Proceedings of the ASME 2012 International Mechanical Engineering Congress & Exposition

IMECE2012
November 9-15, 2012, Houston, Texas, USA

IMECE2012-87820
Micro UAVs Using Mechatronics Techniques
Devdas Shetty
College of Engineering, Technology &
Architecture, University of Hartford,
CT06117, USA
Shetty@hartford.edu

Louis Manzione
College of Engineering, Technology &
Architecture, University of Hartford, CT 06117,
Manzione@hartford.edu

INTRODUCTION
ABSTRACT
This paper looks at the recent trends in mechatronic design configurations and examines how those approaches can be applied to the design of Micro Unmanned
Aerial Vehicles. The current challenges in this area include the design of micro UAV systems that are capable
of precise delivery, minimum volume and lower cost .
This paper examines the use innovative techniques such
as of axiomatic design, TRIZ (theory of inventive problem solving) and Hardware in the loop to arrive at a systematic design process. Virtual product design procedures
involving simulation of complex systems allows designers
to develop system without finalizing the hardware. The
simulation procedure can be as what if scenario when
the hardware doesnt exist. Virtual simulations enable
everyone to work on development before the first prototype is completed. Engineers can validate the entire operating cycle for the machine by driving the simulation with
control system logic and timing. . Given the small volume
available when in launch configuration, the primary driving parameters were maximizing available wing area and
relative wing effectiveness, while minimizing the required
storage volume. The impact of G-forces on the structural
viability, mechanical complexity and overall system survivability are important in determining the relative merit
of the design concepts. This paper also addresses some of
the practical applications, advantages and difficulties associated with the engineering applications of virtual reality.

The research in simulation and modeling along with

virtual prototyping had a major influence on the design and
fabrication of Micro Unmanned Aerial Systems. The
commercialization of these technologies with decreased cost
and size has received attention in both civil and military
applications. Micro UAVs are also used in a small but growing
number of civil applications, such as firefighting or
nonmilitary security work, such as surveillance of pipelines.
Unmanned aerial systems under the category of guided projectiles are also of importance when it is necessary to hit a single
target in a rough terrain. Traditional, unguided projectiles often require multiple rounds be used to strike a single target.
The guided projectiles, although they are remotely guided at
times are not considered UAVs. UAV is defined as a powered,
aerial vehicle that does not carry a human operator, uses aerodynamic forces to provide vehicle lift. It can fly autonomously
or be piloted remotely and can be expendable or recoverable
[1]. UAVs come in two varieties:
Units controlled from a remote location
Units autonomously based on pre-programmed flight
plans using more complex dynamic automation
systems.
DESIGN TRENDS IN MICRO UAVs

Identify various concepts and evaluation of each of

those concepts using axiomatic design approach.
Apply the concept of TRIZ (theory of Inventive
Problem Solving) to arrive at unique solutions
Investigate initial performance estimation and optimization of aerodynamic design.
Study and definition of avionics and GCS capability
requirements for mission profile of UAV.

1
Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/16/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2012 by ASME

System design and creation of the software and

initial mechanical design and verification of
baseline avionics
Fabrication of components that are suitable for
high G forces (based on the zones where the device is lunched)

The current challenges include the need for micro UAV

systems that are capable of:

highly precise delivery,

cost
Complexity

Systems Design Process (SDP) and a quantitative approach to decision making and can be used as a tool for
improving existing systems or for design of new systems
Micro UAVs, the limited pay load constraint influences
the use of high performance avionics systems with complete inertial and air data sensors Multidisciplinary approach integrating expertise across areas: fluid dynamics,
aerodynamics, guidance, control theory, flight dynamics,
microelectronics, mechanical design
Design Methodologies:

