; McClean, S.; Morrow, P.; Parr, G.; Luo, C. Timely autonomous identification of UAV safe landing zones. Image Vis. Comput. 2014, 32, 568–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alam, M.S.; Oluoch, J. A survey of safe landing zone detection techniques for autonomous unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Expert Syst. Appl. 2021, 179, 115091. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Verma, A.K.; Bourke, M.C. A method based on structure-from-motion photogrammetry to generate sub-millimetre-resolution digital elevation models for investigating rock breakdown features. Earth Surf. Dynam. 2019, 7, 45–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Xu, Y.; Duan, F. Color space transformation and object oriented based information extraction of aerial images. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Geoinformatics, Kaifeng, China, 20–22 June 2013; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huletski, A.; Kartashov, D.; Krinkin, K. Evaluation of the modern visual SLAM methods. In Proceedings of the Artificial Intelligence and Natural Language and Information Extraction, Social Media and Web Search FRUCT Conference, AINL-ISMW FRUCT 2015, St. Petersburg, Russia, 9–14 November 2016; pp. 19–25. [Google Scholar]
- Krul, S.; Pantos, C.; Frangulea, M.; Valente, J. Visual SLAM for Indoor Livestock and Farming Using a Small UAV with a Monocular Camera: A Feasibility Study. UAVs 2021, 5, 41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Um, I.; Park, S.; Kim, H.T.; Kim, H. Configuring RTK-GPS Architecture for System Redundancy in Multi-UAV Operations. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 76228–76242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Papa, U.; Del Core, G.; Picariello, F. Atmosphere effects on sonar sensor model for UAS applications. IEEE Aerosp. Electron. Syst. Mag. 2016, 31, 34–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- HC-SR04 Datasheet. Available online: https://cdn.sparkfun.com/datasheets/Sensors/Proximity/HCSR04.pdf (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- PING. Ultrasonic Distance Sensor Product Description. Available online: https://www.parallax.com/product/ping-ultrasonic-distance-sensor/ (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- Kambic KK-105 CH Climatic chamber datasheet. Available online: https://www.cik-solutions.com/content/files/en_climatic_chamber_kambic_kk-105_ch_data_sheet.pdf (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- HD2817T Temperature/Humidity Transmitter, Indicator and Regulator User Manual Rev. 1.2., Delta OHM. 2011. Available online: https://www.deltaohm.com/wp-content/uploads/document/DeltaOHM-HD2817T-active-transmitters-manual-en.pdf (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- Disto D3—Leica Geosystems User Manual. Available online: https://shop.leica-geosystems.com/sites/default/files/2019-03/leica_disto_user_manual_d3_us-en.pdf (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- Ikura, M.; Miyashita, L.; Ishikawa, M. Real-time Landing Gear Control System Based on Adaptive 3D Sensing for Safe Landing of UAV. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE/SICE International Symposium on System Integration (SII), Honolulu, HI, USA, 12–15 January 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sony IMX382 CMOS Image Sensor Product Specifications. Available online: https://www.gophotonics.com/products/cmos-image-sensors/sony-corporation/21-209-imx382 (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- New Scale Technologies DK-M3-RS-U-360 Product Specifications. Available online: https://www.newscaletech.com/micro-motion-modules/m3-rs-rotary-smart-stages/ (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- Kikoh Giken MLX-D12-640-10 Product Specifications. Available online: https://www.monotaro.sg/p/70474696.html (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- Daponte, P.; De Vito, L.; Lamonaca, F.; Picariello, F.; Riccio, M.; Rapuano, S.; Pompetti, L.; Pompetti, M. UAVsBench: An innovative bench to test UAVs. IEEE Instrum. Meas. Mag. 2017, 20, 8–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daponte, P.; Lamonaca, F.; Picariello, F.; Riccio, M.; Pompetti, L.; Pompetti, M. A measurement system for testing light remotely piloted aircraft. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Workshop on Metrology for AeroSpace (MetroAeroSpace), Padua, Italy, 21–23 June 2017; pp. 21–23. [Google Scholar]
