Article

Mission Design and Validation of a Fixed-Wing Unmanned

Aerial Vehicle for Environmental Monitoring
Giancarlo Rufino * , Claudia Conte , Pasquale Basso, Anna Elena Tirri and Vincenzo Donato

Centro Servizi Metrologici e Tecnologici Avanzati (CeSMA), University of Naples Federico II, 80146 Napoli, Italy;
claudia.conte2@[Link] (C.C.); [Link]@[Link] (P.B.); annaelenatirri@[Link] (A.E.T.);
[Link]@[Link] (V.D.)
* Correspondence: [Link]@[Link]; Tel.: +39-081-7682159

Abstract: Climate change is becoming a worldwide emergency. In order to prevent catastrophic

levels of climate change, three broad categories of action are ongoing: cutting emissions, adapting
to climate impacts, and financing required adjustments. Cutting emissions requires stopping the
use of fossil fuels in favor of renewable energy sources. Adapting to climate change and financing
required adjustments need instruments for the understanding of the source causes and how effective
the potential measures are. In this context, the use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles for environmental
monitoring is continuously increasing thanks to their ability to collect a wide range of environmental
data, from the quality of air to the health status of vegetation, waters, and lands. This paper describes
the research activities that are being performed for the design and development of a 100 kg Max
Take Off Mass prototype zero-emission Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, named Daphne, destined for
environmental monitoring, surveillance, and inspection missions. The developed prototype will
drive the next industrialization of the vehicle. A particular focus is given to the design of the power
system, based on the use of Proton Exchange Membrane fuel cells fueled with green hydrogen,
the integration of the sensors allowing for multipurpose observations and measurements, and the
design and validation of the relative multi-purpose missions via an innovative approach based on
Model-Based System Engineering.

Citation: Rufino, G.; Conte, C.; Basso, Keywords: environmental monitoring; UAV; hydrogen fuel cells; sensors integration; MBSE
P.; Tirri, A.E.; Donato, V. Mission
Design and Validation of a
Fixed-Wing Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
for Environmental Monitoring. Drones 1. Introduction
2024, 8, 641. [Link]
The number of remotely piloted fixed-wing UAVs has been continuously increasing
10.3390/drones8110641
for more than two decades, with a global market expected to reach about US$72 million by
Academic Editor: Mostafa the end of 2030 [1]. The use of UAVs allows for low operational and maintenance costs, high
Hassanalian navigation accuracy, high-risk flight potentials, and the ability to integrate several types
Received: 27 September 2024
of continuously evolving high-tech sensors (e.g., multi-/hyper-spectral, optical, chemical,
Revised: 25 October 2024
microwave, magnetic) [2]. Typical fixed-wing UAVs civilian missions are long endurance
Accepted: 28 October 2024 and with wide flight ranges and can be grouped into two categories: commercial flights
Published: 5 November 2024 and freight transports.
Commercial flights include mainly environmental monitoring (e.g., surveillance of
forests, rivers, lakes, costs, and relevant ecosystem areas) [3], the support to agriculture (i.e.,
gathering of information for land preparation, cadaster boundary, vegetation monitoring,
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors. plant health, stock valuation, and planning of the harvesting) [4], and the inspection and/or
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. patrolling of infrastructures (e.g., bridges, highways, critical buildings).
This article is an open access article
In terms of goods transportation, UAVs can perform several tasks across the freight sec-
distributed under the terms and
tor (e.g., warehouse operations, last-mile delivery, and as unmanned air cargo planes) [5,6],
conditions of the Creative Commons
and are projected to grow at 49% CAGR by the end of 2030 [7]. Most of the fixed-wing UAVs
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
are powered by thermal engines or, the lighter models, by electric engines and lithium
[Link]/licenses/by/
batteries [8,9].
4.0/).

Drones 2024, 8, 641. [Link] [Link]

Drones 2024, 8, 641 2 of 26

In this scenario, companies producing fixed-wing UAVs are facing many challenges,
the most relevant ones being the following:
• Reduction in the environmental impacts, in agreement with the international envi-
ronmental targets, towards the development of neutral and/or zero-emission long-
endurance vehicles;
• The integration of a wide range of sensors, allowing for multi-purpose missions, such
as the ones above mentioned.
In terms of environmental impacts, the evolution in the field of hydrogen-fuel cells
seems a solution to achieve zero-emission long-endurance missions, not allowed by stan-
dard lithium batteries whose autonomy is usually within an hour [10,11].
In terms of the challenging integration of a multi-purpose set of sensors, the main
difficulty is dealing with large numbers of concurrent requirements related, for example,
to the efficiency of the flight for range and flight endurance, and the ability of the sensors
to provide the required quality of the monitoring. To ensure all requirements are met and
without conflicts, many modern integration models exist. Among others, MBSE (note: the
meaning of all acronyms is reported in the table of the acronyms at the end of this document)
is finding successful implementation in many industries (e.g., Airbus [12], Boeing [13],
Embraer [14], BMW [15], Rolls Royce [16]) towards the Industry 4.0 goal [17,18].
Considering the continuously developing UAV market, the main challenges given to
industries, and the wide range of future applications, many research projects started in the
field all over the world for almost three decades. Among others, the University of Naples
Federico II in Italy has been coordinating since 2023, a national research program involving
also industrial partners, for the development of a fixed-wing UAV, named DAPHNE,
required to have MTOW within 100 kg, powered by hydrogen fuel cells, and equipped
with a sensor set allowing for multi-purpose monitoring missions to be able to address
the two main challenges above listed. The MTOW is limited to 100 kg in order to hold the
research costs within feasible margins and to facilitate eventual future industrialization
and certification phases by the companies involved. The selection of the hydrogen-based
propulsion system has also been considered compulsory, the main target of the research
being the zero environmental impact of the final product.
In this context, this paper presents activities performed in the frame of the DAPHNE
UAV developments, having as a main focus, the description of the methods applied for the
definition and the integration of the payload (i.e., the sensors) and the propulsion system
based on hydrogen fuel cells. For this purpose, an innovative MBSE approach has been
implemented with the aims of speeding up the sensor selection and integration (i.e., the
payload layout), the hydrogen fuel tank sizing and layout definition, and the evaluation of
the needed flight conditions to accomplish the required monitoring resolutions. Relative to
the global, preliminary and specific design of the airframe is to be considered outside the
scope of this paper.
In the next sections of the document, first, a general overview of the DAPHNE UAV
project is given together with its mission selection, conceptual, and preliminary design.
Next a detailed description of the mission definition in terms of sensor and tank layouts
via MBSE modeling is provided.

2. DAPHNE UAV Project

DAPHNE stands for “Drone with Advanced Propulsion and High-care for Natural
Environment”. It is a 3-year research project funded by the MIMIT in the framework of
a funding program dedicated to SME Innovation. The aim of the project is to design and
develop a prototype of an innovative, remotely piloted, zero-emission UAV, equipped with
a modular payload powered by hydrogen fuel cells and an electric engine, and able to per-
form long-endurance and wide-range multi-purpose environmental monitoring missions.
Drones 2024, 8, 641 3 of 26