Axiomatic Design
TRIZ
Hardware in the loop simulation

There had been different efforts in using design

methodologies for decision making on the construction of
UAVs. The challenge comes from the need for systems
capable of highly precise delivery, cost and complexity.
Axiomatic Design approach has been used in an integrated design atmosphere to investigate flow and structure. It
is based on the assumption that there is a fundamental set
of principles that represents a good design practice.
AXIOMATIC METHODOLOGY APPLIED
TO THE DESIGN PROCESS
Many times we identify a distinguishing piece of art
or music, but still we find it difficult to explain why a
particular combination of elements in a work causes it to
be excellent. In other words, these results lack an absolute
frame of reference, which often leads to differing opinions in evaluating the merits in this field. A lot depends
on intuition and experience when we compose music or
design a product or a process. It is difficult to reduce these
facts and observations into a consistent set of statements
and descriptions. Nam Suh (1990) proposed the use of
axioms to represent design. It is based on the assumption
that there is a fundamental set of principles that represents
a good design practice. There are many similarities in the

design methods of diverse fields such as industrial design,

architecture, mechanical design, and software engineering and
also in the development of management policies. In other
words, it can be said that theyre a set of common factors in a
good design. These common factors can be applied to other
design situations like natural laws in natural science problems.
Nam Such developed a set of axioms and corollaries to
represent design. These were reduced to a set of two fundamental axioms, that if followed would result in a good design.
Axioms are fundamental truths that are always expected to
be true
Corollaries are propositions that follow from the axioms.
Functional Requirements (FRs) are characterization of the
perceived needs for a product or a process. In addition the
minimum set of independent requirements that characterize
the design objectives for a specific need.
Design Parameters(DPs) are the variables that characterize the physical entity created by the design process to fulfill
the FRs. The Design begins with the problem definition from
an array of facts into a coherent statement of the questions.
The objective of design is stated in the functional domain,
while the physical solution is generated in the physical domain. Design involves continuous interaction between the
objectives of what we want to achieve and how we want to do
it with a physical solution. The design process links these two
domains, which are independent of each other. The next step
in the design process is to determine the designs objectives by
defining it in terms of specific functional requirements
(FRs). To satisfy these functional requirements, a physical
embodiment is developed in terms of design parameters
(DPs). Design process relates FRs of the functional domain
to the DPs of the physical domain. This mapping feature between FRs and DPs is illustrated below. The design axioms
provide principles that aid the creative process of design by
enabling good designs to be identified from an infinite number
of designs.
Two main axioms are:
Axiom 1

The Independence Axiom

Maintain
the
requirements.

independence

of

functional

Axiom 2
The Information Axiom
Minimize the information content of the design
The axioms provide an insight into questions like
how one makes design decisions, why a particular
design is better than others. Axiom 1 is related to the
process of translation from the functional to the
physical domain. Axiom 2 states that the complexity
of the design, once axiom 1 is satisfied, should be
reduced. The questions like whether it is a rational
decision, how many design parameters are needed to

2
Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/16/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2012 by ASME

satisfy the functional requirements are answered.

The same principles are used in all design
situations irrespective of whether it is product
related or process related or organization related.

dictable. To test this theory, he reviewed about 200,000 patents submitted at that time in the Soviet Union (Russia) The
analysis showed that most patents suggested means for eliminating system conflicts in a system. For a problem to be considered inventive, it had to pose at least one contradiction.
Such contradictions arise when a certain parameter cannot be
improved without causing another parameter to deteriorate. A
contradiction between speed and sturdiness is one example. If
we want to design an automobile to be sturdy, it means more
weight. More weight generally results in less speed. How do
we design the same vehicle to run faster? Furthermore, TRIZ
researchers found about 39 parameters, each of which could
be in contradiction with one another. The initial step in using
TRIZ is to find out which design parameters are in contradiction with one another.

In mathematical terms, the independence axiom

can be represented as follows:
[FR] = [DM] [DP] where,
[FR] = vector of the functional space to
the vector of the physical space as:
[DP] = vector of design parameters
[DM] = relationship matrix between
functional and physical domain.
An element of [DM], Xij represents the
relationship between each FRi and DPj. If the
FR1
FR
2

FR3
...

FR N

X
0

..

0
X
0
..
0

0 .. 0
0 .. 0

0 .. 0

..
..
0
X

DP1
DP
2

DP3

..
DPN

FRi is affected by DPj, then Xij has a finite value.

If FRi is not affected by DPj, then Xij is zero. We
can write a design equation and design matrix for
each possible solution. The implementation of
the independence design axiom results in the
case where every functional requirement is
associated with a single design parameter. This is
called the uncoupled design and is represented
by the diagonal matrix of the type. It can be
observed from the first axiom that for a design to
be uncoupled, it requires that the number of FRs
and DPs to be the same. When the matrix is
triangular (e.g., Anm = 0 when n m and m > n),
the design is a decoupled design. Both,
uncoupled and decoupled designs satisfy the
independence axiom. All other matrices, which
do not satisfy Axiom 1, are called coupled
designs.

