SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “ATDS”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 217 records · Page 12

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2014

How Well Does the Latest Anthropomorphic Test Device Mimic Human Impact Responses?

One of the goals of the NASA Occupant Protection Group is to understand the human tolerance to dynamic loading. This knowledge has to come through indirect approaches such as existing human response databases, anthropometric test devices (ATD), animal testing, post‐mortem human subjects, and models. This study investigated the biofidelity of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's ATD named the THOR (test device for human occupant restraint). If THOR responds comparably to humans, then it could potentially be used as a human surrogate to help validate space vehicle requirements for occupant protection. The THOR responses to frontal and spinal impacts (ranging from 8 to 12 G with rise times of 40, 70, and 100 ms) were measured and compared to human volunteer responses (95 trials in frontal and 58 in spinal) previously collected by the U. S. Air Force on the same horizontal impact accelerator. The impact acceleration profiles tested are within the expected range of multi‐purpose crew vehicle (MPCV) landing dynamics. A correlation score was calculated for each THOR to human comparison using CORA (CORrelation and Analysis) software. A two‐parameter beta distribution model fit was obtained for each dependent variable using maximum likelihood estimation. For frontal impacts, the THOR head x‐acceleration peak response correlated with the human response at 8 and 10‐G 100 ms but not 10‐G 70 ms. The phase lagged the human response. Head z‐acceleration was not correlated. Chest x‐acceleration was in phase, had a higher peak response, and was well correlated with lighter subjects (Cora = 0.8 for 46 kg vs. Cora = 0.4 for 126 kg). Head x‐displacement had a leading phase. Several subjects responded with the same peak displacement but the mean of the group was lower. The shoulder x‐displacement was in phase but had higher peaks than the human response. For spinal impacts, the THOR head x‐acceleration was not well correlated. Head and chest z‐acceleration was in phase but had a higher peak response. Chest z‐acceleration was highly correlated with heavier subjects at lower G pulses (Cora = 0.86 for 125 kg at 8 G). The human response was variable in shoulder z‐displacement but the THOR was in phase and was comparable to the mean peak response. Head xand z‐displacement was in phase but had higher peaks. Seat pan forces were well correlated, were in phase, but had a larger peak response than most subjects. The THOR does not respond to frontal and spinal impacts exactly the same way that a human does. Some responses are well matched and others are not. Understanding the strengths and weaknesses of this ATD is an important first step in determining its usefulness in occupant protection at NASA

Newby, N.↗

NASA NTRS2014

Simulation Evaluation of Controller-Managed Spacing Tools under Realistic Operational Conditions

Controller-Managed Spacing (CMS) tools have been developed to aid air traffic controllers in managing high volumes of arriving aircraft according to a schedule while enabling them to fly efficient descent profiles. The CMS tools are undergoing refinement in preparation for field demonstration as part of NASA's Air Traffic Management (ATM) Technology Demonstration-1 (ATD-1). System-level ATD-1 simulations have been conducted to quantify expected efficiency and capacity gains under realistic operational conditions. This paper presents simulation results with a focus on CMS-tool human factors. The results suggest experienced controllers new to the tools find them acceptable and can use them effectively in ATD-1 operations.

simulation↗

NASA NTRS2014

How Well Does the Latest Anthropomorphic Test Device Mimic Human Impact Responses?