The partners of the DAPHNE project are the University of Naples Federico II (specifi-
cally the Laboratory of Innovative Flight Technologies—LIFT of the Advanced Metrological
and Technological Services Center-CeSMA [19]) and a pool of small/medium enterprises,
composed by CTM Avio srl [20], Wind srl, and AirItaly srl, all of them located in the
area of Naples in southern Italy. CTM is in charge of the general design and the overall
integration of the UAV (i.e., structure, payload cell, propulsion, and onboard systems) on
top of the preliminary and specific design, development, and manufacturing of the fuselage
structures; Wind srl is in charge of the integration, preliminary and specific design, and
manufacturing of the wing, the tail planes, the movables, and the related systems; AirItaly
srl is in charge of the power and propulsion systems definition, acquisition and integration;
the University of Naples is in charge of the payload definition and integration, and of the
overall scientific coordination of the project. The resulting prototype will next drive the
industrialization phase by the involved enterprises.
For the development of DAPHNE, the following phases have been defined:
1. market analysis;
2. mission definition;
3. selection of the configuration;
4. specifics definition;
5. design;
6. manufacturing;
7. tests.
Phases 6 and 7 have not yet started at the current stage (month 18 of the project);
therefore, they are not described in this paper.
Phase 1 is a market analysis. The purposes of the market analysis are as follows:
• finding the most requested configurations encouraging future industrialization
of DAPHNE;
• collecting overall statistical data such as weights, type of sensors, type of propulsion,
and type of missions (e.g., endurance, range, flight altitude);
• looking for eventual gaps in the market sector.
The market analysis has been conducted with the aim of driving the definition of the
DAPHNE configuration and its typical missions. It has explored the global UAV market
with a particular focus on UAVs with MTOW ≤ 100 kg, considering this value as the
most feasible in terms of costs, dimension of the involved enterprises, and easy eventual
industrialization and certification phases. The main collected data have been as follows:
the type of missions, weight, vehicle configuration, propulsion systems, and payloads.
It has been observed that the majority of the UAVs in the selected sector are fixed-wing
(71%) [21], and can be grouped into two main categories: tractor propeller and pushing
propeller. In terms of missions, they find applications for surveillance, monitoring, and
inspection in many fields such as energy, agriculture, and construction, as already noted in
the Introduction. The market analysis has finally explored the different types of sensors
and their specifications, providing for each kind of mission, the type of sensors typically
applied, and the starting point for the next DAPHNE payload definition and sizing.
Phase 2 is the mission definition. The following overall mission requirements of
DAPHNE have been defined mainly on a statistical basis and in consideration of the
certification rules, with the aim of having a prototype competitive and consistent with
respect to the UAV sector of interest:
• MTOW = 100 kg;
• Payload mass = 20 kg;
• Autonomy = 3 h;
• Cruise speed = 120 km/h;
 eventual future industrialization and certification phases. A detailed description of the
multi-purpose missions and the relative needed sensors selected for DAPHNE is given in
Section 3.
Drones 2024, 8, 641 Phase 3 is the selection of the configuration. On the basis of the mission requirements
4 of 26
defined, and the results of the market analysis, a twin-boom high-wing pushing propeller
as shown in Figure 1, has been selected. Such configuration is very versatile, providing a
•wider and =easily
Payload visible,accessible
IR, microwave,room for the payload,magnetic,
multi-/hyper-spectral, moreover offering an easier
and chemical;
•STOL/VTOL
STOL/VTOL = optional; via twin vertically mounted rotors fitted to each wing, in the
implementation
•sameZero environmental
fashion of modelsimpact;
as the US Navy JUMP20 UAV [22] or the Fly 380 VTOL [23].
• Typical missions: multi-purpose
Phase 4 is the definition of theobservations, small
specifics. The cargo; of the specifics has consisted
definition
where the numerical
of evaluating, on thevalues
basisfor
of the
theMTOW,
generalthe payload mass,
requirements the autonomy,
listed in Phase 2,and
thethefollowing
range are upper
parameters: bounds to be held in order to limit the costs of the research and to ease
eventual future industrialization and certification phases. A detailed description of the
1. Wing, tailmissions
multi-purpose planes,and
andthemovables span and
relative needed surfaces;
sensors selected for DAPHNE is given in
2. Payload
Section 3. volume;
3. Phase
Fuselage and
3 is the boom length;
selection of the configuration. On the basis of the mission requirements
defined,
4. Engineand the results
power of the market analysis, a twin-boom high-wing pushing propeller,
required.
as shown in Figure 1, has been selected. Such configuration is very versatile, providing a
The actual dimensions are reported in Figure 1. They have been obtained throughou
wider and easily accessible room for the payload, moreover offering an easier STOL/VTOL
an iterative
implementation design process,
via twin as shown
vertically mounted in rotors
Figure 2, and
fitted described
to each wing, ininthe
detail
samein the next sub
fashion
section,
of modelsPhase
as [Link] Navy JUMP20 UAV [22] or the Fly 380 VTOL [23].

Figure 1. DAPHNE configuration.

Figure 1. DAPHNE configuration.
Phase 4 is the definition of the specifics. The definition of the specifics has con-
sistedPhase
of evaluating, on theThe
5 is the design. basis of thephase
design general requirements
is still listed inin
ongoing although Phase 2, the state
an advanced
following parameters:
It is being carried out, as already noted above, according to an iterative process, whose
1. Wing, is
flowchart tailshown
planes,inand movables
Figure 2. span and surfaces;
2. Payload volume;
3. Fuselage and boom length;
4. Engine power required.
The actual dimensions are reported in Figure 1. They have been obtained throughout
an iterative design process, as shown in Figure 2, and described in detail in the next
sub-section, Phase 5.
Drones 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 27
Drones 2024, 8, 641 5 of 26

Figure 2. DAPHNE design flowchart.

Figure 2. DAPHNE design flowchart.
Phase 5 is the design. The design phase is still ongoing although in an advanced state.
It is A firstcarried
being preliminary
out, asconceptual
already noted design
above, phase, performed
according for a set process,
to an iterative of eligible airfoils
whose
and wing configurations
flowchart is shown in Figure 2. by means of classical analytical approaches [24] and CFD anal-
yses, A has provided
first preliminary the global starting
conceptual designdesign values
phase, (e.g., airfoils,
performed for a setdimensions, weights,
of eligible airfoils
aero-performances and loads, engine power required, etc.) to feed
and wing configurations by means of classical analytical approaches [24] and CFD analy- the DAPHNE iterative
design
ses, hasprocess,
provided as shown
the globalin Figure 2. design
starting Specifically,
valueseach (e.g.,iteration
airfoils,of the design weights,
dimensions, process has
been divided into two
aero-performances and steps:
loads, loads
engineand
powerperformance
required, etc.)evaluation
to feed the(step 1) and sizing
DAPHNE iterative(step
design
2). In theprocess,
first step,asthe
shown in Figure of
computation 2. the
Specifically,
aero-loads each
anditeration of the design
performances, such asprocess
the power
has beenfor
required divided into two
the flight, the steps:
ceilingloads and and
altitude, performance
the takeoff evaluation
and landing(stepdistances,
1) and sizingis per-
(step 2). In the first step, the computation of the aero-loads
formed to update the values with respect to the previous iteration. In the secondand performances, such as the the
step,
power required
preliminary andfor the flight,
specific the ceiling
designs altitude, and
are performed the takeoffthe
throughout anditerations,
landing distances,
for the air-
is performed to update the values with respect to the previous
frame, the on-board systems, the power systems, and the payload. The activities iteration. In the second
relative
step, the preliminary and specific designs are performed throughout the iterations, for
to the airframe preliminary and specific design are outside the scope of this paper as per-
the airframe, the on-board systems, the power systems, and the payload. The activities
formed by the industrial partners, and will be not further described. The rest sections of
relative to the airframe preliminary and specific design are outside the scope of this paper
this paper will instead focus on the activities performed via an innovative MBSE ap-
as performed by the industrial partners, and will be not further described. The rest sec-
proach,
tions of for
thisthe preliminary
paper will instead andfocus
specific
on thedesign of the
activities payload and
performed via antheinnovative
propulsion system
MBSE
based on hydrogen
approach, fuel cells. Such
for the preliminary and methodology
specific design hasofbeen used to deal
the payload withpropulsion
and the the complex-
ity of the payload layout, as required by multi-purpose missions,
system based on hydrogen fuel cells. Such methodology has been used to deal with to speed up the design,
the
and to validate the sizing ensuring all requirements are met
complexity of the payload layout, as required by multi-purpose missions, to speed without conflicts. The layout
up
design of the
the design, payload
and and the sizing
to validate propulsion
ensuringsystem via MBSE modeling
all requirements is givenconflicts.
are met without in Sections
3–5.
The layout design of the payload and the propulsion system via MBSE modeling is given
in Sections 3–5.
3. Missions and Payload Definition
3. Missions and Payload Definition
In agreement with the market analysis results, the following promising applications
In agreement with the market analysis results, the following promising applications
for DAPHNE have been selected [25–29]:
for DAPHNE have been selected [25–29]:
• aerial photography;
• support to agriculture;
• coasts surveillance and rescue;
• borders patrolling;
• emissions measurement;
• inspection of electrical lines;
Drones 2024, 8, 641 6 of 26

• aerial photography;
• support to agriculture;
• coasts surveillance and rescue;
• borders patrolling;
• emissions measurement;
• inspection of electrical lines;
• support to firefighting;
• fishing areas protection;
• oil and gas pipeline inspection;
• buildings inspection;
• engineering, architecture, and construction monitoring;
• weather and environment;
• traffic monitoring;
• support to police;
• archeology;
• geology;
• cultural heritage;
• demining in war areas;
• water quality monitoring;
• maritime traffic monitoring.
In order to perform such a wide range of missions, the selection and integration of
numerous different types of sensors have been conceived in agreement with the specifica-
tions provided by the market analysis. Specifically, the following sensor categories have
been selected:
• High-resolution VIS camera;
• IR camera;
• Multispectral and hyperspectral cameras;
• SAR and GPR (microwave);
• LIDAR;
• Sniffers (chemical);
• Magnetic.
The hi-res VIS and IR cameras are suited for all the applications above listed.
Multispectral and hyperspectral cameras are specific for the support to agriculture,
being able, for instance, to distinguish green leaves from yellow ones, that is, to monitor
the health status of a plantation. In general, this kind of sensor can identify targets in the
scene by exploiting their spectral signature.
SAR sensors find application in the surveillance of borders and monitoring missions [30]
in conjunction with electro-optical VIS and IR sensors.
LIDAR sensors are used mainly for archeology, geology, and precision inspection of
infrastructures.
GPR sensors find applications for demining, archeology, and geology.
Sniffers are chemical sensors able to measure the quality of the air and the presence of
specific target substances.
Magnetic sensors are aimed at detecting iron/steel items on the observed surface or
slightly underground, useful, for example, for demining.
The selection of the above-listed sensors has been guided by the mission require-
ments reported in Section 2 of this paper. Specifically, the accuracy, size, and the main
specifications of the sensors, reported in Table 1, have been selected according to the main
requirements reported in Section 2.
Drones 2024, 8, 641 7 of 26

Table 1. DAPHNE selected sensors.