TRIZ METHODOLOGY APPLIED TO THE DESIGN PROCESS

TRIZ methodology systematically investigates the problem as

an innovative solution and applies a series of step by step
guidelines to generate solution alternatives, improving the
product parameters while maximizing product changes and
costs. This procedure was developed with a very limited
knowledge of other methodologies, but is based on a large
empirical knowledge base of patents. This concept has been
adopted by many organizations as an effective conceptgenerating tool. Apart from solving technological issues, it has
additional capability of affecting key functions in leadership
and management.

TRIZ - Resolution of Technical Contradictions

The basic concept of TRIZ is the resolution of a contradiction.
A contradiction arises from mutually exclusive demands that
may be placed on the same system. Improvement of one of the
system parameters will then lead to deterioration of others. To
resolve this, it is important to find the physical contradictions
that are at the hidden root of the technical problem. The most
effective solutions are achieved when a designer solves technical problem that contains a contradiction, which generally
occurs when the designer tries to improve on specific parameters. The physical contradictions and principles are combined
in a matrix, the rows and columns of which contain 39 generalized parameters, corresponding to the most common parameters the engineers try to improve. The complete matrix is
provided in a TRIZ table that has been built after reviewing
about 2 million patents.

TRIZ is the acronym for a Russian term that translates to

Theory of Inventive Problem-Solving (TIPS) It was
developed by Genrich Altshuller in 1946. He began with
the hypothesis that there are universal principles of invention serving as the basis for creative innovation across all
scientific fields. If these principles are codified and
taught, it would be possible to make innovation more pre-

3
Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/16/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2012 by ASME

HARDWARE IN THE LOOP SIMULATION

METHODOLOGY APPLIED TO THE DESIGN
PROCESS
During the design phase of small unmanned aerial
vehicles, Hardware-in-the-Loop (HIL) simulation and
experimental validation are required due to the high cost
of flight tests. Despite the need for real tests, simulationbased testing also plays a very important role.
In the prototyping step, many of the non-computer
subsystems of the model are replaced with actual
hardware. Sensors and actuators provide the interface
signals necessary to connect the hardware subsystems
back to the model.
The resulting model is part
mathematical and part real as shown in Figure 1. Because
the real part of the model inherently evolves in real time
and the mathematical part evolves in simulated time, it is
essential that the two parts be synchronized. This process
of fusing and synchronizing model, sensor, and actuator
information is called real time interfacing or hardware-inthe-loop simulation and is an essential ingredient in the
modeling and simulation environment.

Table 1. .identifies the following six distinct functions:

Control: The control algorithm(s) in executable software

form.
Computer: The embedded computer(s) used in the product.
Sensors
Actuators
Process: Product hardware excluding sensors, actuators,
and the embedded computer.
Protocol: (optional) for bus-based distributed control
applications.

In particular, hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) simulation

environment supports and validates the UAV autopilot
hardware and software development [2]. To validate the
HIL system and aid the engineers in the assessment of the
systems and subcomponents, field experiments as shown
in Figure 1 are conducted to guarantee all laboratory
simulations in the HIL environment are accurate and
realistic [3]

Ref.

Electronics
Modified Variables
Actuators

Sensed Variables

Mechanical
Systems

Sensors

Figure 1. Hardware in the Loop Model

4
Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/16/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2012 by ASME

Real Hardware
Components

Mathematically
Modeled Components

Sensors
Actuators
Process

Flight Control
Algorithm

Modify control system design subject to

unmodelled sensor, actuator, and
machinery errors.

Sensors
Actuators
Control (including
the embedded computer)

Process

Evaluate validity of process model.

Protocol (for distributed

applications)

Control algorithm
Sensors
Actuators
Process

Evaluate
the
effects
transmission on design.

Signal processing
hardware

Control algorithm
Sensors
Actuators
Process

Evaluate the effects of actual signal

processing hardware.