One of the goals of the NASA Occupant Protection Group is to understand the human tolerance to dynamic loading. This knowledge has to come through indirect approaches such as existing human response databases, anthropometric test devices (ATD), animal testing, post-‐mortem human subjects, and models. This study investigated the biofidelity of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's ATD named the THOR (test device for human occupant restraint). If THOR responds comparably to humans, then it could potentially be used as a human surrogate to help validate space vehicle requirements for occupant protection. The THOR responses to frontal and spinal impacts (ranging from 8 to 12 G with rise times of 40, 70, and 100 ms) were measured and compared to human volunteer responses (95 trials in frontal and 58 in spinal) previously collected by the U. S. Air Force on the same horizontal impact accelerator. The impact acceleration profiles tested are within the expected range of multi-‐purpose crew vehicle (MPCV) landing dynamics. A correlation score was calculated for each THOR to human comparison using CORA (CORrelation and Analysis) software. A two-‐parameter beta distribution model fit was obtained for each dependent variable using maximum likelihood estimation. For frontal impacts, the THOR head x-‐acceleration peak response correlated with the human response at 8 and 10-‐G 100 ms but not 10-‐G 70 ms. The phase lagged the human response. Head z-‐acceleration was not correlated. Chest x-‐acceleration was in phase, had a higher peak response, and was well correlated with lighter subjects (Cora = 0.8 for 46 kg vs. Cora = 0.4 for 126 kg). Head x-‐displacement had a leading phase. Several subjects responded with the same peak displacement but the mean of the group was lower. The shoulder x-‐displacement was in phase but had higher peaks than the human response. For spinal impacts, the THOR head x-‐acceleration was not well correlated. Head and chest z-‐acceleration was in phase but had a higher peak response. Chest z-‐acceleration was highly correlated with heavier subjects at lower G pulses (Cora = 0.86 for 125 kg at 8 G). The human response was variable in shoulder z-‐displacement but the THOR was in phase and was comparable to the mean peak response. Head x-‐ and z-‐displacement was in phase but had higher peaks. Seat pan forces were well correlated, were in phase, but had a larger peak response than most subjects. The THOR does not respond to frontal and spinal impacts exactly the same way that a human does. Some responses are well matched and others are not. Understanding the strengths and weaknesses of this ATD is an important first step in determining its usefulness in occupant protection at NASA

Newby, Nate↗

NASA NTRS2015

An Investigation of Interval Management Displays

NASA's first Air Traffic Management (ATM) Technology Demonstration (ATD-1) was created to transition the most mature ATM technologies from the laboratory to the National Airspace System. One selected technology is Interval Management (IM), which uses onboard aircraft automation to compute speeds that help the flight crew achieve and maintain precise spacing behind a preceding aircraft. Since ATD-1 focuses on a near-term environment, the ATD-1 flight demonstration prototype requires radio voice communication to issue an IM clearance. Retrofit IM displays will enable pilots to both enter information into the IM avionics and monitor IM operation. These displays could consist of an interface to enter data from an IM clearance and also an auxiliary display that presents critical information in the primary field-of-view. A human-in-the-loop experiment was conducted to examine usability and acceptability of retrofit IM displays, which flight crews found acceptable. Results also indicate the need for salient alerting when new speeds are generated and the desire to have a primary field of view display available that can display text and graphic trend indicators.

Swieringa, Kurt A.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Identifying Key Issues and Potential Solutions for Integrated Arrival, Departure, Surface Operations by Surveying Stakeholder Preferences

NASA's Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) collaborates with the FAA and industry to provide concepts and technologies that enhance the transition to the next-generation air-traffic management system (NextGen). To facilitate this collaboration, ARMD has a series of Airspace Technology Demonstration (ATD) sub-projects that develop, demonstrate, and transitions NASA technologies and concepts for implementation in the National Airspace System (NAS). The second of these sub-projects, ATD-2, is focused on the potential benefits to NAS stakeholders of integrated arrival, departure, surface (IADS) operations. To determine the project objectives and assess the benefits of a potential solution, NASA surveyed NAS stakeholders to understand the existing issues in arrival, departure, and surface operations, and the perceived benefits of better integrating these operations. NASA surveyed a broad cross-section of stakeholders representing the airlines, airports, air-navigation service providers, and industry providers of NAS tools. The survey indicated that improving the predictability of flight times (schedules) could improve efficiency in arrival, departure, and surface operations. Stakeholders also mentioned the need for better strategic and tactical information on traffic constraints as well as better information sharing and a coupled collaborative planning process that allows stakeholders to coordinate IADS operations. To assess the impact of a potential solution, NASA sketched an initial departure scheduling concept and assessed its viability by surveying a select group of stakeholders for a second time. The objective of the departure scheduler was to enable flights to move continuously from gate to cruise with minimal interruption in a busy metroplex airspace environment using strategic and tactical scheduling enhanced by collaborative planning between airlines and service providers. The stakeholders agreed that this departure concept could improve schedule predictability and suggested several key attributes that were necessary to make the concept successful. The goals and objectives of the planned ATD-2 sub-project will incorporate the results of this stakeholder feedback.

