Engineering topics

Santiago, Confesor

Publications and source records attributed to Santiago, Confesor.

At least 19 records

NASA NTRS2017

Modeling and Simulation Plans in Support of Low Cost, Size, Weight, and Power Surveillance Systems for Detecting and Tracking Non-Cooperative Aircraft

RTCA Special Committee (SC) 228 has initiated a second phase for the development of minimum operational performance standards (MOPS) for UAS detect and avoid (DAA) systems. Technologies to enable UAS with less available Size, Weight, and Power (SWaP) will be considered. RTCA SC-228 has established sub-working groups and one of the sub-working groups is focused on aligning modeling and simulations activities across all participating committee members. This briefing will describe NASAs modeling and simulation plans for the development of performance standards for low cost, size, weight, and power (C-SWaP) surveillance systems that detect and track non-cooperative aircraft. The briefing will also describe the simulation platform NASA intends to use to support end-to-end verification and validation for these DAA systems. Lastly, the briefing will highlight the experiment plan for our first simulation study, and provide a high-level description of our future flight test plans. This briefing does not contain any results or data.

surveillance↗

NASA NTRS2017

Ensuring Interoperability between UAS Detect-and-Avoid and Manned Aircraft Collision Avoidance

The UAS community in the United States has identified the need for a collision avoidance region in which UAS Detect-and-Avoid (DAA) vertical guidance is restricted to preclude interoperability issues with manned aircraft collision avoidance system vertical resolution advisories (RAs). This paper documents the process by which the collision avoidance region was defined. Three candidate definitions were evaluated on 1.3 million simulated pairwise encounters between UAS and manned aircraft covering a wide range of horizontal and vertical closure rates, angles, and miss distances. They were evaluated with regard to UAS DAA interoperability with manned aircraft collision avoidance systems in terms of: 1) the primary objective of restricting DAA vertical guidance before RAs when the aircraft are close, and 2) the secondary objective of avoiding unnecessary restrictions of DAA vertical guidance at a DAA alert when the aircraft are further apart. The collision avoidance region definition that fully achieves the primary objective and best achieves the secondary objective was recommended to and accepted by the UAS community in the United States. By this definition, UAS and manned aircraft are in the collision avoidance region--during which DAA vertical guidance is restricted--when the time to closest point of approach is less than 50 seconds and either the time to co-altitude is less than 50 seconds or the current vertical separation is less than 800 feet.

collision avoidance↗

NASA NTRS2017

UAS Well Clear Recovery Against Non-Cooperative Intruders Using Vertical Maneuvers

This paper documents a study that drove the development of a mathematical expression in the minimum operational performance standards (MOPS) of detect-and-avoid (DAA) systems for unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). This equation describes the conditions under which vertical maneuver guidance could be provided during recovery of well clear separation with a non-cooperative VFR aircraft in addition to horizontal maneuver guidance. Although suppressing vertical maneuver guidance in these situations increased the minimum horizontal separation from 500 to 800 feet, the maximum severity of loss of well clear increased in about 35 of the encounters compared to when a vertical maneuver was preferred and allowed. Additionally, analysis of individual cases led to the identification of a class of encounter where vertical rate error had a large effect on horizontal maneuvers due to the difficulty of making the correct left-right turn decision: crossing conflict with intruder changing altitude. These results supported allowing vertical maneuvers when UAS vertical performance exceeds the relative vertical position and velocity accuracy of the DAA tracker given the current velocity of the UAS and the relative vertical position and velocity estimated by the DAA tracker. Looking ahead, these results indicate a need to improve guidance algorithms by utilizing maneuver stability and near mid-air collision risk when determining maneuver guidance to regain well clear separation.

detect and avoid↗

NASA NTRS2017

Validation of Minimum Display Requirements for a UAS Detect and Avoid System

unmanned aircraft systems↗

NASA NTRS2017

The Generic Resolution Advisor and Conflict Evaluator (GRACE) for Detect-And-Avoid (DAA) Systems

