Top Banner

of 23

Micro UAVs

Apr 14, 2018

Download

Documents

aloksahu1
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    1/23

    Pioneer1

    E/ME 103 Final Report

    Team Pioneer:Kevin Gu, James Leet, Amit Alon, Manpreet Singh

    June 7, 2012

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    2/23

    Pioneer2

    TABLE OF CONTENTS

    I. Executive Summary. p. 3II. Research Efforts Behind the Concept.. p. 4III. Technical Aspects.... p. 4-6

    i. Payloadii. Size and Reynolds number

    iii. Power Sourceiv. Communications and Processing Capabilitiesv. Automation

    IV. Key Enabling Technological Breakthrough.p. 6V. Military Applications and Considerationsp. 6-10

    i. Surveillanceii. Strike Capability

    iii. Communicationsiv. Cultural Change and Learning Curvev. Automation

    vi. International Marketvii. Conclusions and Projections

    VI. Commercial Applications p. 10-12i. Scientific Research

    ii. Disaster Prevention and Managementiii. Environmental Protectioniv. Communication Missionsv. Homeland Security

    VII. Legal and Political Issues Analysis. p. 12-13VIII.Commercial, Legal, and Political Projections. p. 13IX. S-Curve Analysis. p. 13X. Technology Readiness Level... p. 14-15XI. Team Analysis. p. 15XII. Scenariop. 16XIII.Appendix.. p. 17-23

    i. Analysis of Interview Responsesii. Interviews Conducted

    1.Dr. Yu-Chong Tai Interview2.Mr. Stayne Hoff Telephone interview3.Dr. Matthew Thoss Email correspondence4.Dr. Larry Matthies Telephone interview5.Dr. Peter Seiler Interview6.Dr. Peter Seiler Email correspondence

    iii. References

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    3/23

    Pioneer3

    I.EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

    The terms UAV and drone strike have entered the home of every Americanhousehold in recent years due to media reports regarding the use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles(UAVs) in Iraq and Afghanistan. They have been used to gather intelligence, to provide airsupport for ground forces, and to surgically eliminate some of the most wanted individuals in the

    world. This success, along with a desire for additional capabilities, has recently sparked interestthe field of micro-UAVs.

    We examined a number of the different technical aspects that are at the heart of thedevelopment of micro-UAVs, and we identified power storage as the greatest limiting factorbecause micro-UAVs are currently hampered by their very brief performance capabilities.Additionally, we examined issues in payload capacity and communications.

    In the near future, micro-UAVs will experience the most growth in the defense industry,as their surveillance capabilities will be highly sought after in a world of asymmetric warfare.Furthermore, micro-UAVs will develop the capability to execute lethal force on the battlefield,as infantry and special operations forces develop an acceptance of unmanned technologies. Thisshift will initially be imperfectly implemented though, as a learning curve exists at the senior

    leadership level of the military and the Department of Defense.However, the market position of micro-UAVs in the commercial sector is slowly gaining

    traction. This is due to the wide range of opportunities in search and rescue, firefighting, lawenforcement, journalism, and disaster response. Note that the biggest barriers tocommercialization are the legal regulations and the political quandaries caused by remotesurveillance and unmanned technologies.

    We conclude that micro-UAVs will experience a fairly rapid period of growth due to thehigh demand for their capabilities and the wide variety of potential applications, but technicalinnovation is likely to come at a slower and more incremental pace.

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    4/23

    Pioneer4

    II.RESEARCH EFFORTS BEHIND THE CONCEPT

    Currently, there is micro-UAV research being done throughout all of the major researchinstitutions in the U.S. We have provided a short list of examples within the U.S., but it shouldbe noted that this list is by no means exhaustive.

    -Universities: Caltech, UCLA, MIT, U. Minnesota, Georgia Tech, U. Pennsylvania

    - Government research laboratories: NRL, NASA- Government defense contractors: Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon- Aerospace/Technology companies: AeroVironmentThe majority of the funding for all of these research institutions comes from the

    government in some form. There are a sizable number of university research groups involved inbasic research of micro-UAVs and related technology, mostly obtaining their funding fromDARPA, NSF, NASA, etc. It is difficult to know details of micro-UAV research being donewithin government labs or defense contractors, as there is little publicly available informationdue to the classified nature of the projects. For instance, often our contacts were forced to refrainfrom responding to our questions. However, the overall scale of micro-UAV research is very

    large as evidenced by the Pentagons recent request for $5 billion for UAVs this year [1].Outside of the U.S., there are several efforts directed at the development of UAVs and

    micro-UAVs. As mentioned in our previous HW 7, there are several companies and governmentefforts in Ukraine and South Africa, as well as in Israel, which has existing contracts to providemicro-UAVs to Australia, Canada, England, and Singapore.

    III.TECHNICAL ASPECTS

    i. PayloadPayload has been one of the limitations of micro-UAVs when compared with bigger

    UAVs and other manned aircrafts, due to their size. However, as micro-UAVs are evolving, theneed for higher payloads is increasing in order to meet the demands of surveillance missions andsurgical strikes by the military. Looking through the data of various UAV operations, theDepartment of Defense in 2005 presented an equation that relates the payload weight, the rangeof the UAV, and cost [2]:

    =0.9210.6

    Projecting the cost of micro-UAVs in the near future, an individual micro-UAV isexpected to be around $2000 per unit, with a payload of 15 grams.

    ii. Size and Reynolds number

    Micro-UAVs have generally been UAVs which are lighter than 5 kg. Micro-UAVs,like the Dragon Fly, which weighs about 2.25 kg, have been used for military surveillance.Although reducing the size helps on reduction of fuel usage, micro- and nano-UAVs suffer fromoperating in a low Reynolds number regime. The DoD classifies nano-UAVs as those being lessthan 7.5 cm in any dimension. The Reynolds number is defined as:

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    5/23

    Pioneer5

    =

    Figure 1 compares the Reynolds numbersof various aircrafts. This yields a Reynolds

    number of less than 100,000 for MAVs andNAVs, which causes the aircraft instabilities andin turn limits the overall control andmaneuverability. Due to physical limitations ofthe low energy efficiency of smaller motors, thisis a considerable problem for extremely smallaircrafts.

    iii. Power SourceThe range and duration of flight have been the most significant problems facing micro-

    UAVs both in the past and present. Due to the small size of the aircraft, the amount fuel and

    battery power that can be carried is currently very limited. Landing micro-UAVs to refuel notonly takes them off-station, but it requires skilled manpower and adds the risk of crashing.Researchers have been continuously attempting to find alternative energy sources mainlythrough the following methods:

    - Solar energy In the past, solar energy has been employed on UAVs and in December2010, QinetiQ Zephyr stayed in air for 14 days straight using solar energy and set a newrecord [3]. The scientists at DARPA are currently researching on micro-UAVs whichwould make use of solar energy to stay in air for years [4].

    - Hydrogen fuel cells Hydrogen power has been an inferior fuel to solar energy in termsof range, but in the past micro-UAVs have been employed with this energy source.

    Pterosoar flew 78 miles in 2007 by making use of 16 grams of hydrogen, setting a recordfor this energy [5].

    - Laser energy Researchers have been exploring the use of lasers to transmit energy froma ground station to a photovoltaic receiver at the UAV through a beam director. However,this energy has not been employed yet due to the limited range and low efficiency [6].

    iv. Communications and Processing CapabilitiesCurrently, larger UAVs rely on traditional jamming signal codes and encryption codes,

    but the signal to micro-UAVs is relatively open to interception. Micro-UAVs in the past havesuffered from low processing capabilities, and thereby have had limited multi-taskingcapabilities. This has been one of the biggest factors that has led to an increased use of bigger

    UAVs when compared to micro-UAVs. However, with shrinking size of transistors, emergingmanufacturing techniques, and continued increase of funding, micro-UAVs in the future willhave enough capabilities to stay in competition with the bigger UAVs.

    v.AutomationUnmanned aerial vehicles have not been completely unmanned as the name suggests.

    Micro-UAVs have a ground control crew that pilots the device. Thus, the market for

    Figure 0: Comparison of aircraft Reynolds number

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    6/23

    Pioneer6

    autonomous control is still fairly immature due to technical challenges. However, research isbeing carried out on the following areas:

    - Sensor fusion Synthesizing information from multiple sensors for computation tasks- Communications Handle communications from multiple sources and coordinate

    information

    - Path planning - Determining the optimal path for flight and adjusting to hazards orattacks- Cooperative Tactics Allowing UAV swarms to communicate and coordinate activities- Targeting Automated processes for identifying and tracking the target (very important

    development for commercial applications in future)

    IV.KEY ENABLING TECHNOLOGICAL BREAKTHROUGH

    We believe that the key technological breakthrough for micro-UAVs will be thedevelopment of a suitable high energy-density power source. Through our secondary research,we found that the single most pressing issue facing micro-UAVs is flight time and range, aconclusion that has been validated by our primary research.

    However, suffice it to say that we anticipate our technology will become viable formilitary applications within the next 5-10 years, even without this breakthrough of high energy-density power sources. For instance, as early as 2007, Horizon Fuel Cell Technologies and theNASA Dryden Flight Research Center demonstrated a micro-UAV, called the Pterosoar, with arange of 500 km being powered by hydrogen fuel [7]. Based on the trend of development weobserved through our primary research, current technology is expected to mature sufficiently,such that micro-UAVs will become viable for a number applications that require moderateenergy density. The development of a high energy density power source will then enablesignificantly more complex and power-intensive vehicles (such as devices capable of verticaltake-off and landing), which will dramatically increase the role of micro-UAVs in both military

    and commercial applications.Some potential breakthrough technologies include lithium-air batteries and high

    performance fuel cells. While hydrogen fuel cells have been known and investigated for severaldecades now, any improvement is likely to be incremental. Perhaps more promising are lithium-air batteries, which have demonstrated an energy density of ~10 kWh/kg, more than an order ofmagnitude higher than conventional lithium-ion batteries. The technology is still in its infancyand is projected to be commercially viable no sooner than 2020.

    V.MILITARY APPLICATIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS

    Overall, the defense sector offers the most promising opportunities for the developmentof new technologies and the implementation of new capabilities. First, there is a proven trackrecord of success provided by the deployment of full-size UAV platforms in a variety ofconflicts throughout the world, most notably in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Additionally,the continuing threat of terrorism and regional instability will ensure that there is a continueddemand for asymmetric warfare technologies. In 2009, the Secretary of Defense Robert Gatesinstructed all branches of the armed forces to maximize UAS (unmanned aircraft system)procurement and deployment. Currently the annual UAV budget stands at roughly $4 billion,

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    7/23

    Pioneer7

    which represents a 150% increase since 2004, and it is projected to be $15.2 billion by 2015 [8].Due to the priority placed on these systems, it is likely their development will not be seriouslyhampered by the defense cuts enacted by the Obama administration.