integrated arrival/departure/surface operations↗

NASA NTRS2016

Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) (Orion) Occupant Protection

The purpose of this study was to determine the similarity between the response of the THUMS model and the Hybrid III Anthropometric Test Device (ATD) given existing Wright-Patterson (WP) sled tests. There were four tests selected for this comparison with frontal, spinal, rear, and lateral loading. The THUMS was placed in a sled configuration that replicated the WP configuration and the recorded seat acceleration for each test was applied to model seat. Once the modeling simulations were complete, they were compared to the WP results using two methods. The first was a visual inspection of the sled test videos compared to the THUMS d3plot files. This comparison resulted in an assessment of the overall kinematics of the two results. The other comparison was a comparison of the plotted data recorded for both tests. The metrics selected for comparison were seat acceleration, belt forces, head acceleration and chest acceleration. These metrics were recorded in all WP tests and were outputs of the THUMS model. Once the comparison of the THUMS to the WP tests was complete, the THUMS model output was also examined for possible injuries in these scenarios. These outputs included metrics for injury risk to the head, neck, thorax, lumbar spine and lower extremities. The metrics to evaluate head response were peak head acceleration, HIC15, and HIC36. For the neck, N (sub ij) was calculated. The thorax response was evaluated with peak chest acceleration, the Combined Thoracic Index (CTI), sternal deflection, chest deflection, and chest acceleration- 3 ms clip. The lumbar spine response was evaluated with lumbar spine force. Finally the lower extremity response was evaluated by femur and tibia force. The results of the simulation comparisons indicate the THUMS model had a similar response to the Hybrid III dummy given the same input. The primary difference seen between the two was a more flexible response of the THUMS compared to the Hybrid III. This flexibility was most pronounced in the neck flexion, shoulder deflection and chest deflection. Due to the flexibility of the THUMS, the resulting head and chest accelerations tended to lag the Hybrid III acceleration trace and have a lower peak value. The results of the injury metric comparison identified possible injury trends between simulations. Risk of head injury was highest for the lateral simulations. The risk of chest injury was highest for the rear impact. However, neck injury risk was approximately the same for all simulations. The injury metric value for lumbar spine force was highest for the spinal impact. The leg forces were highest for the rear and lateral impacts. The results of this comparison indicate the THUMS model performs in a similar manner as the Hybrid III ATD. The differences in the responses of model and the ATD are primarily due to the flexibility of the THUMS. This flexibility of the THUMS would be a more human like response. Based on the similarity between the two models, the THUMS should be used in further testing to assess risk of injury to the occupant.

Currie-Gregg, Nancy J.↗

NASA NTRS2018

Finite Element Simulations of Two Vertical Drop Tests of F-28 Fuselage Sections

In March 2017, a vertical drop test of a forward fuselage section of a Fokker F-28 MK4000 aircraft was conducted as part of a joint NASA/FAA project to investigate the performance of transport aircraft under realistic crash conditions. In June 2017, a vertical drop test was conducted of a wing-box fuselage section of the same aircraft. Both sections were configured with two rows of aircraft seats, in a triple-double configuration. A total of ten Anthropomorphic Test Devices (ATDs) were secured in seats using standard lap belt restraints. The forward fuselage section was also configured with luggage in the cargo hold. Both sections were outfitted with two hat racks, each with added ballast mass. The drop tests were performed at the Landing and Impact Research facility located at NASA Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia. The measured impact velocity for the forward fuselage section was 346.8-in/s onto soil. The wing-box section was dropped with a downward facing pitch angle onto a sloping soil surface in order to create an induced forward acceleration in the airframe. The vertical impact velocity of the wing-box section was 349.2-in/s. A second objective of this project was to assess the capabilities of finite element simulations to predict the test responses. Finite element models of both fuselage sections were developed for execution in LS-DYNA(Registered Trademark), a commercial explicit nonlinear transient dynamic code. The models contained accurate representations of the airframe structure, the hat racks and hat rack masses, the floor and seat tracks, the luggage in the cargo hold for the forward section, and the detailed under-floor structure in the wing-box section. Initially, concentrated masses were used to represent the inertial properties of the seats, restraints, and ATD occupants. However, later simulations were performed that included finite element representations of the seats, restraints, and ATD occupants. These models were developed to more accurately replicate the seat loading of the floor and to enable prediction of occupant impact responses. Models were executed to generate analytical predictions of airframe responses, which were compared with test data to validate the model. Comparisons of predicted and experimental structural deformation and failures were made. Finally, predicted and experimental soil deformation and crater depths were also compared for both drop test configurations.

