BARCELONA SmartDrone Challenge 2017smartdronechallenge.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/... ·...

Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

BARCELONA

SmartDrone

Challenge 2017 Competition Rules

Mission and Competition Rules Issue 1.7, December 2016

Improving the world through engineering 1

Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

Contents

1. Introduction .......................................................................................................… 5

2. Competition Overview .......................................................................................… 7

3. UAS Requirement Specification .......................................................................… 11

4. Statement of Work ...........................................................................................… 15

5. Adjudication and Scoring Criteria .....................................................................… 18

6. Prizes and Awards ……....................................................................................… 22

Annex A - Mission ............................................................................................… 23

Annex B - UAS Safety and Airworthiness Requirements ….............................… 27

Annex C - GPS Tracker Installation and Operation .........……..............…........... 29

Annex D - General Guidance for Teams ..........................................................… 31

Annex E - Document Templates and Guidance ...............…............................… 33

Annex F - Guidance on Autopilot Selection .....................…...................…......… 39


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

Glossary and Abbreviations

AGL Above Ground Level

BMFA British Model Flying Association

BRS Ballistic Recovery Systems

BSDC Barcelona SmartDrone Challenge

BVLOS Beyond Visual Line of Sight

CAA Civil Aviation Authority

CAT Catalonia

CDR Critical Design Review

COTS Commercial Off The Shelf

EU European Union

FMC Flight Management Computer

FRR Flight Readiness Review

FSO Flight Safety Officer

FTS Flight Termination System

GCS Ground Control Station

GPS Global Positioning System

KIAS Knots: Indicated Air Speed

MTOM Maximum Take-Off Mass

PDR Preliminary Design Review

QFE Q-Code Field Elevation - Altimeter zeroed at runway height RIN Royal Institute of Navigation

UA Unmanned Aircraft

UAS Unmanned Aircraft System(s)

VFR Visual Flight Rules

VLOS Visual Line of Sight

WP Waypoint


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

Competition Rules - Revision status

Issue 30, Juny 2015: Issued to Teams at the start of the 2015 competition

Issue 4, July 2015: incorporates responses to feedback and questions, including:

• Clarification on use and pricing of COTS items;

• Definition of the height of the alphanumeric code in the target area;

• Details of the supplied GPS Tracker;

• Clarification on the target Mission time;

• Clarification on automatic take-off and use of launch / recovery equipment;

• Additional details provided on Flight Termination System functionality;

• Clarification on dropping two payloads in the same sortie;

• Clarification on measurement of payload drop accuracy;

• Clarification on allowable means of protecting the payload;

• Confirmation that UA is not permitted to land whilst deploying the payload;

• Piloting competency requirements added.

Issue 25, March 2016: update to the example demonstration course and airfield map, Figures A2, A3.

Issue 15, April 2016: Extensively revised to incorporate feedback from the 2016 competition, and issued to Teams at the launch of the 2016 competition.

Issue 1, June 2016: incorporates responses to feedback and questions by UPC (Castelldefels).

Issue 7, June 2016: confirmation of demonstration event dates (29 Jun – 2 Jul 2016) in the “Circuit of Catalonia”.

Issue 10, June 2016: Demo ….

Issue 27, December 2016: Small changes of date and adjustment of clearer words.

Issue 5, January 2017: Change in the logo of BSDC, place the word "Barcelona".


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

1 Introduction

1.1 Competition Overview

The competition will engage University Undergraduate teams in the design, construction, development anddemonstration of an Autonomous Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS). With a Maximum Take-off Mass(MTOM) of under 7 kg, and operating within Visual Line of Sight (VLOS), the Unmanned Aircraft (UA) will bedesigned to undertake a representative humanitarian aid mission. It will require the system operatesautomatically in the first instance, humanitarian UAS flight plan upon before the flight will be awarded. Thisflight plan will be created by scouts UNIFEC, will at the same time the land where you have to performhumanitarian aid. This flight plan should therefore consist of a series of tasks like taking a plane in the areaof search, navigation waypoints, dropping accurately payloads that are, possibility to change flight plan inreal time by a new (possible movements of the needs of scouts UNIFEC) and has always been to return tothe base through a defined route or creating a tour optimization settings and saving battery power. It willhave very encuenta the ability to transmit real information from the UAS, which is always revealing toUNIFEC scouts.

The competition will be held annually over the duration of an academic year, with the competitioncommencing in September 2016, and the flight demonstration being held in early July 2017. This period willbe structured into design, development and demonstration phases, with a Design Review presentationcontributing to the scoring, as well as the flying demonstration.

1.2 Objectives of the Event

The competition has a number of objectives, in particular to:

1. Provide a challenge to students in systems engineering of a complex system, requiring design,development and demonstration against a demanding mission requirement;

2. Provide an opportunity for students to develop and demonstrate team working, leadership andcommercial skills as well as technical competence;

3. Stimulate interest in the civil UAS field, and enhance employment opportunities in the sector;

4. Foster inter-university collaboration in the UAS technology area, and to provide a forum forinterdisciplinary research.

1.3 Scenario

The real life scenario is set in the near future. A natural disaster has occurred, with a large stretch of remotecoastal area devastated by an earthquake and tsunami. It is known that several thousand people living incoastal communities are cut off; their houses destroyed, and with night-time temperatures dropping belowfreezing they urgently need supply drops of humanitarian aid of food, shelter and first aid supplies. Time iscritical, and a UAS supply mission is launched from the Rescue Centre some distance away from theaffected area.

The UAS operates autonomously, transiting rapidly via pre-planned waypoints to the devastated area, withimage recognition used to identify and locate the supply drop zone, and delivering the aid safely andaccurately to the local people. It returns to base via a different route to ensure de-confliction with otherRescue UAS operating in the area, to refuel and reload another aid payload. It repeats the mission in allweather conditions until the need to drop aid subsides, sustaining a vital lifeline until a large scale rescuemission can be mounted to evacuate people from the devastated area.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

1.4 Structure of this document

Section 2 presents the overview of the competition, what is involved for participating teams, the schedule of key activities, eligibility and funding;

Section 3 presents the requirement specification for the UAS, with sufficient information for teams to design and develop the system;

Section 4 provides the ‘Statement of Work’ for the competition, outlining what is required in each of the stages, including the design review deliverables;

Section 5 presents the Adjudication and Scoring criteria. This should help the teams in selecting and designing their concept to maximise their score, especially at the Preliminary Design stage;

Section 6 summarises the Prize categories which will be awarded. These are designed to recognise merit and achievement in a range of areas reflecting the key competition objectives;

Annex A provides the representative mission to be flown, and around which the UAS is to be designed;

Annex B details the safety and airworthiness requirements which encompass design requirements, such as Flight Termination System, and operating safety requirements such as the need for a suitably experienced pilot;

Annex C gives technical details of the GPS tracker to be fitted to the UA, so that teams can make allowance in the design for installation of this item;

Annex D provides some general guidance to help the teams develop a practical and competitive UAS;

Annex E gives templates and guidance for completion of the three design review deliverables, the PDR, CDR and FRR.

Annex F provides guidance to the teams on autopilot selection.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

2 Competition Overview

2.1 Context

The competition is structured to replicate a real world aircraft system development programme, with aphased 9 month design and development process over the course of an academic year, and culminating inthe build, test and demonstration of the UAS. Deliverables have been carefully specified to maintainreasonable technical rigour, yet aiming to keep the workload manageable for student teams.