Description

of

data

Table 1. Different configurations for hardware-in-the-loop simulation

900MHz
wireless

Simulink/Matlab
Dynamic model
Real time
Simulation

Flight
Dynamics
Simulation

HIL
Hardware

Autopilot

Real time Simulink,

Two way communication

Sensor data
processing
Flight control

Wireless
Modem

Ground
Station

Flight
Dynamics
Visualization

Figure 2. Hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) simulation environment

5
Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/16/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2012 by ASME

Once the above requirements are satisfied based on the

modeling, fabrication and testing of a wind-tunnel model
of the baseline design should be conducted, in order to
confirm and/or adjust the CFD results.
Further CFD
modeling is conducted, to develop a dynamic model of the
aircraft. Pitch, roll, and yaw rates are determined, and
control response. Baseline wind-tunnel model should
include functional actuators, to allow verification of the
CFD results. Iterative design procedures are used to
optimize the aerodynamic performance of the design.
Free-flight testing of low-speed sub-weight flight article
may be conducted, if deemed appropriate.

The comprehensive development of mechatronic systems

starts with modeling and simulation, model building for
static and dynamic models, transformation into simulation
models, programming and computer based control and
final implementation. In this atmosphere, hardware-in-theloop plays a major part. Using visual simulation tools in a
real time environment, major portions of the mechatronic
product could be simulated along with the hardware in the
loop.
It is possible to simulate the electronics, where the
actuators, mechanics and sensors are the real hardware. On
the other hand, if appropriate models of the mechanical
systems, actuators, and sensors are available, the
electronics could be the only hardware. There are different
ways in which hardware in the loop could be simulated
such as: electronics simulation, simulation of actuators and
sensors, or simulation of mechanical systems alone.

In Aerodynamics the nature of the boundary layer

viscous airflow is determined by a single dimensionless
parameter the Reynolds Numbers (Re)

Re

OTHER DESIGN TRENDS

where:

is the density of the airflow depending on the

temperature, pressure, altitude and humidity of the air.

Investigate initial performance estimation and optimization of aerodynamic design.

Study and definition of avionics and GCS capability requirements for mission profile of UAV.

Analyze the line of sight verification and demonstration of motion optical tracking capability for
the UAV

V Re Vo

Identify various concepts and evaluation of each

of those concepts and analysis of each of those
concepts.

Vl V

V0

V is the mean velocity of the UAV relative to airflow

l is a characteristic linear dimension, representing the
travelled length of the airflow

is the dynamic velocity of the airflow and is very

dependent on temperature but particularly independent of
pressure.

System design and creation of the software and initial mechanical design and verification of baseline avionics

V0

Experimental design work, fabrication testing of

a Zone-1 to 4 G-test device

l is the constant speed for the given

, and l
For modeling and simulation of a small UAV, the standard
six degree of freedom equations of motion for conventional
aircraft are used.

GENERAL AERODYNAMIC MODELING OF

SMALL UAV [4,5,6,7 and 8]
The baseline concept should be capable of at least a 3:1
glide-slope, carrying a predetermined payload. Initial
focus should be on the viability of the aerodynamics.
Mechanical design should be initially limited to basic
size/fit and balance verification, with provisions for a
three-axis control system. This work is followed by
computational fluid dynamics work for the design that
must confirm lift/drag and neutral or positive aerodynamic
stability in all three axes.

The governing equations are:

6
Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/16/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2012 by ASME

1. Force Equations

Fx
F
q w r v g 0 sin x V0 (q Rew r Rev ) g 0 sin ,
m
m
Fy
Fy
v
p w r u g 0 sin cos
V0 ( p Rew r Reu ) g 0 sin cos
m
m
F
F
w z p v q u g 0 cos cos z V0 ( p Rev q Rev ) g 0 cos cos
m
m

where

u, v and w - components

of velocity V along x, y, and z body axes.

u V cos cos ,

v V sin ,

w V sin cos ,

V u 2 v 2 w2

w
u

tan 1 ( ) - angle- of- attack (onto vertical plane), tan 1 (

v
u 2 w2

) - sideslip angle

g 0 the gravity of the Earth

and as well as are the Euler angles and they are named as the bank angle ( ) , pitch angle ( )
and heading angle

( ). [4,5] Fx , Fy and Fz -total forces along x, y and z body axes. They are composed of

gravitational, aerodynamic and propulsive forces.