Jackson, Karen E.↗

NASA NTRS2013

Evaluation of the Controller-Managed Spacing Tools, Flight-Deck Interval Management and Terminal Area Metering Capabilities for the ATM Technology Demonstration #1

NASA has developed a suite of advanced arrival management technologies combining time-based scheduling with controller- and flight deck-based precision spacing capabilities that allow fuel-efficient arrival operations during periods of high throughput. An operational demonstration of these integrated technologies, i.e., the ATM Technology Demonstration #1 (ATD-1), is slated for 2016. Human-in-the-loop simulations were conducted to evaluate the performance of the ATD-1 system and validate operational feasibility. The ATD-1 system was found to be robust to scenarios with saturated demand levels and high levels of system delay. High throughput, 10 above baseline demand levels, and schedule conformance less than 20 seconds at the 75th percentile were achievable. The flight-deck interval management capabilities also improved the median schedule conformance at the final approach fix from 5 to 3 seconds with less variance.

terminal metering↗

NASA NTRS2019

Departure Approval Request Compliance Effects on Overhead Stream Insertion

Integrated Arrival-Departure-Surface (IADS) air traffic management relies on information sharing and integration between automation systems for efficiency, predictability, and throughput improvements throughout the National Airspace System (NAS). The NASA Airspace Technology Demonstration 2 (ATD-2) project supports this effort by integrating SWIM (System Wide Information Management) information and evaluating and refining potential TFDM (Terminal Flight Data Manager) functionality in a surface traffic management system fielded at Charlotte-Douglas International Airport (CLT). Among the IADS areas under study during ATD-2 is the use of electronically negotiated departure times for efficiently inserting flights into overhead traffic streams. Stream-insertion accuracy is important for reducing excessive vectoring that negatively impacts the NAS by increasing controller workload along with aircraft fuel burn and emissions. Departure-time approval requests (APREQs) provide center-approved departure times to allow for smooth stream insertion. In this presentation, TBFM (Time-Based Flow Management) and ATD-2 flight summary data are used to empirically show that APREQ compliance leads to improved stream insertion.

Overhead-Stream Insertion↗

NASA NTRS2019

Fast-Time Simulation for Evaluating the Impact of Estimated Flight Ready Time Uncertainty on Surface Metering

NASA has been developing and demonstrating new concepts and technologies for Integrated Arrival, Departure, and Surface (IADS) traffic management capabilities under the Airspace Technology Demonstration 2 (ATD-2) project. One of the IADS capabilities in the ATD-2 project is surface metering enabled by a tactical surface scheduler to provide controllers with the pushback advisories for departures at gates. The tactical surface scheduler uses the estimated flight ready times provided by airlines, called Earliest Off-Block Times (EOBTs), as input to calculate the target off-block times for pushback advisories. However, the EOBTs are often inaccurate and deviate from the actual flight ready times, which may reduce the benefits of surface metering. In this paper, a linear regression model is developed to model the EOBT uncertainty distribution over time based on actual EOBT data collected at Charlotte airport. This EOBT model is integrated with a tactical surface scheduler and a fast-time simulation tool. To evaluate the impact of the EOBT accuracy on airport surface operations, fast-time simulations are implemented for selected traffic scenarios under different levels of modelled EOBT accuracy. The simulation results show that the EOBT uncertainty affects several performance metrics related to the surface metering, such as gate hold, taxi time reduction, and target takeoff time predictability, which in turn influences ATD-2's scheduler performance.