Sensor Size [mm]

Sensor Type Weight [g] Power [W] Specifications Type of Missions
(L × W × H) or (D × L)
Provide high-resolution
Resolution:
70 × 50 × 30 ÷ images and videos for
Visible ~500 3.8–6.5 3840 × 2160 ÷ 11,600 ×
150 × 100 × 100 surveillance and aero
8700 pixel
photogrammetry.
Temperature measurement
Resolution: for precision agriculture,
IR <500 ~60 × 40 × 40 ~5 336 × 256 or 642 × 512 pixel volcanology, photovoltaic
Spectral Band 75–13.5 µm panel maintenance, and gas
leakage applications.
Resolution ~3.2 MP per
70 × 50 × 30 ÷ Agriculture, toxic soil, and
Multispectral ~500 ~15 multispectral band, ~12 MP
150 × 100 × 100 water substances monitoring
panchromatic band
Solar panel inspection,
Resolution 1289 × 1024,
SWIR observation through harsh
<500 ~60 × 40 × 40 ~10 pixel pitch 10 µm, spectral
(900–1700 nm) weather conditions, visibility
response 0.9 to 1.7 µm
through fog
Hyperspectral Spectral Range 400–1000 nm;
80 × 100 × 100 ÷ Vegetation monitoring,
VNIR ~500 ~20 Spectral sampling 2.68 nm;
130 × 150 × 200 biodiversity and health of
(400–1000 nm) Spectral resolution 5.5 nm
terrestrial and aquatic
Hyperspectral ecosystems, forest
80 × 100 × 100 ÷ Spectral Range 900–1700 nm;
VNIR ~500 ~30 fire detection.
130 × 150 × 200 Spectral resolution 8.0 nm
(900–1700 nm)
Available parameters
include: PM2.5, PM10, SO2 ,
Monitoring chemicals in the
NO2 , O3 , CO, VOCs,
Chemical ~300 ~150 × 100 × 90 ~30 air, measuring
CxHy/CH4 /LEL, H2 S, O2 ,
toxic substances.
NH3 , HCI, HCN, HF, H2 ,
PH3 , NO, CO2 , Odor.
Agriculture and forestry,
350◦ field of view, multiple glacier and snowfield
target capability, up to mapping, archeology and
80 × 100 × 100 ÷
LIDAR ~1000 ~20 5 target echoes per laser cultural heritage
130 × 150 × 200
shot, scan speed up to documentation, construction
100 scans/s. site monitoring,
landslide monitoring.
High penetration up to Mine or metal structure
GEORADAR ~7000 ~1000 × 150 × 200 ~80 120 m depths in specific detection, glaciology, search
models. and rescue under rubble.
Specialized ISR missions,
wildland fire monitoring,
coastal mapping, railroad
monitoring, pipeline
Resolution 0.3–1 M
SAR ~4000 ~1000 × 3000 ~80 monitoring, sea ice detection
Range 10–16 km
and monitoring, support for
Coherent Change Detection
(CCD) applications, and
moving target detection.

In terms of sensor integration, Autodesk InventorTM [31] CAD models of the payload
bay, located in the front part of the vehicle fuselage, as shown in Figure 3, and of a modular
multisensory chassis have been generated with the chassis, allowing for different sensor
configurations, depending on the type of mission to perform.
 In terms of sensor integration, Autodesk InventorTM [31] CAD models of the payload
bay, located in the front part of the vehicle fuselage, as shown in Figure 3, and of a mod-
ular multisensory chassis have been generated with the chassis, allowing for different sen-
Drones 2024, 8, 641 sor configurations, depending on the type of mission to perform. 8 of 26

(a)

(b)
FigureFigure
3. CAD modelmodel
3. CAD of theofDAPHNE fuselage:
the DAPHNE (a) side
fuselage: view,
(a) side (b)(b)
view, toptop
view.
view.

The multisensory
The multisensory chassis
chassis is not
is not visible
visible in Figure
in Figure 3 as3 the
as the industrial
industrial partnersare
partners aregoing
going
to file for the patenting of the concept, and will be the subject of future publications.
to file for the patenting of the concept, and will be the subject of future publications.
4. Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Tank Sizing
4. Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Tank Sizing
The power system of DAPHNE has been designed to meet the zero-emission primary
The
goal,power system
according to of
theDAPHNE
requirementshas been
listeddesigned to 2.
in Section meet
Forthe zero-emission
this primary
purpose, a propulsion
goal, system
accordingbased on the use of hydrogen fuel cells has been selected. This choice has sys-
to the requirements listed in Section 2. For this purpose, a propulsion been
tem based
driven bythe
on theuse of hydrogen
following fuel
factors: thecells
zerohas been selected.
environmental Thisof
impact choice has beenfuel
the hydrogen driven
cells
by thewhen
following factors:
using green the zero(i.e.,
hydrogen environmental impact by
hydrogen produced of the hydrogen
renewable fuelsources),
energy cells whenand
usingtheir
green hydrogen (i.e., hydrogen produced by renewable energy sources),
promising, ever-increasing efficiency, which allows for autonomies such as the one and their
promising,
requiredever-increasing
by DAPHNE and efficiency,
reportedwhich allows
in Section 2. for autonomies such as the one re-
quired by The
DAPHNE
selection and
andreported
sizing ofintheSection 2. system are performed in the following phases:
fuel cell
The
1. selection and budget
flight power sizing of the fuel cell system are performed in the following phases:
computation;
1. 2.
flight fuel cellsbudget
power marketcomputation;
analysis/fuel cell selection;
2. 3. fuel cells and hydrogen
fuel cells market analysis/fuel tank
cellsizing.
selection;
3. Phase
fuel cells 1 ishydrogen
and the flight power budget computation. The power required for the flight has
tank sizing.
been computed according to the flight mechanics of the vehicle, as evaluated in the design
phase described in Section 2. The computation, shown in Figure 4, has been performed
for the whole flight envelope, including the flight conditions for maximum endurance
 Phase 1 is the flight power budget computation. The power required for the flight has
been computed according to the flight mechanics of the vehicle, as evaluated in the design
Drones 2024, 8, 641
phase described in Section 2. The computation, shown in Figure 4, has been9 ofperformed
26

for the whole flight envelope, including the flight conditions for maximum endurance and
maximum range. The diagram shows also the stall speed at n = 1, the stall speed at n =
and maximum range. The diagram shows also the stall speed at n = 1, the stall speed at
nmax, the cruise speed, and the maximum speed, represented, respectively, by points A,
n = nmax, the cruise speed, and the maximum speed, represented, respectively, by points
B,
A, C, and
B, C, D.D.
and

Figure 4. Required
Figure 4. Requiredflight
flight power.
power.

Finally,
Finally,the therequired
required total power
total has has
power beenbeen
determined by adding
determined the flight
by adding thepower
flight power
budget to the power needed by sensors and the onboard
budget to the power needed by sensors and the onboard systems. systems.
Phase 2 is the market analysis. It has explored the majority of fuel cells available on
Phase 2 is the market analysis. It has explored the majority of fuel cells available on
the market. PEM fuel cells IESOAR of Intelligent Energy [32] are a possible example of
the
the market.
DAPHNE PEM fuel cellsThey
application. IESOAR of Intelligent
are able to generate Energy [32]asare
only water an aemission
possiblefromexample
the of the
DAPHNE
reaction of application. They are able
oxygen and hydrogen. to generate
The primary only water
zero-emission as an
goal emission is
of DAPHNE from
thenthe reac-
tion of once
reached oxygengreenand hydrogen.
hydrogen The primary
(e.g., hydrogen produced zero-emission
with electricitygoal of DAPHNE
obtained exclusively is then
reached once green
from renewable hydrogen
sources) is used to(e.g., hydrogen
fuel the cells. produced with electricity obtained exclu-
sivelyPhase
from3renewable
is the fuel sources)
cell and hydrogen
is used totank
fuelsizing. The sizing of the fuel cell has
the cells.
consisted of the selection from the market of a set
Phase 3 is the fuel cell and hydrogen tank sizing. Theof two PEMs ablesizing
to provide
of thethefuel
required
cell has con-
total power, as computed in Phase 1, and with dimensions compatible with
sisted of the selection from the market of a set of two PEMs able to provide the required the fuselage
volume reserved for the fuel cells.
total power, as computed in Phase 1, and with dimensions compatible with the fuselage
The hydrogen tank sizing has consisted, as well, in the selection from the market
volume
of tanks reserved
compatible for thethe
with fuelallocation
cells. in the fuselage, and the flight autonomy targets.
The hydrogen
Considering the masstank sizingrequirements
and power has consisted, as well,
of liquid in the selection
hydrogen storage notfrom the market of
compatible
tanks
with the size of DAPHNE, only tanks for hydrogen in its gaseous form at 350 bars targets.
compatible with the allocation in the fuselage, and the flight autonomy have Con-
sidering
been takenthe intomass and Eventually,
account. power requirements of liquid
two configurations havehydrogen storage not compatible
been designed:
with
• 2the size of
internal DAPHNE, only tanks for hydrogen in its gaseous form at 350 bars have
tanks;
been
• 2taken
subalarinto account.
tanks, Eventually,
1 internal tank. two configurations have been designed:
• The first and
2 internal the second configurations have enabled, respectively, 2.2 and 3 h flights.
tanks;
• In Figure 5, the
2 subalar tanks, CAD mockuptank.
1 internal of the first configuration is shown.