- Brzozowski, B.; Daponte, P.; De Vito, L.; Lamonaca, F.; Picariello, F.; Pompetti, M.; Tudosa, I.; Wojtowicz, K. A remote-controlled platform for UAS testing. IEEE Aerosp. Electron. Syst. Mag. 2018, 33, 48–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Datasheet of GY-85 module. Available online: http://www.hotmcu.com/ (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- Datasheet of ACS770 Hall-effect current sensor. Available online: http://www.allegromicro.com/ (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- Daponte, P.; De Vito, L.; Cornacchia, G.; Pompetti, M. An Innovative Procedure and Indexes for UAS Testing. In Proceedings of the NATO AVT-355 Research Workshop on Intelligent Solutions for Improved Mission Readiness of Military UxVs, Video Teleconference, 3–7 May 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Faundes, D.N.; Wunsch, V.; Hohnstein, S.; Glass, B.; Vetter, M. Research paper on the topic of different UAV drive train qualification and parameter sets. In Proceedings of the 32nd Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC), East Syracuse, NY, USA, 6–10 October 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Waliszkiewicz, M.; Wojtowicz, K.; Rochala, Z.; Balestrieri, E. The Design and Implementation of a Custom Platform for the Experimental Tuning of a Quadcopter Controller. Sensors 2020, 20, 1940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Santos, M.F.; Silva, M.F.; Vidal, V.F.; Honorio, L.M.; Lopes, V.L.M.; Silva, L.A.Z.; Rezende, H.B.; Ribeiro, J.M.S.; Cerqueira, A.S.; Pancoti, A.A.N.; et al. Experimental Validation of Quadrotors Angular Stability in a Gyroscopic Test Bench. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on System Theory, Control and Computing (ICSTCC), Sinaia, Romania, 10–12 October 2018; pp. 783–788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scanavino, M.; Avi, A.; Vilardi, A.; Guglieri, G. Unmanned Aircraft Systems Performance in a Climate-Controlled Laboratory. J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 2021, 102, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hann, R.; Wenz, A.; Gryte, K.; Johansen, T.A. Impact of atmospheric icing on UAV aerodynamic performance. In Proceedings of the 2017 Workshop on Research, Education and Development of Unmanned Aerial Systems (RED-UAS), Linköping, Sweden, 3–5 October 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Scanavino, M.; Vilardi, A.; Guglieri, G. A new facility for UAV testing in climate-controlled environments. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems (ICUAS), Atlanta, GA, USA, 11–14 June 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scanavino, M.; Vilardi, A.; Guglieri, G. An Experimental Analysis on Propeller Performance in a Climate-controlled Facility. J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 2020, 100, 1–3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scanavino, M.; Avi, A.; Vilaradi, A.; Guglieri, G. UAS testing in low pressure and temperature conditions. In Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems (ICUAS), Athens, Greece, 1–4 September 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.E.; Jung, J.-W.; Choi, Y.; Yoon, Y.-J.; Hong, J.-W. Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Impacts on Heat-Strengthened Glass. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 104269–104278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Datasheet of PCB 208C05. Available online: https://www.pcb.com/products?model=208C05 (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- Datasheet of Phantom V611. Available online: https://www.adept.net.au/cameras/visionresearch/Phantomv61x.shtml (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- Campolettano, E.T.; Bland, M.L.; Gellner, R.A.; Sproule, D.W.; Rowson, B.; Tyson, A.M.; Duma, S.M.; Rowson, S. Ranges of Injury Risk Associated with Impact from Unmanned Aircraft Systems. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 2017, 45, 2733–2741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- DJI Phantom 3. Available online: https://www.dji.com/phantom-3-standard (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- DJI Inspire 1. Available online: https://www.dji.com/inspire-1 (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- DJI S1000+. Available online: https://www.dji.com/spreading-wings-s1000-plus (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- Humanetics Hybrid III 50th Male. Available online: https://humanetics.humaneticsgroup.com/products/anthropomorphic-test-devices/frontal-impact/hybrid-iii-50th-male/hybrid-iii-50th-male (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- Endevco 7264-2000b. Available online: https://buy.endevco.com/accelerometer/7264b-accelerometer (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- Vision Research Phantom v9 Datasheet. Available online: https://weitzlab.seas.harvard.edu/files/weitzlab/files/v9spec.pdf (accessed on 4 November 2021).