tactical surface scheduler↗

NASA NTRS2019

Fast-Time Simulation for Evaluating the Impact of Estimated Flight Ready Time Uncertainty on Surface Metering

tactical surface scheduler↗

NASA NTRS2019

TPSAS-NF1676L-32920-DND

In June 2019, a full-scale crash test of a Fokker F28 Fellowship aircraft will be conducted at NASA Langley Research Center?s Landing and Impact Research (LandIR) Facility. The F28 is a high-performance twin-turbo fan narrow-body aircraft with seating in a 3+2 configuration. The MK4000 variant, used in this test, is capable of carrying up to 85 passengers on medium range routes. The F28 was first type certified by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in 1969 and now the majority of the F28 fleet has retired from service in the United States. In 2016, the FAA and NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) signed an interagency agreement for conducting a research program to obtain test data that will support the development of airframe level crash requirements for transport category airplanes [1]. The objectives of the full-scale crash test can be divided into six categories: (1) To compare and contrast responses in identical aircraft undergoing vertical only to combined vertical and horizontal loading conditions, (2) To examine the effects of horizontal loading on aircraft structure during a crash event, (3) To generate data for the use in calibration of computer modelling efforts, (4) To generate data from onboard Anthropomorphic Test Devices (ATDs) for the evaluation of injury, (5) To obtain data from experimental seats, and (6) To obtain data from new and novel ATD designs including Warrior Injury Assessment MANikin (WIAMan) [2], Test device for Human Occupant Response (THOR), and other newly developed child ATDs. The focus of this presentation will be to document finite element model development of the full-scale F28 aircraft and to present preliminary test-analysis predictions. NASA obtained the full-scale F28 aircraft, plus three fuselage sections and two sets of wings with funding through the NASA Aviation Safety Program in 1998. In addition to the hardware, NASA purchased a full NASTRAN model of the airframe that had been developed by the Dutch manufacturer, Fokker. Beginning in 2016, the NASTRAN model was converted to LS-DYNA? [4, 5] format and modified by combining parts, adding missing parts of internal structure, and including ballast for loading weights, etc. It contains: 89,223 nodes; 24,065 beam elements; 55,404 shell elements; 29,044 solid elements; 740 parts; 80 material definitions; and, 46 Constrained Nodal Rigid Bodies (CNRBs). The aircraft model will be executed in LSDYNA to simulate the test article impact onto a 2-ft.-high bed of soil under combined velocity conditions of 70-ft/s forward and 30-ft/s vertical velocity. Pre-test simulation predictions will be generated and correlated with test data.

Karen E Jackson↗

NASA NTRS2020

Lunar Transient Accelerations White Paper

Recently, the United States announced a plan to return astronauts to the moon by 2024 [8]. Lunar landing (and subsequent Mars landing) architecture was not considered when the current NASA standards and vehicle design requirements for crew injury risk were developed. Therefore a gap exists in protecting the crew in planetary landing scenarios. One of the interesting aspects of this design reference mission (DRM)is the consideration of having the crew stand during dynamic phases of flight. Although this approach was contemplated for the Apollo Lunar Module, current NASA standards do not address design solutions that allow the crew to stand. Currently, NASA uses several tools and associated limits to mitigate crew injury because of dynamic loads. Some of these tools are the Brinkley Dynamic Response Criterion (BDRC) model and Hybrid III Anthropomorphic Test Devices (ATDs) [10]; and these have several limitations for assessing spaceflight loading environments, as well as specific underlying assumptions that may not be applicable in planetary landing vehicles. The BDRC is a simple lumped mass parameter model developed by the U.S. military, and has been used primarily to evaluate injury risk associated with aircraft ejection systems. The model evaluates seat accelerations in each axis to determine injury risk. Because the model treats the human-seat-restraint system as a single system, it is contingent on a restraint system and seat with similar characteristics of the original test data underlying the model. In particular, the model requires a rigid seat with a minimum natural frequency of 15Hz, minimal seat pan padding, side supports, and multipoint harness. The BDRC model uses undamped natural frequency and damping coefficients based on these requirements and any deviations may render the model injury predictions void. In lunar landing, one expects that a minimal or even no seat with minimal restraints will be employed. In this case, the original model parameters are likely to not be applicable. For capsule-based spacecraft returning crew to Earth, the Hybrid III ATD in various sizes also is used to supplement the BDRC. This analytical tool was added to address limitations in the BDRC related to spacecraft landings while wearing a pressure garment and helmet. Although the Hybrid III ATD has additional measurement capability; head, neck,and lumbar spine responses were the only metrics included because of the limitations imposed by the model.Lunar landing acceleration limits must assume the crew is standing during landing, an orientation for which we have limited data.Although the Apollo missions did employ a standing orientation for the crew, much of the data is lost. Therefore data from othersources havebeen examined to inform lunar landing acceleration limits.