The first and the second configurations have enabled, respectively, 2.2 and 3 h flights.
In Figure 5, the CAD mockup of the first configuration is shown.
Drones 2024, 8, 641Drones 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 26
10

Figure 5. CAD modeling of onemodeling

Figure 5. CAD of the DAPHNE
of one ofconfigurations
the DAPHNEfor the hydrogen
configurations tanks,
for the payload,
the hydrogen tanks, the pa
and the fuel cells.
and the fuel cells.

5. Mission Design and Validation via MBSE Modeling

5. Mission Design and Validation via MBSE Modeling
The ability to perform multi-purpose missions, that is, the ability to monitor different
The ability to perform multi-purpose missions, that is, the ability to monitor diff
targets by means of a set of various sensors, represents a quite tough challenge for designers
targets by means of a set of various sensors, represents a quite tough challenge for de
and engineers in the definition of the payload and its layout, and of the flight conditions
ers and engineers in the definition of the payload and its layout, and of the flight c
(i.e., speed and altitude). As a matter of fact, such kinds of missions could imply the use of
tions (i.e., speed and altitude). As a matter of fact, such kinds of missions could imp
sensors whose sensitivity and resolution require different altitudes and/or flight speeds. In
use of sensors whose sensitivity and resolution require different altitudes and/or
order to overcome and/or mitigate such eventual conflicts, and for the rapid prototyping of
speeds. In order to overcome and/or mitigate such eventual conflicts, and for the
the payload layout, an innovative approach Via MBSE has been developed for DAPHNE.
prototyping of the payload layout, an innovative approach Via MBSE has been deve
The MBSE model of the DAPHNE UAV has been generated specifically with the
for DAPHNE.
following aims:
The MBSE model of the DAPHNE UAV has been generated specifically with th
• speeding lowing
up the payload,
aims: and hydrogen tanks layout definition;
• automatic selection of the sensors set able to fulfill the mission requirements from a
database of• commercial
speeding up the payload, and hydrogen tanks layout definition;
models;
• • automatic selection
automatic evaluation of the optimal of the sensors
mission set able
profile (i.e.,toflight
fulfillspeed
the mission requirements f
and altitude),
according to thedatabase
type ofof commercial
mission models;
and sensors set up;
• •
automatic evaluation and update of thethe
automatic evaluation of optimalconsumption;
hydrogen mission profile (i.e., flight speed and alti
• according to the type of mission and
automatic selection of adequate fuel tanks from a database ofsensors setcommercial
up; models;
• automatic evaluation and update of the hydrogen
• validation of the mission profile, and solution of eventual requirement consumption;
conflicts, by
means of •the definition
automaticofselection of adequate
ad hoc use cases; fuel tanks from a database of commercial mod
• ability to •perform
validation of the mission
simulations profile,toand
of the mission solution
check if theofUAV eventual requirement conflic
can successfully
means of
perform the assigned the definition of ad hoc use cases;
mission.
• ability to perform simulations of the mission to check if the UAV can succes
The above-listed aims represent the main expected benefits of using the MBSE ap-
proach with respectperform the non-automated
to classical assigned mission. ones. Specifically, the abilities to check for
The above-listed
conflicting requirements, aims
to simulate the represent
mission, andthe mainquickly
to very expected
andbenefits of using
automatically up-the MBS
date the payload and propulsion systems layouts, are seen as key factors for the successful to che
proach with respect to classical non-automated ones. Specifically, the abilities
conflictingofrequirements,
design and performance to simulatemissions,
complex multi-purpose the mission, and
and for tocompetitiveness
the very quickly and of automat
update
the final product the
that is payload
barely and propulsion
achievable by today’s systems layouts,
classical are seen as
non-automated key factors for th
approaches.
cessful
With the aims of design
above, and performance
the flowchart, of complex
shown in Figuremulti-purpose missions, and for the co
6, has been developed.
itiveness of the final product that is barely achievable by today’s classical non-autom
approaches.
Drones 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 27

Drones 2024, 8, 641 11 of 26

With the aims of above, the flowchart, shown in Figure 6, has been developed.

Figure 6.
Figure 6. MBSE
MBSE model
model flowchart.
flowchart.

Inputs to
Inputs to the
the model
model areare the
the mission
mission requirements
requirements in in terms
terms ofof target,
target, site,
site, and
and duration
duration
of the observation.
observation. Once the inputs have been defined, the model starts selecting selecting eligible
eligible
sensors (e.g., the ones having a resolution compatible with the target dimensions) from a
database of commercial
commercial products.
[Link] Theuseuseofofdatabases
databasesisiscrucial
crucial forfor
thetherapid
rapidselection
selection of
thethe
of mostmost compatible
compatible sensors
sensors andandforfor
thethemitigation
mitigation of of
possible
possible requirement
requirement conflicts
conflicts in
terms
in terms of of
flight conditions.
flight conditions. Specifically,
Specifically,once thethe
once eligible sensors
eligible have
sensors beenbeen
have selected
selectedas ful-
as
filling the resolution requirements, the model evaluates the
fulfilling the resolution requirements, the model evaluates the optimal mission profile optimal mission profile (i.e.,
required flight
the required flight speed
speed and
and altitude,
altitude, and
and the
the power needs) for each selected sensor. sensor. The
mission profiles of all sensors sensors are nextnext compared
compared to to check
check forfor eventual
eventual conflicts,
conflicts, such as
required flight speeds lower than the stall velocity, velocity, and and sensors
sensors requiring
requiring very very different
different
flight speeds and/or and/orflight
flightaltitude.
[Link] of moderate
moderate conflicts,
conflicts, thethe
model model mitigates
mitigates the
the resolution
resolution requirements,
requirements, finding
finding the the
bestbest compromise
compromise among
among thethe available
available sensors
sensors as
as given in the database. The sensor selection specifically calculates
given in the database. The sensor selection specifically calculates first the main sensor pa- first the main sensor
parameters
rameters (e.g., (e.g., frame
frame rate,number
rate, numberofofpixels,
pixels,FOV,FOV,optic),
optic),andand then
then finds
finds the compromise
or setting of the sensors able to minimize the deviations with respect to the requirements
when
when adopting
adopting uniqueunique values
values for the flight speed and altitude. In case of strong conflicts,
such
such as, as, for
forexample,
example,flight
flightspeeds
speedsbelow
belowthe thestall velocity,
stall velocity,thethe
model
model is able to activate
is able the
to activate
VTOL capability to overcome the conflict and to split the mission
the VTOL capability to overcome the conflict and to split the mission into two or more into two or more phases,
according
phases, accordingto the complexity of the layout
to the complexity of the of the sensor
layout and theand
of the sensor level
theoflevel
conflicts. Once
of conflicts.
the conflicts have been resolved/mitigated, the model provides
Once the conflicts have been resolved/mitigated, the model provides in the output the in the output the sensor
layout, the mission
sensor layout, profile (i.e.,
the mission the(i.e.,
profile flightthealtitude and speed,
flight altitude andthe mission
speed, phases, and
the mission the
phases,
fuel
and consumption),
the fuel consumption), the engine,thesensor,
engine,and tankand
sensor, layouts.
tank layouts.
Relative to the optical sensor database,
Relative to the optical sensor database, it contains it contains various
varioussensors
sensors as selected
as selectedfromfrom
the
market, together with their specifications, such as mass and dimensions,
the market, together with their specifications, such as mass and dimensions, focal length focal length and
resolution,
and resolution, and power
and powerneeds. The sensor
needs. database
The sensor defined
database for DAPHNE
defined for DAPHNE contains different
contains dif-
sensors, is able to perform the missions listed in Section 2, and is
ferent sensors, is able to perform the missions listed in Section 2, and is given in Tables given in Table 1. During1
the
andindustrialization phase, the sensor
2. During the industrialization database
phase, will bedatabase
the sensor extended to cover
will a widertorange
be extended coverofa
sensor capabilities.
wider range of sensor capabilities.
Relative to the tank database, it contains different cylindrical tanks as available from
Relative to the tank database, it contains different cylindrical tanks as available from
the market together with their specifications: maximum pressure, volume for fuel, dimen-
the market together with their specifications: maximum pressure, volume for fuel, dimen-
sions, mass, and fuel capacity (kg) at the maximum pressure. Specifically, two different
sions, mass, and fuel capacity (kg) at the maximum pressure. Specifically, two different
classes of tanks have been introduced: the first class works at 300 bar internal pressure, the
classes of tanks have been introduced: the first class works at 300 bar internal pressure,
second class at 350 bar [33]. The maximum pressure of the tanks is selected by the customer.
the second class at 350 bar [33]. The maximum pressure of the tanks is selected by the
The DAPHNE MBSE models allow for the automatic selection of the power and
customer.
payload systems layouts and for the avoidance of any requirements conflict. It will also
The DAPHNE MBSE models allow for the automatic selection of the power and pay-
allow in the near future the definition of scenarios simulating the full mission of the UAV,
load systems layouts and for the avoidance of any requirements conflict. It will also allow
activity still in the developing phase.
in the near future the definition of scenarios simulating the full mission of the UAV, activ-
The DAPHNE MBSE model architecture is shown in Figure 7, and it has been devel-
ity still
oped inin
thethe developing
Matlab Systemphase.
Composer™ [34]. It has the following components:
Drones 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 27

Drones 2024, 8, 641 12 of 26

The DAPHNE MBSE model architecture is shown in Figure 7, and it has been devel-
oped in the Matlab System Composer ™ [34]. It has the following components:
•• power
powersystem;
system;
•• electric
electricengine;
engine;
•• payload;
payload;
•• loads;
loads;
•• mitigation
mitigationengine.
engine.