q, p and r -pitch, roll and yaw rates about the bodys x, y and z axes,
m-mass of body and

- accelerations according to the components of the velocity.

u, v and w

Rev , R e u and R e w
Rev

- are the Reynolds numbers for the speeds v, u and w

v
,
Vo

R eu

u
,
V0

R ew

w
V0

2. Moment Equations
2
2

Iy Iz
I xz
I xz I xz ( I x I y )
I xz
M
I
1
p (1
) pq(

) qr (

) x M z xz
IxIz
Ix
IxIz
Ix
IxIz
Ix
I x I z

q pr

My
Iz Ix
I
( p 2 r 2 ) xz
Iy
Iy
Iy

2
2
Ix Iy
I y I z I xz
I xz
I xz
I
M
1
r (1
) pq(

) qr ( I xz

) z M x xz
IxIz
IxIz
Iz
IxIz
Iz
Iz
I x I z

7
Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/16/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2012 by ASME

Where,

p , q and r -accelerations due to the roll, pitch and yaw rates about the bodys x, y and z axes
I x , I y and I z -are the moments of inertia about x, y and z body axes and I xz is the cross product of inertia with
respect to x and z body axes.
n

Ix

Iy

i 1

mi y i2 ,

Iz

i 1

n is the number of the bodies,

mi xi2 ,

mi z i2 ,

I xz

m z x

i i i

i 1

i 1

i elementary masses m i and xi y i and z i are their coordinates.

M x , M y and M z -total moments about x, y and z body axes, which are produced by aerodynamic and propulsive
forces. Mx is rolling moment, My is pitching moment and Mz is yaw moment.

Re2 SbC1
M x q SbC I
,
2
here

M y q Sc C M

1
V 2 - dynamic pressure,
2

Re2 Sc C M

,
2

Re2 SbC N
M z q SbC N
2

- density of air current, S- wing total area, b- wing span

- mean aerodynamic chord.

C I , C M and C N -are the coefficients of roll, pitch and yaw moments [4,5]
These moments are related to the drag (D), lift (L) and side (crosswind) forces (Y) through the expressions

D q SCD ,

L q SCL ,

Y q SCY

C D, C L and C Y -are the coefficients of drag, lift and side (crosswind) forces[6]
3. Kinematic Equations:

p q sin tan r cos tan

q cos r sin
q sin sec r cos sec
where:

, and are the Euler angles and they are named as the bank angle ( ) , pitch angle ( ) and
heading angle [7, 8, 9].

, and

are the rate of change of those angles.

8
Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/16/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2012 by ASME

4. Navigation equations

p V R cos sin R (cos cos sin sin sin ) R

h V R sin R sin cos R cos cos

p N V0 Reu cos cos Rev ( cos sin sin sin cos ) Rew (sin sin cos sin cos )
E

eu

ew (cos sin sin

ev

eu

ev

sin cos

ew

, P and h are the velocities, representing the derivatives of the geometrical coordinates aligned with
Where, P
N
E
north (N), east (E) and altitude (h) of the UAV.
5. The flying coordinates

x aX bY cZ x0
y dX eY fZ y0
z gX hY iZ z 0
Where,

x, y and z are the coordinates of UAV according to

the ground stationary vision system which is used
for controlling the traffic of the UAV.
X , Y and Z are the coordinates of the detecting
object according to the miniature mobile vision system.
x0 , y 0 and z o are the initial coordinates of UAV
according to xyz coordinate system
a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h and i are the coefficients of the
various combinations of multiplications and summations
of the sines and cosines of the Euler angles between
the axes of the xyz and XYZ coordinate systems [9,10 and 11]
SURVIVABILITY
FROM
MECHANICAL SHOCK

G-FORCES

AND

Once the external form is defined, the internal

structure and mechanical/electromechanical installation is
attempted. At this point, the at least some results from the
G-survivability screening should be available, as well as
initial results from the optical tracking software
development, allowing selection of internal components.
Since the baseline model already has the majority of the
mechanical components worked out, the focus will
primarily be on refinement of the components, developing
mounting arrangements for onboard equipment and
analysis
to
confirm
structural
G-tolerance.
Material choices should be conventional whenever possible,
to simplify fabrication. Weight/balance analysis should
also be performed throughout this stage.

