Laki2
The UCF Robotics Club is competing in the 2019 AUVSI SUAS competition for the first time with their octorotor vehicle Laki-2. The intention of the team was to develop a vehicle capable of effectively completing all competition elements. This Technical Design Paper describes the approach taken by the team to develop the system. The paper highlights the key aspects of the mechanical, aerodynamic, electrical, and software designs as well as the fundamental engineering considerations behind them.
Competition Rules | SUAS 2019
by the AUVSI Seafarer Chapter
http://www.auvsi-suas.org
This document contains the rules for the 17th Annual Student Unmanned Aerial Systems
Competition (SUAS) by the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI)
Seafarer Chapter.
Competition Purpose. The AUVSI SUAS Competition is designed to foster interest in
Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS), stimulate interest in UAS technologies and careers, and to
engage students in a challenging UAS mission. The competition requires students to design,
integrate, report on, and demonstrate a UAS capable of autonomous flight and navigation,
remote sensing via onboard payload sensors, and execution of a specific set of tasks. The
competition has been held annually since 2002.
Statement of Liability. The Seafarer Chapter of AUVSI and the host organization, their
employees and agents, as well as the SUAS committee, are in no way liable for any injury or
damage caused by any entry, or by the disqualification of an entry. The Seafarer Chapter and
AUVSI at large are not responsible for ensuring SUAS teams operate their UAS systems within
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) rules and regulations.
Overview
Schedule & Deliverables
Draft Rules, Comment Period, Final Rules
Kickoff & Registration
Personnel Registration & Base Access Documents
Fact Sheet & Technical Design Paper
Proof of Flight, Safety Pilot Log, Flight Readiness Review
Team Promotional Video
Competition: Check-in, Mission, Awards Banquet
Requirements
Team Composition
Unmanned Aerial System
Unmanned Ground Vehicle
Ground Station
Radio Frequency (RF)
Weather & Airfield
Interoperability System
Code Repository & Documentation
Interaction with System
Mission Demonstration (60%)
Timeline (10%)
Autonomous Flight (20%)
Obstacle Avoidance (20%)
Object Detection, Classification, Localization (20%)
Air Drop (20%)
Operational Excellence (10%)
Technical Design Paper (20%)
Systems Engineering Approach (20%)
System Design (50%)
Safety, Risks, & Mitigations (20%)
Writing Style (10%)
Flight Readiness Review (20%)
Experience, Roles, Responsibilities (5%)
System Overview & Planned Tasks (15%)
Developmental Testing (50%)
Mission Testing (30%)
Awards & Prize Money
Overall Ranking
Best In Class
Completed Tasks
Special Awards
Appendix
Mailing Address
Base Access Form & Documentation
Foreign National Form & Documentation
Sample Mission Map
Mission Flight Boundary
Air Drop Location & Boundary
Object File Format
Overview
The competition has three major elements: the Technical Design Paper, the Flight Readiness
Review Presentation, and the Mission Demonstration. The paper details a team’s UAS design.
The presentation details the team’s testing and preparedness for the competition. The
demonstration simulates a mission in which the UAS and team is evaluated. The mission
consists of autonomous flight, obstacle avoidance, object detection, and air drop.
SUAS 2019 Mission. A package delivery company has tasked an Unmanned Aerial System
(UAS) to deliver a package to a customer. The UAS must avoid obstacles like buildings, identify
potential drop locations, drop the package to a safe location, and then move the package to the
customer’s location.
Competition Location. The competition will be held in June 12th to 15th at Webster Field, St.
Inigoes, Maryland of the Naval Air Station (NAS) in Patuxent River, Maryland.
Google Groups. All communication will use the AUVSI SUAS mailing list on Google Groups. All
team members and advisors must join in order to receive important announcements and ask
questions.
Rules Subject to Change. The judges try to provide the best possible rules and competition
experience. Sometimes errors are made and situations change. The judges reserve the right to
make changes at any time to the rules, point allocations, and prizes.
Spirit of Competition. The judges expect teams to compete in a fair and professional manner.
Cheating will not be tolerated. Teams caught cheating will be disqualified, and the school will be
banned from competing for 4 years.
Ranks and Awards. There are three major graded elements of the competition: the mission
demonstration, the technical design paper, and the flight readiness review presentation. There
are also awards for which teams earn prize money.
Schedule & Deliverables
This section describes the major elements of the competition, the schedule of events and
deliverable due dates, and details for deliverable submission.
Google Calendar. The competition hosts an AUVSI SUAS Calendar containing the competition
events and deliverable due dates. All dates listed here will also be in the calendar. The
calendar’s events will be updated with details as they become available. It is the team’s
responsibility to monitor the calendar and comply with all deadlines and dates.
Deliverable Submission. All non-mission deliverables will be submitted via Google Forms.
Each team will need a single Google account which has access to Google Drive (to host file
deliverables) and YouTube (to host video deliverables). Teams are responsible for ensuring all
links are accessible by the judges (publicly viewable) for the duration of the competition.
Document Format. All documents must be submitted as a PDF. The filename and first page of
the document must include the university and team name. All documents must have at least
10pt font and 1 inch margins. Documents must be uploaded to Google Drive, and teams will
provide a publicly accessible link.
Video Format. All videos must be at least 1080p resolution with at least 24 frames per second.
The video name must include the university and team name. Videos must be uploaded to
YouTube, and teams will provide a publicly accessible link.
Lateness. Teams are given these deadlines months ahead of time. Failure to meet a deadline
will result in either losing points for the graded element or disqualification from the competition.
The judges will evaluate extenuating circumstances for exemption and deadline extension.
The following subsections describe the individual deliverables and events.
Draft Rules, Comment Period, Final Rules
(2018-09-14) Draft Rules Released. The judges will release a draft of the rules in order to get
feedback from the teams. The rules will be posted to the competition website.
(2018-09-15 to 2018-09-28) Comment Period. During this period, teams must read the rules
and should submit questions and comments to the Google Groups. The judges may respond to
the comments and adapt the rules.
(2018-10-04) Final Rules Posted. The final rules will be posted to the competition website. The
judges reserve the right to change the rules after this date if necessary.
Kickoff & Registration
(2018-10-05 1pm) Competition Kickoff Meeting. The judges will hold a conference call to
discuss the final rules, answer last-minute questions, and otherwise prepare for the competition
year. This meeting is purely for the benefit of the team and is not mandatory.
(2018-10-14 to 2018-10-29) Registration Period. During this period, the team captain can
submit the following Google Form to register a team. The team captain must also send a
registration fee and it must be delivered prior to the end of this period. Registration is first-come,
first-served: the first 75 valid form submissions that also provide the registration fees will be
accepted. The registration fee is $1,000 USD. The registration fee is non refundable once a
team is officially accepted into the competition. The registration fee will only be refunded to
teams which are not accepted to the competition. The registration fee must be sent as a check
or money order in USD. The fee must be payable to “AUVSI Seafarer Chapter”. The registration
fee must be sent to the address in the Mailing Address Appendix.
Registration Form: goo.gl/forms/TkLtiXsMfd8uN9Pu
Personnel Registration & Base Access Documents
(2019-03-04) Personnel Registration. The team captain will electronically submit a form for
each member of the development team and the advisor.
Personnel Registration Form: goo.gl/forms/lwHdcmDdjcS0VcRP
(2019-03-04) Base Access Documents. The competition is held on a US Naval Air Station.
Each person attending competition, from competitors to guests, will be required to fill out a form
and provide documentation in order to be vetted for base access. Failure to obtain passports or
visas in time for the submission deadline will not be cause for any extension. International
teams should obtain passports and visas as soon as possible. See the appendix sections for
Base Access Form & Documents and Foreign National Form & Documents. These forms must
be mailed and received by the provided date. See the Mailing Address appendix.
