Study on the head and neck injury risk impacted by UAV: effect of impact velocity, angle, location, and mass

References

• Shelley AV. A model of human harm from a falling unmanned aircraft: implications for UAS regulation. Int J Aviat Aeronaut Aerosp. 2016;3(3):1. doi: 10.15394/ijaaa.2016.1120.
   Google Scholar
• Stevenson JD, O'Young S, Rolland L. Assessment of alternative manual control methods for small unmanned aerial vehicles. J Unmanned Veh Syst. 2015;3(3):73–94. doi: 10.1139/juvs-2015-0007.
   Google Scholar
• Demirci E, Yildiz AR. An experimental and numerical investigation of the effects of geometry and spot welds on the crashworthiness of vehicle thin-walled structures. Mater Test. 2018;60(6):553–561. doi: 10.3139/120.111187.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yildiz BS. Slime mould algorithm and kriging surrogate model-based approach for enhanced crashworthiness of electric vehicles. Int J Veh Des. 2020;83(1):54–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Demirci E, Yildiz AR. An investigation of the crash performance of magnesium, aluminum and advanced high strength steels and different cross-sections for vehicle thin-walled energy absorbers. Mater Test. 2018;60(7–8):661–668. doi: 10.3139/120.111201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yildiz AR, Solanki KN. Multi-objective optimization of vehicle crashworthiness using a new particle swarm based approach. Int J Adv Manuf Technol. 2012;59(1–4):367–376. doi: 10.1007/s00170-011-3496-y.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kiani M, Yildiz AR. A comparative study of non-traditional methods for vehicle crashworthiness and NVH optimization. Arch Computat Methods Eng. 2016;23(4):723–734. doi: 10.1007/s11831-015-9155-y.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aye CM, Pholdee N, Yildiz AR, et al. Multi-surrogate-assisted metaheuristics for crashworthiness optimisation. IJVD. 2019;80(2/3/4):223–240. doi: 10.1504/IJVD.2019.109866.
   Google Scholar
• Alliance for System Safety of UAS through Research Excellence (ASSURE). Final report for the FAA UAS center of excellence task A4: UAS ground collision severity evaluation. Washington (DC): Federal Aviation Administration; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Dvaid A. Final report for the task A11-Part 107 waiver request case study. The University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, USA; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Alexander RM. Human injury model for small unmanned aircraft impacts. Monash University, Melbourne, Australia; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Courharbo AL. Mass threshold for ‘harmless’ drones. Int J Micro Air Veh. 2016;9(2):77–92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li K, Lu K, Wu YN. Unmanned aircraft system ground collision severity quantitative evaluation. J Civ Aviat. 2020;4:62–64.
   Google Scholar
• Campolettano ET, Bland ML, Gellner RA, et al. Ranges of injury risk associated with impact from unmanned aircraft systems. Ann Biomed Eng. 2017;45(12):2733–2741. doi: 10.1007/s10439-017-1921-6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stark DB, Willis AK, Eshelman Z, et al. Human response and injury resulting from head impacts with unmanned aircraft systems. Stapp Car Crash J. 2019;63:29–64. doi: 10.4271/2019-22-0002.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Koh CH, Deng C, Li L, et al. Experimental and simulation weight threshold study for safe drone operations. 2018 AIAA Information Systems-AIAA Infotech @ Aerospace; 2018. doi: 10.2514/6.2018-1725.
   Google Scholar
• Koh CH, Low KH, Li L, et al. Weight threshold estimation of falling UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) based on impact energy. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol. 2018;93:228–255. doi: 10.1016/j.trc.2018.04.021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alliance for System Safety of UAS through Research Excellence (ASSURE). Task A14: UAS ground collision severity evaluation 2017–2019. Washington (DC): Federal Aviation Administration; 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Rattanagraikanakorn B, Gransden DI, Schuurman M, et al. Multibody system modelling of unmanned aircraft system collisions with the human head. Int J Crashworthiness. 2020;25(6):689–707. doi: 10.1080/13588265.2019.1633818.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rattanagraikanakorn B, Schuurman M, Gransden DI, et al. Modelling head injury due to unmanned aircraft systems collision: crash dummy vs human body. Int J Crashworthiness. 2020;12:1–14.
   Google Scholar
• Weng YH, Bian KW, Gunasekaran K, et al. Modeling small remotely piloted aircraft system to head impact for investigating craniocerebral response. J Biomech. 2021;128(13):110748. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2021.110748.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zhang YJ, Huang YJ, Liang K, et al. High-precision modeling and collision simulation of small rotor UAV. Aerosp Sci Technol. 2021;118:106977. doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2021.106977.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS), FMVSS 208: occupant crash protection. Washington (DC): National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, US Department of Transportation; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (ECE). ECE R94: uniform provisions concerning the approval of vehicles with regard to the protection of the occupants in the event of a frontal collision; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Klinich K, Saul R, Auguste G, et al. Techniques for developing child dummy protection reference values. Washington (DC): National Highway Traffic Safety Administration; 1996.
   Google Scholar
• China-New Car Assessment Program (C-NCAP). Management center. C-NCAP management regulation. 2021 ed. Tianjin: China Automotive Technology and Research Center Co.; 2020.
   Google Scholar
• European New Car Assessment Program Committee. Assessment protocol-adult occupant protection. European new car assessment program (Euro NCAP), Brussels, Belgium; 2020.
   Google Scholar
• National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Laboratory test procedure for new car assessment program (NCAP): frontal impact testing. Washington (DC): National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, US Department of Transportation; 2015.
   Google Scholar