2.2 Generic Mission Task

The challenge is to design, build and demonstrate a small autonomous UAS to fly a mission which ismodelled on the real life humanitarian aid scenario described in Section 1.3. The competition will vary fromyear to year, but typically seek to test a number of characteristics, such as:

• Accuracy of payload delivery to pre-determined points on the ground;

• Maximum mass of cargo that can be safely transported in an allocated time;

• Quickest time to compete the payload delivery mission;

• Navigation accuracy via waypoint co-ordinates provided on the day;

• Search object recognition, detecting, recognising and geo-locating objects;

• Extent of automatic operations from take-off to landing;

• Safety, demonstrating safe design and flight operations throughout;

• Minimum environmental impact, notably noise levels and overall efficiency;

• Maximum payload / empty weight ratio.

The representative mission for the 2017 competition is presented at Annex A.

2.3 Development Stages

The UAS development stages comprise:

• Preliminary Design, culminating in the Preliminary Design Review (PDR);

• Detail Design, concluding with the Critical Design Review (CDR);

• Manufacture of the UAS;

• Test;

• Flight Readiness, including the Flight Readiness Review (FRR);

• Demonstration Event, including the Design Presentation, Scrutineering, Certification Flight Test, and

the Demonstration (Mission Flight).

Section 4 provides details of the stages and the ‘Statement of Work’ for the competition. Templates for thePDR, CDR and FRR deliverables, together with guidance on what the judges are looking for, are provided atAnnex E.

Figure 1 below depicts the competition stages, the key deliverables, the adjudication team leading theassessment in each phase, and the main Prize Categories*.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

Figure 1: UAS Challenge Competition Stages

2.4 Competition Schedule

The competition will be launched at the start of the academic year in September. Key activities and dates areas follows:

Date Activity Deliverable

Jul 20162016/17 Competition Launch, coincident with 2016 Demonstration event

-

30 Sep 2016 2016 Rules provided to entrants -

15 Feb 2017 Deadline for entries to be received Entry form and fee

28 Feb 2017 Preliminary Design Review PDR report

30 Mar 2017 Critical Design Review CDR report

17 Jun 2017 Flight Readiness Review submission FRR report

Jul 2017

Demonstration Event, including:

• Design and FRR Presentation • Scrutineering • Certification Flight Test • Mission Flight

PresentationFRR ScrutinyFlight TestFlight Demonstration(s)


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

Exact dates and venue for the Demonstration Event will be published separately.

Adherence to deadlines is a prerequisite for entry into the next stage, and the organisers retain the right toeliminate a team in the event that deliverables are not submitted on time.

2.5 Engineering Challenges

The competition has been designed to give students exposure to a number of disciplines that they will needin their engineering careers, and the requirement provides a number of engineering challenges. Factorswhich the judges will be looking for include:

• a methodical systems engineering approach to identify the requirements, selection of the concept

with a design to meet those requirements, and then test to confirm that the actual system meets therequirements in practice;

• an elegant and efficient design solution, supported by an appropriate depth of analysis and

modelling;

• innovation in the approach to solving the engineering challenges;

• due consideration of the safety and airworthiness requirements which shall be addressed from the

early concept stage right through into the flying demonstration;

• appreciation of the practical engineering issues and sound design principles essential for a

successful, robust and reliable UAS; e.g. adequate strength and stiffness of key structuralcomponents, alignment of control rods/mountings, servos specified appropriately for the controlloads, consideration given to maintenance, ease of repair in the field;

• construction quality, paying attention to good aerospace practice for such details as connection of

control linkages, use of locknuts, security of wiring and connections, resilience of the airframe andundercarriage;

• good planning and team-working; organising the team to divide up roles and responsibilities. Good

communication and planning will be essential to achieve a successful competitive entry, on time andproperly tested prior to the Demonstration Event;

• automatic or autonomous operations; the UAS should ideally be able to operate automatically,

without pilot intervention from take-off to touchdown;

• A strong business proposition for your design, demonstrating good commercial understanding of

how your design might be developed to generate revenue for an operator.

• Attention to environmental impact, including minimising noise, developing an efficient aircraft

design which minimises energy consumption, and attention to minimising use of hazardousmaterials.

The prize categories (see Figure 1 above and Section 6) aim to recognise merit in overcoming theseengineering challenges. Guidance notes to help teams are provided at Annex D.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

2.6 Eligibility and Team Structure

The Competition is open to Undergraduates or students from any World University. Whilst expected tobe predominantly a CAT event, entrants from overseas universities will also be considered.

Teams will be put forward by each University, and will constitute members drawn from student cohorts in anyyear of study.

A pair of Universities may form an alliance to enter a joint team. Some specialist industry support is to beallowed, where specific skills and knowledge are required outside the scope of the undergraduate students.

The numbers of students in each team will be entirely determined by each University. This is so that theeducational objectives can be determined to meet the needs of each University’s degree programme. Thecompetition, whilst having a set of defined performance objectives to achieve, is as much about thedevelopment and demonstration of team-working skills.

Please note that attendance at the Demonstration Event is limited to no more than 15 members per team,plus up to 3 support staff, e.g. pilots or academic staff.

2.7 Sponsorship of Teams

Universities are encouraged to approach potential commercial sponsors, particularly aerospace companiesat any time prior to or during the competition, for both financial support and technical advice. Note that wheretechnical advice is received from sponsors, the judges will need to be sure that by far the majority of thedevelopment work has been undertaken by the students themselves. Such sponsorship shall be fullyacknowledged in the Design Review submissions.

2.8 Cost and Funding

An entry fee of 850€ per team is payable upon submission of an entry form. This fee contributes towards thecost of putting on the Demonstration Event. It is non- refundable in the event that a team cannot participatein the Demonstration Event.

Universities shall fund the costs of their UAS design and development, and their attendance at the DesignReview and Demonstration events.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

3 UAS Requirement Specification

The UAS shall be designed to meet the following constraints and have the following features:

3.1 Mission

The ‘humanitarian aid’ mission to be flown is presented at Annex A. Note that details of Waypoint co-ordinates will be provided at the start of the Demonstration Event.

3.2 Airframe Configuration and Mass

Either Fixed Wing or Rotary Wing solutions are permissible, with a Maximum Take- Off Mass (MTOM) notexceeding 6.9 kg, including the payload(s).

3.3 Propulsion

Electric motors or internal combustion engines are permitted for propulsion.

3.4 Payload Specification

The payload(s) to be delivered by the UA shall be standard commercially available 1 kg bags of flour,provided to the teams by the organisers at the Demonstration Event.

3.5 Payload Carriage and Delivery

The UA shall be designed to carry and release up to two payloads, as specified in Section 3.4.

The payload(s) shall be individually deployable from the UA by either manual or automatic command. Onlyone payload shall be jettisoned at any one instant, i.e. payloads may not be ganged together and droppedsimultaneously.

The payload(s) shall be deployed whilst the aircraft is in flight, from any suitable height above the ground.The UA is not permitted to land to deploy the payload.

The UA design may incorporate features to provide protection and cushioning of the payload to keep it intactduring the deployment and ground impact, but the payload shall not itself be modified, for example bypermanent reinforcement with duct tape.

The payload can be inserted into a protective module, but without modifying the flour bags in any way. Theflour cannot be decanted into a different container. Protection afforded to the bag of flour shall be removablewithout the use of any tools and without damaging the original packaging. Thus wrapping in bubble wrap ispermitted.

To score maximum points, the payload shall remain intact through the deployment and after impact with theground.

3.6 Safety and Airworthiness

The UAS shall comply with the Safety Requirements given at Annex B.

3.7 Autonomy

The UAS shall operate in a fully automatic manner as far as practicable, including automatic take-off andlanding. UAS which are manually operated are permitted, although manual operation will score considerablyfewer points.

Stability augmentation systems do not classify as ‘autonomous’ or ‘automatic’ control, and shall count as partof manual control.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

Automatic take-off implies that the system, after it has been started, can be positioned at the runwaythreshold manually, then when the control transferred to platform, it executes the take-off without humanintervention. Auxiliary launch/landing equipment is permitted, so long as it all operates autonomously. Handlaunch is also permitted.