Fact Sheet & Technical Design Paper
(2019-04-14) Fact Sheet. The teams will submit a Google Form detailing specific facts about
the UAS the team is designing. The details specified in this form must not change after this point
without written approval from the judges.
Fact Sheet Form: goo.gl/forms/YH4b2X1pPPeEGfr
(2019-04-14) Technical Design Paper. The Technical Design section describes this
deliverable. It is a paper detailing the technical design and plan for evaluation of the UAS
designed by the team.
Technical Design Form: goo.gl/forms/6AgUVopJGwzDgvph
Proof of Flight, Safety Pilot Log, Flight Readiness Review
(2019-05-14) Proof of Flight. Teams must provide proof via video that the UAS can be flown
safely. Teams must provide a video showing a manual flight including the safety pilot, UAS
takeoff, 5 minutes of UAS flight where the UAS gets at least 1000ft from the safety pilot, and
UAS landing. Teams must provide a second video showing the UAS in autonomous mode,
transition to manual mode, and manual landing. Teams must provide this video for each
potential pair of safety pilot and aircraft instance (primary, backup, etc) that might be used at
competition.
Proof of Flight Form: goo.gl/forms/ESr0c2kB8EeESk4F
(2019-05-14) Safety Pilot Log. Safety is critically important for the competition, and vital to
safety is the safety pilot’s ability to control the aircraft in an emergency. To this end, teams must
submit a safety pilot log detailing the manual flights conducted by the safety pilot on the UAS in
competition configuration. The pilot must perform and log at least 3 hours of manual flight, 10
takeoffs, and 10 landings. The team must provide multiple logs, each meeting this specification,
for each pair of pilot and aircraft instance (primary, backup, etc) that might be used at
competition.
Safety Pilot Log Form: goo.gl/forms/cosrRRKPRCK3mvSt
(2019-05-14) Flight Readiness Review. The Flight Readiness Review section describes this
deliverable. It is a video presentation detailing the result of testing and the team’s preparedness
for competition.
Flight Readiness Review Form: goo.gl/forms/u3QEOoJBfcfVgKyW
Team Promotional Video
(2019-05-31) Team Promotional Video . Each team is required to submit a promotional video
for their team. The video must be no longer than 2 minutes, show the full team, show the UAS in
flight, and briefly describe the design. The team can add additional content to the video as
desired.
Team Promotional Video Form: goo.gl/forms/j0SPFmFB7zNp4Y5o
Competition: Check-in, Mission, Awards Banquet
(2019-06-12 3pm - 6pm) Career Fair. After teams have checked in, the students may
participate in a career fair hosted by the competition sponsors. Students can use this time to
meet potential employers and learn about the companies and their technologies.
(2019-06-12 4pm - 6pm) Check-In. The teams will check-in to receive base access badges, fill
out forms, and complete other logistical tasks. The team captain and at least 50% of the team
competitors must be present. Check-in will close to new teams 30 minutes prior to end. Teams
which fail to check-in may be disqualified. Unexpected delays must be communicated to the
judges as soon as possible. The team captain will need to provide a signed waiver for all
attendees. At this time, the team will be provided the interoperability connection details.
Waiver:
http://www.auvsi-suas.org/static/competitions/2019/auvsi_suas-2019-risk_and_liability_waiver.pdf
(2019-06-12 6pm - 7pm) Dinner. The competition will provide a buffet dinner, which teams will
be welcome to once they have checked in. Limited dietary restrictions will be accommodated at
this meal.
(2019-06-12 6pm - 8pm) Orientation. This is a meeting covering all of the logistics for the
week. Teams must be present to receive last-minute updates.
(2019-06-13 6am - 7am) Base Entry. Teams must arrive at the base gate and make it onto the
base by 8am. Teams with foreign national students or guests must arrive at the gate no later
than 7am. People who aren’t on base by 8am might not be allowed entry at a later time.
(2019-06-13 7am) Safety Inspections. The UAS and the ground station will be inspected for
safety and competition compliance. Inspection will include at least a physical inspection,
fail-safe and flight termination check, and maximum weight check. Teams will be evaluated in
their flight order. If a team fails inspection or is not present, they will be put in the back of the
queue for an additional attempt. Failing safety inspection may change the team’s mission
demonstration order. Each aircraft instance must be safety inspected.
(2019-06-13 7am) Individual Team Photos. After a team has passed safety inspection, the
entire team will pose for a photograph in front of the competition banner. These photos will be
posted to the web with the rest of the competition photos.
(2019-06-13 7am) Interop Testing. Teams will be given the opportunity to test their system’s
connection with the Interoperability System using the same mission credentials and a
representative set of hardware. Teams should begin testing immediately after the team photo.
Note that teams which are called to the flight line will need to use an in-pit timeout to extend this
testing time.
(2019-06-13 12pm - 7pm) Mission Demonstrations. Mission demonstrations will be started
once a critical mass of teams have passed safety inspections and taken their photo. Teams will
be given at least 5 minutes notice of transportation to flight line. The team and the equipment
will be transported via flatbed trailer to the flight line, after which the setup time will start.
Depending on base logistics, the Group Photo may be moved to this time so all teams must be
present.
(2019-06-14 6am - 7am) Base Entry. Same as Thursday.
(2019-06-14 7am - 7pm) Mission Demonstrations. Same as Thursday.
(2019-06-15 6am - 7am) Base Entry. Same as Thursday.
(2019-06-15 7am - 4pm) Mission Demonstrations. Same as Thursday.
(2019-06-15) Group Photo. The teams and judges will get together for a competition photo. It
will most likely happen after the last flight. Teams and their UAS must be present. Note the
Group Photo may be moved to Thursday.
(2019-06-15 6pm-10pm) Awards Banquet. The awards banquet includes dinner, a keynote
speaker, and the presentation of awards. The recommended attire is business casual. Teams
must attend to collect their awards and prize money.
Requirements
This section describes the requirements that the team and UAS must meet. Teams which fail to
comply with these requirements may be disqualified.
Team Composition
Single Team per School. Each school may only register a single team.
Development Team. The development team must consist of undergraduate or high school
students which attend school full-time for at least one semester during the academic year. The
team may have at most 1 graduate student participate during the academic year.
Competition Team. The team of students which attends the competition, participates in the
Flight Readiness Review (FRR), and participates in Mission Demonstration must be at most a
10 person subset of the development team. The competition will provide food, t-shirts, and other
resources for these 10 students. Extra resources may be available for purchase.
Team Captain. One member of the competition team will fill the role of team captain during the
competition year. This student will be the primary point of contact for the judges. All questions,
comments, statements, and deliverables must be submitted by the team captain. The judges
must be immediately notified of any team captain change.
Advisor. Each team must have a school faculty member/advisor or official point of contact
(POC) from the team’s school. Teams whose entire team is age 18 years or above are not
required to have the advisor or school official travel with the team, otherwise at least two adults
shall travel with the team and shall take full responsibility for the students. The advisor will also
be admitted to all competition events, and will be provided food and a t-shirt. The advisor will be
permitted to observe the team at the flight line, but is forbidden from communicating or
otherwise assisting the team during setup, mission, or tear down.
Safety Pilot. The safety pilot used during the year, for whom a safety pilot log is required, can
be a student, the advisor, or non-student. At competition, you may use the same safety pilot or
request a competition volunteer act as safety pilot. The safety pilot will count as 1 of the 10
members of the competition team, regardless of whether it’s the advisor or competition
volunteer. If the pilot is not a member of the development team then the pilot is limited to safety
Competition Guests. Each team will be allowed to bring up to 10 additional guests to
competition. If desired, these guests may be development team members, but they cannot
assist with the mission demonstration. These guests will need to purchase tickets for access to
on-site food and the awards banquet. There are a limited number of food and banquet tickets
which will be distributed first-come-first-served. The team is required to provide the base access
details for these guests by the specified deadline.
