Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ground Risk Map for Unmanned Aircraft in Urban Environments

  • Published:
Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The large diversity of unmanned aircraft requires a suitable and proper risk assessment. In this paper, we propose the use of risk maps to define the risk associated to accidents with unmanned aircraft. It is a two-dimensional location-based map that quantifies the risk to the population on ground of flight operations over a specified area. The risk map is generated through a probabilistic approach and combines several layers, including population density, sheltering factor, no-fly zones, and obstacles. Each element of the risk map has associated a risk value that quantifies the risk of flying over a specific location. Risk values are defined by a risk assessment process using different uncontrolled descent events, drone parameters, environmental characteristics, as well as uncertainties on parameters. The risk map is able to quantify the risk of large areas, such as urban environments, and allows for easy identification of high and low-risk locations. The map is a tool for informed decision making, and our results report some examples of risk map with different aircraft in a realistic urban environment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ancel, E., Capristan, F.M., Foster, J.V., Condotta, R.C.: Real-Time Risk Assessment Framework for Unmanned Aircraft System (Uas) Traffic Management (Utm). In: 17Th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference, pp. 3273 (2017)

  2. Andreev, I., Hittenberger, M., Hofer, P., Kromp-Kolb, H., Kromp, W., Seibert, P., Wotawa, G.: Risks due to beyond design base accidents of nuclear power plants in europe—the methodology of riskmap. J. Hazard. Mater. 61(1), 257–262 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3894(98)00130-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Arterburn, D., Ewing, M., Prabhu, R., Zhu, F., Francis, D.: FAA UAS Center Of Excellence Task A4: UAS Ground Collision Severity Evaluation. Tech rep (2017)

  4. Bertrand, S., Raballand, N., Viguier, F., Muller, F.: Ground Risk Assessment for Long-Range Inspection Missions of Railways by Uavs. In: ICUAS 2017, International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems, pp. 1343–1351. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICUAS.2017.7991331 (2017)

  5. Bir, C., Viano, D.C.: Design and injury assessment criteria for blunt ballistic impacts. J. Trauma Acute Care Surg. 57(6), 1218–1224 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bradski, G.: The openCV Library. Dr Dobb’s Journal of Software Tools (2000)

  7. Capello, E., Dentis, M., Mascarello, L.N., Primatesta, S.: Regulation Analysis and New Concept for a Cloud-Based Uav Supervision System in Urban Environment. In: RED-UAS 2017, Workshop on Research, Education and Development of Unmanned Aerial Systems, pp. 90–95. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/RED-UAS.2017.8101649 (2017)

  8. Castagno, J., Ochoa, C., Atkins, E.: Comprehensive Risk-Based Planning for Small Unmanned Aircraft System Rooftop Landing. In: ICUAS 2018, International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems. IEEE (2018)

  9. Clare, V.R., Lewis, J.H., Mickiewicz, A.P., Sturdivan, L.M.: Blunt Trauma Data Correlation. Technical report, Edgewood Arsenal Aberdeen Proving Ground Md (1975)

  10. Clothier, R.A., Walker, R.A.: Safety Risk Management of Unmanned Aircraft Systems. In: Handbook of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, pp. 2229–2275. Springer (2015)

  11. Clothier, R.A., Walker, R.A., Fulton, N., Campbell, D.A.: A Casualty Risk Analysis for Unmanned Aerial System (Uas) Operations over Inhabited Areas. In: AIAC12, Twelfth Australian International Aerospace Congress, 2Nd Australasian Unmanned Air Vehicles Conference, pp. 1–15 (2007)

  12. Clothier, R.A., Williams, B.P., Hayhurst, K.J.: Modelling the risks remotely piloted aircraft pose to people on the ground. Saf. Sci. 101, 33–47 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.08.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. la Cour-Harbo, A.: Ground impact probability distribution for small unmanned aircraft in ballistic descent. preprint - 1–24 (2017)

  14. la Cour-Harbo, A.: Mass threshold for ’harmless’ drones. Int. J. Micro Air Veh. 9(2), 77–92 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1177/1756829317691991

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. la Cour-Harbo, A.: Quantifying ground impact fatality rate for small unmanned aircraft. Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems 93(1-2), 367–384 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10846-018-0853-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. la Cour-Harbo, A.: The Value of Step-By-Step Risk Assessment for Unmanned Aircraft. In: ICUAS 2018, International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems. IEEE (2018)