The paper describes the Generic Resolution Advisor and Conflict Evaluator (GRACE), a novel alerting and guidance algorithm that combines flexibility, robustness, and computational efficiency. GRACE is "generic" in that it makes no assumptions regarding temporal or spatial scales, aircraft performance, or its sensor and communication systems. Accordingly, GRACE is well suited to research applications where alerting and guidance is a central feature and requirements are fluid involving a wide range of aviation technologies. GRACE has been used at NASA in a number of real-time and fast-time experiments supporting evolving requirements of DAA research, including parametric studies, NAS-wide simulations, human-in-the-loop experiments, and live flight tests.

Unmanned Aircraft↗

NASA NTRS2017

UAS Well Clear Recovery Against Non-Cooperative Intruders Using Vertical Maneuvers

This paper documents a study that drove the development of a mathematical expression in the detect-and-avoid (DAA) minimum operational performance standards (MOPS) for unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). This equation describes the conditions under which vertical maneuver guidance should be provided during recovery of DAA well clear separation with a non-cooperative VFR aircraft. Although the original hypothesis was that vertical maneuvers for DAA well clear recovery should only be offered when sensor vertical rate errors are small, this paper suggests that UAS climb and descent performance should be considered-in addition to sensor errors for vertical position and vertical rate-when determining whether to offer vertical guidance. A fast-time simulation study involving 108,000 encounters between a UAS and a non-cooperative visual-flight-rules aircraft was conducted. Results are presented showing that, when vertical maneuver guidance for DAA well clear recovery was suppressed, the minimum vertical separation increased by roughly 50 feet (or horizontal separation by 500 to 800 feet). However, the percentage of encounters that had a risk of collision when performing vertical well clear recovery maneuvers was reduced as UAS vertical rate performance increased and sensor vertical rate errors decreased. A class of encounter is identified for which vertical-rate error had a large effect on the efficacy of horizontal maneuvers due to the difficulty of making the correct left/right turn decision: crossing conflict with intruder changing altitude. Overall, these results support logic that would allow vertical maneuvers when UAS vertical performance is sufficient to avoid the intruder, based on the intruder's estimated vertical position and vertical rate, as well as the vertical rate error of the UAS' sensor.

UAS in the NAS↗

NASA NTRS2017

The Generic Resolution Advisor and Conflict Evaluator (GRACE) for Detect-And-Avoid Systems

Java Architecture for Detect-And-Avoid (DAA) Extensibility and Modeling (JADEM) was developed at NASA Ames Research Center as a research and modeling tool for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Integration in the National Airspace System (NAS). UAS will be required to have DAA systems in order to fulfill the regulatory requirement to remain well clear'' of other traffic. JADEM supports research on technological requirements and Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for UAS DAA systems by providing a flexible and extensible software platform that includes models and algorithms for all major DAA functions. This paper describes one of these algorithms, the Generic Resolution Advisor and Conflict Evaluator (GRACE). GRACE supports two core DAA functions: threat evaluation and guidance. GRACE is generic in the sense that it is designed to work with any aircraft or sensor type (both cooperative and non-cooperative), and to be used in various applications and DAA guidance concepts, thus supporting evolving MOPS requirements and research. GRACE combines flexibility, robustness, and computational efficiency. It has modest memory requirements and can handle multiple cooperative and noncooperative intruders. GRACE has been used as a core JADEM component in several real-time and fast-time experiments, including human-in-the-loop simulations and live flight tests.