Unmanned Aerial System
General Restrictions. The team may only fly a single aircraft during the mission. The aircraft
must be capable of heavier-than-air flight, and be free flying without any encumbrances like
tethers. The max takeoff weight is 55lbs.
Single Design & Backup Instances. The team must use exactly one design throughout the
competition. Teams are locked into a specific design upon submission of the Technical Design
Paper. The team may use backup instances of that design during development. The team must
use exactly one instance during the Mission Demonstration.
AMA Safety Code. The aircraft must comply with the AMA Model Aircraft Safety Code except
that autonomous operation is authorized at competition, and both free flight and control line are
not applicable.
Return to Land & Flight Termination. The UAS must have either autonomous return to home
(RTH) or return to land (RTL), and autonomous flight termination. These must be configured
with the location specified in the Mission Flight Boundary Appendix. Both must be activatable by
the safety pilot and the ground station. After 30 seconds of communications loss, the aircraft
must automatically RTH or RTL. After 3 minutes of communication loss, the aircraft must
terminate flight. For fixed wing aircraft, flight termination must be: throttle closed, full up elevator,
full right rudder, full right or left aileron, and full flaps down (if equipped). For non fixed wing
aircraft, throttle must be closed and all actuators off. The termination system must be designed
to touch ground within 500ft over ground of the termination point.
Fuel & Batteries. Exotic fuels or batteries will not be allowed. Any option deemed by the judges
as high risk will be denied. All batteries must be brightly colored for identification in a crash, and
it is preferred if they are wrapped in bright colored tape.
Fasteners . All fasteners must have either safety wire, loctite (fluid), or nylon nuts.
components involved in air drop while attempting that task. Foreign object debris (FOD), like
nuts and bolts, must be cleared from the operating area before mission flight time stops.
Autonomous Flight. The UAS must have autonomous flight capabilities to compete. The UAS
must fly autonomously for at least 3 minutes to receive any mission demonstration points.
Unmanned Ground Vehicle
General Restrictions. The team may use a single Unmanned Ground Vehicle (UGV) at the
competition as part of the air drop task. The entire drop payload can weigh up to 48oz. The
UGV drive speed may be up to 10 miles per hour.
Drive Termination. The UGV must terminate driving after 30 seconds of communication loss or
after driving out of the boundary specified in the Air Drop Location & Boundary Appendix. Drive
termination must also be activatable by the safety pilot or the ground station.
Fuel & Batteries. Exotic fuels or batteries will not be allowed. Any option deemed by the judges
as high risk will be denied. All batteries must be brightly colored for identification in a crash, and
it is preferred if they are wrapped in bright colored tape.
Autonomous Driving. The UGV may only drive autonomously.
Ground Station
Ground Station Display. Teams must have a display, always viewable by the mission judges,
which shows the a map showing the flight boundaries, the UAS position, and all other
competition elements. This display must also indicate the UAS speed in KIAS or ground speed
in knots, and MSL altitude in feet. Teams will not be able to fly without this display.
Safety Materials. Teams must have available personal protective equipment (PPE) (tools,
gloves, eye protection, hearing protection, etc.), safety risk mitigation (training, checklists,
radios, etc.) and equipment to support rapid response to accidents (first aid kit, fire extinguisher,
etc.) as needed.
One Motor Vehicle & One Trailer. Teams may use up to one motor vehicle and one trailer at
the flight line. The judges will provide a tent, table, and set of chairs. Additional equipment may
be brought by the team. These vehicles cannot assist UAS takeoff or recovery.
No Objects Taller than 15ft. No antenna masts, balloons, or other objects taller than 15ft will
be permitted.
No Ground-Based Sensors. No ground based sensors can be used.
Radio Frequency (RF)
No RF Management. The judges will not provide any RF spectrum management. This means
that any device can be used in any of the allowed bands at any time. This includes both the
flight line and the pits. Teams are encouraged to use hardwired connections when possible. As
relevant, teams should use encryption, directional antennas, and RF filters. Each team should
expect other teams to be using similar equipment (e.g. same autopilot), and teams must ensure
they don’t allow invalid connections (e.g. connecting to another team’s autopilot). Where
possible, teams should use frequency hopping or dynamic channel selection. The judges
reserve the right to institute RF management if necessary, but teams may not rely on or expect
such.
Allowed Bands. All RF communications must comply with FCC regulations. 72MHz is allowed
for RC control but is highly discouraged. 433MHz is allowed but must use frequency hopping
spread spectrum. 462.7Hz is allowed, but the judges will also be using this frequency for
handheld radios. 900MHz is allowed. 1.08, 1.12, 1.16, 1.2, 1.24, 1.28, 1.32, and 1.36 GHz are
allowed but must use frequency hopping spread spectrum. 1.2GHz to 1.3GHz may only be used
for analog or digital video systems. 2.4GHz, 5GHz, and cellular connections are allowed.
Intentional Interference. Teams found intentionally jamming or interfering with another team’s
communications will be considered cheating.
Weather & Airfield
The judges will temporarily suspend the competition if conditions are deemed unsafe. Teams
must be able to secure equipment against sudden weather like winds and rain.
Winds. The aircraft must be able to operate in 15 knot winds with gusts to 20 knots, including
takeoff and landing. There are two accessible runways that are 90 degrees apart. Teams may
launch in any safe direction from the grass.
Temperature. The system must be able to operate in temperatures up to 110 degrees
Fahrenheit peak, and 100 degrees Fahrenheit sustained.
Precipitation & Visibility. Teams will not have to operate during precipitation, but they must be
prepared to quickly secure their equipment from sudden precipitation. Fog conditions are
acceptable if there is at least 2 miles of visibility.
Provisions. The judges will provide the team a tent for shade, a folding table, chairs, and a
single electrical power extension cord from a mobile generator.
Electrical Power. The electrical power provided will be 115 VAC, 60 Hz, rated up to 15
amperes. This may not be enough for many ground stations, and teams should consider
bringing additional generators and UPS battery backups. There is a possibility the mobile
generator may run out of gas at any time during the competition and not be refilled and restarted
for some undetermined period of time. Teams must be capable of operating without competition
provided electrical power for up to 10 minutes.
Airfield Notes. Airfield coordinates are 38°09'01.5"N, 76°25'29.7"W. Airfield elevation is 22 feet
MSL. Airfield magnetic deviation is 11 degrees west. The runway is a paved asphalt surface,
roughly 100 feet wide, with no height obstacles. Grass areas within the takeoff/landing area will
not be prepared but will be available for use.
Interoperability System
The Interoperability System is a network and web server that teams should interact with during
the mission. This system provides mission details and receives mission deliverables. The
system provides automatic evaluation for scoring, and is available to teams for testing.
Code Repository & Documentation
Code Repository. The entire Interoperability System is open source so teams can develop and
test against the system. The AUVSI SUAS Interop Github Repository contains all code and
documentation. The system will evolve over the year as features are added and bugs are fixed,
so teams should watch the repository to receive notifications.
Documentation. All documentation for the Interoperability System can be found linked off the
code repository website. This documentation contains instructions for setting up the system,
configuring it, integrating with it, and testing with it.
Interaction with System
This section provides a high-level overview of the interaction with the Interoperability System.
Teams should refer to the documentation website for details.