    Consider Figure 2 from a recently declassified Air Force Report, which details the MAVcapabilities that are desired in the future:

    Figure 1. Direction of Capabilities Outlined in Unmanned Aircraft Systems Flight Plan 2009-2047

    i. SurveillanceThe primary capability that sparked our interest in UAVs was the proposal to use a

    nano-UAV, which could be disguised as an insect, to perform reconnaissance inside a building.While NAVs offer some exciting opportunities in the future, this goal is likely to be a fewdecades away. The technical challenges involved in reaching such a small scale, in terms ofaerodynamics, sensors, and power storage are simply too great to overcome without miraculoustechnological advancements. Additionally, our secondary research uncovered the fact that whilethis idea is popular in the media, there is, actually, not a large demand for this capability in themilitary. While a nano-UAV-insect could be effective outside, in secure locations, currentstrategy experts believe such a system could easily be rendered useless by a wide array of simple

    countermeasures, such as closing all the doors and windows and going around the room with afly-swatter.The use of micro-UAVs to conduct more traditional surveillance, such as situational

    awareness for infantry, will likely continue to be the dominant application. As budget constraintsand asymmetric threats continue to support a shift from large conventional forces to small,special operations units, MAVs will become even more valuable. While these units possessamazing capabilities, their small size leaves them vulnerable in enemy territory, and continuoussituational awareness of their immediate area of operations is needed to operate most effectively.

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    8/23

    Pioneer8

    This area represents the most obvious need for MAVs, but the relatively short flight time ofcurrent systems, which typically ranges from 45-90 minutes, is inadequate. However, we believethat innovation will occur in this sector as evidenced by the Wide-Area Surveillance Projectile(WASP), which was developed by AeroVironment and DARPA and is currently employed onthe battlefield. It can fly for about 2 hours, at 5,000 feet and in 105 degree Fahrenheit weather,

    and it can be manufactured for about $5,000/vehicle [9].

    ii. Strike CapabilityAnother capability that we examined in depth was the ability of a MAV to execute lethal

    force. We began with the hypothesis that in the near future increased payload capacities wouldallow MAVs to deploy some specially adapted weapons system. Our most recent researchillustrates that although there is a desire to weaponize MAVs, payload capacity is not increasingfast enough to make this a reality. Thus, AeroVironment led an effort to develop a smallunmanned aerial system referred to as the Switchblade (pictured below), which is small enoughto be carried in a backpack, can be launched into the air through a tube, can stream real-timevideo, and carries a small warhead that explodes on impact. Thus, the system is designed to be a

    small, unmanned Kamikaze capable of eliminating small groups of individuals and lightvehicles. AeroVironment received $4.9 million for this project in 2011 from DARPA, $5.1million from the U.S. Army on March 20, 2012, and the company predicts that the device will becarried by American soldiers in 1-2 years [10].

    Figure 2. AeroVironments Switchblade MAV

    This interest in weaponization is actually one of the most serious issues facing MAVsthat could define the future of the technology because it is related to one of the most infamousintelligence blunders in U.S. history. In 1999, an unarmed Predator UAV, being operated by theCIA, located and identified Osama bin Laden on the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan, but itcould not take any action because it was designed only for surveillance. This incident directly ledto an expedited effort to install Hellfire missiles on the Predator. Ever since, the special

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    9/23

    Pioneer9

    operations and intelligence communities have strongly influenced a trend towards ensuring thatUAVs can eliminate, or aid in the elimination of, the threats they identify.

    iii. CommunicationsDue to their low cost and unmanned nature, MAVs offer a set of unique capabilities,

    such as the ability to self-destruct and a relative indifference to being lost in combat. Thus, thereis currently very little emphasis being placed on securing the communication link betweenground forces and MAVs because they are viewed as disposable. Also, since MAVs can onlybe kept aloft for a very brief time, and the current threats facing American soldiers tend to bevery low-tech (i.e. IEDs), the threat of hacking is relatively low. Nevertheless, we view this as acritical problem that is not receiving the proper amount of attention. Inevitably, MAVs will bekept aloft longer, employ more destructive weapons, and be tied into large, centralized commandand control networks, rather than being operated by a single soldier. As cyber-warfare isproliferated and grows in complexity, MAVs will be vulnerable to being completely taken overor used as a link to networks that contain other valuable information.

    iv. Cultural Change and Learning CurveThe growing importance of UAVs of all kinds has ignited a number of cultural changesin the military that cannot be ignored as systems continue to develop. For example, the Air Forceis undergoing a shift in leadership from the pilots who flew the traditional fighters and bombersof the Cold War, to pilots that do their flying with both feet on the ground. This has created acultural friction, and it has induced the practical challenges of adjusting training programs forpilots and support staff. Thus, over the next 5-7 years there will be a substantial learning curve inimplementing the optimal programs and strategies with regards to MAV systems, as UAV pilotsbegin to replace the old guard leadership.

    v. Automation

    The implementation of automation in military MAVs is likely to follow a relatively slowand incremental path in the near future. Note that the initial steps have already been taken bytranslating the autopilot capabilities of manned aircraft, including takeoff, landing, andnavigating between known waypoints. As our interview with JPLs computer vision expert LarryMatthies indicated, the next steps are defined by the ability to dynamically conduct surveillanceand mapping operations over a given region. In particular, within five years, a user woulddesignate a target area, and based on the information gathered by an array of sensors duringflight, the MAV would identify areas of interest and re-direct to observe. However, our researchhas shown that the implementation of automation will likely lag several years behind the frontierof technical capabilities due to fears and regulations surrounding the idea of turning over controlof military hardware to a computer program.

    vi.International MarketDue to the challenges of asymmetric warfare, growth in MAVs in the US is already

    taking place at a rapid pace. However, due to the lack of any disruptive technologicalinnovations on the horizon, a senior business executive at AeroVironment indicated that theinternational market will most likely be the focus of the most rapid growth in the next 5-10 years.This is because the low cost of MAV systems offers nations with limited military resourcesgreatly expanded capabilities for aerial surveillance and reconnaissance. American defense

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    10/23

    Pioneer10

    corporations have begun to focus on providing nations in central and southern Africa withMAVs, so that inadequate government forces can better deal with rebels, poachers, and otherthreats over expansive and rugged terrain.

    vii. Conclusions and Projections

    We conclude that MAVs are likely to follow an incremental path of innovation, asrelatively small innovations and improvements increase capabilities. This has become thestandard operating procedure for all defense related aerospace technologies as old platforms areexpected to last several decades, such as the B-52 bomber which will have a 90 year lifetimewhen it is finally decommissioned in 2040. This prediction, with regards to UAVs, is in linewith the Unmanned Aircraft Systems Roadmap released by the Department of Defense, whichpredicts that the Predator and Global Hawk platforms (the major full size UAV systems usedtoday) will be in service until 2030.

