无人机系统安全目标水平预估方法

张泽京; 张曙光; 柳旭; 金镭

doi:10.13224/j.cnki.jasp.2018.04.029

无人机系统安全目标水平预估方法

doi: 10.13224/j.cnki.jasp.2018.04.029

张泽京¹,
张曙光^2,3,
柳旭⁴,
金镭¹

1.
中国航空综合技术研究所适航性技术研究与管理中心，北京 100028
2.
北京航空航天大学交通科学与工程学院，北京 100191
3.
先进航空发动机协同创新中心，北京 100191
4.
北京航空航天大学国际学院，北京 100191

基金项目: 民航安全能力建设项目(AADSA0010)

计量
- 文章访问数: 910
- HTML浏览量: 20
- PDF量: 612
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2016-10-08
- 刊出日期: 2018-04-28

Estimated method of target level of safety for unmanned aircraft system

摘要

摘要: 考虑无人机系统（UAS）与有人机运行安全特性的不同，通过事件树分析识别出对地撞击是无人机系统运行的首要风险方式。基于等效安全水平的概念，建立确定无人机系统安全目标水平的对地撞击模型，将无人机撞击动能、构型参数以及飞行环境因素综合考虑到模型中，并计算了不同无人机系统在不同运行场景下的安全目标水平以及基于我国地域人口的安全目标水平，结果表明: 在考虑运行环境的情况下，对无人机系统安全目标水平的定量要求可能跨越4～5个数量级。在此基础上，结合风险矩阵的概念，给出基于对地撞击情况的无人机系统运行风险评价矩阵，为无人机系统运行风险评价提供了一种可行思路。
- 无人机系统（UAS） /
- 等效安全水平(ELS) /
- 对地撞击模型 /
- 安全目标水平(TLS) /
- 风险评价矩阵
Abstract: Considering the differences of safety features between unmanned aircraft system(UAS) and manned aircraft, the ground impact was recognized as the critical risk condition by means of event tree analysis. Based on definition of equivalent level of safety, safety evaluation model for unmanned aircraft system was established by consideration of kinetic energy, configuration and flight environment factors. Target levels of safety evaluation approaches based on different UAS classes operating in different scenarios and Chinese population density were discussed. Results indicated that quantitative requirement for UAS operating in different scenarios may range between 4 or 5 orders of magnitude. On this basis, risk evaluation matrix of UAS operation based on ground impact condition was proposed, providing an effective approach to risk evaluation matrix for operations of UAS.
- unmanned aircraft system(UAS) /
- equivalent level of safety(ELS) /
- ground impact model /
- target level of safety(TLS) /
- risk evaluation matrix

HTML

参考文献(18)

[1]	CLOTHIER R A,PALMER J L,WALKER R A.Definition of an airworthiness certification framework for civil unmanned aircraft systems［J］.Safety Science,2011,49(2):871-885.
[2]	European Aviation Safety Agency.Policy for unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) certification［R］.European Aviation Safety Agency,A-NPA No.16-2005,2005.
[3]	European Aviation Safety Agency.Policy statement airworthiness certification of unmanned aircraft systems［R］.European Aviation Safety Agency,E-Y01301,2009.
[4]	WEIBEL R E.Safety considerations for operation of different classes of UAVs in the NAS［R］.Chicago,US:AIAA 3rd Unmanned Unlimited Technical Conference,2004.
[5]	DALAMAGKIDIS K,VALAVANIS K P,PIEGL L A.Evaluating the risk of unmanned aircraft ground impacts［R］.Ajaccio,France:the 16th Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation,2008.
[6]	CLOTHIER R,WALKER R.Determination and evaluation of UAV safety objectives［C］∥Proceedings of the 21st International Unmanned Air Vehicle Systems (UAVS) Conference.Bristol,United Kingdom:Curran Associates,2006:1-16.
[7]	Federal Aviation Administration.Airworthiness standards:transport category airplanes:CFR 14［S］.Washington DC:Federal Aviation Administration,2007:129-130.
[8]	Federal Aviation Administrator.System safety handbook:practice and guidelines for conducting system safety engineering and management［M］.Washington DC:Federal Aviation Administration,2000.
[9]	DE FLORIO F.适航性：航空器合格审定引论［M］.张曙光,柯鹏,潘强,等,译.北京:北京航空航天大学出版社,2011.
[10]	NATO Standardization Agency.Unmanned aerial vehicles systems airworthiness requirements (USAR)：STANAG 4671［S］.Brussels,Belgium:North Atlantic Treaty Organization Standardization Agency,2009:198-202.
[11]	李春锦,文泾.无人机系统的运行管理［M］.北京:北京航空航天大学出版社,2011.
[12]	CLOTHIER R,WALKER R,FULTON N.A casualty risk analysis for unmanned aerial system (UAS) operations over inhabited areas［R］.Queensland,Australia:the 2nd Australasian Unmanned Air Vehicles Conference,2007.
[13]	Range Safety Group.Range safety criteria for unmanned air vehicles-rationale and methodology supplement［R］.Range Commanders Council,Document 323-99,1999.
[14]	Range Safety Group.Common risk criteria standards for national test ranges［R］.Range Commanders Council,Document 321-07,2007.
[15]	United States Air Force Safety Center.MQ-1 predator aircraft accident statistics and accident investigation report［EB/OL］.［2013-08-21］.http:∥afsc.af.mil.
[16]	中国国家统计局.中国统计年鉴2010［M］.北京:中国统计出版社,2010.
[17]	CLOTHIER R,PALMER J,WALKER R.Definition of airworthiness categories for civil unmanned aircraft systems (UAS)［C］∥Proceedings of the 27th International Congress of the Aeronautical Sciences.Nice,France:International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences,2010:1-12.
[18]	United States of America Department of Defense.Standard practice for system safety:MIL-STD-882D［S］.Washington DC:Department of Defense,2000:18-20.