Network Connection. At setup time, teams will receive a single ethernet cable with which to
connect to the Interoperability System. This connection will provide DHCP and a single static IP
address. The IP addresses will be on the subnet 10.10.130.XXX with subnet mask
255.255.255.0. Teams will typically connect this to the WAN port of their router, which will
provide a separate subnet for the team’s systems. Teams will then connect to the system using
the IP address (DHCP or static), username, and password that is provided at Check-In and
Orientation. Teams may then use this connection until the end of the mission clock.
Mission Download. Teams must download mission details from the Interoperability System.
UAS Telemetry Upload. Certain tasks require teams to upload valid UAS telemetry at an
average of at least 1Hz while the UAS is airborne. Telemetry must not be duplicated,
interpolated, or extrapolated beyond what is generated by the autopilot. Teams may upload
telemetry faster. Data dropouts will count against the team.
Object Upload. Teams can submit objects via the Interoperability System to earn more points.
The Interoperability Specification defines an object, with details like the set of valid background
colors for a standard object.
Mission Demonstration (60%)
This section describes the mission demonstration that will be conducted by the team at
competition. It is for this mission that teams must design a UAS. It is worth 60% of the entire
competition.
Points and Penalties. There are a series of components for which teams can receive points.
Each subsection below contains a component and it’s worth as a percentage of mission
demonstration points. Penalties are also described in the subsections below. Penalties are
defined as a percentage of achievable component points. Unlike points, penalties do not have a
bound. This means time spent out of bounds can cost the team all points for mission
demonstration. If penalties are greater than points, the team will receive a zero for
demonstration. Teams cannot score points while generating a penalty.
Mission Details and Deliverables. The mission flight boundaries are given in the rules in the
Mission Flight Boundary Appendix. The air drop location and boundaries are given in the rules
in the Air Drop Location & Boundary Appendix. The interoperability connection details will be
provided at competition check-in. At setup time and during the mission, teams may retrieve all
other mission details via the Interoperability System. All deliverables will be submitted to the
judges via the Interoperability System.
Lead, GCS, and Safety Judge. The GCS judge will be located in the team’s tents and will
watch the Ground Control Station screens. The safety judge will stand with the team’s safety
pilot. The lead judge will be with the team’s mission lead.
Order of Team Demonstration. The judges will score all deliverables due before the mission
demonstration and produce an initial ranking. This ranking will be the order in which teams get a
chance to perform mission demonstration. Teams will not be notified of this initial ranking. The
judges will attempt to fly as many teams as possible.
Order of Tasking. Teams must successfully takeoff and go above 100ft MSL within the first 10
minutes of the mission clock, or the demonstration will be terminated. Upon every takeoff, teams
must immediately fly the waypoint path before attempting other tasks, thereby simulating the trip
to the operation area. Teams are allowed to attempt other tasks while flying the waypoints, so
long as such doesn’t require a change in flight path. After the waypoints, teams may decide the
order of all other tasks.
Termination and Disqualification. Breaking the rules, risking safety, and accumulating too
many penalties may cause mission termination and may cause disqualification.
Timeline (10%)
UAS must be able to fly missions in a restricted time scenario. This involves setting up the UAS,
flying the mission, and tearing down within provided time limits.
Setup Time. Teams will be provided at least 20 minutes for setup. The last 5 minutes of the
setup time must include the pre-mission brief. This brief must include a summary of planned
tasks, roles and responsibilities, and other information judges should know. Once the other
teams have stopped occupying the airspace and the setup time has elapsed, the judges will
start the mission time regardless of team readiness.
Mission Time (80%). Teams will be provided 40 minutes to complete the mission. This is
broken down into two periods: flight time and post-processing time. Flight time is when the team
occupies the runway or airspace. Post-processing time starts once the UAS has landed, the
UAS has cleared the runway, and the team relinquishes the airspace. Post-processing time
ends when the team has stopped processing imagery, stopped uploading data through
interoperability, and has returned the interoperability network cord to the judges. Flight time and
post processing time are limited to 30 minutes and 10 minutes respectively. The ratio of mission
time points a team is awarded will be max ( 0 , 60 − 5 max ( 0 , X 20 ) ) / 60 ,whereXisthe
− − Y
team’s flight time in minutes and Y is their post-processing time in minutes.
Mission Time Penalty. The team will receive a penalty equal to 3% of timeline points for every
second of flight time or post processing time over their respective limits.
Timeout (20%). Teams are allowed one timeout to stop the mission clock, and it will cost them
these timeline points. A timeout can only be taken at the flight line, after the mission clock starts,
and before the UAS first completes the waypoints. The timeout will last at least 10 minutes.
Teardown Time. Teams will be provided 10 minutes to remove all of their equipment from the
flight line tent area.
Autonomous Flight (20%)
UAS which can fly autonomously are cheaper to operate, which means organizations can
leverage more UAS at the same cost, which means better performance and more missions.
Autonomy also keeps the UAS airborne during connectivity loss, a very likely occurrence in real
world environments.
Autonomous Flight (40%). The team receives points if the UAS flies autonomously for at least
3 minutes. Teams will lose 10% of autonomous flight points for each safety pilot takeover into
manual flight. Manual takeoff and manual landing will each count as a takeover. Hand launch
with autonomous climbout counts as autonomous takeoff. The team is responsible for telling the
mission judge (in the tent) and the safety judge (next to safety pilot) whenever the autopilot
transitions between modes.
Waypoint Capture (10%). The teams will be given a sequence of waypoints that should be
flown during the mission. The waypoint path may be up to 4 miles in length. Teams may attempt
the waypoints multiple times, and the highest scoring sequence will be used. Teams will be
graded on whether they can fly the entire waypoint sequence and get within 100ft of each
waypoint. Teams will be evaluated by a human observer at the autopilot station.
Waypoint Accuracy (50%). Teams will be graded on how close they can get to the waypoints
in a sequence. Teams may attempt the waypoints multiple times, and the highest scoring
sequence will be used. Each waypoint will be weighted equally, and the ratio of points received
per waypoint will be max ( 0 , ( 100 ft − distance ) / 100 ft ). To receive points for waypoint accuracy,
teams must upload valid telemetry to the Interoperability System at an average of 1Hz while
airborne.
Out of Bounds Penalty. Teams are given a flight boundary in the Mission Flight Boundary
Appendix. Every time the UAS goes out of these bounds, or if the UAS goes below 100ft MSL or
above 750ft MSL, the team will receive a penalty equal to 10% of autonomous flight points. For
every boundary violation that risks safety, like by flying over the pits or the flight line tents, the
team will receive an additional penalty equal to 10% of autonomous flight points. Teams will be
evaluated by human observers.
Things Falling Off Aircraft Penalty (TFOA). If parts fall off the UAS during flight, teams will
receive a TFOA penalty equal to 25% of autonomous flight points.
Crash Penalty. If the UAS crashes during flight, teams will receive a crash penalty equal to
35% of autonomous flight points.
Obstacle Avoidance (20%)
UAS must integrate with the national airspace in order to perform missions. Part of this
integration means avoiding obstacles. The UAS should have obstacle avoidance capabilities.
Telemetry Prerequisite. To receive points for obstacle avoidance, teams must upload valid
telemetry to the Interoperability System at an average of 1Hz while airborne.
Stationary Obstacle Avoidance. Through the Interoperability System, the teams will be given
a set of stationary obstacles. Each stationary obstacle will be a cylinder, with height axis
perpendicular to the ground, and bottom face on ground. The cylinders will have a radius
between 30ft and 300ft, and height between 30ft and 750ft. There can be up to 30 stationary
obstacles. The ratio of points received for will be ( obstacles avoided / total obstacles ).