    Figure 3. Timeline from US Air Force Unmanned Aircraft Systems Flight Plan 2009-2047

    VI.COMMERCIAL APPLICATIONS

    In our midterm paper we surveyed possible civilian applications for MAVs andexamined the cost effectiveness in civilian applications compared to other products. Below is asummarized list of possible civilian applications:

    i. Scientific ResearchUnmanned aircrafts can assist science where the desired locations of study are either remote ordangerous. A few examples of such areas include:

    - In 2005, the American National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration used a variantof a Predator to conduct a 20 hours survey over the Eastern Pacific.

    - In 2010, NASA used a Global Hawk for collect information on hurricane formation andbehavior.

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    11/23

    Pioneer11

    ii. Disaster Prevention and Management

    - Firefighters and other government agencies can deploy micro-UAVs to dynamicallyexamine forest fires continuously, while a conventional aircraft such as a Black Hawkcan only fly for two hours and eighteen minutes without refueling [11].

    - In April 2011, an RQ-16 was used to assess the damage to the nuclear reactor inFukushima, Japan. In this mission, manned aircraft could not be used because of the highradiation in the disaster area.

    iii.Environmental ProtectionWith the development of autonomous systems, for low complexity missions, a UAV can performan entire mission independently without the constant need of an operator. These are usually low-complexity missions, often to collect information in a relatively uniform surface (such as an openocean) for a long period of time.

    - Monitoring illegal fishing and water resources- Collection of air and water samples

    iv. Communication Missions

    - Here UAVs can replace communication satellites in poor weather conditions. Since theyare flying closer to the ground, their signal distorts less than that of the satellites.

    - In journalism, an MAV can provide a live feed from the scene and at a lower operatingcost of a helicopter.

    v.Homeland Security

    - A UAV can fly above an area of interest for a long time and alert its operators on theground if it discovers suspicious activity.

    - UAVs can be used to patrol national borders instead of ten manned aircrafts or twentyagents on the ground (assuming thirty UAV flight hours) for the same area coverage. TheDepartment of Homeland Security only has six UAVs at the moment [11], since theprice of full size UAVs is almost prohibitively high; it usually ranges between $4 and$26.5 million [2].

    - In the 2008 Soccer World Cup, the Swiss police used UAVs to observe suspiciousmovements and for crowd control; the police was able to determine the direction of thecrowd movement in real time and prevent build-ups.

    While some of the civilian applications listed above already use UAVs, the market ofmicro- and nano-UAVs is expected to hold over 60% of the full civilian UAV market by 2015[11]. This market change will happen due to the low price of small UAVs compared to a regular

    UAV. For example, a Dragon Eye UAV cost $28.5K, and the DoD has marked $5000 as the endcost for a nano-UAVs [2].

    During our research on possible civilian applications for MAVs, we found that thegreatest need for MAVs and NAVs systems is in dynamic applications. Dynamic applicationsare applications where the aircrafts have a clear mission and can take action to adjust to adynamic environment. In those missions, time is the critical factor that can save lives. Forexample, in a search and rescue mission, MAVs can be deployed much faster than existingalternatives (satellites, tethered aerostat radar, and manned aircrafts) and possess lower cost of

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    12/23

    Pioneer12

    operation. Another benefit is the fact that MAVs can be deployed by personnel in the areasimilar to the Raven in the military. This advantage cuts out the middleman (helicopter pilot,satellite image reconstruction specialist, etc.), and enables continuous and direct flow ofinformation.

    VII.LEGAL AND POLITICAL ISSUES ANALYSIS

    Unmanned aerial vehicle technologies have advanced tremendously due to theirsuccessful development and use in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. These machines, which areoften piloted by a remote operator, eliminate the risk that a pilot might otherwise face inconducting reconnaissance or combat missions. They also offer a stealthier means of conductingmilitary operations. Around the globe, MAVs have been used successfully for civilian missionssuch as coastal monitoring in England and Australia due to the length of their coast-line.

    Due to their success, Congress showed bipartisan support for a $63 billion bill earlier thisyear that requires the FAA to come up with standardized regulations to open the domesticairspace for UAVs by 2015 and speed up the current process for government agencies to obtain

    permits. Until now, the FAA approved 313 permits in 2011 out of which 295 are still active [12,13].

    Now, the FAA needs to provide clear guidelines for UAVs of all sizes in order to usethem over domestic soil. Some of the issues that they will be considering include the following:

    - The use of UAVs for reconnaissance on civilians without their consent- Reconnaissance by commercial entities for profit- Possible Fourth Amendment conflicts

    It is not clear whether the FAA will be able to provide satisfactory answers to thesequestions within the time frame because of the short time that elapsed since the bill passed.Nonetheless, it is was made clear by the large consensus supporting the bill that there were

    massive lobbying efforts by the defense industry.To consider the motives of the defense industry for lobbying for this bill, one should

    consider recent developments in conflict areas in which the US is active, as well as the evolutionof the industry. With the return of US troops from Iraq and the scheduled return of the troopsfrom Afghanistan in 2014, UAV activity in those regions will decline dramatically. There mightbe a need for surgical strikes against specific insurgents, but the vast majority of UAV operationswill cease. Furthermore, in our Porter forces analysis (see HW 7), we mentioned that most if notall of the UAV manufacturers plan to enter the civilian market by beginning to produce MAVs.This change is possible for those companies since the technology in both systems is the same,but MAVs have lower payload capabilities and shorter flight duration. Additional informationwas revealed recently when the FAA estimated that the number of permits for civilian purpose

    UAVs by 2020 will be 30,000 [2]. Hence, after considering the three points mentioned above,one can conclude that the $63 billion bill was strongly lobbied for by the defense industry toenable them to enter their white space market when the conflicts in the Middle East will end,hopefully, in a couple of years.