9
Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/16/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2012 by ASME

G-survivability G-Test Rig for UAV Tests

in-the loop simulation environment to support and validate

the UAV hardware and software development.

In order to facilitate in-house testing of small components

(primarily avionics and guidance elements), a pneumatic
G-test rig is essential. Testing results confirm mechanical
functionality at the design loads. If the UAV is designed
for Zone-1 applications, peak accelerations of 2100 G have
to be generated. Based on dynamic modeling, the
acceleration profiles provide a reasonable facsimile of the
acceleration data. An instrumentation package will allow
measurement of the payload velocity as it leaves the
accelerator stage, which in turn will allow estimation of the
average acceleration

NOMENCLATURE
Hybrid Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, Micro UAVs, G-Test,
Axiomatic Design, TRIZ, Aero-dynamic design, Hardware
in the loop
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors thank the support given by Mr. Leon Manole
of ARDEC, Piccatiny, NJ
REFERENCES

Camera
Analog transmitters
Digital transceivers
IR horizon sensors/processors
Autopilot
GPS receiver
Actuators
Battery pack
In addition, the mounting fixtures include damping
materials and special mounting arrangements, to allow
evaluation of G-mitigating techniques.

1. Chafac, M., Howell, K., Williams, C and Sexton, J

Transforming Projectile System Proceedings IEEE
systems and Information Engineering Design
University of Virginia, Charlottesville, April 23, 2010
2. Lyons. D.H., A Military Perspective on Small
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles IEEE magazine of
Instrumentation and Measurement Vol. 7, Issue 3, Sept.
2004
3. Jung, D and Tsiotras P Modeling and Hardware-in-theLoop Simulation for a Small Unmanned Aerial Vehicle,
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, 303320150, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics
4. Sean M. Calhoun, Dr. Frank Van Graas and Dr. Douglas
Lawrence. Aerodynamic Modeling for the Ohio
University
UAV.
(2001)
Identification
of
Aerodynamic Coefficients for a UAV (2003). Avionics
Engineering Center, Ohio University.
5. F-16 Aircraft Model. University of California at San
Diego, NASA Lab.
6. Bei Lu. Linear Parameter-Varying Control of An F-16
Aircraft at High angle of Attack. Ph.D. Dissertation.
NC State University. (2004)
7. Laban, M. On-line Aircraft Aerodynamic Model
Identification. Ph.D. Dissertation. Delft University of
Technology (1994).
8. Stevsns, B. L., and Lewis, F. L. Aircraft Control and
Simulation. John Wiley & sons, Inc. (1992).
9. Morelli, E., Global nonlinear parametric modeling with
application to F-16 Aerodynamics. Dynamics and
control Branch, NASA Langley research Center. (1998)
10. Valasek, J. and Smith, D. Comparison of Agility
Metrics to Beck Agility Metrics Using Linear Error
Theory. Texas A&M University; College Station.
Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, Vol. 26.
No. 1. January-February 2003.
11. Sadraey, M and Colgren, R. A Dynamic Performance
Evaluation technique for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.
The University of Kansas. ALAA Atmospheric Flight
Mechanics Conference , August 2006

Shock Response Study

UAV components encounter mechanical shock from a variety of sources. Components must be designed and tested
accordingly to ensure reliability. For example, the designers must anticipate transportation and shipping shock. For
example, if the container is placed on a truck which runs
over a speed bump, the avionics components are encased in
foam packing material inside a shipping container. The
avionics component may receive a half-sine shock pulse.
This type of pulse can be readily represented in the time
domain by its duration and peak amplitude. Also, reproduction of this pulse in an environmental test laboratory is
usually straightforward. Eventually, the avionics component is integrated into a spacecraft. The component must
now withstand a series of flight shock pulses. These pulses
result from rocket motor ignition, staging, and deployment
events. Linear shape charge and pyrotechnic devices are
typically used to initiate staging events.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, some of the design methodologies
in determining the relative merit of the different concepts
are discussed. The major challenges are in the areas of
evaluation of structural viability, mechanical complexity
and overall system survivability by G forces. This paper
examines some of the design methodologies and hardware-

10
Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/16/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

Copyright 2012 by ASME