Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Fern, Lisa

Publications and source records attributed to Fern, Lisa.

36 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2015

An Evaluation of Detect and Avoid Displays for UAS: The Effect of Information Level and Display Location on Pilot Performance

The pilot-in-the-loop Detect-and-Avoid (DAA) task requires the pilot to carry out three major functions: 1) detect a potential threat, 2) determine an appropriate resolution maneuver, and 3) execute that resolution maneuver via the GCS control and navigation interface(s). The purpose of the present study was to examine two main questions with respect to DAA display considerations that could impact pilots ability to maintain well clear from other aircraft. First, what is the effect of a minimum (or basic) information display compared to an advanced information display on pilot performance? Second, what is the effect of display location on UAS pilot performance? Two levels of information level (basic, advanced) were compared across two levels of display location (standalone, integrated), for a total of four displays. The results indicate that the advanced displays had faster overall response times compared to the basic displays, however, there were no significant differences between the standalone and integrated displays.

detect and avoid↗
NASA NTRS2015

UAS Integration into the NAS: Detect and Avoid Display Evaluations in Support of SC-228 MOPS Development

This presentation provides an overview of the work the Human Systems Integration (HSI) sub-project has done on detect and avoid (DAA) displays while working on the UAS Integration into the NAS project. Much of the work has been used to support the ongoing development of minimum operational performance standards (MOPS) for UAS by RTCA Special Committee 228. The design and results of three different human-in-the-loop simulations are discussed, with particular emphasis on the role of the UAS pilot in the Self Separation Timeline.

unmanned aircraft systems↗
NASA NTRS2015

An Evaluation of Detect and Avoid (DAA) Displays for Unmanned Aircraft Systems: The Effect of Information Level and Display Location on Pilot Performance

A consortium of government, industry and academia is currently working to establish minimum operational performance standards for Detect and Avoid (DAA) and Control and Communications (C2) systems in order to enable broader integration of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) into the National Airspace System (NAS). One subset of these performance standards will need to address the DAA display requirements that support an acceptable level of pilot performance. From a pilot's perspective, the DAA task is the maintenance of self separation and collision avoidance from other aircraft, utilizing the available information and controls within the Ground Control Station (GCS), including the DAA display. The pilot-in-the-loop DAA task requires the pilot to carry out three major functions: 1) detect a potential threat, 2) determine an appropriate resolution maneuver, and 3) execute that resolution maneuver via the GCS control and navigation interface(s). The purpose of the present study was to examine two main questions with respect to DAA display considerations that could impact pilots' ability to maintain well clear from other aircraft. First, what is the effect of a minimum (or basic) information display compared to an advanced information display on pilot performance? Second, what is the effect of display location on UAS pilot performance? Two levels of information level (basic, advanced) were compared across two levels of display location (standalone, integrated), for a total of four displays. The authors propose an eight-stage pilot-DAA interaction timeline from which several pilot response time metrics can be extracted. These metrics were compared across the four display conditions. The results indicate that the advanced displays had faster overall response times compared to the basic displays, however, there were no significant differences between the standalone and integrated displays. Implications of the findings on understanding pilot performance on the DAA task, the development of DAA display performance standards, as well as the need for future research are discussed.

detect and avoid↗
NASA NTRS2015

Measured Response for UAS Integration into the National Airspace System

The measured response (MR) is the response time of aircraft to Air Traffic Controller (ATCo) commands and clearances. The overall MR can be broken up into several components, including the pilot verbal latencies (MR1), the time between the end of an ATCo clearance and the beginning of the pilots read back, and the execution initiation latency (MR2), the time between the end of the ATCos clearance and when the pilot begins to execute a maneuver. The MR is a crucial concern for the integration of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) into the National Airspace System (NAS) due to potentially greater latencies stemming from remote pilot communication and command execution. As a result, it is important to quantify what latencies in verbal responding and command execution are acceptable for safe and efficient operations in the NAS. The present studies begin to address these issues in a series of four simulations supported by the UAS Integration into the NAS program.

UAS in the NAS↗
NASA NTRS2014

UAS Integration into the NAS: iHTL: DAA Display Evaluation Preliminary Results

The integrated human-in-the-loop (iHITL) simulation examined the effect of four different Detect-and-Avoid (DAA) display concepts on unmanned aircraft system (UAS) pilots' ability to maintain safe separation. The displays varied in the type and amount of guidance they provided to pilots. The study's background and methodology are discussed, followed by a presentation of the preliminary 'measured response' data (i.e., pilots' end-to-end response time in reacting to traffic alerts on their DAA display). Results indicate that display type had moderate to no affect on pilot measured response times.

unmanned aircraft systems↗
NASA NTRS2014

NASA's UAS Integration into the NAS: A Report on the Human Systems Integration Phase 1 Activities

This presentation summarizes the technical activities undertaken by the UAS in the NAS project's Human-Systems Integration team during during it's first phase. The technical activites are discussed in terms of the project's stated mission, research themes and technical challenges. The talk also covers the simulation research that has been performed by the HSI in Phase 1. The end of the presentation lays out the group's plans for Phase 2.

Fern, Lisa↗
NASA NTRS2014

NASA's UAS Integration into the NAS: A Report on the Human Systems Integration Phase 1 Simulation Activities

In 2011 the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) began a five-year Project to address the technical barriers related to routine access of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS). Planned in two phases, the goal of the first phase was to lay the foundations for the Project by identifying those barriers and key issues to be addressed to achieve integration. Phase 1 activities were completed two years into the five-year Project. The purpose of this paper is to review activities within the Human Systems Integration (HSI) subproject in Phase 1 toward its two objectives: 1) develop GCS guidelines for routine UAS access to the NAS, and 2) develop a prototype display suite within an existing Ground Control Station (GCS). The first objective directly addresses a critical barrier for UAS integration into the NAS - a lack of GCS design standards or requirements. First, the paper describes the initial development of a prototype GCS display suite and supporting simulation software capabilities. Then, three simulation experiments utilizing this simulation architecture are summarized. The first experiment sought to determine a baseline performance of UAS pilots operating in civil airspace under current instrument flight rules for manned aircraft. The second experiment examined the effect of currently employed UAS contingency procedures on Air Traffic Control (ATC) participants. The third experiment compared three GCS command and control interfaces on UAS pilot response times in compliance with ATC clearances. The authors discuss how the results of these and future simulation and flight-testing activities contribute to the development of GCS guidelines to support the safe integration of UAS into the NAS. Finally, the planned activities for Phase 2, including an integrated human-in-the-loop simulation and two flight tests are briefly described.

National Airspace System↗
NASA NTRS2014

UAS Measured Response: The Effect of GCS Control Mode Interfaces on Pilot Ability to Comply with ATC Clearances

The present study examines the effects of three different control mode interfaces on unmanned aerial system (UAS) pilots ability to comply with air traffic controller traffic clearances. Pilots controlled a simulated UAS with a waypoint-only interface, an auto-pilot interface and a manual, stick and throttle interface. Results indicate that pilots are best able to get in-the-loop when provided with auto-pilot and manual control inputs. Limitations to the present study and future analyses are discussed.

Measured Response↗
NASA NTRS2014

UAS Measured Response: The Effect of GCS Control Mode Interfaces on Pilot Ability to Comply with ATC Clearances

This presentation summarizes the background and primary findings from a study on UAS (Unmanned Aerial Systems) pilots' ability to get 'in-the-loop' when responding to air traffic controller clearances around traffic and weather. Pilots controlled a simulated UAS using three different control mode interfaces: a waypoint-to-waypoint interface, an auto-pilot interface (which allowed heading and altitude holds), and a manual stick-and-throttle interface. Pilots' response times were compared across the three conditions, with the waypoint-to-waypoint interface resulting in the slowest pilot performance in several of the metrics. Conclusions from these findings and limitations of the study are discussed.

Measured Response↗
NASA NTRS2014

Detect and Avoid Timeline

This brief presentation provides a timeline for the steps taken by an unmanned aerial system (UAS) pilot when maneuvering to avoid a conflicting aircraft. This talk also provides time estimates for each step in the timeline utilizing 'measured response' data from previous Human Systems Integration Division simulation research.

Fern, Lisa↗
NASA NTRS2014

UAS Contingency Management: The Effect of Different Procedures on ATC in Civil Airspace Operations

Current study examined the impact of four, currently-employed, unmanned aerial system (UAS) contingency procedures on air traffic controller (ATC) workload and performance. Controllers managed a Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON) sector while a single UAS passed through their sector. In four of the five scenarios, the UAS was scripted to experience an emergency (e.g., loss of command and control link, sudden drop in oil pressure) and then execute one of four possible contingency maneuvers. The fifth scenario was a baseline and contained no emergency. Results showed no significant differences in performance or workload among the four the study's design discussed.