  17. Dalamagkidis, K., Valavanis, K.P., Piegl, L.A.: On integrating unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace system: issues, challenges, operational restrictions, certification, and recommendations, vol. 54. Springer, Netherlands (2012)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  18. De Filippis, L., Guglieri, G., Quagliotti, F.: A minimum risk approach for path planning of uavs. J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 61(1-4), 203–219 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10846-010-9493-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Denney, E., Pai, G., Whiteside, I.: Modeling the safety architecture of uas flight operations. In: International Conference on Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security, pp. 162–178. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66266-4_11 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Deville, P., Linard, C., Martin, S., Gilbert, M., Stevens, F.R., Gaughan, A.E., Blondel, V.D., Tatem, A.J.: Dynamic population mapping using mobile phone data. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 111(45), 15888–15893 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1408439111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Dey, P.K.: Managing project risk using combined analytic hierarchy process and risk map. Appl. Soft Comput. 10(4), 990–1000 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2010.03.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. DJI: Phantom 4 - DJI’s smartest flying camera ever. https://www.dji.com/en/phantom-4. Accessed: 2019-01-28

  23. Doxsey-Whitfield, E., MacManus, K., Adamo, S.B., Pistolesi, L., Squires, J., Borkovska, O., Baptista, S.R.: Taking advantage of the improved availability of census data: a first look at the gridded population of the world, version 4. Appl. Geogr. 1(3), 226–234 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1080/23754931.2015.1014272

    Google Scholar 

  24. EASA: Certification specifications and acceptable means of compliance for large aeroplanes cs-25. Tech. rep., Amendment 21 European Aviation Safety Agency (2018)

  25. EASA, European Aviation Safety Agency: Concept of Operations for Drones: A Risk Based Approach to Regulation of unmanned Aircraft. Cologne, Germany (2015)

  26. European Aviation Safety Agency: Notice of proposed amendment 2017-05 (a) - introduction of a regulatory framework for the operation of drones. Tech. rep. (2017)

  27. European Aviation Safety Agency: Notice of proposed amendment 2017-05 (b) - introduction of a regulatory framework for the operation of drones. Tech. rep. (2017)

  28. FAA, Federal Aviation Administration: UAS Integration Pilot Program. https://www.faa.gov/uas/programs_partnerships/uas_integration_pilot%_program/. Accessed: 2019-01-28

  29. FAA, Federal Aviation Administration: System safety handbook. Department of transportation, Washington (2000)

  30. Fankhauser, P., Hutter, M.: A Universal Grid Map Library: Implementation and Use Case for Rough Terrain Navigation. In: Koubaa, A. (ed.) Robot Operating System (ROS) – The Complete Reference (Volume 1), chap. 5. Springer, Berlin (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26054-9_5

    Google Scholar 

  31. Guglieri, G., Lombardi, A., Ristorto, G.: Operation oriented path planning strategies for rpas. Amer. J. Sci. Technol. 2(6), 1–8 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Guglieri, G., Quagliotti, F., Ristorto, G.: Operational issues and assessment of risk for light uavs. J. Unmanned Veh. Syst. 2(4), 119–129 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Guglieri, G., Ristorto, G.: Safety Assessment for Light Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems. In: INAIR 2016, International Conference on Air Transport, pp. 1–7 (2016)

  34. Haartsen, Y., Aalmoes, R., Cheung, Y.: Simulation of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles in the Determination of Accident Locations. In: ICUAS 2016, International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems, pp. 993–1002. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICUAS.2016.7502548 (2016)

  35. Istat: Rapporto URBES 2015. https://www.istat.it/storage/urbes2015/torino.pdf. Accessed: 2019-01-28 (2015)

  36. JARUS: Jarus guidelines on specific operations risk assessment (SORA), joint authorities for rulemaking of unmanned systems JARUS. Technical report (2017)

  37. Jensen, O.B.: Drone city-power, design and aerial mobility in the age of ”smart cities”. Geogr. Helv. 71(2), 67 (2016). https://doi.org/10.5194/gh-71-67-2016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Kang, C., Liu, Y., Ma, X., Wu, L.: Towards estimating urban population distributions from mobile call data. J. Urban Technol. 19(4), 3–21 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2012.715479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Karaman, S., Frazzoli, E.: Sampling-based algorithms for optimal motion planning. Int. J. Robot. Res. 30 (7), 846–894 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1177/0278364911406761

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. La Cour-Harbo, A.: Quantifying Risk of Ground Impact Fatalities of Power Line Inspection Bvlos Flight with Small Unmanned Aircraft. In: 2017 International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems (ICUAS), pp. 1352–1360. IEEE (2017)

  41. Lin, X., Fulton, N.L., Horn, M.E.: Quantification of High Level Safety Criteria for Civil Unmanned Aircraft Systems. In: Aerospace Conference, pp. 1–13. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/AERO.2014.6836463 (2014)