3.8 Design Mission Range and Endurance

For the purpose of sizing the fuel / battery load, the design team should plan on a typical target Mission flightpath distance of around 2km, from take-off to landing. For a UAS delivering both its payloads in a singlesortie, this might equate to a Flight Time of around 2 – 3 minutes from take-off to touchdown. Note that thistime does not account for any time spent in pre-flight checkout, nor for any contingency associated withsearch time to locate targets, or other delays in completing the mission.

The Mission will not require the UAS to operate further than 500m from the pilot. Note that for resilience ofoperation, the radio equipment including data links, shall be capable of reliable operating ranges up to 1km.

3.9 Take-off and Landing (section for UAV type Fixed Wing)

The UAS shall be designed to operate from within a 10 m x 30 m box, orientated within 30° of the winddirection. Landing includes touchdown and roll-out, with the UA required to stop within the box.

The UA should be capable of operating from grass or hard runway surfaces.

Use of an auxiliary launcher, or hand launch is permitted providing the design and operation is deemedsatisfactory by the Flight Safety Officer and scrutineers.

3.10 Weather Limitations

The UA should be designed to operate in winds of up to 20 kts gusting to 25 kts, and light rain. In the eventthat either type of wing UAV fixed type. the UA shall be typically be capable of take-off and landing incrosswind components to the runway of 5 kts with gusts of 8 kts.

3.11 Limits on use of COTS Items

The UAS airframe processing system on board to comply with parts of the mission automatically, shall bedesigned from scratch, and not based upon commercially available kits or systems. This is a qualifying rule,meaning that an entrant based on a commercially available system It will not be considered in the same way.

Permitted Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) stock component parts include motors, batteries, servos,sensors, autopilots and control boards such as the Pixhawk or Ardupilot platforms. Guidance on potentiallysuitable autopilots is provided at

Annex F. Teams are allowed to use the supplied software with COTS autopilots, although it may needmodifying to meet the specific mission challenges.

A guideline maximum value of COTS components used in the UA itself is 1.000 €. A Bill of Materials andcosts will be required as part of the design submission. Cost efficient solutions will score more points.

Teams may use COTS components which already exist at the University, but for which no receipts areavailable. An estimate of the price can be obtained by looking up part numbers or by manufacturer, and ascreen shot of the price will suffice.

Teams shall also demonstrate that manufacture of the airframe and integration of the UAS involves asignificant proportion of effort from the students themselves, rather than being substantially outsourced to acontractor.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

3.12 Radio Equipment

All radio equipment and datalinks shall comply with AESA/EU directives, and shall be licensed for use in theCatalonia (Spain).

Radio equipment, including data links, shall be capable of reliable operating ranges at least of 1 km.

Radio equipment providing control of the UAS and the Flight Termination System shall be ‘Spread Spectrum’compliant on the 2.4 GHz bandwidth, to allow simultaneous testing of several UAS without interference.Evidence of compliance shall be presented in the CDR submission and at the Flight Readiness Review.

The radio equipment shall include a buddy box transmitter, which as a minimum shall allow the Flight SafetyOfficer to activate the Flight Termination System should this be required.

If an imagery downlink is incorporated, and if it is central to the safety of flight, control or for FlightTermination decisions, then it shall be suitably reliable and resilient to interference.

3.13 Camera / Imaging System

Whilst not mandatory, the UA may carry a camera system and target recognition capability to refine thelocation of the target autonomously, and to identify the alphanumeric code within the target area.

3.14 Flight Termination System

A Flight Termination System (FTS) shall be incorporated as part of the design and is a mandatoryrequirement to achieve a Permit To Fly. The purpose of the FTS is to initiate automatically all relevant actionswhich transform the Unmanned Aircraft (UA) into a low energy state should the data links between theGround Control Station (GCS) and UA be lost or be subject to interference / degradation. The FTS shall alsobe capable of manual selection, should the Flight Safety Officer deem the UA’s behaviour a threat to themaintenance of Air Safety.

The actions of the FTS must aim to safely land the UA as soon as possible after initiation. The throttle shallbe set to idle / engine off. Other actions could include, but are not limited to: deployment of a recoveryparachute; the movement of all control surfaces to a default position to achieve a glide; the initiation of adeep stall manoeuvre; movement of the relevant control surfaces to achieve a gentle turn.

Uplink – defined as the data link which provides control inputs to the Unmanned Aircraft (UA) from the GCS(manually or autonomously), including manual initiation of the FTS. The FTS shall be automatically initiatedafter 5 seconds lost uplink.

Downlink – defined as the data link which relays the UA’s telemetry / positional info and video feed to theGCS. The FTS shall be automatically initiated promptly and no longer than 10 seconds after lost downlink.

A “Return To Home” option can be incorporated into the FTS, but shall only be functional as long as uplink ismaintained between the GCS and UA.

3.15 Location Finder

It is recommended that in the event of the UA making an uncommanded departure and landing outside of thedesignated Flying Zone, the UA makes an audible/visual warning to improve ease of UA location.

3.16 Tracking System

A GPS Data Logger shall be fitted permitting post-flight evaluation of the 3D trajectory. The organizers mayask a team member who propocionen a file with the GPS tracker for each team at the start of thedemonstration event, which operates independently and can be easily integrated into the UA. A full


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

specification for the G- Rays 2 GPS tracker is attached at Annex C. The tracker shall be easily releasablefrom the UA, for analysis by the organizers after each flight.

3.17 Environmental Impact

In the design process, consideration should be given to environmental impact, including the use of non-hazardous and recyclable materials; low pollution; low energy usage; low noise.

Teams are encouraged to determine the overall energy consumption of the Mission Flight, as a measure ofthe efficiency of the UA. For IC engines, this could be done simply by measuring the fuel usage, and tofacilitate this the fuel tank should be designed to be readily removable from the UA so that it can be weighed(or contents measured) before and after the flight.

For electric powered UAs, the electrical energy consumed could be measured directly, for example via apower logger between the ESC and the electric motor. Points will be awarded both for incorporating into thedesign the ability to measure the energy consumption, and also for achieving good efficiency.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

4 Statement of Work

This section provides more details of the activities and outputs in each stage. Templates for the deliverablePDR, CDR and FRR reports are provided at Annex E. The schedule for the key milestones and deliverablesis provided at Section 2.4.

4.1 Development Stages

The main stages and deliverables, as depicted in Figure 1 (see Section 2.3) are as follows:

Concept: including requirements capture, trade studies, selection of system concept, initial sizing andperformance studies, and generation of the outline design. As a guide this stage is around 3 months longand concludes with the Preliminary Design Review (PDR).

Design: including the detailed design for manufacture supported by structural, aerodynamic, system andperformance analysis. This stage should include an assessment of how the requirements are to be verifiedthrough test, and importantly how the safety requirements are to be met. Some prototyping may also beundertaken. This stage is around 3 months long and concludes with the Critical Design Review (CDR).

Build: construction of the UAS. This may also involve the manufacture of prototypes during the detail designstage to de-risk the design.

Test: demonstration through analysis, modelling and physical test that the design will meet the requirements,and is sufficiently robust and reliable. Physical test should include subsystem test, as well as flight testing ofthe complete UAS.

The main deliverable elements of this stage comprise:

• Flight Readiness Review (FRR) report: The FRR report shall be submitted prior to the

Demonstration Event. It shall summaries the test and validation work to demonstrate that the builtUAS meets the requirements identified at the outset. It shall be accompanied by video evidence ofthe flight test. This is a key input to the Scrutineering (see below).

• Presentation of the design and FRR report. On the first day of the Demonstration Event, each team

will give a 15 minute presentation on the design and development to the judging panel, with 10minutes for questions.