    Alas, another serious barrier to the adaptation of MAVs in civilian areas is safety. Publicopinion regarding the value of human lives continues to increase (partially because of thecollateral damage made by UAV attacks), and the public will not tolerate unjust loss of livesdue to accidents in civilian airspace. Prof. Seiler from the University of Minnesota, one of our

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    13/23

    Pioneer13

    interviewees, mentioned that the probability of fatal error of UAVs is seven orders of magnitudehigher than fatal errors in commercial manned flights. The large difference is due to the lack of atriple redundancy system, which was described in HW 5, in UAVs. A new approach ofanalytical error modeling is being developed to significantly improve the rate of fatal errors inMAVs which will result in more reliable operation. If MAVs can become nearly accident free,

    it is likely that they will be here to stay.

    VIII.COMMERCIAL,LEGAL,AND POLITICAL PROJECTIONS

    In order to estimate the timeline of the adoption of MAVs into our civilian lives, oneshould consider several factors. For one, legal issues are currently being considered, as therecently passed FAA bill has paved the way for the legalization of the usage of UAVsdomestically. Also, technology readiness is a twofold issue. On one hand, the technology ofMAVs is mature and several models are deployed around the world. On the other hand, the highfatal error rate of UAVs is a concern (the rate is 0.01 fatal errors per hour of flight).

    We envision that the FAA will provide the required regulations by 2015, but the usage of

    micro-UAVs will not become widespread until the safety issues have been resolved, which weestimate to be around 2018. A period of five years was chosen to accommodate the developmentof analytical models for fatal errors in aircrafts. Since the modeling knowledge and aircraftdynamics are well known areas, we believe this estimate is realistic and achievable. It will not beadvantageous for commercial companies and government agencies to use MAVs withoutaddressing this concern, since one accident over a populated area will be a high profile event inthe media, which can sway the public away from supporting the usage of unmanned aircraftsover US soil.

    IX.S-CURVE ANALYSIS

    The DoD has shown interest in MAVs and NAVs through initial funding in the late1980s. Between 1990 and 1999, the DoD invested over $3 billion in UAV development,procurement, and operations. The increasing budget spent on the development of UAVs has ledto decreased size and higher performance, from Pioneer in the 1980s to Dragon Eye in early2000.

    The vast majority of the research and development has occurred in the defense industrydue to relatively high capital costs, which has consequently resulted in a low demandcommercially. MAVs are in the growth region in the defense industry, but still in theintroduction region in commercial applications as discussed in the section above.

    Possible applications for micro-UAVs that would fully differentiate them from their full-

    size counterparts are not yet fully developed. Thus, in the very near future, there will continue tobe a reliance on manned aircrafts and full-size UAVs. However, as micro-UAVs become morecost effective and gain the required capabilities they will establish a sizeable market position.Presently, micro-UAVs face strong competition from larger UAVs and their mannedcounterparts, but there is still the potential for a disruptive market event. Figure 5 below showsthe projected budget on UAVs for next ten years.

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    14/23

    Pioneer14

    Figure 4: Teal Groups estimation of the budget to be spent on UAV's [14]

    This recent market study by Teal Group [14] estimates that UAV spending willapproximately double over the next decade from current worldwide UAV expenditures of $6.6billion annually to $11.4 billion. Therefore, within the next 10-15 years, micro-UAVs will enterthe initial growth region commercially and initial maturity region in the defense industry.

    Figure 5: S-Curve analysis for the next 10-15 years

    X.TECHNOLOGY READINESS LEVEL

    The technology development of UAVs in general had started as early as World War I,but when the army began demonstrations, initially UAVs failed due to several technologicalfaults. However, UAVs have developed significantly since then, and after becoming fully

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    15/23

    Pioneer15

    operational, the DoD began funding on micro-UAVs in1990s. Micro-UAVs had reached a Technologyreadiness level of 6 in 2005 [15], when the technologyhad been demonstrated successfully by the military andwas beginning its transition through the Future Combat

    Systems program of United States. The technologyreadiness of micro-UAVs can be divided into thereadiness of three main aspects

    1. Sensors The sensors for autonomous operationof micro-UAVs are still at Level 4, as thesensors are still being developed according tothe size for targeting and coordination betweenswarms of UAVs.

    2. Power Source Although different energysources have been demonstrated for micro-UAVs as noted above, research is still being

    carried out to prove feasibility on a widespreadscale. Thus, the power source readiness is still atLevel 3.

    3. Processing Capabilities Presently, micro-UAVs only carry out single-applicationspecific tasks, but the technology is beingdeveloped (Level 4) to allow for more dynamictasks.

    XI.TEAM ANALYSIS

    The team structure was as follows: Each member reads the weekly assignment anddevelops some preliminary points prior to the team meeting, typically held on Friday. The casequestions are discussed and major points are recorded. The write-ups for the assignment are splitbetween team members, and other action items are assigned following a discussion of whichtasks need to be completed, such as contacting primary resources. A rotating designated compilerreceives individual HW sections and sends the compiled document to the team for review.