3
Object Detection, Classification, Localization (20%)
UAS should be able to search for objects. Teams will have to detect, classify, and localize two
types of objects: standard and emergent. A standard object will be an colored alphanumeric
(uppercase letter or number) painted onto a colored shape. The standard object will be at least
1 foot wide with 1 inch thick lettering. One of the standard objects will be located outside the
flight boundary. The emergent object is a person engaged in an activity of interest. There may
be up to 20 objects. Each object will be weighted equally. Teams must submit objects via the
Interoperability System. Teams may additionally provide objects via the Object File Format over
USB drive, which will be used only in the event of an unplanned failure of the judging system.
Search Area & Off-Axis . Teams will be given a search grid which will contain all but one of the
objects, and will be given the position of a standard object located outside of the flight
boundaries. The off-axis object will be up to 250ft beyond the flight boundary. Teams must not
fly over the off-axis object if it is out of bounds. Objects may be placed under obstacles.
Object Matching. During scoring, submitted objects are matched with real objects to determine
points scored. The judges will use the matching that maximizes the points for the team.
Matching is performed separately for manually and autonomously submitted objects.
Imagery. To receive credit for an object, teams must submit a cropped image such that the
object fills 25%+ of the image. Judges will decide whether the image is sufficient to resolve the
object.
Characteristics (20%). Each object has a set of characteristics, and teams are awarded points
for ratio of correct characteristics: correct characteristics / total characteristics. For standard
objects there are 5 characteristics: shape, shape color, alphanumeric, alphanumeric color, and
alphanumeric orientation. The interoperability specification provides an enumeration of possible
standard object characteristics. For emergent objects there is one characteristic: a description of
the person in need of rescue and the surrounding scene.
Geolocation (30%). Teams are awarded points for accurately providing the GPS location of
objects. The ratio of points a team is awarded is max ( 0 , ( 150 ft − distance ) / 150 ft ) where distance
is the geodesic distance between the submitted GPS location and the object’s true GPS
location.
Actionable (30%). Objects which are submitted during the team’s first flight will be considered
actionable. For the Object File Format, teams will submit an additional USB drive prior to the
aircraft landing. Objects submitted as actionable via the Object File Format must not be present
in the end of mission submission, as they will be considered an additional object and may incur
an extra object penalty. For interoperability, objects which were created and last edited during
the first flight will be considered actionable.
Autonomy (20%). Teams may submit objects manually and autonomously. Submission is
autonomous if no human assistance is needed from image capture to object submission, and
otherwise processing is considered manual. A match gets additional points if it is autonomous. If
a team submits a manual and autonomous object that is matched to the same real object, the
higher scoring object will be counted, and the lower scoring object won’t count as an extra
object.
Extra Object Penalty. Each submitted object which isn’t matched with a real object will be
penalized at 5% of object detection, classification, and localization points. An object will not
match a real object if such a match would yield no point value, or if another submitted object has
been matched with the real object to yield more points.
Air Drop (20%)
UAS should be able to air drop an object to a specified position. The safety judge must be
notified before the UAS attempts the air drop. The aircraft must not fly below the minimum
altitude in order to deliver. Teams may only perform the drop once.
Payload. Teams should design an Unmanned Ground Vehicle (UGV) that can be air dropped to
a specified location. The UGV must carry a standard 8oz water bottle (example) that will be
provided by the judges at setup time. Upon landing, the UGV should be capable of driving to
another location with the water bottle. See the Unmanned Ground Vehicle Requirements.
Drop Accuracy (50%). Teams are given the GPS coordinates of the drop location. To receive
points, the UGV and water bottle must land gently and without damage. The percentage of
points awarded for a drop is 100% for within 5ft distance, 50% for within 25ft distance, 25% for
within 75ft distance, and 0% for beyond 75ft distance, where distance is the distance between
the actual and the desired drop location.
Drive to Location (50%). Teams are given the GPS coordinates of a destination. Upon landing,
the UGV should drive to this location with the water bottle and stop. Teams are awarded points
if the UGV stops within 10ft of the specified location without going out of bounds.
Operational Excellence (10%)
Operational excellence will be graded by the judges as a subjective measure of team
performance. This will evaluate things like operation professionalism, communication between
members, reaction to system failures, attention to safety, and more.
Technical Design Paper (20%)
Each team must submit a technical design paper that describes the design of their entry and the
rationale behind their design choices. The purpose of the paper is to show the team’s overall
coordination and systems engineering process, design tradeoffs, final design solution, with a
plan to collect analytical evidence and bench/flight test data proving it will safely fly and perform
planned mission tasks. The paper must address the mission tasks the team is capable of
achieving during flight.
The paper must be typed on 8.5” by 11” paper, single spaced, with at least 1” margins and a
10-point font, and use either Times New Roman or Arial font. Each page must have a footer
containing the school, team name, and the page number. The paper must not exceed 15 pages
including the title and references page. The following subsections contain the sections a team’s
paper must have, and the relative weighting of those sections.
Systems Engineering Approach (20%)
This section of the paper describes the systems engineering approach to UAS design.
Mission Requirement Analysis. Teams need to analyze the tasks to determine what
requirements are placed on the UAS, what are the design tradeoffs for those requirements, and
which systems need to be built to complete these tasks.
Design Rationale. This section should start with the environmental factors (e.g. team
qualifications, budget, etc.) and mission requirements (e.g. tasks, point system, etc.), and
describe the flow of decisions which led to the final design. For example, how the object task
influences camera choice which influences aircraft choice which influences autopilot choice. It
should describe the tradeoffs of design options and the rationale for the final solution. For
example, for a fixed-wing aircraft what are the high-level tradeoffs between a high-wing and
low-wing design.
System Design (50%)
This section of the paper describes the design of the UAS system. For each system, the paper
should describe what was chosen or built, why it was chosen, and what implications it has for
task performance. This section should also describe tests which were conducted on each
component and provide data on performance. If a team elects not to include certain elements
(e.g. air drop), it should be so stated in the appropriate section.
Aircraft. This section should describe the design and fabrication of the airframe and surfaces,
along with a discussion of the aircraft’s aerodynamics and propulsion system. It should include a
labelled diagram of the airframe and a table containing all relevant metrics.
Autopilot. This section should identify the autopilot used by the UAS and describe its
capabilities and how they map to the competition tasks. It should also provide a description and
picture of the associated ground control station (GCS).
Obstacle Avoidance. This section should describe the algorithm(s) used to update the flight
plan so as to avoid nearby obstacles.
Imaging System. This section should identify the camera used by the UAS and describe its
capabilities. It should provide a detailed analysis to demonstrate that the chosen camera can
resolve objects of the size required by the competition.
Object Detection, Classification, Localization. This section should provide a description of
how both manual and automatic processing is performed (e.g. algorithms).
Communications. This section should describe the hardware used for communication between
the aircraft and ground station, and between systems on the ground. It should list the
frequencies used and for each, identify the type of data that is sent. This section should include
a block diagram of the communications system.
Air Drop . This section should describe the payload and mechanism used to drop the payload.
Furthermore, it should describe the approach used to determine optimal drop time.
Cyber Security. This section should define potential cyber security threats and describe how
the team addressed them in their ground station and aircraft design to protect their aircraft,
payload, and data.
Safety, Risks, & Mitigations (20%)
Safety is a top priority for the SUAS competition. This section describes the potential safety risks
and the steps taken to mitigate them.
Developmental Risks & Mitigations. This section should describe any safety risks posed by
the development process, and what was done to mitigate them.
Mission Risks & Mitigations. This section should describe any safety risks posed by the
competition mission, autonomous flight, and testing, and what was done to mitigate them.
Writing Style (10%)
The SUAS competition values clear and concise communication. Teams will be judged on their
quality of writing.