Figure 7. MBSE model architecture.

Figure 7. MBSE model architecture.
Power system components. The power system component has two subcomponents,
Power
as shown in system
Figure components.
8: one of them The power system
modeling the fuelcomponent
tanks and hasthe two
othersubcomponents,
one modeling
the fuel cells. The fuel cell subcomponent provides the required total power inmodeling
as shown in Figure 8: one of them modeling the fuel tanks and the other one the
output (i.e.,
fuel cells. The fuel cell subcomponent provides the required total power
electric engine, onboard systems, and payload). The tank subcomponent, on the basis of the in output (i.e.,
electric
fuel engine, onboard
cell efficiency, systems,
determines andamount
the total payload). The for
of fuel tank subcomponent,
mission completion, onthe
therequired
basis of
the fuel cell efficiency, determines the total amount
fuel volume in the tank, and the tank selected from the database. of fuel for mission completion, the
required fuel volume in the tank, and the tank selected from the database.
P·t
hydrogen = 𝑃𝑃 ⋅ 𝑡𝑡 (1)
ℎ𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 η=· LHV (1)
𝜂𝜂 ⋅ 𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿
wherePPisisthe
where thenecessary power,ttisisthe
necessarypower, themission
missionendurance,
endurance,ηη is is the
the fuel
fuel cell
cell efficiency,
efficiency,andand
LHV is the Lower Heating Value of hydrogen.
LHV is the Lower Heating Value of hydrogen.
Payload component. It has as many subcomponents as the number of sensors needed
by the mission. Each sensor subcomponent receives an input of the mission requirements
relative to the observation targets and outputs the selection of the best sensor set for the
mission, selected among the ones available in the database, additionally providing the
optimal flight speed and altitude for the mission. For instance, the visible sensor component,
shown in Figure 9a, receives as input the GSD and the along-track overlap as required
by the mission, and provides in output the flight speed and the altitude needed by each
sensor in the database. The selected visible sensor will be the one ensuring the required
GSD and overlap, flight speed and altitude compatible with the DAPHNE flight envelope,
and minimum power need. For the IR sensor component, shown in Figure 9b, a similar
behavior is implemented.
Drones 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 27
Drones 2024, 8, 641 13 of 26

Figure 8. Power system subcomponents.

Payload component. It has as many subcomponents as the number of sensors needed

by the mission. Each sensor subcomponent receives an input of the mission requirements
relative to the observation targets and outputs the selection of the best sensor set for the
mission, selected among the ones available in the database, additionally providing the
optimal flight speed and altitude for the mission. For instance, the visible sensor compo-
nent, shown in Figure 9a, receives as input the GSD and the along-track overlap as re-
quired by the mission, and provides in output the flight speed and the altitude needed by
each sensor in the database. The selected visible sensor will be the one ensuring the re-
quired GSD and overlap, flight speed and altitude compatible with the DAPHNE flight
envelope, and minimum power need. For the IR sensor component, shown in Figure 9b,
a similar behavior is implemented.
Figure
Figure Powersystem
[Link] system subcomponents.
subcomponents.

Payload component. It has as many subcomponents as the number of sensors needed

by the mission. Each sensor subcomponent receives an input of the mission requirements
relative to the observation targets and outputs the selection of the best sensor set for the
mission, selected among the ones available in the database, additionally providing the
optimal flight speed and altitude for the mission. For instance, the visible sensor compo-
nent, shown in Figure 9a, receives as input the GSD and the along-track overlap as re-
quired by the mission, and provides in output the flight speed and the altitude needed by
each sensor in the database. The selected visible sensor will be the one ensuring the re-
quired GSD and overlap, flight speed and altitude compatible with the DAPHNE flight
envelope, and minimum power need. For the IR sensor component, shown in Figure 9b,
a similar behavior is implemented.

(a) (b)
Figure 9. Visible sensor
Figurecomponent (a), IR
9. Visible sensor component
component (a),(b).
IR component (b).

The Loads component.

The LoadsIt iscomponent.
shown in ItFigure 10, in
is shown and it receives
Figure 10, andas input the
it receives as flight
input the flight
speed as computed by the payload component. It evaluates the power required for the for the
speed as computed by the payload component. It evaluates the power required
flight according to the aerodynamic polars of the vehicle.
flight according to the aerodynamic polars of the vehicle.
𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺 ⋅ 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 GSD · FL
𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 = Altitude = (2)
(2)
Ls
𝐿𝐿𝑠𝑠 Rs
𝑅𝑅𝑠𝑠
where GSD is the ground sampling distance, FL is the focal length, Ls is the sensor length
and Rs is the resolution of the sensor.

Ls − ( Ls · Overlap)
Tracking Velocity = (3)
shutter speed
(a) (b)
Figure 9. Visible sensor component (a), IR component (b).

The Loads component. It is shown in Figure 10, and it receives as input the flight
speed as computed by the payload component. It evaluates the power required for the
flight according to the aerodynamic polars of the vehicle.
𝐺𝑆𝐷 ⋅ 𝐹𝐿
𝐴𝑙𝑡𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑑𝑒 =
𝐿 (2)
𝑅
 where s is the
and RGSD is resolution
the groundofsampling
the sensor.
distance, FL is the focal length, Ls is the sensor length
and Rs is the resolution of the sensor. 𝐿 − (𝐿 ⋅ 𝑂𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑙𝑎𝑝)
𝑇𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑉𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 = (3)
𝐿 −𝑠ℎ𝑢𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑟
(𝐿 ⋅ 𝑂𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑙𝑎𝑝)
𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑
𝑇𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑉𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 = (3)
Drones 2024, 8, 641 𝑠ℎ𝑢𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑 14 of 26

Figure
Figure10.
[Link]
LoadsComponent.
Component.
Figure 10. Loads Component.
Engine
Engine component
component Figure
Figure 11.
11. ItItcomputes
computesthe the available
availablepower
powerfor
for aa given
given electric
electric
engine, evaluating
Engine
engine, the
thepower
component
evaluating Figurerequired
power by
bythe
themission.
11. It computes
required In
Incase
the available
mission. the
themission
casepower requires
for a given
mission it,
it,the
electric
requires the
model
engine, dimensionless
modelevaluating the
the engines
the power
dimensionless for
for vertical
required
engines takeoff
takeoff through
by the mission.
vertical block
In case the
through engines.
mission
block requires it, the
engines.
model dimensionless the engines for vertical takeoff through block engines.

Figure
Figure11.
[Link]
Enginecomponent.
component.
Figure 11. Engine component.
Mitigationengine.
Mitigation [Link] It
is is a logical
a logical component
component that,
that, as previously
as previously described,
described, findsfinds
the
the best matching
bestMitigation sensor
matching engine. layout
sensor Itlayout solving
solving
is a logical small-medium
small-medium
component conflicts,
that, asconflicts,
previously and/or
and/or defines mission
definesfinds
described, mission
the
phases
phases
best forhard
for
matching hard conflicting
conflicting
sensor observation
layoutobservation requirementson
requirements
solving small-medium ontop
topof
ofthe
conflicts, theneeded
needed
and/or sensor
sensor
defines layout.
layout.
mission
ItItcould
phases could potentially
forpotentially be embedded
be embedded
hard conflicting observation intorequirements
into theonboard
the onboard computer
computer for the
on top of for
the the automatic
automatic
needed setting
sensorsetting of
[Link]
the
the autopilot.
autopilot.
It could potentially be embedded into the onboard computer for the automatic setting of
the autopilot.
MBSEModel
MBSE ModelValidation
Validationand
andExemplary
ExemplaryUseUseCases
Cases
MBSEOneOne
Modelof the mainand advantages of theCases
MBSE approach is its ability to link the system
of Validation Exemplary
the main advantages ofUse
the MBSE approach is its ability to link the system
model specifications with related system software simulations. This is achieved by defining
modelOnespecifications
of the main with relatedof
advantages system software
the MBSE simulations.
approach This istoachieved
is its ability link theby defin-
system
meaningful use cases allowing for the detection of conflicts or bottlenecks in the design,
ing meaningful
model use with
specifications casesrelated
allowing for the
system detection
software of conflicts
simulations. or is
This bottlenecks
achieved by in defin-
the de-
manufacturing, and/or operation of complex systems, resulting in a very innovative
sign,
ing manufacturing,
meaningful and/or
use cases operation
allowing of complex
for the detectionsystems, resulting
of conflicts in a very in
or bottlenecks innovative
the de-
approach, only in the last decade extended to a wide range of industries such as aerospace,
approach,
sign, only in theand/or
manufacturing, last decade extended
operation to a wide
of complex range of
systems, industries
resulting in asuch
veryasinnovative
aerospace,
automotive, energy, naval, rail.
automotive,
approach, only energy, naval,
in the last rail. extended to a wide range of industries such as aerospace,
decade
In the case of DAPHNE, the challenge is to find the best sensors and tank layout
automotive, energy, naval, rail.
avoiding, as many as possible, conflicts, especially in terms of flight speed and altitude [35].
DAPHNE MBSE model validation has been performed by means of the definition of the
following three exemplary use cases:
4. monitoring mission with visible sensor of the health status of the plants in an agricul-
tural field [36];
5. inspection of a solar panel field by means of visible and infrared sensors [37];
Drones 2024, 8, 641 15 of 26

6. mines mapping by means of a multi-sensor layout.