detect and avoid↗

NASA NTRS2017

Validation of Minimum Display Requirements for a UAS Detect and Avoid System

The full integration of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) into the National Airspace System (NAS), a prerequisite for enabling a broad range of public and commercial UAS operations, presents several technical challenges to UAS developers, operators and regulators. A primary barrier is the inability for UAS pilots (situated at a ground control station, or GCS) to comply with Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations sections 91.111 and 91.113, which require pilots to “see and avoid” other aircraft in order to maintain well clear. UAS pilots’ removal from the flight deck of the aircraft necessitates the development of a UAS-specific system for detecting nearby traffic and displaying traffic information to the pilot to support their ability to maintain an objectively defined “DAA well clear” threshold from other aircraft. This new UAS-specific function of remaining DAA well clear is called traffic avoidance. The resulting Detect and Avoid (DAA) system, however, will be subject to a collection of requirements that manufacturers will be obligated to meet in order to certify their equipment. RTCA Special Committee 228 (SC-228), a consortium of representatives from government, industry and academia, is responsible for developing and documenting the Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for UAS DAA systems. The present study is the final in a series of human-in-the-loop (HITL) experiments designed to explore and test the various display and alerting requirements being incorporated into the DAA MOPS. Whereas the prior DAA HITLs examined a wide variety of DAA display features and concepts, the current experiment aims to validate the latest minimum display requirements for Phase 1 of the DAA MOPS. Rather than test different display concepts, this study tests two configurations of a MOPS-compatible DAA display: a version that is integrated into the primary navigation and control display of the GCS and a version that is physically separated from the primary display. This manipulation tests the draft minimum requirement that allows the DAA traffic display to be a separate, or standalone, configuration. This type of configuration is a more achievable near-term technology solution since it does not stipulate additional certification or integration requirements on UAS manufacturers. However, a standalone display configuration has the potential to result in pilot performance issues resulting from the cognitive costs of switching between the primary DAA display and the primary navigation and control display. This configuration is also particularly susceptible to errors if the displays are in different orientations (e.g., north-up versus track-up). Both the integrated and standalone display configurations were presented to 16 active UAS pilots in a medium-fidelity simulation, which included confederate air traffic controllers and pseudo pilots operating simulated manned traffic. Pilots were tasked with navigating two different mission routes while maintaining DAA well clear with scripted conflicts. Pilot response times (i.e., measured response) and ability to remain DAA well clear are reported. Primary results indicate that both display configurations resulted in favorable response times and well clear rates. While there were clear trends of pilots objectively performing better in the integrated display condition, with several measured response metrics reaching statistical significance, the differences between the two displays were typically moderate. While the primary variable of DAA display location did not have an especially large impact on pilot performance on its own, when examined alongside the type of DAA threat the pilot was facing (a caution-level versus a warning-level alert), the response time benefits associated with the integrated display were amplified. The implications of these American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics 2 results on the Phase 1 DAA MOPS and the connection of this data to previous studies is also discussed.

detect and avoid↗

NASA NTRS2017

The Generic Resolution Advisor and Conflict Evaluator (GRACE) for Unmanned Aircraft Detect-And-Avoid Systems

The paper describes the Generic Resolution Advisor and Conflict Evaluator (GRACE), a novel alerting and guidance algorithm that combines flexibility, robustness, and computational efficiency. GRACE is generic since it was designed without any assumptions regarding temporal or spatial scales, aircraft performance, or its sensor and communication systems. Therefore, GRACE was adopted as a core component of the Java Architecture for Detect-And-Avoid (DAA) Extensibility and Modeling, developed by NASA as a research and modeling tool for Unmanned Aerial Systems Integration in the National Airspace System (NAS). GRACE has been used in a number of real-time and fast-time experiments supporting evolving requirements of DAA research, including parametric studies, NAS-wide simulations, human-in-the-loop experiments, and live flight tests.

