Ranges of Injury Risk Associated with Impact from Unmanned Aircraft Systems
Ranges of Injury Risk Associated with Impact from Unmanned Aircraft Systems
EAMON T. CAMPOLETTANO 0 1
MEGAN L. BLAND 0 1
RYAN A. GELLNER 0 1
DAVID W. SPROULE 0 1
BETHANY ROWSON 0 1
ABIGAIL M. TYSON 0 1
STEFAN M. DUMA 0 1
STEVEN ROWSON 0 1
0 Institute and State University , Blacksburg, VA , USA. Electronic mail:
1 Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University , Blacksburg, VA , USA
-Regulations have allowed for increased unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) operations over the last decade, yet operations over people are still not permitted. The objective of this study was to estimate the range of injury risks to humans due to UAS impact. Three commercially-available UAS models that varied in mass (1.2-11 kg) were evaluated to estimate the range of risk associated with UAS-human interaction. Live flight and falling impact tests were conducted using an instrumented Hybrid III test dummy. On average, live flight tests were observed to be less severe than falling impact tests. The maximum risk of AIS 3+ injury associated with live flight tests was 11.6%, while several falling impact tests estimated risks exceeding 50%. Risk of injury was observed to increase with increasing UAS mass, and the larger models tested are not safe for operations over people in their current form. However, there is likely a subset of smaller UAS models that are safe to operate over people. Further, designs which redirect the UAS away from the head or deform upon impact transfer less energy and generate lower risk. These data represent a necessary impact testing foundation for future UAS regulations on operations over people.
Drone; Skull; Brain; Concussion; Cervical spine; Neck
INTRODUCTION
Small unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) represent a
potentially substantial market as their use becomes
more commonplace. It has been estimated that the
economic benefit from UAS operations may exceed
$82.1 billion by 2025.2,26 Since 2008, the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) has been attempting to
incorporate the use of UAS within the national
airspace system (NAS).1,6,9,16,21,25 The FAA
Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 set forth directives
towards assessing the risks associated with operational
UAS.26 Part 107 of Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations, which stipulates the regulations regarding UAS
flight, was signed into effect in 2016. Operational
specifications limit the mass of any UAS to 55 lbs.
(25 kg), maximum speed to 100 mph (45 m/s), and
maximum altitude to 400 ft. (122 m) above ground
level. The rule further states that all UAS must be
operated within visual line-of-sight of the pilot and
may not operate over persons.9
Unmanned aircraft systems applications are
currently limited to monitoring and inspection for
agriculture, power lines, and bridges, educational pursuits,
research and development, aerial photography, and
rescue operations.9 Two applications considered to be
among the largest potential markets for UAS, freight
transport and public safety applications by police
officers or firefighters, are not included in this list.2,5
These operations would require flight over people,
which the FAA has yet to allow for two major reasons:
a paucity of safety data available for risk to humans
and that no other country with UAS regulations allows
for operation over people.8,9,16
Safety standards exist in most industries to regulate
the potential for catastrophic injury and death. Of
note, current safety standards in the automotive and
sport industries have been very effective in limiting
catastrophic and fatal events. In the automotive
industry, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
(FMVSS) 208 and 214 specify minimum occupant
protection requirements for frontal and side impact
motor vehicle crashes. These two standards, combined
with the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP),
which provides consumers with ratings of occupant
2017 The Author(s). This article is an open access publication
protection by vehicle model beyond the standards,
have reduced the fatality rate associated with motor
vehicle crashes by 80% over the last 50 years.15 In the
sport industry, the National Operating Committee on
Standards for Athletic Equipment (NOCSAE) governs
standards that specify minimum performance
requirements for protective headgear. When the NOCSAE
standard for football helmets was first implemented,
the number of fatal head injuries in football was
reduced by 74%.13 Safety standards such as these have
been so effective because they limit loads transferred to
the body during impact events.
Impact safety standards employ pass-fail thresholds
for biomechanical parameters experienced by a human
surrogate. In order to be certified as safe, meaning use
of the product is unlikely to result in catastrophic or
fatal injury, impact tests of products must produce
biomechanical parameters below the threshold. It is
important to note that these thresholds represent a
specified risk of catastrophic or fatal outcome that is
considered acceptable. Passin (...truncated)