Sensing Solution | State of the Art LIDAR | State of the Art Cameras | Low-Cost LIDAR | Low-Cost Optical Cameras | Low-Cost Ultrasonic Sensors | Low-Cost Ultrasonic + IR Sensors | Low-Cost LIDAR + Optical Cameras |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Incorporated perception sensor(s) | Sick LIDAR, Ibeo LIDAR Lux scanner | ZED camera, RGB depth camera | LIDAR lite, UTM-30LX | Logitech Cam Pro, Logitech C310 | Max-botix Sonar, HCSR04 | SFR02 + GP2Y0A710K0F | 1D LIDAR + monocular camera |
Minimum sensor(s) cost | R20,000 ≈ 1400 USD | R15,000 ≈ 1000 USD | R1600 ≈ 110 USD | R500 ≈ 35 USD | R60 ≈ 4 USD | R60, R75 ≈ 4, 5 USD | R1600 ≈ 110 USD |
Minimum sensor(s) weight | 3.7 kg | 900 g | 22 g | 25 g | 7 g | 7 g | 50 g |
Minimum processor speed requirements | 1.6 GHz | 2.6 GHz | 180 MHz | 600 MHz | 32 MHz | 32 MHz | 600 MHz |
Minimum power consumption | 25 W | 10 W | 1.3 W | 7 W | 1.3 W | 1.3 W | 7 W |
Resolution | +/−25 mm at 40 m | +/−1 mm at 12 m, 4416 × 1242 pixels | +/−3 cm at 40 m | 640 × 480 pixels | +/−3 cm at 7 m | +/−1 cm at 7 m | +/−3 cm at 40 m, 640 × 480 pixels |
Measurements | Range and appearance | Range and appearance | Range | Appearance | Range | Range | Range and appearance |
Radar | LIDAR | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Echodyne MESA-DAATM | Aerotenna μSharp PatchTM | IMST sR-1200eTM | Innoviz ProTM | Velodyne ULTRA PuckTM | Leddartech Vu8TM | |
FOV | ≥120° Az × 80° El | 50° Az × 30° El | (Int. patch ant.) 65° Az × 24° El | 73° Az × 20° El | 360° Az × 40° El (−25° to +15°) | Az: narrow 20°, medium 48°, wide 100° El 0.3–3° |
Scan/update rate | ≈1 Hz for 120° Az × 40° El | 90 Hz | 10 Hz–200 Hz | 20 Hz | 5–20 Hz | Up to 100 Hz |
Detec. range | 3400 m (max range) (>750 m for small UAV) | 120 m (max range) | 307 m (max range) | 150 m (max range) | 200 m (max range) | 85 m claimed for retro-reflector, medium FOV in Az, 3° El FOV |
Sensing accuracy/resolution | 3.25 m (range), 0.9 m/s (velocity), Az ± 1° El ± 3° | 22 cm (range) | ≤0.6 m (range), 6.25 m/s (velocity) 2–3° angle | 3 cm (range), 0.15° × 0.3° (angular resolution) | 3 cm (range) Az 0.33°, El 0.1° to 0.4° (angular resolution) | 5 cm (range), angular resolution depends on FOV (8 detection segments in Az) |
Operating frequency/wavelength | 24.45–24.65 GHz (Multichannel) | 24.00 GHz | 24.00–24.25 GHz | 905 nm | 903 nm | 905 nm |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Balestrieri, E.; Daponte, P.; De Vito, L.; Picariello, F.; Tudosa, I. Sensors and Measurements for UAV Safety: An Overview. Sensors 2021, 21, 8253. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21248253
Balestrieri E, Daponte P, De Vito L, Picariello F, Tudosa I. Sensors and Measurements for UAV Safety: An Overview. Sensors. 2021; 21(24):8253. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21248253
Chicago/Turabian StyleBalestrieri, Eulalia, Pasquale Daponte, Luca De Vito, Francesco Picariello, and Ioan Tudosa. 2021. "Sensors and Measurements for UAV Safety: An Overview" Sensors 21, no. 24: 8253. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21248253