Unmanned Aircraft↗

NASA NTRS2017

Considerations for RTCA Phase 2 Low Size, Weight, and Power (SWAP) Surveillance Requirements

RTCA (Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics) Special Committee 228 has initiated a second phase for the development of minimum operational performance standards (MOPS) for UAS (Unmanned Aircraft Systems) detect and avoid (DAA) systems. Technologies to enable UAS with less available Size, Weight, and Power (SWaP) will be considered. A white paper is in development for what topics and issues need to be addressed to develop DAA requirements for low SWAP surveillance systems. This briefing will document the issues to be investigated in SC-228. It will also serve as a review with the committee to get feedback so the white paper can be written and finalized. These topics and issues are not necessarily all the things that NASA will contribute to SC-228 during Phase 2, but what the overall committee needs to accomplish. A portion of the work will be in NASA's UAS in the NAS (National Airspace System) project plan.

Santiago, Confesor↗

NASA NTRS2016

NAS-Wide Fast-Time Simulation Study for Evaluating Performance of UAS Detect-and-Avoid Alerting and Guidance Systems

This presentation contains the analysis results of NAS-wide fast-time simulations with UAS and VFR traffic for a single day for evaluating the performance of Detect-and-Avoid (DAA) alerting and guidance systems. This purpose of this study was to help refine and validate MOPS alerting and guidance requirements. In this study, we generated plots of all performance metrics that are specified by RTCA SC-228 Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS): 1) to evaluate the sensitivity of alerting parameters on the performance metrics of each DAA alert type: Preventive, Corrective, and Warning alerts and 2) to evaluate the effect of sensor uncertainty on DAA alerting and guidance performance.

DAA Alerting Performance↗

NASA NTRS2016

FT4 Data Analysis Summary (SSI-ARC)

Standards for Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Detect-and-Avoid (DAA) systems are currently being developed under the auspices of the RTCA Special Committee 228 (SC-228). To support the development of these standards, a series of flight tests has been conducted at NASAs Armstrong Flight Research Center (NASA-AFRC). The fourth in this series of flight test activities (Flight Test 4, or simply FT4) was conducted during the Spring and Summer of 2016. FT4 supported the objectives of numerous organizations working toward UAS DAA Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) and UAS DAA Radar MOPS. The summary provided herein is limited to the objectives, analysis and conclusions of the NASA Ames Research Center (NASA-ARC) SSI team toward the refinement of UAS DAA MOPS. This document provides a high-level overview of FT4 and the SSI-ARC objectives, a summary of the data analysis methodology and recommendations for UAS DAA MOPS refinements based on the data analysis results. A total of 72 encounters were flown to support SSI-ARC objectives. Test results were generally consistent with acceptable UAS DAA system performance and will be considered in broader SC-228 requirements validation efforts. Observed alert lead times indicated acceptable UAS DAA alerting performance. Effective interoperability between the UAS DAA system and the Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) was observed with one notable exception: TCAS Resolutions Advisories (RA) were observed in the absence of any DAA alert on two occasions, indicating the need for alert parameter refinement. Findings further indicated the need for continued work in the areas of DAA Well Clear Recovery logic and alert stability for Mode-C-only intruders. Finally, results demonstrated a high level of compliance with a set of evaluation criteria designed to provide anecdotal evidence of acceptable UAS DAA system performance.

UAS Test Flight↗

NASA NTRS2016

UAS Integration in the NAS Project: Flight Test 3 Data Analysis of JADEM-Autoresolver Detect and Avoid System

The Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration in the National Airspace System project, or UAS Integration in the NAS, aims to reduce technical barriers related to safety and operational challenges associated with enabling routine UAS access to the NAS. The UAS Integration in the NAS Project conducted a flight test activity, referred to as Flight Test 3 (FT3), involving several Detect-and-Avoid (DAA) research prototype systems between June 15, 2015 and August 12, 2015 at the Armstrong Flight Research Center (AFRC). This report documents the flight testing and analysis results for the NASA Ames-developed JADEM-Autoresolver DAA system, referred to as 'Autoresolver' herein. Four flight test days (June 17, 18, 22, and July 22) were dedicated to Autoresolver testing. The objectives of this test were as follows: 1. Validate CPA prediction accuracy and detect-and-avoid (DAA, formerly known as self-separation) alerting logic in realistic flight conditions. 2. Validate DAA trajectory model including maneuvers. 3. Evaluate TCAS/DAA interoperability. 4. Inform final Minimum Operating Performance Standards (MOPS). Flight test scenarios were designed to collect data to directly address the objectives 1-3. Objective 4, inform final MOPS, was a general objective applicable to the UAS in the NAS project as a whole, of which flight test is a subset. This report presents analysis results completed in support of the UAS in the NAS project FT3 data review conducted on October 20, 2015. Due to time constraints and, to a lesser extent, TCAS data collection issues, objective 3 was not evaluated in this analysis.