Contingency Management↗
NASA NTRS2014

UAS Integration into the NAS: HSI Full Mission Simulation Analysis by Input Method

The goal of the Full Mission Sim was to examine the effects of different command and control interfaces on UAS pilots' ability to respond to ATC commands and traffic advisories. Results suggest that higher levels of automation (i.e., waypoint-to-waypoint control interfaces) lead to longer initial response times and longer edit times. The findings demonstrate the importance of providing pilots with interfaces that facilitate their ability to get back 'in the loop.'

ground control stations↗
NASA NTRS2014

UAS Integration into the NAS: Phase 1 Human Systems Integration Activities

This presentation addresses the work conducted by the Human Systems Integration (HSI) subproject during Phase 1 of the UAS in the NAS project. This includes information on the HSI technical barriers to UAS integration into the NAS, as well as the HSI objectives that address these barriers. The presentation includes brief discussions of the human-in-the-loop simulations conducted by HSI in Phase 1 and concludes with a look at the activities planned for Phase 2.

human-systems integration↗
NASA NTRS2014

UAS Integration into the NAS: HSI Full Mission Simulation Preliminary Results

The goal of the Full Mission Sim was to examine the effects of different command and control interfaces on UAS pilots' ability to respond to ATC commands and traffic advisories. Results suggest that higher levels of automation (i.e., waypoint-to-waypoint control interfaces) lead to longer initial response times and longer edit times. The findings demonstrate the importance of providing pilots with interfaces that facilitate their ability to get back "in the loop."

ground control stations↗
NASA NTRS2014

UAS Integration into the NAS: HSI Display Evaluation Overview

This is a HSI (Horizontal Situation Indicator) display evaluation overview presented to the RTCA (Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics) SC-228 Detect and Avoid Working group. The goal of the presentation is to provide data on the effect of various Detect and Avoid (DAA) display and guidance features with respect to pilot performance of the self-separation function in order to determine the minimum information requirements for DAA displays.

Well Clear↗
NASA NTRS2012

UAS Integration Into the NAS: An Examination of Baseline Compliance in the Current Airspace System

As a result of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) are expected to be integrated into the National Airspace System (NAS) by 2015. Several human factors challenges need to be addressed before UAS can safely and routinely fly in the NAS with manned aircraft. Perhaps the most significant challenge is for the UAS to be non-disruptive to the air traffic management system. Another human factors challenge is how to provide UAS pilots with intuitive traffic information in order to support situation awareness (SA) of their airspace environment as well as a see-and-avoid capability comparable to manned aircraft so that a UAS pilot could safely maneuver the aircraft to maintain separation and collision avoidance if necessary. A simulation experiment was conducted to examine baseline compliance of UAS operations in the current airspace system. Researchers also examined the effects of introducing a Cockpit Situation Display (CSD) into a UAS Ground Control Station (GCS) on UAS pilot performance, workload and situation awareness while flying in a positively controlled sector. Pilots were tasked with conducting a highway patrol police mission with a Medium Altitude Long Endurance (MALE) UAS in L.A. Center airspace with two mission objectives: 1) to reroute the UAS when issued new instructions from their commander, and 2) to communicate with Air Traffic Control (ATC) to negotiate flight plan changes and respond to vectoring and altitude change instructions. Objective aircraft separation data, workload ratings, SA data, and subjective ratings regarding UAS operations in the NAS were collected. Results indicate that UAS pilots were able to comply appropriately with ATC instructions. In addition, the introduction of the CSD improved pilot SA and reduced workload associated with UAS and ATC interactions.

Fern, Lisa↗
NASA NTRS2012

Varying Levels of Automation on UAS Operator Responses to Traffic Resolution Advisories in Civil Airspace

Continuing demand for the use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) has put increasing pressure on operations in civil airspace. The need to fly UAS in the National Airspace System (NAS) in order to perform missions vital to national security and defense, emergency management, and science is increasing at a rapid pace. In order to ensure safe operations in the NAS, operators of unmanned aircraft, like those of manned aircraft, may be required to maintain separation assurance and avoid loss of separation with other aircraft while performing their mission tasks. This experiment investigated the effects of varying levels of automation on UAS operator performance and workload while responding to conflict resolution instructions provided by the Tactical Collision Avoidance System II (TCAS II) during a UAS mission in high-density airspace. The purpose of this study was not to investigate the safety of using TCAS II on UAS, but rather to examine the effect of automation on the ability of operators to respond to traffic collision alerts. Six licensed pilots were recruited to act as UAS operators for this study. Operators were instructed to follow a specified mission flight path, while maintaining radio contact with Air Traffic Control and responding to TCAS II resolution advisories. Operators flew four, 45 minute, experimental missions with four different levels of automation: Manual, Knobs, Management by Exception, and Fully Automated. All missions included TCAS II Resolution Advisories (RAs) that required operator attention and rerouting. Operator compliance and reaction time to RAs was measured, and post-run NASA-TLX ratings were collected to measure workload. Results showed significantly higher compliance rates, faster responses to TCAS II alerts, as well as less preemptive operator actions when higher levels of automation are implemented. Physical and Temporal ratings of workload were significantly higher in the Manual condition than in the Management by Exception and Fully Automated conditions.

Kenny, Caitlin↗