• Scrutineering: The Presentation will be followed by scrutineering of the UAS by the Scrutineering

Panel to confirm it is suitably compliant and airworthy. This is a pass / fail review governingprogression to the Operate stage.

• Manufacturing assessment: The Scrutineering Panel will also assess the Manufacturing quality.

Operate: The flying demonstration comprises a two stage process of qualification and demonstration:

• Certification Flight Test: Each team will be required to conduct a short test flight to confirm safe

operation. Upon passing this a ‘Permit to Fly’ is granted allowing entry to the Mission Flight;

• Demonstration Mission Flight: Following the test flight the team will have a short time to prepare

the UAS, and then fly the mission.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

4.2 Demonstration Event

4.2.1 Pilot Qualifications and Insurance

Note that by the time of the CDR, teams shall have identified and appointed their own BMFA ‘B’ certificatequalified pilot to operate their UAS. The pilot shall have had familiarization flying with the UAS prior to theDemonstration Event.

The pilot shall have appropriate Civil Liability Insurance and Personal Accident Insurance to cover test flyingand the Demonstration Event. The BMFA offer competitively priced insurance for members affiliated to aclub.

4.2.2 Logistics

A detailed briefing will be given prior to the Demonstration Event covering the logistics and timings for theevent, rules and good conduct for safe operations, pre- flight briefings etc.

At the start of the Demonstration Event, Teams will be given a running order and strict time schedule for thequalification process, including presentation, scrutineering, certification flight test, and missiondemonstration. The schedule is necessarily tight and teams who are not ready to fly at their appointed slottime will have to re-apply for a later slot. This is solely at the discretion of the organizers.

The schedule will allow limited time for Teams to undertake testing of their UAS. It is expected that Teamswill arrive with a UAS that is in good working condition. Efforts will be made to retain flexibility in the scheduleto allow teams who fail to pass one of the qualification events time to repair, rectify, test and re-apply, butscoring penalties may apply.

4.2.3 Scrutineering

A panel of expert aircraft engineers will inspect the UAS to ensure that it is safe and airworthy, that anycritical recommendations made at the CDR presentation have been addressed, and that any latemodifications introduced after the CDR and FRR are reviewed and acceptable.

The scrutineering panel will have read the FRR, which is a key input to the Scrutineering process as it shouldcontain evidence of satisfactory testing. The assessment will include:

• Regulatory Compliance - Pass/Fail criteria;

Control checks – Communications; Function and Sense;

◦ Radio range check, motor off and motor on;

◦ Verify all controls operate in the correct sense;

• Airworthiness Inspection – Structural and Systems Integrity;

◦ Verify that all components are adequately secured, fasteners are tight and are correctly locked;

◦ Verify propeller structural and attachment integrity;

◦ Check general integrity of the payload and deployment system;

◦ Visual inspection of all electronic wiring to assure adequate wire gauges have been used, wires

and connectors are properly supported;

◦ Verify correct operation of the fail safe and flight termination systems;

A ‘Permit to Test’ is awarded following satisfactory completion of the Scrutineering, and an amber sticker (max 10 cm x 10 cm) applied to the UA. This will allow the team to progress to the Certification Flight Test stage.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

Should the UAS fail the Scrutineering, the team will be given the chance, if practical and if time permits, to rectify the issues and re-apply for Scrutineering.

4.2.4 Manufacturing Assessment

The Scrutineering Panel will also conduct the Manufacturing Assessment (a marked Prize) and look for:

• Design and Build quality, including use of appropriate materials, systems integration and

configuration control;

• Attention to detail in assembly and aesthetics;

• Sound and safe workshop practices.

4.2.5 Certification Flight Test

This test is to be conducted in two parts, firstly with the UAS operated manually, and then transitioning to automatic control. This may be done in two separate flights if necessary. The Certification Flight Test will assess the Basic Operation, to include:

• Take-off from the designated Take-off and Landing area. After take-off the UAS shall maintain steady

controlled flight at altitudes above 100 ft (30m) and less than 400 ft AGL (122m). Take-off under manual control with transition to automatic control is permitted;

• Demonstrate maneuverability by flying a figure of eight, in the same flight; o Loiter in a ‘race-track’

pattern over the airfield at a defined point for a period of 2 minutes at a height of 100 ft (30m);

• Land, back at the take-off point;

• An element of ground-based assistance for take-off and landing is acceptable, but the aircraft should

operate automatically during other phases of flight;

• Demonstrate switch between manual and automatic flight.

The assessors will be looking to confirm that the team operating the UAS is competent as well as confirmingthe airworthiness of the UAS itself.

On satisfactory completion of the Certification Flight Test, a ‘Permit to Fly’ will be issued by the Flight SafetyOfficer, and a green sticker, signed by the safety officer, shall be applied to the UA. This is a simple visualway of confirming that a UAS has clearance to participate in the flying event.

4.2.6 Flight Demonstration - Mission

Upon successful issue of a Permit to Fly, the Team will have a short time to prepare their aircraft for theMission Flight. The Mission brief is presented in Annex A with sample waypoint data.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

5 Adjudication and Scoring Criteria

5.1 Overall Scoring Breakdown

The competition will be assessed across three main elements, themselves broken down into sub-elements:

• Design (150 points), comprising:

• Preliminary Design Review (25)

• Critical Design Review (125 points) including

◦ Design (75)

◦ Business case (30)

◦ Environmental Impact (20)

• Flight Readiness (100 points), comprising:

◦ Presentation (50)

◦ Manufacturing (50)

• Flight Demonstration (250 points), comprising:

◦ Certification Flight Test (50)

◦ Mission Flight (200)

A maximum of 500 points is therefore available.

Note that the Flight Readiness Review is not itself scored. The FRR is an important input to thescrutineering, to provide evidence of appropriate testing.

For further guidance please see Annex E, which gives templates for the main PDR, CDR and FRR

deliverables.

5.2 Design (150)

5.2.1 Preliminary Design Review Report (25)

The assessment panel will be looking for a number of factors including:

• Demonstration of a sound systems engineering approach to meeting the design requirements;

• A structured design process adopted by the team, and how the derived performance requirements

are developed for each of the sub-systems such as wing (or rotor), airframe, propulsion, control, navigation, payload handling etc;

• Extent of Innovation in the Outline Design;

• Adherence to the rules;

• Depth and extent of underpinning engineering analysis;

• Design and planning to meet safety and airworthiness requirements;

• Evidence of sound project management, planning, budgeting;

• Overall Quality of PDR submission.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

5.2.2 Critical Design Review Report (125)

5.2.2.1 Design (75)

The assessment panel will be looking for:

• Factors as for PDR plus:

• Technical assessment of UAS Detail Design;

• Integrity and depth of design data and supporting analyses;

• Design and demonstration of key safety features such as FTS;

• Extent of scratch design vs. COTS procurement;

• Overall Quality of CDR submission.

5.2.2.2 Business Case (30)

The assessors will be looking for a well-articulated understanding of the market and good alignment of theUAS capabilities and cost projections with the target market. Note that the Business Case is a section withinthe CDR Report.

• Up to 10 pts for identifying a practical commercial market;

• Up to 10 pts for description of the revenue model and sales projections;

• Up to 10 pts for analysis of the development and manufacturing costs;

5.2.2.3 Environmental Impact (20)

This will be judged from evidence supplied in the PDR and CDR, as well as from answers to questions during the Presentation and Scrutineering, and the assessment of energy usage during the Mission Flight. The assessors will be looking for evidence that the team has made efforts to minimise the environmental impact of the design.

Teams are encouraged to determine the overall efficiency of the mission flight, by measuring the energy usage (chemical or electrical).