flight test↗

NASA NTRS2016

Effect of Vertical Rate Error on Recovery from Loss of Well Clear Between UAS and Non-Cooperative Intruders

When an Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) encounters an intruder and is unable to maintain required temporal and spatial separation between the two vehicles, it is referred to as a loss of well-clear. In this state, the UAS must make its best attempt to regain separation while maximizing the minimum separation between itself and the intruder. When encountering a non-cooperative intruder (an aircraft operating under visual flight rules without ADS-B or an active transponder) the UAS must rely on the radar system to provide the intruders location, velocity, and heading information. As many UAS have limited climb and descent performance, vertical position andor vertical rate errors make it difficult to determine whether an intruder will pass above or below them. To account for that, there is a proposal by RTCA Special Committee 228 to prohibit guidance systems from providing vertical guidance to regain well-clear to UAS in an encounter with a non-cooperative intruder unless their radar system has vertical position error below 175 feet (95) and vertical velocity errors below 200 fpm (95). Two sets of fast-time parametric studies was conducted, each with 54000 pairwise encounters between a UAS and non-cooperative intruder to determine the suitability of offering vertical guidance to regain well clear to a UAS in the presence of radar sensor noise. The UAS was not allowed to maneuver until it received well-clear recovery guidance. The maximum severity of the loss of well-clear was logged and used as the primary indicator of the separation achieved by the UAS. One set of 54000 encounters allowed the UAS to maneuver either vertically or horizontally, while the second permitted horizontal maneuvers, only. Comparing the two data sets allowed researchers to see the effect of allowing vertical guidance to a UAS for a particular encounter and vertical rate error. Study results show there is a small reduction in the average severity of a loss of well-clear when vertical maneuvers are suppressed, for all vertical error rate thresholds examined. However, results also show that in roughly 35 of the encounters where a vertical maneuver was selected, forcing the UAS to do a horizontal maneuver instead increased the severity of the loss of well-clear for that encounter. Finally, results showed a small reduction in the number of severe losses of well-clear when the high performance UAS (2000 fpm climb and descent rate) was allowed to maneuver vertically, and the vertical rate error was below 500 fpm. Overall, the results show that using a single vertical rate threshold is not advisable, and that limiting a UAS to horizontal maneuvers when vertical rate errors are above 175 fpm can make a UAS less safe about a third of the time. It is suggested that the hard limit be removed, and system manufacturers instructed to account for their own UAS performance, as well as vertical rate error and encounter geometry, when determining whether or not to provide vertical guidance to regain well-clear.

detect and avoid↗

NASA NTRS2016

Piloted "Well Clear" Performance Evaluation of Detect-and-Avoid Systems with Suggestive Guidance

This study evaluated the performance of four prototype unmanned aircraft detect-and-avoid (DAA) display configurations, each with different informational elements driven by alerting and guidance algorithms. Sixteen unmanned aircraft pilots flew each combination of the display configurations, with half being given zero DAA surveillance sensor uncertainty and the other half experiencing errors that were comparable, and in some cases slightly better than, errors that were measured in DAA system flight tests. The displays that showed intruder alert information in altitude and heading bands had significantly fewer losses of well clear compared with alternative displays that lacked that information. This difference was significant from a statistical and practical perspective: those losses that did occur lasted for shorter periods and did not penetrate as far into the geometric "separation cylinder" as those in the non-banded displays. A modest level of DAA surveillance sensor uncertainty did not affect the proportion of losses of well clear or their severity. It is recommended that DAA traffic displays implement a band-type display in order to improve the safety of UAS operations in the National Airspace System. Finally, this report provides pilot response time distributions for responding to DAA alerts.