Use Case 1 is a very simple monitoring mission using a single sensor and a visible
camera. It has been defined to simulate and check the basic functioning of the model.
Use Case 2 is a more complex case, which is a mission using two different sensors
requiring different flight conditions. It represents a low-level conflict case and it has been
defined to validate the mitigation engine logic. A variant of the Use Case 2 has been on top
defined to check for hard requirement conflicts, by varying the required resolution of the
two sensors, and the ability of the mitigation engine in activating the VTOL capability.
Use Case 3 is finally the simulation of a multi-sensor layout.
In the following parts of this section, a detailed description of each of the use cases
listed above, and the results of the relative simulations are provided.
Use Case 1. The first use case is the simulation of the monitoring of the health status
of an agricultural field. The mission has the following specific requirements:
• GSD = 13 mm;
• Overlap along track = 80%;
• Endurance 3 h;
• Hydrogen tank inner pressure = 350 bar;
• MTOW = 90 kg.
The DAPHNE MBSE model simulation selects the adequate visible sensor able to fulfill
the above requirements, evaluates the amount of hydrogen needed for the mission, defines
the tank’s configuration, and calculates the needed flight speed and altitude compatible
with the flight envelope of DAPHNE. Use Case 1 simulation produces the results shown by
the diagrams in Figures 12–14. Figure 12: the selected sensor having minimum deviation in
Drones 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW terms of GSD and overlap, the requested power by the sensor, the sensor mass, and 16 of the
27
optimal flight speed and altitude to ensure the requested frame rate, overlap, and GSD.

Figure12.
Figure Sensorselected
[Link] selectedfor
forUse
UseCase
Case1.1.

The diagram in Figure 13 shows the amount of hydrogen required to complete the
mission, evaluating the power required by the electric engine, the onboard subsystems,
the payload, and the duration of the mission (3 h).
 Figure 12. Sensor selected for Use Case 1.

The diagram in Figure 13 shows the amount of hydrogen required to complete the
Drones 2024, 8, 641 mission, evaluating the power required by the electric engine, the onboard subsystems,
16 of 26
the payload, and the duration of the mission (3 h).

Drones 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 17 of 27

Figure 13. Amount

Figure of hydrogen
13. Amount required
of hydrogen by Use
required CaseCase
by Use 1. 1.

Figure
Figure 14. Tank
14. Tank configuration
configuration selected
selected for Use
for Use CaseCase
1. 1.

TheThe diagram
selected tankinconfiguration
Figure 13 shows the amount
is shown in Figureof 14
hydrogen required
as defined on theto complete
basis of the the
amount of hydrogen required as previously calculated. The diagram visualizes also the the
mission, evaluating the power required by the electric engine, the onboard subsystems,
payload,
deviation of and the duration
the selected tankof
setthe
upmission
from the(3 tank
h). database with respect to the optimal
The selected tank configuration is shown in Figure 14 as defined on the basis of the
one in terms of maximum pressure, volume, and hydrogen mass.
amount of hydrogen required as previously calculated. The diagram visualizes also the
The last diagram generated by the MBSE modeling is the weight distribution for the
deviation of the selected tank set up from the tank database with respect to the optimal one
vehicle, as shown in Figure 15.
in terms of maximum pressure, volume, and hydrogen mass.
 Figure 14. Tank configuration selected for Use Case 1.

The selected tank configuration is shown in Figure 14 as defined on the basis of the
Drones 2024, 8, 641 amount of hydrogen required as previously calculated. The diagram visualizes also17the of 26
deviation of the selected tank set up from the tank database with respect to the optimal
one in terms of maximum pressure, volume, and hydrogen mass.
The
Thelast
lastdiagram
diagramgenerated
generatedby
bythe
theMBSE
MBSEmodeling
modelingisisthe
theweight
weightdistribution
distributionfor
forthe
the
vehicle, as shown in Figure 15.
vehicle, as shown in Figure 15.

Figure15.
Figure Weightdistribution
[Link] distributionfor
forUse
UseCase
Case1.1.

UseCase
Use Case2 2simulates
simulatesthetheinspection
inspectionofofa asolar
solarpanel
panelfield
fieldby
bymeans
meansofofvisible
visibleand
and
infraredsensors.
infrared [Link]
Thesolar
solarpanel
panelfield
field is
is located
located in
in an
an area
area subjected
subjectedtotostrong
strongwinds
windscausing
caus-
damage to the panels due to debris impacts. Such damage can be detected by IR sensors
ing damage to the panels due to debris impacts. Such damage can be detected by IR sen-
measuring the temperature difference between the impacted areas and the undamaged
sors measuring the temperature difference between the impacted areas and the undam-
ones. The challenge of the inspection is to distinguish actual damage from eventual debris,
aged ones. The challenge of the inspection is to distinguish actual damage from eventual
a fact that requires the use of a visible sensor too. The MBSE model simulation is run to
select both sensors, the IR and the visible ones, providing the optimal flight speed and
altitude, together with the hydrogen consumption, the power needs, and the weights of
the fuel tanks and the payload. The mission has the following specific requirements:
• IR GSD = 15 cm/pixel;
• Visible GSD = 1 cm/pixel;
• Overlap along track = 80%;
• Endurance 30 min;
• Hydrogen tank inner pressure = 300 bar;
• MTOW = 90 kg.
As given by the above requirements, two different values of GSD, respectively, for
the visible sensor and the IR sensor, are required to distinguish debris from damage to
photovoltaic panels.
The MBSE model evaluates the values of the flight altitude and flight velocity for each
sensor of the database, according to the required GSD. In most cases, the values of the
altitude and velocity are a function of the type of sensor, and they result differently for the
visible sensors and the IR sensors. The model is able to select the best sensor configuration,
ensuring higher or equal GSD values with respect to the required values. In Figure 16,
the optimal flight altitude and flight speed are shown as a compromise between the ones
required by the visible sensor and the ones required by the IR sensor as decided by the
mitigation engine. In the specific case, the selected visible sensor is able to provide the
required GSD if the vehicle operates at an altitude of about 93 m, with a flight speed of
about 68 km/h, while the IR sensor needs a flight altitude of about 114 m and a flight speed
of about 68 km/h. As the altitude required by the visible sensor is lower than the one
required by the IR sensor, considering that a lower altitude is beneficial for the GSD, the
MBSE model selects the lower altitude to ensure the required GSD for both the visible and
the IR sensor.
 required GSD if the vehicle operates at an altitude of about 93 m, with a flight speed of
about 68 km/h, while the IR sensor needs a flight altitude of about 114 m and a flight speed
of about 68 km/h. As the altitude required by the visible sensor is lower than the one re-
quired by the IR sensor, considering that a lower altitude is beneficial for the GSD, the
Drones 2024, 8, 641 MBSE model selects the lower altitude to ensure the required GSD for both the visible and
18 of 26
the IR sensor.

Drones 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 19 of 27

Figure 16. Sensor selected for Use Case 2.

Figure 16. Sensor selected for Use Case 2.
The amount of hydrogen required, according to the power needs, is shown in Figure
The amount of hydrogen required, according to the power needs, is shown in
17, and it results lower than the one required in Use Case 1, because of the shorter endur-
Figure 17, and it results lower than the one required in Use Case 1, because of the shorter
ance required.
endurance required.

Figure 17. Amount

Amount of
of hydrogen
hydrogen required
requiredby
byUse
UseCase
Case2.2.

In Figure 18, the selected tank configuration for Use Case 2 is shown. The model se-
lects from the tank database the one having 300 bar as maximum pressure, excluding the
ones working at 350 bar. Finally, the weight distribution of Use Case 2 is given in Figure
19.
Drones 2024, 8, 641 19 of 26
Drones 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 20 of 27

In Figure 18, the selected tank configuration for Use Case 2 is shown. The model
Drones 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 20 of 27
selects from the tank database the one having 300 bar as maximum pressure, excluding the
ones working at 350 bar. Finally, the weight distribution of Use Case 2 is given in Figure 19.

Figure
Figure 18.
18. Tank
Tank configuration
configuration selected
selected for
for Use
Use Case
Case 2.
2.

Figure 18. Tank configuration selected for Use Case 2.

Figure 19. Weights distribution for Use Case 2.

Figure 19. Weights distribution for Use Case 2.
In order to simulate a requirement conflict, a variant of Use Case 2 has been defined
withIntheorder to simulate
following a requirement conflict, a variant of Use Case 2 has been defined
requirements:
Figure 19. Weights distribution for Use Case 2.
with Use
the following
Case 2b requirements:
Use CaseIn 2b
• IR GSD = 1 order to simulate a requirement conflict, a variant of Use Case 2 has been defined
cm/pixel;
• IR GSDwith= the
1 cm/pixel;
following requirements:
• Visible GSD = 1 cm/pixel.
• Visible GSD Use=Case
1 cm/pixel.
2b
• variant
In this case,
IR GSD = 1the GSD required for the IR sensor has decreased, with respect to
cm/pixel;
•
the one previously defined,
Visible GSD = down to 1 cm/pixel, resulting in a flight speed lower than the
1 cm/pixel.
In this variant case, the GSD required for the IR sensor has decreased, with respect to
the one previously defined, down to 1 cm/pixel, resulting in a flight speed lower than the
Drones 2024, 8, 641 20 of 26
Drones 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 21 of 27
Drones 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 21 of 27
In this variant case, the GSD required for the IR sensor has decreased, with respect to
the one previously defined, down to 1 cm/pixel, resulting in a flight speed lower than the
stall one. This requirement violation has been then detected by the requirement checks
stall one.
stall one. This
Thisrequirement
requirement violation
violation has been then detected by the requirement checks [38],
[38], as shown in Figure 20, where the has been then
requirement detected by the
“Stall_Velocity” requirement
(i.e., the lowestchecks
possi-
as shown
[38],flight in
as shown Figure 20,
inresults where
Figureviolated the
20, where requirement
thered-colored)“Stall_Velocity”
requirement[39]. (i.e., the lowest possible
“Stall_Velocity” (i.e., the lowest possi-
ble speed) (i.e.,
flight
ble speed)
flight results
speed) violated
results (i.e.,(i.e.,
violated red-colored) [39].[39].
red-colored)

Figure 20. Failed requirement test for Use Case 2b. Blue: requirement correctly implemented in the
Figure 20.
model; Failed
Green: requirement
mission test for
requirement Usemet,
fully CaseRed: Blue: requirement
2b. mission correctly
requirement implemented in the
not satisfied.
model; Green: mission requirement fully met, Red: mission requirement not satisfied.
model; Green: mission requirement fully met, Red: mission requirement not satisfied.
The mitigation engine provides a solution to the conflict to ensure the correct perfor-
manceThe
of mitigation
the mission, engine
even ifprovides a solution
the requirement to
solutionon the
the conflict
tostall speed isto
conflict to ensure
ensure
not the
the correct
verified. correct
As perfor-
perfor-
previously
mance of the mission, even if the requirement on stall speed is not
mentioned, the DAPHNE project drone can be configured VTOL by adding four engines verified. As previously
mentioned,
for the DAPHNE
vertical take-off. When project drone can
the monitoring be configured
speed is lower than VTOLtheby adding
stall speed, four
theengines
model,
for vertical
(through take-off.
thetake-off. When the
When the monitoring
engine component) monitoring speed
speed
activates the VTOL is lower
is lower than
than
engines the stall
the
Figures stall speed,
21speed,
and 22,thethe model,
model,
updating
(through the engine component) activates the VTOL engines Figures
the needed energy budget. When the VTOL capability is activated, the full MBSE model 21 and 22, updating
is needed
needed energy
theupdated: power budget.
energybudget, When
[Link] the VTOL
VTOLcapability
thehydrogen
cells, capability isisactivated,
tank layouts, activated,
and thethe
thefull MBSE
full
needed MBSE model
flight model
speedis
updated:
is updated: power
power budget,
budget, fuel
fuel
to achieve the required resolution. cells, hydrogen
cells, hydrogen tank
tanklayouts,
layouts, and
andthe needed
the needed flight speed
flight to
speed
achieve
to thethe
achieve required
requiredresolution.
resolution.

Sensor selected
Figure 21. Sensor selected for Use Case 2b.
Figure 21. Sensor selected for Use Case 2b.
 Drones2024,
Drones 2024,8,8,641
x FOR PEER REVIEW 22 of 27
21 of 26

Figure
Figure 22.22. Tank
Tank configuration
configuration selected
selected for Usefor Use2b.
Case Case 2b.

The
The resulting
resulting altitude
altitude of about
of about 7 m,speed
7 m, and and ofspeed
aboutof4about 4 km/h
km/h Figure 21 Figure 21 are possible
are possible
asas
thethe
DAPHNE drone operates in this case as a quadcopter (VTOL configuration).
DAPHNE drone operates in this case as a quadcopter (VTOL configuration). These These
kinds
kindsof of
missions are are
missions possible only only
possible over inhabited areas and
over inhabited VLOS
areas andconditions.
VLOS conditions.
Use Case 3 This last use case has been defined to simulate
Use Case 3 This last use case has been defined to simulate the following multi-sensor
the following multi-sensor
mission,
mission, relative to the mapping of mines, and the air quality of aFor
relative to the mapping of mines, and the air quality of a given site. the de-
given site. For the
tection of both plastic and metal objects, the use of GPR, as well as IR cameras, is required,
detection of both plastic and metal objects, the use of GPR, as well as IR cameras, is
resulting in the following mission payload requirements:
required, resulting in the following mission payload requirements:
• Overlap Along Track and Cross Track: 80–30%;
• • GSDOverlap Along Track and Cross Track: 80–30%;
IR: 10 mm/pixel;
• • GSDGSDVisible: 10mm/pixel;
IR: 10 mm/pixel;
• • Depth
GSDGeoradar:
Visible: 10
15 mm/pixel;
m;
• • Measurements
Depth Georadar: 15 m;
of air quality.
Drones 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 23 of 27
• TheMeasurements
microwave andofchemical
air quality.
sensor components are shown in Figure 23.
The microwave and chemical sensor components are shown in Figure 23.

Figure 23. Chemical component and GPR microwave component.

Figure 23. Chemical component and GPR microwave component.
The mitigation engine component, in Figure 24, receives the specifications of each
sensor and finds the layout minimizing the eventual requirements conflicts and is in
charge of activating the VTOL capability, if required, as in the present case. It provides
the sensor and tank layouts as given in Figures 25 and 26. Tank configuration selected for
Use Case 3 (VTOL)
Drones 2024, 8, 641 22 of 26
Figure 23. Chemical component and GPR microwave component.

The
The mitigation
mitigation engine
engine component,
component, in in Figure
Figure 24,
24, receives
receives the
the specifications
specifications ofof each
each
sensor
sensor and finds the layout minimizing the eventual requirements conflicts and is
and finds the layout minimizing the eventual requirements conflicts and is in
in
charge of activating the VTOL capability, if required, as in the present case. It provides
charge of activating the VTOL capability, if required, as in the present case. It provides the
the sensor
sensor andand
tanktank layouts
layouts as given
as given in Figures
in Figures 25 and
25 and 26. Tank
26. Tank configuration
configuration selected
selected for
for Use
Use
CaseCase 3 (VTOL)
3 (VTOL).

Drones 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2

Mitigation engine component.

Figure 24. Mitigation

Figure 25. Sensor selected

Figure 25. for Use selected
Sensor Case 3. for Use Case 3.
Drones 2024, 8, 641 23 of 26
Figure 25. Sensor selected for Use Case 3.

Figure 26. Tank configuration selected for Use Case 3 (VTOL).

The
Figure 26. resulting
Tank altitude
configuration of about
selected 4 m,
for Use and
Case speed of about 4 km/h are possible as the
3 (VTOL).
DAPHNE drone operates in this case as a quadcopter (VTOL configuration). These kinds
ofThe
missions are possible
resulting altitude only over4inhabited
of about areas of
m, and speed and VLOS
about 4 conditions.
km/h are possible as the
DAPHNE drone operates in this case as a quadcopter (VTOL configuration). These kinds
6. Conclusions
of missions are possible only over inhabited areas and VLOS conditions.
The work conducted for the design and development of the DAPHNE UAV has been
generically presented in this paper whose main focus is the description of the design and
validation of the monitoring missions, for which DAPHNE will be used. For this purpose,
an innovative approach using MBSE models has been defined and implemented, with the
intents and expected benefits given in Section 5, which are the selection and integration
of a complex multi-sensor layout, as required by multi-purpose monitoring missions, and
the sizing of the fuel-cell-based main power system. Only the first exemplary results
obtained via the MBSE model have been presented, showing the high flexibility and ability
to find inconsistencies.
A plan for the future includes the extension of the MBSE model to all the sensors
as given in Table 1, for supporting the coming development phases (Phases 5 and 6), as
defined in Section 2 (i.e., manufacturing and test), that is, the use of the MBSE model
described for the flight test campaign missions planning. In this context, the test campaign
is expected to verify the efficiency and accuracy of the MBSE model in selecting the payload
configuration, and the adequate flight speeds and altitudes.
The final goal of the DAPHNE project is to provide by the end of 2025, a fixed-wing
UAV prototype able to perform multipurpose missions at zero impact, easily definable
via the MBSE approach as described in the paper, and ready for the next industrialization
phase, which is not part of the DAPHNE project.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, G.R., C.C., P.B.; methodology, G.R., C.C., P.B. and V.D.;
software, V.D. and P.B.; validation, G.R., C.C. and P.B.; formal analysis, V.D.; investigation, V.D. and
A.E.T.; resources, V.D. and A.E.T.; data curation, V.D. and A.E.T.; writing—original draft preparation,
V.D. and P.B.; writing—review and editing, G.R., C.C., P.B. and V.D.; visualization, V.D.; supervision,
G.R., C.C. and P.B.; project administration, G.R.; funding acquisition, G.R. All authors have read and
agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Drones 2024, 8, 641 24 of 26

Funding: The DAPHNE project is being carried out under the financial support of the Italian
Ministry of Enterprises and Made in Italy—MIMIT, specifically in the framework of the MIMIT
Call—Agreements for Innovation, Prog n. F/310202/04/X56, CUP: B69J23000640005.
Data Availability Statement: Data is contained within the article.
Acknowledgments: The authors wish to thank the enterprises involved in the DAPHNE Project
and, in particular, M.S. Archt. Davide Napolitano as CEO of CTM and DAPHNE enterprises’
consortium leader.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviation

BVLOS Behind Visual Line of Sight

CAGR Compounded Average Growth Rate
CD Drag Coefficient
CFD Computational Fluid Dynamic
CL Lift Coefficient
GPR Ground Penetrating Radar
GSD Ground Samling Distance
IR infrared
LHV hydrogen Lower Heating Value
LIDAR Light Detection and Ranging
MBSE Model-Based System Engineering
MIMIT Ministry of Enterprises and Made in Italy
MTOW Maximum Take-Off Weight
n Vertical Load Factor
nmax Maximum Vertical Load Factor
PA Power Available
PEM Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell
PR Power Required
SAR Synthetic Aperture Radar
SME Small and Medium Enterprise
STOL Short Take Off and Landing
SWIR Short-wave infrared
VTOL Vertical Take Off and Landing
UAV Unmanned Aerial Vehicle

References
1. [Link]. Fixed Wing Drone Market Outlook 2023–2033. Available online: [Link]
market#:~:text=Fixed%20Wing%20Drone%20Market%20Outlook,by%20the%20end%20of%202033 (accessed on 29 June 2024).
2. Roy, S.; Gulati, G. Environmental Monitoring via Drone. Int. J. Eng. Appl. Sci. Technol. 2021, 5, 250–253. [CrossRef]
3. Gallacher, D. Drone Applications for Environmental Management in Urban Space: A Review. Int. J. Sustain. Land Use Urban Plan.
2017, 3, 1–14. [CrossRef]
4. Manfreda, S.; McCabe, M.; Miller, P.; Lucas, R.; Madrigal, V.; Mallinis, G.; Ben Dor, E.; Helman, D.; Estes, L.; Ciraolo, G.; et al. On
the Use of Unmanned Aerial Systems for Environmental Monitoring. Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 641. [CrossRef]
5. Yakushiji, K.; Fujita, H.; Murata, M.; Hiroi, N.; Hamabe, Y.; Yakushiji, F. Short-Range Transportation Using Unmanned Aerial
Vehicles (UAVs) during Disasters in Japan. Drones 2020, 4, 68. [CrossRef]
6. Gupta, A.; Afrin, T.; Scully, E.; Yodo, N. Advances of UAVs toward Future Transportation: The State-of-the-Art, Challenges, and
Opportunities. Futur. Transp. 2021, 1, 326–350. [CrossRef]
7. Marketandmarkets. Drone Package Delivery Market. Available online: [Link]
[Link] (accessed on 27 April 2024).
8. Diogo, C.M.A.; Fernandes, E. A Mass, Fuel, and Energy Perspective on Fixed-Wing Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Scaling. Drones
2024, 8, 396. [CrossRef]
9. Zhang, B.; Song, Z.; Zhao, F.; Liu, C. Overview of Propulsion Systems for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Energies 2022, 15, 455.
[CrossRef]
Drones 2024, 8, 641 25 of 26

10. Gavrilovi, N.; Vincekovi, D.; Moschetta, J.M. A Long Range Fuel Cell/Soaring UAV System for Crossing the Atlantic Ocean. In Pro-
ceedings of the 11th International Micro Air Vehicle Competition and Conference, Madrid, Spain, 29 September–4 October 2019.
11. Shen, Z.; Liu, S.; Zhu, W.; Ren, D.; Xu, Q.; Feng, Y. A Review on Key Technologies and Developments of Hydrogen Fuel Cell
Multi-Rotor Drones. Energies 2024, 17, 4193. [CrossRef]
12. Airbus. Airbus and Georgia Tech Open Center for Overall Aircraft Design. Available online: [Link]
newsroom/press-releases/2018-10-airbus-and-georgia-tech-open-center-for-overall-aircraft-design (accessed on 29 June 2024).
13. Boeing. Model Based Engineering (MBE) Supplier Integration. Available online: [Link]
[Link] (accessed on 29 June 2024).
14. Embraer. Crafting Extraordinary Futures. Available online: [Link] (accessed on 29
June 2024).
15. Kriebel, S.; Moyses, V.; Strobl, G.; Richenhagen, J.; Orth, P.; Pischinger, S.; Schulze, C.; Greifenberg, T.; Rumpe, B. The Next
Generation of BMW’s Electrified Powertrains: Providing Software Features Quickly by Model-Based System Design. Available
online: [Link]
[Link] (accessed on 29 June 2024).
16. Daly, J. Rolls Royce. Arcadia and Capella for a Large Complex Mechanical System. Available online: [Link]
resources/pdf/Case_Study_Rolls_Royce.pdf (accessed on 29 June 2024).
17. Brusa, E. Synopsis of the MBSE, Lean and Smart Manufacturing in the Product and Process Design for an Assessment of the
Strategy “Industry 4.0”. Available online: [Link] (accessed on 29 June 2024).
18. Pop, G.I.; Titu, A.M.; Pop, A.B. Enhancing Aerospace Industry Efficiency and Sustainability: Process Integration and Quality
Management in the Context of Industry 4.0. Sustainability 2023, 15, 16206. [CrossRef]
19. CeSMA. Centro Servizi Metrologici e Tecnologici Avanzati. Available online: [Link]
(accessed on 29 June 2024).
20. CTM Avio. Research and Development. Available online: [Link] (accessed on 29
June 2024).
21. Researchdive. UAV Drones Market by Product Type. Available online: [Link]
vehicle-uav-drones-market (accessed on 29 June 2024).
22. AeroVironment. JUMP 20. Available online: [Link] (accessed on 29 June 2024).
23. Fly Dragon. FLY-380 VTOL. Available online: [Link] (accessed on 29
June 2024).
24. Roskam, J. Airplane Design; 1985 First Print; DARcorporation: Lawrence, Kansas, 1985; 207p, ISBN 9781884885426.
25. Motlagh, N.H.; Kortoçi, P.; Su, X. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles for Air Pollution Monitoring: A Survey. IEEE Internet Things J. 2023,
10, 21687–21704. [CrossRef]
26. Waagen, J.; Sánchez, J.G.; van der Heiden, M.; Kuiters, A.; Lulof, P. In the Heat of the Night: Comparative Assessment of
Drone Thermography at the Archaeological Sites of Acquarossa, Italy, and Siegerswoude, The Netherlands. Drones 2022, 6, 165.
[CrossRef]
27. Zheng, R.; Wang, Z.; Li, X.; She, Z.; Wang, B. Water Quality Sampling and Multi-Parameter Monitoring System Based on
Multi-Rotor UAV Implementation. Water 2023, 15, 2129. [CrossRef]
28. Asadzadeh, S.; de Oliveira, W.J.; de Souza Filho, C.R. UAV-based remote sensing for the petroleum industry and environmental
monitoring: State-of-the-art and perspectives. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2022, 208, 109633. [CrossRef]
29. Esposito, F.; Rufino, G.; Moccia, A.; Donnarumma, P.; Esposito, M.; Magliulo, V. An Integrated Electro-Optical Payload System
for Forest Fires Monitoring from Airborne Platform. In Proceedings of the IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, Montana, 3–10
March 2007. 13p.
30. Koo, V.; Chan, Y.K.; Gobi, V.; Chua, M.C. A new unmanned aerial vehicle synthetic aperture radar for environmental monitoring.
Prog. Electromagn. Res. 2012, 122, 245–268. [CrossRef]
31. AutoDesk. Software Inventor. Available online: [Link]
tab=subscription (accessed on 29 June 2024).
32. Ferreira, B.; Santos, D.F.M.; Pinto, A.M.F.R.; Falcão, D.S. Development and testing of a PEM fuel cell stack envisioning unmanned
aerial vehicles applications. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2024, 52, 1345–1353. [CrossRef]
33. Tanks Intelligent Energy. Cylinder Options for UAVs. Available online: [Link]
uploads/2022/11/[Link] (accessed on 29 June 2024).
34. MathWorks. System Composer Design and Analyze System and Software Architectures. Available online: [Link]
[Link]/products/[Link] (accessed on 29 June 2024).
35. MathWorks. Link, Manage, and Verify Requirements. Available online: [Link]
[Link] (accessed on 29 June 2024).
36. Lawrence, I.D.; Agnishwar, J.; Vijayakumar, R. Drone Technology in Agriculture For Surveillance and Inspection. Eur. Chem. Bull.
2023, 12, 1253–1263.
37. Libra, M.; Daneček, M.; Lešetický, J.; Poulek, V.; Sedláček, J.; Beránek, V. Monitoring of Defects of a Photovoltaic Power Plant
Using a Drone. Energies 2019, 12, 795. [CrossRef]
Drones 2024, 8, 641 26 of 26

38. Gianni, D.; D’Ambrogio, A.; Tolk, A. (Eds.) Modeling and Simulation-Based Systems Engineering Handbook, 1st ed.; CRC Press:
Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2014; ISBN 9781466571457.
39. MathWorks. Create a Test Harness. Available online: [Link]
(accessed on 29 June 2024).

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.