• Up to 5 pts for minimising noise, hazardous materials.

• 5 pts awarded for measuring the energy used during the Mission flight;

• Up to 10 pts for measured efficiency, pro-rata to the best performing UA;

5.3 Flight Readiness (100)

5.3.1 Presentation (50)

The assessment panel will be looking to test each team’s communication skills as well as technical knowledge:

• Demonstrating a clear and concise presentation of the

◦ concept selection process;

◦ key design features and supporting analysis;

◦ development and test programme;


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

◦ Demonstrating good teamwork and organisation;

◦ Good responses to questions.

5.3.2 Manufacturing (50)

The manufacturing element will be assessed based on visual inspection and answers to questions during theScrutineering process. The assessors will be looking at issues including:

• Design and Build quality, including use of appropriate materials, systems integration and

configuration control;

• Attention to detail in assembly and aesthetics;

• Sound and safe workshop practices.

5.4 Flight Demonstration (250)

5.4.1 Certification Flight Test (50)

The test flight will score points for:

• Take-off within the operational area (10)

• Navigating the course (20)

Controlled flight around at least one lap each of a figure of eight and a racetrack circuit. 10 pts each circuit

Navigation points halved for extended (>5 s) breach of the geofenc

Zero points for persistent or repeated breach of the geofence

• Landing within the operational area (10)

• Operation in Automatic mode (10)

for at least one lap of the racetrack

5.4.2 Mission Flight (200)

The Mission Flight will score points as follows

• Automatic Take-off within operational area (20)

Take-off points halved if UA touches ground outside operational area;

• Navigation around WPs: (40)

10 pts per WP to max 40 pts

Navigation points halved for extended (>5 s) breach of the geofence;

Zero points for persistent or repeated breach of the geofence

• Target ID – identify the alphanumeric character (30)

• Payload release (40)

Max 20 pts per payload within the Target Area

Deduct 1 pt for every 1 m away from edge of Target Area

Subject to minimum 6 pts per payload deployment for intact payload;


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

Payload points halved for any breach of flour bag on delivery

Zero points if payload more than 50 m from edge of Target Area

• Automatic Landing (30)

Landing points halved if UA touches ground outside operational area

Landing points halved for damage sustained on landing

• Mission Time < Target Time (40)

Deduct 1 pt for every 5 s over the Target Time

• Energy Usage measured

points allocated in Environmental Impact Section above

Above maximum points assume Automatic operation. Manual operation for each of the above reduces each score by 50%.

The 2017 Mission is presented at Annex A.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

6 Prizes and Awards

There are a number of categories for which prizes will be awarded:

6.1 Design

For the entrant showing greatest overall merit with regard to the systems engineering approach to the designprocess, conformance to the competition rules, the technical element of the design and underpinninganalysis.

6.2 Innovation

For the entrant showing the greatest degree of innovation in addressing the engineering challenges.

6.3 Safety and Airworthiness

For the entrant developing the best combination of a well-articulated safety case, with evidence that safetyand airworthiness have been considered throughout the design and development phases, the UAS exhibitingpractical safety features, and demonstrating safe operation.

6.4 Autonomous / Automatic Operations

For the entrant demonstrating the greatest degree of autonomy in operations, from take-off to touchdown.

6.5 Manufacturing

For the entrant with the best manufactured UAS, in terms of innovative use of materials, constructiontechniques and engineering practices, manufacturing quality, attention to detail, finish and aesthetics.

6.6 Viable Operational System

For the entrant with the most viable operational system, which performs the mission demonstrating the bestoverall score for accurate navigation, supply drop accuracy, minimum mission time, and target recognitionaccuracy.

6.7 Business Proposition

For the entrant with the most promising business case, reflecting a well-articulated understanding of themarket and good alignment of the UAS capabilities and cost projections with the target market.

6.8 Environmentally Friendly

For the entrant who best demonstrates attention through the design and development to minimisingenvironmental impact, with measured energy usage during the Mission Flight, and good overall flightefficiency.

6.9 Most Promise

For the entrant which couldn’t quite make it all work on the day, but where the team showed most ingenuity,teamwork, resilience in the face of adversity, and a promising design for next year’s competition.

6.10 Overall Grand Champion

For the entrant who most impressed the judges with overall excellence across all elements of thecompetition.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

Annex A Mission

A1 Objective

The overall objective is to drop two Payloads, representing humanitarian aid, as accurately and quickly aspossible onto a ground marker, navigating via pre-planned Waypoints (WPs), and return to base safely.

The UAS will also need to autonomously identify an alphanumeric code located within the target area toscore maximum points.

The Payloads should remain intact after dropping to score maximum points. The UA should take-off and land/ stop within the designated 10 m x 30 m box.

Figure A2 below describes an example Mission routing. Maps together with actual WP and target co-ordinates will be provided to teams at the start of the demonstration event. The actual Mission may featuremore or less Waypoints than the example described below.

A2 Mission Tasks

Take-off: Take-off shall be conducted within the designated take-off and landing box, into wind as far aspracticable. After take-off the system shall maintain steady controlled flight at any suitable height1, typicallyaround 120 m. Take-off under manual control with transition to automatic flight is permitted, though a higherscore will be given to automatic take-off.

Navigation: The flying zone is bounded and defined by co-ordinates which mark out a ‘geofence’, beyondwhich the UA is not permitted to fly. The UA shall automatically fly around selected Waypoints WP1, WP2,WP3, WP4, whilst remaining within the geofence (see Figure A2).

The UA shall locate the target, by reference to the GPS co-ordinates, and automatically identify theAlphanumeric code within the target box, relaying this to the base station.

Payload Delivery: The UAS shall position itself to deliver one payload onto the target. It may then go aroundWP5 and reposition to deliver a second. Alternatively it may return directly to the landing area to resupplywith the second payload and fly a second sortie.

The payload drop accuracy is the shortest measured distance from the edge of the square target area to thepoint at which the payload finally comes to rest. A payload dropped anywhere within the square target areawill score full accuracy marks.

Landing: The UAS shall return to and land at the designated take-off and landing zone. Transition to manualcontrol is permitted for landing, though a fully automatic landing will score more points. The mission iscomplete after the final payload delivery sortie, when the UAS comes to a halt and the engine is stopped.

1 Note heights are quoted in feet Above Ground Level (AGL).

A3 Rules

Navigation: Each team will be provided with a map of the airfield, showing the geofence boundary withinwhich the UA must remain at all times, together with any other no-fly zones. The map will provide GPS co-ordinates for the geofence vertices, the WPs and the Target.

A mission route will define the WP order, together with the direction (to right or left) that the UA must passaround the WPs. The accuracy of the navigation will be evaluated by analysis of the GPS data logger afterthe flight. Note that the UA must pass around the correct side of each WP, and not ‘cut corners’, but there areno penalties for going wide around the WP. Both WP co-ordinates and the direction (leaving the WP to rightor left) will be specified.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

Points will be deducted for breach of the geofence. At the Flight Safety Officer’s discretion, the FlightTermination System may be initiated upon such breach, or the team may be directed to return the UA to thelaunch site and land.

Mission Time: Each team will have a slot time for their Mission, and UAS must be prepared and ready tolaunch by the allocated slot time. Penalties will be incurred if the UAS is not ready to launch within 5 minutesof the allocated slot time. The Mission time will be measured from the launch signal, until the UAS touchesdown for the final time at the end of the mission.

If the UA requires more than one sortie to complete the Mission, the timer keeps running until the finaltouchdown of the Mission.

Should the mission flight extend longer than 5 minutes after the Target time has elapsed, the team will berequired to land the UAS, whether or not they have completed the Mission.

Multiple Sorties: The UAS may carry two payloads in one flight, locating and dropping the Payloadssequentially, to minimise the Mission time. Alternatively, it may be designed to carry a single Payload,returning after the first sortie to reload the second payload and conduct the second sortie etc. If the UASreloads a payload, it is permissible to refuel / reload fresh batteries at the same time.

Target Identification: The team will be provided with the co-ordinates of the target, and the UAS may use acamera system with target recognition capability to refine the location accuracy autonomously. The UA willneed to identify the Alphanumeric within the target area automatically.

Payload deployment: The payload(s) shall be deployed whilst the aircraft is in flight, from any suitableheight above the ground. The UA is not permitted to land to deploy the payload.

Operating height: All operating heights between 0 m – 140 m are valid within the allowable flying zone.Typically the mission height may be specified around the waypoints, but the aircraft may descend in thevicinity of the target to deploy the payload. The UA may drop the payload from any desired height above theground, however it shall not land to deploy the payload.

During transit phases between the landing area to the target area, the UAS shall maintain a safe heightabove ground.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

A4 Ground Marker Description

The ground marker shown below in Figure A1 is a red 25 cm x 25 cm central square, incorporating analphanumeric code in white letters, approximately 15 cm high, within the square. To help identification of theground marker, an 1 m x 1 m white border will surround the central area.

Figure A1: Ground Marker Dimensions.

Figure A2: Typical Mission Scenario


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

NOTES of Figure A2:

In the example mission to the left, after departing the Take-Off zone the course goes via Waypoints 1, 2, 3, 4,then to the Target to drop the first payload. The UAS shall pass the correct side of the Waypoint.

Then out to and around Waypoint 5 and back to the Target to drop the second payload.

After dropping the second payload, the course routes back to the Runway via Waypoints 5 and 4 (course line

not shown).

For this example the mission target time would be in the order of 140 seconds.

The actual course will differ from this example.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

Annex B UAS Safety and Airworthiness Requirements

This section presents the safety related requirements and guidance with which the UAS shall comply before being permitted to fly in the Demonstration Event.

B1 General Safety Requirements

• The UA shall have a maximum Take-Off Mass (MTOM) of 6.9 kg or less;

• The maximum airspeed of the UA in level flight shall not exceed 25 KIAS;

• The design and construction of the UAS shall employ good design practice, with appropriate use of

materials and components;

• The design shall be supported by appropriate analysis to demonstrate satisfactory structural

integrity, stability and control, flight and navigation performance, and reliability of safety critical systems.

B2 Command and Control

• The UA shall be capable of manual override by the pilot during any phase of flight;

• The Ground Control Station may display the UA position with reference to the airfield and any no-fly

zones, though this is not mandated. In the absence of such live telemetry, the Judges’ and / or Flight Safety Officer’s decision on boundary breaches is final.

B3 Flight Termination

• The FTS requirements are defined at Section 3.14. The actions of the FTS shall aim to safely land

the UA as soon as possible after initiation and in a controlled and low energy descent.

• The FTS elements should be tested during the development, with evidence of correct and reliable

functionality provided in the FRR.

• A Fail Safe check will demonstrate flight termination on the ground by switching off the data-link for

30 seconds and observing activation of the flight termination commands.

B4 Design Safety Features

• Batteries used in the UA shall contain bright colours to facilitate their location in the event of a crash;

• At least 25% of the upper, lower and each side surface shall be a bright colour to facilitate visibility in

the air and in the event of a crash;

• Any fuel / battery combination deemed high risk in the opinion of the judges may be disqualified.

B5 Operation

Some important points about flying operations are noted below.

• The Flight Safety Officer shall have absolute discretion to refuse a team permission to fly, or to order

the termination of a flight in progress.

• Only teams issued with a ‘Permit to Test’ through the Scrutineering process, and a ‘Permit to Fly’

through the Certification Test Flight, will be eligible to enter the Flying Demonstration stage;

• Teams shall have appointed a BMFA ‘B’ rated pilot to operate the system during the Certification

Flight Test and the Flying Demonstration. The pilot shall have had familiarization flying of the UASprior to the Demonstration Event. Please note that the Organisers are not able to provide a qualified


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

pilot for Teams;

• Note the requirement at Section 3.12 for provision of a buddy box.

• The UA shall remain within Visual Line of Sight (VLOS) and no greater than 500m horizontally from

the Pilot, and remain below 460 m AGL;

• The UA shall not be flown within 50 m of any person, vessel, vehicle or structure not under the

control of the Pilot; during take-off or landing, however, the UA shall not be flown within 30 m of anyperson, unless that person is under the control of the Pilot2;

• During the entire flight the UA shall remain in controlled flight and within the geofence boundary of

the Flying Zone;

• Failure of the Pilot to recover promptly a UA appearing uncontrolled or departing from the Flying

Zone, shall require activation of the FTS, either by the Pilot or at the direction of the FSO.

B6 Ground Control Station

It is desirable but not mandated that the Ground Control Station should display the following information and be visible to the Operators, Flight Safety Officer and Judges:

• Current UA position on a moving map;

• Local Airspace, including the Flying Zone;

• AGL (QFE);

• Indicated Airspeed (kts);

• Information on UA Health.

B7 Payload Carriage and Delivery

The Safety Case shall include demonstration by analysis and test, that the risk of inadvertent jettison of the Payload and subsequent injury to persons on the ground is acceptably low.

2 Air Navigation Order, Articles 166 and 167


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

Annex C GPS Tracker Installation and Operation

The Quanum GPS Logger V2 with Backlit LCD Display NEO-6 U-Blox is to be provided to provide ahistorical track of competitors in the Smart Moto / Bike / Drone Challenge. Because of its accuracy, smallsize and light weight it is ideal for providing historical navigation data in Unmanned Aerial Systems. Thetracker will provide position (Lat & Long), Altitude, Date and Time. In addition it creates a log of estimatedaccuracy and satellite status throughout the flight.

The GPS Logger is a stand-alone device that packs the power of a U-BLOX NEO-6 GPS receiver, andrecords everything from; distance traveled, start and end positions, UTC time stamps, course and speed…and the infamous MAX speed the logger reached. The data can be viewed on the integrated backlit LCD orthe NEMA data can be downloaded to a PC and plotted out on map sites such as Google Earth. To saveweight the logger gets its power from a spare channel from your receiver so no additional battery is needed.

Instrument position

The tracker shall be positioned on the upper surface of the aircraft with a clear view of the sky above. It maybe mounted internally or externally, but there must be a 140 degree field of view above the tracker aroundthe full 360 degree azimuth which is unobscured by metallic or carbon fibre parts. A cover of fabric, plastic,foam or GRP will not affect the reception. In the case of rotary platforms, avoid placing the tracker under thesweep of the rotor(s). If teams cannot meet this specification they should contact the organisers to discussthe requirements further.

Instrument fixation

The instrument should be secured to the aircraft by means of straps or held firmly in place in an enclosure,while permitting ready access to the two buttons and status LCD Display. It is suggested that a polystyrene“jacket” would provide an ideal method of locating the tracker firmly within the structure. Dimensions areprovided overleaf.

Operation on Day of Competition

When first switched on in a new position the tracker may take up to 30 minutes to create an up to datealmanac. The RIN staff will run the trackers on site for a suitable time before they are issued. The lock-ontime for competitors will be between 4 and 32 seconds, thereafter the tracker will operate quiteindependently. As the information contained within the tracker could be a deciding feature of the competitionthe RIN staff will be available to assist in priming the trackers throughout. The trackers will be collected onlanding and the data downloaded immediately. The data is presented both in tabular format and asuperimposed track on a suitable map (Memory Map aviation chart or OS map). Downloaded data can bemade available to competitors at the end of the competition.