    Overall the team functioned extremely well. Some main points are highlighted: Meetingtimes have been flexible to enable all team members to be present at every meeting. Teammeetings have all been effective and efficient, rarely requiring more than one hour per week.Every assignment was satisfactorily completed to all team members standards, and the marksreceived reflect the high quality of work done by each individual team member. Interviews were

    conducted as a team.As mentioned in HW 4, the only two issues that arose were some initial uneven

    distribution of work, and submission of individual HW sections to the compiler duringreasonable hours. Within the two weeks following, those issues were rectified and no newproblems with the teams function have arisen since.

    Figure 7. Technology Readiness Level diagram [16]

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    16/23

    Pioneer16

    XII.SCENARIO

    It was no more than a slight buzzing sound that awoke Billy in the middle of the night.Just a swarm of bees passing by, he thought, putting his head back down. They wont harmthe crops. The next time he awoke, it was to footsteps and shuffling, loud and intent. The doorsburst open and the police had Billy on the ground within seconds. It was over; they had found

    him and his marijuana farm deep within Yosemite National Park.The Chief Ranger responsible for the bust said in a news release: Thanks to the newest

    addition to our police forces surveillance equipment, we were able to perform rapid and widesweeps for marijuana plantations throughout Yosemite, and yesterdays operation reaffirms ourcommitment that the reserve remains safe for visitors. The job had just become a whole loteasier.

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    17/23

    Pioneer17

    XIII.APPENDIX

    i.Analysis of Interview Responses

    While the majority of the responses we obtained through primary research were veryinformative, consistent, and insightful, there were a few extreme responses of which we were

    naturally wary. On one hand, Dr. Yu-Chong Tai of Caltech gave a very pessimistic view of thefuture of micro-UAVs. However, we note that his research was conducted more than 5 yearsago, and the state of the technology has changed dramatically during that time. For instance,when asked about the future of micro- and nano-UAVs, his response was that neither would befeasible. All of our other sources, who are more up to date with the current state of thetechnology, agree that the former are feasible while the latter are not.

    On the other end of the spectrum, we remain critical of the extremely positive responsesobtained by Mr. Michael Thoss. It is clear that the marketing manager of a company which sellsmicro-UAVs would be overly optimistic, due to the vested interest in the technology.

    ii.Interviews Conducted

    1. Dr. Yu-Chong Tai Principle Investigator of Caltech MEMS Group, Electrical EngineeringDepartment. In-person interview.

    1. Why did your group stop its research on micro- and nano-UAVs?- While the area is interesting no doubt, it has a significant barrier to overcome. That is

    if its physically possible.2. What is the barrier that you are referring to?

    - The main barrier of these UAV categories is energy, more specifically energyconversions from the battery to the motor and the motors efficiency.

    3. But it seems that these days motors, in general, become more and more efficient acrossthe board. What is the issue with the motors of micro- and nano-UAVs?

    - As we miniaturize devices such as motors there is a great loss of efficiency. Whilewind turbines can operate at 40% efficiency, efficiency decreases with size. Forexample, when they tried to miniaturize combustion engine the loss of efficiencycame from its small dimension that resulted in loss of heat to the surrounding. Also,electric motors cannot provide high enough energy density to power up asophisticated nano-UAV. This combined with a low Reynolds number (

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    18/23

    Pioneer18

    - For the micro-UAVs it is not as big of an issue, as it is for nano-UAVs. On onehand, sensors dont consume any energy, and hence it is possible to implement themon any size drone assuming that they dont add significant weight (again, wed like tohave a high Reynolds number). On the other hand, actuators consume energy, so theiractivity will be limited.

    2. Mr. Stayne Hoff Director of International Business Development for Unmanned AircraftSystems at AeroVironment. Senior Program Manager of Strategic Products for SmallUnmanned Aerial Vehicles. Senior Program Manager of Design Development Center forUnmanned Aerial Vehicles. Over 20 years of experience in aerospace engineering. Telephoneinterview.

    Sees incremental improvements in the field of MAVs but does not see the potential forany breakthrough or disruptive technology in the near future.

    Due to the current limit on technical capabilities, there is an inability to meet additionaldemands of US military, so there is a focus on exploiting international growth.

    The communication links with the Predator were initially entirely unencrypted: If youhad a computer and an Internet connection, you could have watched the video streamssent back by the Predator from Bosnia.

    Security of communications and software systems is dictated by performance needs andcosts: Emphasis on protecting large, complex, and sensitive systems (i.e. Global Hawk).

    Discussed AeroVironments corporate strategy for succeeding as a $500 million marketcap company amongst multi-billion dollar defense firms:i. Engineering-centric.

    ii. Maintains direct relationship with military and understood and pivoted to the changescaused by 9/11.

    iii. Utilize a technology readiness scale to manage R&D. Does not believe nano-UAVs are practical in the near future (5-10 years), but sees a

    definite push towards commercialization of MAVs.

    3. Mr. Michael Thoss Marketing manager of German company Microdrones GmbH. Emailcorrespondence.

    1. Are there any foreseeable disruptive technologies that could alter the development ofmicro-UAVs, or do you think it will follow a natural progression as UAVs did?

    - My personal guess is that it will follow a natural progression.2. What are the various applications where UAVs have been used in past? What are the

    most popular UAV applications presently?

    - Various applications: count penguins in Antarctica, inspections of pipe and powerlines, photogrammetry, precision farming, GIS, inspection of industrial plants, bigprojects in research and development for disaster management (Air Shield:http://www.microdrones.com/company/research-and-development/uav-projects-microdrones.php#air-shield).

    - Most popular: Inspection flights & surveys of all kinds (Photogrammetry, GIS).3. What do you feel would be the most realizable commercial applications for micro-

    UAVs?

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    19/23

    Pioneer19

    - Aerial Inspection Services, Aerial Mapping Services, Aerial Security Services (e.g.safety for industrial plants or other sensitive areas).

    4. What are the possibilities for weaponization of micro-UAVs?- Microdroness aerial platform could get used for scouting jobs (get an overview of an

    area).

    5. How much does an average micro-UAV cost and how do you see the costs in the nearfuture?- A Microdrone platform costs between 23.000 and 40.000 EUR as a standard version.

    6. How have the sales of UAVs and number of competitors in the field been in the past?- Sales have been excellent and it looks like they will be in the future since our

    products seem to be well accepted by our clients - they love them, which is even moremotivating for us.

    - Very few other producers, we evaluate as a qualified competition although a lot of"hobby lines" seems to pop into the market.

    7. How do you see the sales of UAVs in the near future (5-10 years)?- Strongly increasing.

    8. Where do you see the market of UAVs heading? What market has been the most popularfor you (except the military)?- For micro drones, the military market never has been one of the most popular.- Totally more into the civil market (see above) next to public authority market:

    firefighting & disaster management.9. Concluding, how many years until micro-UAVs would be used widely all around the

    world in various applications?

    - At Microdrones, the micro drone platforms are already since 2006 getting usedworldwide. It is already happening and the worldwide market is strongly increasing.

    4. Dr. Larry Matthies Principal investigator/task manager of numerous research tasks in

    computer vision funded by NASA, DARPA, U.S. Army, and other sponsors since 1992 atJPL. Conducted seed research in the area of vision-based navigation of micro air vehicles forreconnaissance and surveillance. Telephone interview.

    1. What is the focus of your particular work within the Micro-UAV industry? Can youspeak to any fields in particular?

    - Research on autonomous systems specifically for military reconnaissanceapplications. MAVs will be used for civil surveillance, news reporting, andentertainment, which all require automation to a different extent.

    2. Of these, which do you expect to have the greatest need for automation?- Mostly DOD reconnaissance and inspections, or anything to survey large areas, will

    need to greatly improve automation capabilities. For instance, automation was keyduring the disaster in Fukushima when UAVs were sent in to inspect the damage tothe reactors.

    3. What are some of the greatest technical challenges associated with MAVs used in themilitary?

    - There are several key areas: The significantly smaller size of MAVs is an issue for durability and endurance.

    The smaller the vehicle is, the lower the endurance.

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    20/23

    Pioneer20

    The decreased energy efficiency of flight requires high energy-density powersources. This also pertains to sensor and processors, which also need to be madesmaller to minimize their impact on the endurance.

    It is difficult to ensure communications within swarms between individualvehicles for obstacle avoidance and path planning. The simultaneous localization

    of maps is a big requirement for swarms to work effectively, and this is currentlya significant area of focus.4. As for visual systems and obstacle avoidance, what is the current state-of-the-art?

    - Currently, this would be Kinect, where vehicle motion is tracked within a closedenvironment. Some problems such as wind disturbance arise in open areas.

    5. What are currently some of the areas of specific focus?- Mapping is a big point of focus. When a vehicle does not have an external reference

    map, it needs to generate an internal map from sensor input. Many people areworking on this, and they work closely with people involved in motion planning.

    6. What are the funding trends in the MAV field? Does most of it come from the military?- Since there are multiples sources of funding such as the DOD, NSF, and DARPA,

    funding over the years has been fairly steady. It is expected to remain so.7. Do you have a rough timeline for when MAVs will come to the market, say to be in the

    hands of a teenager?

    - You can get a quadrocopter today for about $300, but of course it will have verylimited automation capabilities.

    5. Dr. Peter Seiler Professor of Aerospace Engineering and Mechanics at University ofMinnesota. Research in the area of control systems with applications to aerospace systems,and design and analysis of safety critical systems. In-person interview.

    1. What is your primary research area?- My research interest is in flight controls, more specifically in developing analytic

    models for error prediction that do not rely on the Fly By Wire (FBW) method.2. What is FBW?

    - FBW is the most common method of failure detection in airplanes. It uses the conceptof triple modular redundancy. For example, the Boeing 777 has three main computerswhich were all designed by different teams and relay on different processors (Intel,AMD, and Motorola).

    3. What are the advantages of using FBW?- FBW uses independent sub-modules that take over if one system fails, and it also, in

    some sensors, serves as a signal comparator to detect system error.4. What are the disadvantages of such a system:

    - Well, if we consider unmanned aircrafts it means that in order to provide high safetymeasures against fatal system errors, the company needs to use more processors,sensors, etc. These redundant components add weight and hence reduce the payloadof the UAV. Additionally, power consumption is tripled which reduces the missiontime.

    - In commercial airplanes, added weight and higher power consumption are nottypically an issue. For small aircraft such as micro aerial vehicles, this redundancy isnot possible.

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    21/23

    Pioneer21

    5. On that topic, how does your research pertain to micro-UAVs?- As I mentioned, you cant put redundant components on an MAV like you can a

    commercial airplane like the 777. Through modeling, we can detect errors withoutneeding to use heavy sensors to directly measure them.

    6. What are the existing safety regulations on commercial aircraft?- The FAA regulations require that all aircraft above civilian airspace have aprobability of fatal system error less than 10-9 per hour of flight.

    7. How does the failure rate of MAVs compare? Is it significantly worse?- Yes, by orders of magnitude. The rate of fatal system errors in current MAVs is

    0.001 per hour of flight. In fact, you are much more likely to get hit by lightning thanbe in a commercial plane crash, but MAVs are still too unreliable.