Clarity. The paper should be easily understandable to engineers from various fields (i.e.
mechanical engineering, computer science, electrical engineering, etc). It should clearly define
all terms and symbols, label all accompanying illustrations, and ensure that all points are
expressed as clearly as possible.
Accuracy & Precision. Data and facts presented in the paper should be free from errors. All
assumptions relevant to data analysis should be clearly stated and challenged for legitimacy.
Experimental or analytical data should be accompanied by error bars or confidence bounds.
Logic. The paper as a whole should make sense and not contain any contradictions. The
conclusions should be supported by logical analysis. The flow of decisions should be clear.
Relevance, Depth, Suitability. The included data and analysis should be carefully selected to
provide detailed insight into the UAS without being irrelevant to the competition. The writing
style should be appropriate for the intended audience.
Flight Readiness Review (20%)
The flight readiness review is a presentation where teams demonstrate that their system is
mature enough to compete. This readiness must be demonstrated with data. Judges will review
this presentation to determine whether teams are ready enough to attend competition, and they
may decide to disqualify unprepared teams.
The flight readiness review will be a video presentation submitted prior to attending competition.
The video must be no longer than 15 minutes. The following sections contains the sections a
team’s presentation must have, and the relative weighting of those sections.
Experience, Roles, Responsibilities (5%)
At the start of the presentation, each member of the competition team must introduce
themselves and provide the following information.
Experience. Team members should state their class year at their university, the number of
years they’ve been on the team, and their degree of experience with UAS technologies.
Roles and Responsibilities. Team members should identify their role and their responsibilities
on the development and competition team, and what they will do on the flight line.
System Overview & Planned Tasks (15%)
Teams must provide an overview of their system and identify the tasks they are planning to
attempt.
System Overview. This section should contain a brief overview of the mechanical, electrical
and software systems of the UAS. Note that the overview need not be very detailed, as the
specifics of the system will already have been discussed in the technical design paper.
Planned Tasks & Expected Performance. In this section, teams should classify each of the
mission tasks into one of two categories: attempting and not attempting. Furthermore, teams
should indicate how confident they are about successfully completing each of these tasks.
Developmental Testing (50%)
Testing is vital to proving the readiness of a team’s UAS for completing the mission. In this
section, teams must detail the testing they conducted on individual components of the UAS to
ensure they work according to specification. Data must be presented and described how it
demonstrates readiness.
Types of Developmental Testing. This section should describe the types of testing conducted
by the team (i.e unit testing, simulations, etc) and the rationale behind choosing to conduct each
type of test.
Autonomous Flights. This section should identify the number of autonomous flights conducted
by the team and the average amount of time spent in manual mode per flight. It should also
discuss the process of tuning the aircraft for autonomous takeoff, flight, and landing.
Waypoint Accuracy. This section should contain a description of the testing conducted on
waypoints and provide statistics such as number of waypoints attempted, the number of
waypoints hit, and the average waypoint miss error.
Obstacle Avoidance Performance. This section should describe the types of tests conducted
to verify obstacle avoidance. In particular, it should include statistics on the number of obstacles
tested against, and the number of obstacles avoided.
Imaging Performance. This section should contain an overview of the tests conducted on the
imagery system and provide statistics such as the average resolution of the objects in the
images. It should also discuss the team’s strategy for ensuring the best image quality.
Detection & Classification Performance. This section should contain an overview of the
testing conducted on the autonomous detection and classification algorithms, the data the
testing was conducted on, and the results of the testing.
Localization Performance. This section should contain a description of the testing conducted
on the localization algorithms, the number of objects on which localization was tested, and the
average localization error identified.
Air Drop Performance. This section should contain a description of the testing conducted on
the air drop task and provide statistics such as number of times air drops attempted, the number
of times the payload has survived the landing, and the average distance from the target the
payload has landed.
Mission Testing (30%)
This section describes the full mission testing with the competition UAS and the competition
team which will operate it.
Full Mission Tests. This section should describe in detail the mission tests conducted by the
team and use the results to provide evidence that the system is capable of completing the
planned tasks. It should discuss whether the testing that was conducted provided sufficient
coverage, any flaws that it exposed in the system, and the subsequent corrective actions that
were taken.
Estimated Score from Full Mission Tests. Teams should grade their full mission tests based
on the rubric provided in the Mission Demonstration section. They should provide the scores
from each full mission test, the average across all tests, and their expected performance.
Awards & Prize Money
This section describes the awards and prize money given to teams at the competition.
Overall Ranking
Trophies will be awarded to the teams which ranked first, second, and third. Plaques will be
awarded to the teams which ranked fourth and fifth. The overall ranking will be worth prize
money: the higher a team ranks the more prize money the team will receive.
Best In Class
There are three awards for best in class: best in technical design, best in flight readiness review,
and best in mission. For each best in class award received, the team will receive a plaque and
prize money.
Completed Tasks
Each team which completes eligible tasks will receive prize money. Tasks include autonomous
flight, obstacle avoidance, object detection / classification / localization, and air drop. A task
attempt is eligible if the team receives some points for the task.
Special Awards
A single team will be selected for each special award. For each special award received, the
team will receive a plaque and prize money. The special awards are Dawn Jaeger Tenacity
Award, Dr. Arthur Reyes Safety Award, JustJoe Sportsmanship Award, and Cyber Security
Award.
Appendix
The Appendix contains additional reference material the teams will need at some point during
the developmental year. Similar to the rules, these details are subject to change.
Mailing Address
U.S. Postal Service:
AUVSI Seafarer Chapter
Post Office (P.O.) Box 141
California, MD 20619
301 - 862 - 1246
UPS or FEDEX:
AECOM
46591 Expedition Drive, Suite 100
Lexington Park, Maryland 20653
ATTN: Mr. Tim Piester
301 - 862 - 1246
Base Access Form & Documentation
Each competition attendee must fill out the following form. Foreign Nationals must their use
Passport as the ID. A photocopy of IDs must be sent with form. The same ID must be presented
at check-in. These forms, ID photocopies, and other sensitive data must not be sent
electronically; we will only accept them via mail. See the Mailing Address appendix.
Base Access Form:
http://www.auvsi-suas.org/static/competitions/2019/auvsi_suas-2019-base_access_form.pdf
● Block 25: Leave blank, to be filled in by judges
● Block 26, 27, 28: Leave blank, not required for this event
● Block 30: Must return passes to competition director by end of event
● Block 31: Must be signed
Foreign National Form & Documentation
Any team which will have foreign nationals attend competition must mail an additional letter to
gain base access. The team must send a letter on university letterhead that is signed by a
responsible university official. See the Mailing Address appendix for the address. The letter
must contain at least:
● Purpose of visit: UNCLASSIFED , Students from this (name of University or College) will
participate in the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI)
Student UAS (SUAS) Competition to be held at Webster Field, St. Inigoes, Maryland.
Student teams will inspect and check their airplane and system, and will fly the vehicle
around a prescribed course at Webster Field under the guidance and supervision of
Navy Government personnel and other AUVSI officials and volunteers.
● Confirmation that the visitation is strictly limited to the dates and times of the SUAS
competition held at Webster Field, MD.
● For each foreign national, provide: Full Legal Name, Place of Birth (POB), Date of Birth
(DOB), Country of Citizenship, Country of Residence, Title/position (Team Lead, Team
Member, Faculty Advisor, Guest, Sponsor, etc.), Passport / Visa / Resident Alien “Green
Card” number and expiration date. A photocopy of the passport or green card must also
be included.
● Include University address, and phone and fax numbers.
● A responsible University official (a Dean, Department Head, or Senior Faculty official),
other than persons listed on the request, shall sign the letter. The official name and
position, and the date, must be typed on the letter, along with the official’s written
signature and date.