Before each competition flight teams will be handed a live tracker by RIN staff. It is their responsibility to:

• Attach the tracker securely to the aircraft; and

• Once the tracker is attached, check that the LCD display on the tracker indicate it is logging. If it

does not appear to be logging, teams should notify a member of RIN staff but should not attemptto operate the tracker unless instructed to do so.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

Tracker description

A description of the device operation is given here for information only, and a diagram of the tracker withdimensions, mass, and status LCD display descriptions is provided below. There are four modes which youscroll through using buttons on the side. The modes are;

1. Navigation - current location information.

2. Logging - basically start the logging.

3. View Data.

4. Connect to PC.

The tracker runs on a continuous data loop lasting the power off GPS/UAV. The plan for the Challenge is thatthe RIN staff will hand over a live tracker leaving the competitors to position it on the vehicle and double-check the status in the LCD display. Teams should not attempt to operate the trackers unless instructed to doso.

Tech Specs of GPS:

Receiver: NEO-6M U-BLOX

Max Speed Recording: 1000km/h

Sensitivity: -161 dBm (Tracking & Navigation)

Accuracy: 2.5 m (GPS), 2.0 m (SBAS)

Cold Start: 27 s approx.

Navigation: UTC date and time, geographic coordinates, time, speed, course

Logging: geographic coordinates, date and time, speed, course, distance (up to 100km)

Logging time: >1000 hours

Logging ON/OFF Control: Manual, RC (1520us)

Voltage: 4.5V ~ 6.5V

Current: 80mA typical

Size: 24 x 77 x 18mm

Weigh: 43g


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

Annex D General Guidance for Teams

This section offers a few hints and tips to help teams achieve a successful and competitive entry. This is in part based on feedback from the 2016/2017 competition entries.

D1 Concept Selection

The UA may be designed to carry a single payload, in which case return to the landing site for replenishmentwill be required to drop a second payload, possibly incurring time penalties. Alternatively it may be designedto carry two payloads, allowing delivery of payloads to be accomplished in a single mission.

Rotary Wing, UAS(R) and Fixed Wing UAS(A) each have their advantages and drawbacks. The UAS(R) maydescend to drop the payload onto the ground from a low height accurately and without damage, but may beslower in transit to the target area, and may have reduced payload capacity compared to the UAS(A),requiring two sorties to complete the two payload drops; The UAS(A) pose a greater challenge in achieving adirect hit on the target than for the UAS(R).

The UAS(A) may require a more sophisticated payload protection or retardation system to minimise impactdamage compared to the UAS(R). Alternatively it may be decided from looking at the scoring, that somedamage to the payload will be tolerated and traded against the additional complexity and weight of aprotection system.

Either electric or internal combustion engines are permitted. Note there are marks for quiet andenvironmentally friendly operations.

The assessment panel will be looking for teams to explain their rationale in making their system designdecisions and trade-offs.

D2 Programme Planning

Make allowance for things to go wrong – the aircraft will crash on the test flight and need to be rebuilt. Testsubsystems early and in parallel. Don’t rely on it all being OK on the day – it never is!

D3 Construction Quality

Do ensure that mechanical systems such as pushrods, control linkages, propellers are properly locked, forexample with locknuts or wire locking, and bolts/pins inserted from above (gravity aided), to avoid themfailing during flight.

Ensure wiring and fuel lines are retained securely, so as not to interfere with flight controls or fasteners.

Ensure that control linkages operate with minimal lateral load / moments.

Get your UAS inspected during build by an experienced aero-modeller to help with construction details andbest practise.

Build a storage box for your UAS to avoid handling damage during transport, and to support the UAS duringpreparation / test / maintenance.

D4 Radio Equipment

Note the mandatory requirement for 2.4GHz band, Spread Spectrum compliant systems, and range of 1 km.A good quality receiver is key to ensuring reliable reception at longer ranges.

A range check shall be carried out as part of your system testing prior to the Demonstration Event, and youare reminded allow for the possibility that the RF environment at the Demonstration Event may be morehostile than at your home field.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

D5 Autonomous / Automatic operation

The competition mission will require a flight firstly in manual mode, and then assuming all goes well, inautomatic mode. It will also test the switch from manual to automatic, and vice-versa. When testing your UASpay particular attention to the switch between manual and automatic mode, to ensure the behaviour of theUAS is as expected.

D6 Payload Specification and Deployment

Note that your design will need to accommodate the slight variability in dimensions of commercially available1kg bags of flour.

Remember that wind speed and direction must be allowed for when calculating the payload release point.

D7 Demonstration Event Preparation

Be organised and do be prepared for breakages. Do bring a workbench so that you can safely domaintenance and repairs. Bring plenty of tools and spare parts for your UAS. Ensure that batteries can bechanged easily.

There will be limited time in the schedule allowed for testing, so plan to use your time wisely. Refuelling andengine run-ups in the pits will be allowed, but only in a segregated area under the supervision of IMechEstaff, and availability of slots may be limited.

It is your responsibility to dispose of your rubbish; bring a suitable bag to handle damaged batteries etc.There is no facility provided for this on site.

D8 The Route to a Permit to Fly

For background reading on the wider regulations applicable to UAS, teams are encouraged to consult theAESA for UAS design and operation, and its regulatory framework which is downloadable for free from theAESA website (http://www.seguridadaerea.gob.es/media/4389070/ley_18_2014_de_15_octubre.pdf) .

See also the Order of air navigation of each country of origin. But like we're flying in Catalonia, we willconsider the legal framework Spain.

AESA - State Aviation Safety Agency is responsible for regulating operations with drones up to 150 kg. Todrones above this limit, it has established rules at European level, and the agency responsible for regulatingthese aircraft is EASA (European Aviation Safety Agency)

Link of Order: http://www.seguridadaerea.gob.es/lang_castellano/cias_empresas/trabajos/rpas/default.aspx


http://www.seguridadaerea.gob.es/lang_castellano/cias_empresas/trabajos/rpas/default.aspx

http://www.seguridadaerea.gob.es/lang_castellano/cias_empresas/trabajos/rpas/default.aspx

Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

Annex E Document Templates and Guidance

This Annex provides guidance on the structure and content of the PDR, CDR and FRR deliverables. Teamsare also encouraged to reflect on the Engineering Challenges summarised in Section 2.5, which indicateswhat the Judges are looking for throughout the competition.

E1 Preliminary Design Review

The Preliminary Design phase culminates with the Preliminary Design Review, a written report of no more than 15 pages in the body of the report, plus figures and supporting appendices. The suggested structure and content should include:

Introduction

Project Management

• Chart showing the team organisation and roles;

• Project plan with the main activities, lead times and dependencies;

• Table summarising the project risks and their mitigation.

Technical

• Summary of UAS Requirements, including regulatory requirements, and the Systems Engineering

approach adopted to develop compliant solutions;

• Discussion of the design drivers, the concept generation process, concept options considered, the

trade studies undertaken to choose between Fixed Wing vs Rotary Wing, and the factors influencingthe downselect to the chosen concept;

• UAS overall layout & description with a three-view scale drawing;

• Preliminary aerodynamic, structural and performance calculations supporting the initial sizing, basic

stability and control calculations, together with a Weight and Balance estimate;

• Diagram showing the preliminary system architecture and data flow for the navigation and mission

control, flight control, vision sensor and the design for automatic operation;

• Brief Functional Description, and the rationale for selection of each of the proposed systems,

including Airframe, Propulsion, Flight Controls, Navigation & Mission Control, Sensors, ImageProcessing, Autonomy / Automatic Operation, Payload Carriage and Delivery system, FlightTermination System;

• Table summarising the technical risks and their mitigation;

• A summary of the workstrands to be carried out during the detail design phase.

Safety

• An overview of the safety risks, presented in a table of hazards and mitigating design features.