    8. Why are the failure rates so much higher for MAVs than commercial planes?- The small size of MAVs prohibits the component redundancy found in commercial

    planes.9. In your opinion, roughly by when would you estimate that UAVs achieve the same

    safety statistics as manned aircraft?

    - Earlier this year, Congress passed a bill requiring the FAA to develop regulations oncommercial UAV usage. I believe that in the next 5-10 years the industry will beforced to comply with these upcoming FAA regulations in order to compete in thisemerging market.

    10.What are the main sources of funding for your research?- My research regarding analytic models of flight control is mainly funded by DARPA

    and the DOD.11.Do you expect funding to change in the next years?

    - No, these agencies provide continuous and stable funding for this type of research.6. Dr. Peter Seiler Email correspondence following interview.

    1. What are some of the physical design challenges specific to small aircraft such as micro-UAVs that don't exist in a large aircraft? What methods of fault analysis are currentlyemployed in UAVs?

    - Size, weight, and power constraints are the main issues with micro-UAVs relative tolarge aircraft. As noted in my talk, commercial aircraft mainly rely on massivephysical redundancy to obtain reliable designs. This is not possible for micro-UAVs.I'm not up to date on the micro-class of UAVs but medium/larger sized UAVsmainly rely on single-string designs (i.e. they don't use as much redundancy). I wouldimagine the same would be true for micro-UAVs.

    2. You had mentioned that commercial planes have a failure rate of 10^-9 per hour of flight.Would it be it possible, in the near future, to completely avoid triple modular redundancyin favor of analytical failure models and achieve similar failure rates?

    - It seems unlikely that micro-UAVs would achieve a level of 10^-9 catastrophicfailures per hour achieved by commercial aircraft. Military aircraft achieve ~10^-5fails/hour and recent data on larger UAVs (e.g. predator) show even higher failurerates ~10^-2 fails/hour. One point is that micro-UAVs may not need to achieve suchhigh levels of reliability because the consequences are not so severe (no pilot on-board, smaller aircraft means that crashing into something may not be catastrophic). I

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    22/23

    Pioneer22

    guess I would envision model-based methods being used to improve the existingUAV reliability by a few orders of magnitude (from 10^-2 to 10^-4). This seemsfeasible but I don't envision that you would get to 10^-9 purely with model-basedmethods.

    3. By when do you expect micro-UAVs to attain a sufficiently low failure rate to be usedcommercially?- As noted above, I don't envision micro-UAVs ever achieving the same level of

    reliability as commercial aircraft. This is not really a big issue in my mind sincemilitary fighter aircraft also do not achieve the same level of reliability as commercialaircraft.

    4. What do you think would be some of the first commercial applications of micro-UAVs?- Surveillance (e.g. after natural disasters), scientific studies that require mobile

    sensors, enhanced agricultural sensing, etc.5. Do you have an opinion on the negative public perception that is triggered by the thought

    of conducting surveillance using UAV's over American soil?

    - Yes, there are important ethical and legal issues that must be addressed.6. What are/have been the main sources of funding for your research, and what do youanticipate the trend to be in the near future?

    - Funding for UAV in general typically comes from the usual suspects: NSF, AFOSR,ONR, NASA, industry (Lockheed, Boeing, Honeywell, Goodrich). This trend willlikely continue possibly with some additional funds from the FAA and/or Dept. ofHomeland Security.

    iii.References

    [1] New York Times. War Evolves with Drones, Some Tiny as Bugs. January 2011.http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/20/world/20drones.html?pagewanted=all

    [2] Department of Defense. Unmanned Aircraft Systems Roadmap 2005-2030, 2005.http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/uav_roadmap2005.pdf

    [3] Barnard microsystems limited. Solar Powered unmanned aircraft.http://www.barnardmicrosystems.com/L4E_solar_uav.htm

    [4] Popsci. Power-Seeking Flying Microdrone Would Scavenge Solar and Thermal EnergyDay and Night. April 2010. http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2010-04/micro-drone-would-scavenge-solar-and-thermal-energy-day-and-night

    [5] Gizmag.Micro-UAV distance record smashed. November, 2007.http://www.gizmag.com/go/8287/

    [6] Laser Power for UAVs. http://lasermotive.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/Wireless-Power-for-UAVs-March2010.pdf

    [7] Horizon Fuel Cell Technologies.Horizon Fuel Cell Powers New World Record in UAVFlight. http://www.horizonfuelcell.com/file/Pterosoardistancerecord.pdf

    [8] United States Air Force. Unmanned Aircraft Systems Flight Plan 2009 2047.http://www.govexec.com/pdfs/072309kp1.pdf

    [9] Federal Research Division, DoD.Mini, Micro, and Swarming Unmanned Aerial Vehicles:A Baseline Study. http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA521374

    [10] AeroVironment.AeroVironment Switchblade. http://www.avinc.com/uas/adc/switchblade/[11] Chad Haddal and Jeremiah Gertler, Homeland Security. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and

  • 7/30/2019 Micro UAVs

    23/23

    Border Surveillance. Congressional Research Service, July 2010.http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RS21698.pdf

    [12] Hill Kashmir. Congress Welcomes The Drones. Forbes, July 2012.http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/02/07/congress-welcomes-the-drones/

    [13] Waterman Shaun.Drones over U.S. get OK by Congress. Washington Post, July 2012.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/feb/7/coming-to-a-sky-near-you/print/[14] Teal groups prediction on future UAV market. http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/teal-group-predicts-worldwide-uav-market-will-total-89-billion-in-its-2012-uav-market-profile-and-forecast-147008115.html

    [15] Gizmag. UAVs get smaller: The Micro Air Vehicle nears readiness.http://www.gizmag.com/go/4779/

    [16] NASA Technology Readiness Level Scale.http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/NASA_TRL_Meter.jpg