Sample Mission Map
White Triangle: Pit Area Tents
Red Start: Flight Line Tents
Red Outline: No-Fly Zone Boundary
Yellow Pins: Boundary Judge Stations
Blue Outline: Waypoint Sequence
Green Outline: Search Area
Blue Circle: Off-Axis Object
White Pin: Last Known Position (LKP) of Emergent Target
DROP Pin: Air Drop Location
Mission Flight Boundary
The following are a series of GPS points which form a polygon that is the mission flight
boundary. The UAS must remaining within this polygon and within the altitude restrictions.
N38-08-46.57
W076-25-41.39
N38-09-05.85 W076-25-43.26
N38-09-06.80 W076-25-53.28
N38-09-02.14 W076-26-07.30
N38-08-51.24 W076-25-56.43
N38-08-40.80 W076-25-58.61
N38-08-35.72 W076-26-05.16
N38-08-25.67 W076-25-57.49
N38-08-26.59 W076-25-33.65
N38-08-37.54 W076-25-16.34
N38-08-50.45 W076-25-23.56
N38-08-46.07 W076-25-35.95
The following must be the configured lost comms RTH/RTL and flight termination point.
N38-08-41.20
W076-25-45.90
Air Drop Location & Boundary
The following is the air drop location.
N38-08-45.10
W076-25-35.00
The following are a series of GPS points which form a polygon that is the driving boundary for
the UGV. The UGV must remaining within this polygon.
N38-08-46.20
W076-25-36.00
N38-08-46.90 W076-25-34.20
N38-08-44.10 W076-25-33.90
N38-08-43.50 W076-25-35.80
The following is the driving destination for the UGV.
N38-08-46.20 W076-25-35.10
Object File Format
The Object File Format is a folder containing object detection files. Each object submitted by the
team gets 2 files in the folder, both of which start with a number unique to the object, where one
has the extension “json”, and the other has either the extension “jpg” or “png”. The “json”
extension file must contain a JSON formatted object data conforming to the POST /api/odlcs
data segment. A “jpg” extension file must be a JPEG image, and a “png” extension file must be
a PNG image. The team will copy this folder to a USB drive provided by the judges. If the team
is attempting actionable objects, the team will be provided 2 USB drives.
Example folder structure for 2 objects:
● myteam/
○ 1.json
○ 1.jpg
○ 2.json
○ 2.png
Example JSON file:
{
"type": "standard",
"latitude": 38.1478,
"longitude": -76.4275,
"orientation": "n",
"shape": "star",
"background_color": "orange",
"alphanumeric": "C",
"alphanumeric_color": "black"
}
The judges will ignore object detection files which are not proper JSON or do not conform to the
specification. The judges will ignore object images which are not in either JPEG or PNG format.
Technical Report
Mission and Design
Systems Engineering Approach
Mission Requirements Analysis
The SUAS competition has three main sections [1]: The technical paper, the flight readiness review, and the mission demonstration. The competition is scored out of 100% in which the first two sections are worth 20% of the final score, and the final section is worth 60% of the final score. All scores are presented as their percentage of the final score.
The purpose of this portion of the document is to determine the sections of the mission demonstration on which to focus in order to maximize the competition score. The intent is to create hardware requirements for the vehicle design process. Table 1 breaks down the mission demonstration sections and highlights the aspects of the vehicle required to effectively complete those sections. Operational excellence is omitted as it is highly subjective.
Design Rationale
Prior to the start of the design process for the AUVSI SUAS competition, the UCF Robotics Club intended to create a multirotor vehicle. The aerial team deemed that a multirotor platform would provide the most utility to future club endeavors compared to other vehicle types such as fixed-wing, quad plane, helicopter, etc. This decision was made due to the nature of multirotor vehicles, notably, the ability to hover, decoupled yaw, pitch, and roll control, and relatively ease of upgrade mechanically and electrically. As previously shown in Table 1, the ideal vehicle for the AUVSI SUAS competition will be one that has high maneuverability, long range, and the ability to hover. The tradeoff is that the vehicle will not be relatively fast. The only competition element that suffers from reduced speed is the Timeline, but this portion is worth the least of the Mission Demonstration score. The team’s decision to create a multirotor vehicle and the values of the competition were well aligned, and as such a multirotor vehicle was designed for the purposes of the competition.
From the decision of creating a multirotor vehicle, preliminary research was conducted as outlined in section 1.1.1 From the preliminary research, the project budget, and preliminary mass budget were created. The budgeting process is largely ignored in this document as it was not a major contributor to the design and construction of the vehicle. From the mass budget and preliminary research, appropriate batteries, motors, and propellers were selected. With the majority of the vehicle systems determined, the vehicle frame was designed and constructed. In tandem with the physical design process, the vehicle software was begun. The first stages of software development focused on flight-critical items such as the flight controller implementation and basic autonomy. Further development was then done for more advanced software systems such as path planning, computer vision, etc.
Systems Design
Aircraft
Vehicle Configuration
The team began the vehicle configuration generation by creating scripts to calculate the thrust given the propeller diameter, propeller pitch, motor RPM, and vehicle speed. The intention was to create a system optimizer with these parameters and other necessary vehicle parameters as inputs in order to output vehicle performance estimates. The thrust script was based on theoretical equations [12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 21, 23] as well as empirical data from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) Propeller Data Site [11]. During the development process of the optimizer, an online resource xcopterCalc [17], was discovered. This resource inputs multirotor parameters and outputs expected performance data. xcopterCalc boasts 9000 motors and 7 million visitors [17]. The team independently verified results using data from the UIUC Propeller Data Site as well as the beginnings of the system optimizer. Values tested in the calculator matched the UIUC data as well as the system optimizer within a reasonable degree. The decision was made that because xcopterCalc was deemed reliable, in the interest of time xcopterCalc would function as the team’s system optimizer.
It was at this time that the decision was made to utilize NCR battery chemistry. NCR cells are roughly 15% lighter per unit energy, at the cost of decreased power per unit capacity, and increased volume per unit capacity. Typical multirotor vehicles and especially racing drones require relatively high power [24] and suffer significantly from increased drag due to increased volume. The intended mission for the vehicle has a particularly enhanced range of requirements. Due to this, any battery option selected will have a required capacity on the order of 80,000 mAh. Additionally, due to the enhanced range requirements, minimizing weight is of significant concern. Since the NCR cell chemistry is lighter per unit energy, an estimated 1.2 kg can be removed from the vehicle assuming an 80,000 mAh battery at 6S. The lower power per unit capacity can be sidestepped by the shear capacity required. Additionally, the increased volume of the cells can be ignored as the planned mission for the vehicle does not require speeds such that drag is of significant concern, and the size of other components makes the battery volume not the driving factor.
A preliminary mass estimate for the vehicle was created in order to properly scale the vehicle for the required mission. Research was conducted for all components necessary for the vehicle and mass estimates for each component were tabulated. The base weight is the same as that previously defined. The mass of the UGV was assumed to be the entirety of the allotted 1.36 kg (3 lb) by the competition rules. Table 2 shows the mass estimated for the valid vehicle types (quad, hex, octo) both with and without the UGV.
Table 2: Estimated System Masses
From preliminary mass and range estimates, it was found that the vehicle would need a propeller diameter between 15 and 21 inches. It was at this time that the team decided to purchase consumer off the shelf (COTS) propellers in lieu of manufacturing custom components. Experimental data for COTS propellers is largely unavailable on both general hobbyist and propeller manufacture sites. Possible vendors of these large hobbyist propellers included Quanum, XOAR [13], and Falcon, etc. Of these vendors considered, only XOAR provided significant experimental data [23]. Performance estimates from the team's calculations, the UIUC Propeller Data Site, xcopterCalc, and XOAR all matched within a reasonable tolerance.