Jeffrey T Somers↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Test and Simulation of a Fokker F28 Crash Landing

Test and Simulation of a Fokker F28 Crash Landing – Jacob B. Putnam 1, Justin D. Littell 1, Karen E. Jackson 2; 1 NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, 2 National Institute of Aerospace, Hampton, VA. In June of 2019, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Langley Research Center (LaRC) conducted a full-scale crash test of a Fokker F28 MK1000 aircraft. Aircraft crash-worthiness is typically evaluated through component level tests (i.e. vertical drops of fuselage subsections or isolated seat tests). Finite Element Models (FEMs) are also used to bridge the gap between component testing and full-scale crash prediction. The full-scale crash test performed in conjunction with previous subsection testing of a Fokker F28 fuselage provided the opportunity to evaluate differences in crash-worthiness predictions between full- and sub-scale testing and to quantify the predictive capability of FEMs in the aerospace crash environment. In this study vehicle crash-worthiness was quantified through anthropometric test devices (ATDs) included in both the full-scale crash test as well as fuselage section drop tests previously performed at NASA LaRC. A FEM of the Fokker F28 aircraft was developed and simulated within the tested environment. Vehicle and ATD response predictions were compared between test and simulation. The International Organization for Standardization ISO/TR 16250 curve comparison methodology was used to provide a quantitative assessment of predictive accuracy for both the vehicle and ATD FEMs. Determination of aircraft crash-worthiness made between the three evaluations methodologies (full-vehicle crash test, component test, and FEM simulation) were then compared. Structural differences as well as the more complex loading environment achieved within the full-vehicle test resulted in increased injury risk compared to that predicted within the component level tests. The FEM simulations were found to produce a more realistic prediction of injury risk within the full-vehicle crash environment than the component level testing. Limitations of both component testing and FEM simulation within aerospace crash environment were identified.

impact testing↗

NASA NTRS2019

Industry Inputs into Future NASA Project Planning

NASA is currently formulating its plans for follow-on related work that builds upon knowledge gained in ATD related activities and collaborative engagements with the aviation community. The NASA Air Traffic Management - eXploration (ATM-X) project has the desire to continue this engagement with the aviation industry and capture industry inputs to continue development of their plans and is supporting this outreach with the ATD-2 team.

ATD↗

NASA NTRS2018

Flight Deck Implications for the Implementation of an Integrated Arrival, Departure, and Surface (IADS) Traffic Management System

NASA's Airspace Technical Demonstration-2 (ATD-2) Integrated Arrival, Departure, and Surface (IADS) traffic management system integrates strategic and tactical scheduling tools for traffic sequencing from the gate to the overhead stream and back again for multi-airport, metroplex environments. The system is expected to increase airport efficiency, predictability, and throughout while improving information sharing among all airport operators. A series of knowledge elicitation sessions were conducted with commercial airline pilots and general aviation pilots to characterize airport operations and procedures. This presentation describes ATD-2 IADS-enabled Information Sharing impacts on the Flight Deck, benefits of that Information Sharing, pilot procedural changes, our pilot engagement/outreach efforts, use of a Mobile App to faciliate information flow in GA operations, and future IADS efforts at other airports/metroplexes.

IADS↗

NASA NTRS2017

TBFM IDAC Procedure to Disable NASA Connection with CLT STBO Electronic Requests for Release Times

This document defines the procedure to disconnect TBFM IDAC's connection with ATD-2's STBO System at the Washington Air Route Traffic Center. This is part of the ATD-2 ZDC training package that was presented in September 2017.

ATD-2↗

NASA NTRS2018

Taxi Time Comparison Before and After Surface Metering Using ASPM Data

In this taxi time analysis, the ASPM data before and after surface metering were compared to see the effects of surface metering on taxi-out/in times. Results show that the surface metering from ATD-2 technologies did no harm in taxi-out times at CLT. This was originally presented to the ATD-2 Analytics team in April 2018.

ATD-2↗