unmanned aircraft system↗

NASA NTRS2016

Defining the Collision Avoidance Region for DAA Systems

Unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) will be required to equip with a detect-‐and-‐avoid (DAA) system in order to satisfy the federal aviation regulations to maintain well clear of other aircraft, some of which may be equipped with a Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) to mitigate the possibility of mid-‐air collisions. As such, the minimum operational performance standards (MOPS) for UAS DAA systems are being designed with TCAS interoperability in mind by a group of industry, government, and academic institutions named RTCA Special Committee-228 (SC-228). This document will discuss the development of the spatial-‐temporal volume known as the collision avoidance region in which the DAA system is not allowed to provide vertical guidance to maintain or regain DAA well clear that could conflict with resolution advisories (RAs) issued by the intruder aircraft's TCAS system. Three collision avoidance region definition candidates were developed based on the existing TCAS RA and DAA alerting definitions. They were evaluated against each other in terms of their interoperability with TCAS RAs and DAA alerts in an unmitigated factorial encounter analysis of 1.3 million simulated pairs.

collision avoidance region↗

NASA NTRS2016

UAS Integration in the NAS Project: Part Task 6 V & V Simulation: Primary Results

This is a presentation of the preliminary results on final V and V (Verification and Validation) activity of [RTCA (Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics)] SC (Special Committee)-228 DAA (Detect and Avoid) HMI (Human-Machine Interface) requirements for display alerting and guidance.

human systems integration↗

NASA NTRS2016

ACES M and S: Unmitigated Factorial Encounter Study on DAA/TCAS Interoperability

Realization of the expected proliferation of Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) operations in the National Airspace System (NAS) depends on the development and validation of standards for UAS Detect and Avoid (DAA) Systems. The RTCA Special Committee 228 is charged with leading the development of draft Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for UAS DAA Systems. NASA, as a participating member of RTCA SC-228 is committed to supporting the development and validation of draft requirements for DAA alerting and guidance systems. This presentation contains the results of two combinatorial encounter analysis studies using NASA's SAA Control fast-time simulation capability for this purpose. In these studies, encounters between two aircraft were simulated one at a time for the full factorial combination of encounter geometries (e.g., encounter angle, CPA offset) and aircraft performance (e.g., ownership and intruder ground speeds and vertical rates). The first study analyzes the relationships (e.g., timeline) between the different alerting-safety regions in the SC-228 MOPS (in order of increasing severity): 1) DAA warning alert, 2) well clear recovery (WCR) guidance, 3) DAA-Collision Avoidance (CA), and 4) TCAS RA. This study will focus primarily on encounter situations in which TCAS RA occurs prior to any of the other alerting-safety boundaries. In particular, this study will investigate whether using vertical distance or vertical distance at closest point of approach (i.e., vertical miss distance or VMD) is more appropriate for the definition of the DAA-CA region. In addition, cases where transitions between different regions skip an intermediate region will be analyzed. The second study in this presentation explores a proposal to use an altitude rate error threshold to determine if vertical maneuvers are acceptable for DAA WCR guidance against non-cooperative intruders. This study incorporates the radar from the Honeywell sensor model and examines a series of pairwise encounters between a non-cooperative intruder and a UAS ownship, with different combinations of intruder states and ownship performance levels. The study uses SAA Control as a simulation platform and pilot model, and Omnibands to provide DWC recovery guidance. Two simulation sets, one that allows vertical DWC recovery guidance and one that does not, are compared to determine if encounters with altitude rate errors above 250 feet-per-minute are more likely to have more severe losses of well clear, as determined by the Loss of Well-Clear Severity metric.

SaaControl↗