  42. Melnyk, R.V., Schrage, D.P., Volovoi, V., Jimenez, H.: A third-party casualty prediction model for uas operations. Georgia Institute of Technology (2012)

  43. Warren, M, Mejias, L., Kok, J., Yang, X., Gonzalez, F., Upcroft, B.: An automated emergency landing system for fixed-wing aircraft: Planning and control. Journal of Field Robotics 32(8), 1114–1140 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1002/rob.21641

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Mohammed, F., Idries, A., Mohamed, N., Al-Jaroodi, J., Jawhar, I.: Uavs for Smart Cities: Opportunities and Challenges. In: ICUAS 2014, International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems, pp. 267–273. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICUAS.2014.6842265 (2014)

  45. Naviair: Droneluftrum website. https://www.droneluftrum.dk. Accessed: 2019-01-28

  46. OpenStreetMap contributors: Planet dump retrieved from https://planet.osm.org. https://www.openstreetmap.org. Accessed: 2019-01-28 (2017)

  47. Primatesta, S., Capello, E., Antonini, R., Gaspardone, M., Guglieri, G., Rizzo, A.: A Cloud-Based Framework for Risk-Aware Intelligent Navigation in Urban Environments. In: International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems ICUAS 2017, pp. 447–455. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICUAS.2017.7991358 (2017)

  48. Primatesta, S., Guglieri, G., Rizzo, A.: A risk-aware path planning strategy for uavs in urban environments. Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems, 1–15 (2018)

  49. Quigley, M., Conley, K., Gerkey, B., Faust, J., Foote, T., Leibs, J., Wheeler, R., Ng, A.Y.: Ros: an Open-Source Robot Operating System. In: ICRA Workshop on Open Source Software, vol. 3, pp. 5 (2009)

  50. Range Commanders Coucil: Standard 321-07 Common risk criteria standards for national test ranges: Supplement. USA Department of Defense (2007)

  51. Rudnick-Cohen, E., Herrmann, J.W., Azarm, S.: Risk-based path planning optimization methods for unmanned aerial vehicles over inhabited areas. J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng. 16(2), 13 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4033235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Batista e Silva, F., Gallego, J., Lavalle, C.: A high-resolution population grid map for europe. J. Maps 9(1), 16–28 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Smith, P.G.: Expected Casualty Calculations For Commercial Space Launch and Reentry Missions - Advisory Circular. Technical report (2000)

  54. Stöcker, C., Bennett, R., Nex, F., Gerke, M., Zevenbergen, J.: Review of the current state of uav regulations. Remote Sens. 9(5), 459 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Twisdale, L., Vickery, P.: Comparison of Debris Trajectory Models for Explosive Safety Hazard Analysis. Technical report, Applied Research Associates Inc Raleigh Nc (1992)

  56. Van Der Hoek, W., Konradsen, F., Amerasinghe, P.H., Perera, D., Piyaratne, M., Amerasinghe, F.P.: Towards a risk map of malaria for Sri Lanka: the importance of house location relative to vector breeding sites. Int. J. Epidemiol. 32(2), 280–285 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Washington, A., Clothier, R.A., Silva, J.: A review of unmanned aircraft system ground risk models. Progress in Aerospace Sciences (2017)

  58. Washington, A., Clothier, R.A., Williams, B.P.: A bayesian approach to system safety assessment and compliance assessment for unmanned aircraft systems. J. Air Transp. Manag. 62, 18–33 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2017.02.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Wu, P.P., Clothier, R.A.: The Development of Ground Impact Models for the Analysis of the Risks Associated with UnmannedAircraft Operations over Inhabited Areas. In: Eleventh Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management Conference (PSAM11) and the Annual European Safety and Reliability Conference (ESREL 2012), pp. 5222–5234 (2012)

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by a fellowship from TIM, by the Siebel Energy Institute, and by Compagnia di San Paolo, Italy.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Control and Computer Engineering, Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24, 10129, Torino, Italy

    Stefano Primatesta

  2. Department of Electronics and Telecommunications, Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24, 10129, Torino, Italy

    Alessandro Rizzo

  3. Department of Electronic Systems, Aalborg University, Frederik Bajers Vej 7C, 9220, Aalborg East, Denmark

    Anders la Cour-Harbo

Authors
  1. Stefano Primatesta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alessandro Rizzo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anders la Cour-Harbo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefano Primatesta.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Primatesta, S., Rizzo, A. & la Cour-Harbo, A. Ground Risk Map for Unmanned Aircraft in Urban Environments. J Intell Robot Syst 97, 489–509 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10846-019-01015-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10846-019-01015-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation