Review Article
Micro- and Nano-Air Vehicles: State of the Art
Table 2
Selection criteria of different rotary AVS typologies [
27] (1: bad, 10: very good).
| Selection criteria | Conventional (a) | Ducted coaxial (b) | Coaxial (c) |
| Compactness of folding | 1 | 2 | 10 | Reliability | 9 | 10 | 8 | Controllability | 5 | 5 | 7 | Aerodynamic cleanliness | 8 | 2 | 8 | Maturity of technology | 10 | 8 | 10 | Hover efficiency | 10 | 8 | 8 | Aerodynamic interaction | 7 | 7 | 7 | Vibration | 1 | 2 | 1 | Cruise efficiency | 7 | 6 | 8 | Maneuverability | 5 | 3 | 3 | Ease of payload packaging | 10 | 8 | 10 | Simplicity of structure | 8 | 8 | 10 | Simplicity of control system | 6 | 6 | 6 |
| Selection criteria | Side by side (d) | Tandem (f) | Quad-rotor (g) |
| Compactness of folding | 2 | 2 | 8 | Reliability | 8 | 8 | 9 | Controllability | 5 | 5 | 10 | Aerodynamic cleanliness | 6 | 6 | 2 | Maturity of technology | 9 | 10 | 5 | Hover efficiency | 10 | 10 | 8 | Aerodynamic interaction | 10 | 10 | 7 | Vibration | 2 | 2 | 2 | Cruise efficiency | 6 | 6 | 5 | Maneuverability | 4 | 4 | 9 | Ease of payload packaging | 10 | 10 | 8 | Simplicity of structure | 8 | 8 | 7 | Simplicity of control system | 6 | 6 | 10 |
|
|