• A short description of the safety features incorporated to mitigate the risks such as the flight

termination system;

• A short summary of the approach to ‘Certification and Qualification’, which could include design and

analysis evidence to be generated in the next phase, and the outline elements of the test programmeto demonstrate the integrity of the system.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

Commercial Considerations

• An initial outline of the possible commercial use for the system, either at the 7kg scale or scaled up

to a larger system;

• A summary of the estimated UAS construction costs.

Conclusions

References

Appendices

Typically appendices could include:

• Summary of the UAS requirements, and the derived system requirements;

• Background work supporting the main conclusions and studies;

• Concept options considered;

• Supporting calculations;

• Project Gantt Chart;

• Risk Register.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

E2 Critical Design Review

A key output towards the end of the Detail Design phase is the Critical Design Review, a written report of nomore than 40 pages supported by diagrams and appendices. The suggested structure and content shouldinclude:

Introduction

Project Management

Note any update to the information presented in the PDR.

• Chart showing the team organisation and roles;

• Project plan with the main activities, lead times and dependencies;

• Table summarising the project risks and their mitigation.

Technical

• Requirements:

◦ Summary of how the UAS Requirements, including regulatory requirements, have been satisfied

by the proposed design, and a Verification and Validation Matrix.

• UAS Design Overview:

◦ UAS overall layout & description with a three-view drawing showing dimensions and centre of

gravity; summary of the rationale for the layout and key design features;

◦ Description of the Aero-mechanical Design, including where appropriate the materials and

construction techniques for each of the elements. This should include:

▪ Arrangement of flying surfaces and major components;

▪ Airframe structural design including consideration of flight,

▪ ground, handling and transport requirements;

▪ Aerodynamic design and performance, including Stability and Control;

▪ Control actuation system providing roll, pitch and yaw control;

▪ Propulsion system;

▪ Fuel system / propulsion battery;

▪ Undercarriage;

▪ Payload Carriage and Release System;

▪ Payload protection system;

▪ Flight Termination System.

◦ Description of the Avionics, Mission System and Electrical Power Design, including:

▪ Mission Planning and Performance analysis; o Autopilot design and automatic operation;

▪ Avionics, Navigation and Mission Control System;

▪ Sensors and Image Processing System;

▪ Radio Control System, including Data Link and Telemetry;


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

▪ Ground Control Station.

◦ Brief description of any consideration given to Support equipment, such as test equipment,

handling or storage fixtures;

◦ Analysis and Modelling. Provide a summary of the analysis and test undertaken to support the

design and development, e.g.

▪ Structural performance;

▪ Aerodynamic performance;

▪ Payload release dynamics;

▪ Navigation and Mission performance;

◦ Table summarising the technical risks and their mitigation.

Qualification Test Plan

Summary of the proposed test plan for the UAS, which may include physical testing supported by modelling, and including:

• Structural testing;

• Subsystem testing;

• Flight testing.

Safety Case

The Safety Case should show an understanding of the main regulations relevant to this UAS. It shouldpresent the argument demonstrating the airworthiness of the UAS, summarising the main safety risks andtheir mitigation, with arguments supported by evidence from design, analysis or test.

One of the mitigations to a number of safety risks is the incorporation of the Flight Termination System (FTS).The safety case should describe how the FTS mitigates each of the identified risks that it is designed toaddress.

The safe operation of the UAS should be discussed, in addition to the technical design.

Environmental Management

A short summary of the design features to minimise environmental impact, including hazardous materials,pollution and emissions, fuel usage, noise, and disposal considerations for materials such as batteries andcomposite structures.

Business Case

This should present the proposed commercial use for the system. The Business Case might be for a scaledup or otherwise altered version of the UAS prototype if this is justified by the requirements of the chosenmarket. It should include the proposed business model, a high level estimate of the equipment and operatingcosts, and potential sources of revenue.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

ConclusionsReferencesAppendices

Typically appendices could include:

• Summary of the UAS requirements, and the derived system requirements;

• Verification and Validation Matrix;

• Background work supporting the main conclusions and studies;

• Supporting calculations, e.g. for structural and aerodynamic analysis;

• Design Dossier and Bill of Materials with costs for COTS components;

• Project Gantt Chart;

• Risk Register.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

E3 Flight Readiness Review

The Flight Readiness Review is a short report, compiling the test evidence supporting the application for aPermit to Test. This should include:

• Copies of the reports and signed declarations from all preceding reviews;

• Update to UAS Performance Analysis;

• Qualification Test Report;

• Video evidence of the test flying undertaken;

• Final Safety Case;

• A signed declaration by an IMechE member, or suitably experienced aerospace engineer that in their

opinion:

• The UAS appears compliant with the requirements noted in Section 3;

• The design and build quality is satisfactory;

• Safety and Airworthiness aspects have been addressed satisfactorily, with appropriate fail

safe mechanisms and a risk register completed;

• The system has been tested, both by modelling and demonstration to evaluate the

performance and reliability;

• The team members preparing and operating the UAS are suitably competent to ensure safe

operations.

A ‘Permit to Test’ will be issued by the Flight Safety Officer for teams that submit a satisfactory FlightReadiness Review, and also satisfactorily complete the scrutineering on the first day of the DemonstrationEvent. An amber sticker, signed by the FSO shall be applied to the UA denoting that it has been granted aPermit to Test.


Versió 1.7 - 2016/17

Annex F Guidance on Autopilot Selection

To help teams with the selection of COTS components, this Annex provides a list of potentially suitableautopilots, compiled as of August 2015. It is not mandatory for teams to choose one of these, and it remainsthe teams’ responsibility to ensure that the autopilot is fit for purpose and suitable for their UAS application.

Name Website Type

NXT AutoPilot http://diydrones.com/profiles/blogs/n xt-autopilot-v-01-beta

Open Source

ArduPilot http://ardupilot.com/ Open Source

Pixhawk, PX4 FMU, Arsov AUAV-X2, APM2 etc

https://pixhawk.org/choice Open Source

Lisa/MX V2.1 Autopilot http://1bitsquared.com/products/lisa-m-autopilot Open Source

Arduino UNO R3 UAV V2 https://www.sparkfun.com/products/1 1021 Open Source

Atto Pilot http://www.attopilotinternational.com Open Source

Piccolo II Piccolo NANO Piccolo SL http://www.cloudcaptech.com/product s/auto-pilots Commercial. Full Integrated solution.

Paparazzi https://wiki.paparazziuav.org/wiki/Mai n_Page https://wiki.paparazziuav.org

Albatros ttp://appliedaeronautics.com/Albatro ss-SP-UAV-Kit_p_17.html

Commercial. The Albatross UAV kits can takeoff, fly and land autonomously via predefined flight paths.

MicroPilot http://www.micropilot.com/ Commercial

Auav EZI-NAV http://www.auav.net/ELECTRONICS.html

Rotomotion http://www.rotomotion.com/about.ht ml Open Source, for HELIS

PNav http://www.hubner.net/pnav-autopilot Open Source/Hardware

NgUAVP http://ng.uavp.ch/FrontPage Open Source for Quads

CC3D/OpenPilot https://www.openpilot.org Open Source Very Cheap Sub(20€)

FY 41-AP Panda AP117 http://www.feiyu-tech.com/product- en.php?id=32 Commercial – Low Cost Sub 100€

SC2 SC2R http://www.skycircuits.com/autopilots Commercial, Academic, Research and Development Use

Flight Management Systems, Avionics/Autopilot - SNAP®

http://www.bbsr.co.uk/products/Custo mised-UAS Commercial


BARCELONA SmartDrone Challenge 2017smartdronechallenge.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/... ·...

Documents

Transcript of BARCELONA SmartDrone Challenge 2017smartdronechallenge.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/... ·...