It was decided that the number of rotors would need to remain under 8 in order to ensure compatibility of the system with available and well characterized flight controllers. Additionally, there were concerns with power distribution, frame size, and vehicle weight, should the number of rotors exceed 8. The number of rotors was further constrained to only the even numbers in order to again ensure compatibility with the available flight controller software. Therefore, the number of rotors on the vehicle is to be 4, 6, or 8.
From this concept space, consisting of 13 motors, 10 propellers, and 3 vehicle types, there were a total of 390 potential vehicle configurations available. For each of the 3 vehicle types, a matrix was created to show a rough battery percentage required to complete the 4 mile waypoint traversal. The goal of this phase of the concept selection was to narrow the search space from 390 to some more manageable number. The quadcopter concept matrix is omitted as none of the quadcopter configurations were able to lift off within the ratings of the selected motors. Additionally, only 10 of the propellers are shown as none of the other 10 were able to lift off within the ratings of the selected motors. These matrices are shown in Tables 3, and 4.
Table 3: Hexacopter Setup Motor and Propeller Configurations
Table 4: Octocopter Set-Up Motor and Propeller Configurations
Within each matrix, there was an envelope of configurations that were able to complete the waypoint traversal. Most configurations suffered from excessive power required to hover, low thrust resulting in no maneuverability, excessive current required at cruising speed, or excessive power required at cruising speed. Of the initial 390 configurations, only 55 were deemed feasible.
An additional requirement was placed on the vehicle at this time to ensure than in the event of a single rotor failure the vehicle is able to continue controlled flight. With this requirement considered, only 16 configurations remained viable. All of these configurations were octocopters. The remaining configurations were ranked based on the estimated post waypoint traversal range. Six of the configurations had approximately 3 miles of post traversal range and the remaining 10 had under 2.5. This was a clear separation that narrowed the configurations available to 6.
Of the 6 remaining configurations, there were 2 propellers options: 18.5 x 6.7 and 19.5 x 7. Given that all the performance estimates are based on the preliminary mass estimate, a margin of safety should be considered in the event that the mass estimate was an underestimate. Therefore the 19.5 x 7 propeller was selected. With the 19.5 x 7 propeller selected, only 4 configurations remained with only the motor differentiating them.
The motors remaining were the 5010, 5012, 5015, and 6012. The 6012 was removed as it is significantly oversized for the propeller selected. The remaining 3 motors had performance estimates from xcopterCalc that were too similar to make a final decision upon. Therefore, the empirical data from XOAR was used as more accurate source. Ultimately, the 5010 motor was selected because it had the lowest power requirements.
Therefore, the final vehicle configuration is an octocopter with XOAR 5010 motors and XOAR 19.5” x 7 propellers. From this systems level design of the vehicle, all further vehicle properties can be determined and designed. Further CFD analysis was conducted on the propellers to confirm these thrust and power calculations, but the details of this analysis are omitted for brevity.
Materials
The materials in aerospace engineering must fit a very specific set of requirements in order to be used for the construction of aerospace parts. One of the main concerns is that the material be capable of handling the loads associated with flight while also being lightweight. This ratio is known as specific strength ratio and gives an idea of the materials ability to hold loading per density of the material. Another important factor is a high stiffness modulus, or the stiffness of the material per density. Lastly, manufacturability and resistance to corrosion direct materials choice. This leaves certain classes of composites and metals for the manufacturing of aerospace parts, such as: carbon fiber reinforced polymers (CFRP), aluminum alloys, and titanium alloys.
For this application, rigidity and weight are the two most crucial factors and will make up the selection criteria. As the preliminary research showed, carbon fiber is often chosen because it has the highest strength to weight ratio of these materials. The Table 5 [39] compares the specific tensile strength and specific tensile modulus of carbon fiber, aluminum, and titanium.
Table 5: Specific Tensile Strength/Modulus of Discussed Materials
The final decision on material for the chassis plates is to use carbon fiber with Nomex cores due to the high strength to weight ratio and rigidity of the carbon fiber. Additionally, the decision was made to utilize circular carbon fiber tubes for the vehicle arms for similar reasons.
Finite element analysis (FEA) was conducted on both the chassis plates and arms in order to ensure the structural integrity of the vehicle. The details of this analysis are omitted for brevity. Additionally, material samples of the carbon composite sandwich were testing in bending tests, and tensile tests to confirm manufacturer data and analytical calculations.
The manufacturing process of the carbon fiber was completed in two main phases, the plate manufacture and machining process. The plate manufacture was done with pre-preg and the nomex honeycomb core in an autoclave. The plates were oversized for the chassis plates for later machining. The machining process was completed by a third-party manufacturer on a CNC in a water bed for safety reasons.
Frame Design
The design of the aircraft frame was driven by the results of the aerodynamics analysis and electronics selection. The size of the chassis plates were determined as the minimum size possible while still able to package all electronics with appropriate space. Some key requirements of other structural components were derived from the team’s intent to make the aircraft easily transportable, which requires ease of disassembly due to its large size. These include the arm clamps remaining attached to the plates and in alignment when the chassis is disassembled to access the electronics, as well as the need to ensure the entire system can be taken apart with minimal tooling in less than 10 minutes. It was decided that having two plates would allow for these goals to be accomplished. The lower plate allows for mounting of hanging components, such as the UGV and camera gimbal. The majority of the electronics and the arm clamps are housed in the middle layer, between the two plates, and the top deck allows for space to mount the batteries and GPS receivers. The two plates, joined together by the arms clamps and threaded standoffs, also create a very rigid chassis that can resist the bending moments the arms are subjected to by the rotors and landing gear. The frame layout can be seen in figure 3. The fully equipped aircraft is also shown in figure 4.
The length of the arms was determined with CFD such that the increase in thrust due to propeller efficiency due to the increase in arm length is equal to the increase in weight due to the increased mass of the arm. A more detailed view of one of the arms and rotors can be seen in figure . The clamp designs for the rotor mounting plate and the landing leg mounting plate are the same. The clamp design for mounting the arm to the chassis differs. All clamps are custom machined from 6061 aluminum. Multiple clamps are used to mount each component and are spaced out so as to limit the effects of stress risers when subject to high loading, such as a rough landing or crash. Test flights have shown the ability of the current design to withstand substantial impacts without major damage. The modular design of the system also allows for easy replacement or repair of parts in the case that serious damage does occur. For example, when a landing leg fails, the weakest point is the small carbon fiber tube, which can simply be pulled out and replaced with a spare 
Acronyms and Terminology
AMA - Academy of Model Aeronautics
BLDC - Brushless Direct Current
cc - Cubic Centimeter
CFD - Computational Fluid Dynamics
COTS - Consumer Off-The-Shelf
EECP SD - Electrical Engineering and Computer Engineering Senior Design
EKF - Extended Kalman Filter
ESC - Electronic Speed Controller
FEA - Finite Element Analysis
GPS - Global Positioning System
IMU - Inertial Measurement Unit
Kt - Motor Torque Constant
Kv - Motor Velocity Constant
LiPo - Lithium Polymer
LRU - Line Replaceable Unit
MAE SD - Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Senior Design
mAh - milli-Amp Hours
MC - Experiments Monte Carlo Experiments
NCR - Nickel Cobalt Rechargeable
NiCd - Nickel Cadmium
NIMH - Nickel Metal hydride
PRM - Probabilistic Road Mapping
PWM - Pulse Width Modulation
ROI - Region of Interest
ROS - Robot Operating System
RPM - Rotations Per Minute
RRT - Rapidly-exploring Random Tree
UAS - Unmanned Aerial System
UGV - Unmanned Ground Vehicle