Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Automated Flight”

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.

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

At least 271 records · Page 15
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1987

The Flight Telerobotic Servicer (FTS) - A focus for automation and robotics on the Space Station

The concept, fundamental design principles, and capabilities of the FTS, a multipurpose telerobotic system for use on the Space Station and Space Shuttle, are discussed. The FTS is intended to assist the crew in the performance of extravehicular tasks; the telerobot will also be used on the Orbital Maneuvering Vehicle to service free-flyer spacecraft. The FTS will be capable of both teleoperation and autonomous operation; eventually it may also utilize ground control. By careful selection of the functional architecture and a modular approach to the hardware and software design, the FTS can accept developments in artificial intelligence and newer, more advanced sensors, such as machine vision and collision avoidance.

Hinkal, Sanford W.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Flight control system design factors for applying automated testing techniques

The principal design features and operational experiences of the X-29 forward-swept-wing aircraft and F-18 high alpha research vehicle (HARV) automated test systems are discussed. It is noted that operational experiences in developing and using these automated testing techniques have highlighted the need for incorporating target system features to improve testability. Improved target system testability can be accomplished with the addition of nonreal-time and real-time features. Online access to target system implementation details, unobtrusive real-time access to internal user-selectable variables, and proper software instrumentation are all desirable features of the target system. Also, test system and target system design issues must be addressed during the early stages of the target system development. Processing speeds of up to 20 million instructions/s and the development of high-bandwidth reflective memory systems have improved the ability to integrate the target system and test system for the application of automated testing techniques. It is concluded that new methods of designing testability into the target systems are required.

Sitz, Joel R.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Autonomous, Context-Sensitive, Task Management Systems and Decision Support Tools I: Human-Autonomy Teaming Fundamentals and State of the Art

Recent advances in artificial intelligence, machine learning, data mining and extraction, and especially in sensor technology have resulted in the availability of a vast amount of digital data and information and the development of advanced automated reasoners. This creates the opportunity for the development of a robust dynamic task manager and decision support tool that is context sensitive and integrates information from a wide array of on-board and off aircraft sourcesa tool that monitors systems and the overall flight situation, anticipates information needs, prioritizes tasks appropriately, keeps pilots well informed, and is nimble and able to adapt to changing circumstances. This is the first of two companion reports exploring issues associated with autonomous, context-sensitive, task management and decision support tools. In the first report, we explore fundamental issues associated with the development of an integrated, dynamic, flight information and automation management system. We discuss human factors issues pertaining to information automation and review the current state of the art of pilot information management and decision support tools. We also explore how effective human-human team behavior and expectations could be extended to teams involving humans and automation or autonomous systems.

context-sensitive↗
NASA NTRS2007

Multi-Sensor Testing for Automated Rendezvous and Docking Sensor Testing at the Flight Robotics Laboratory

The Exploration Systems Architecture defines missions that require rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) of two spacecraft both in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO). Uncrewed spacecraft must perform automated and/or autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations and docking operations (commonly known as AR&D). The crewed missions may also perform rendezvous and docking operations and may require different levels of automation and/or autonomy, and must provide the crew with relative navigation information for manual piloting. The capabilities of the RPOD sensors are critical to the success of the Exploration Program. NASA has the responsibility to determine whether the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) contractor proposed relative navigation sensor suite will meet the requirements. The relatively low technology readiness level of AR&D relative navigation sensors has been carried as one of the CEV Project's top risks. The AR&D Sensor Technology Project seeks to reduce the risk by the testing and analysis of selected relative navigation sensor technologies through hardware-in-the-loop testing and simulation. These activities will provide the CEV Project information to assess the relative navigation sensors maturity as well as demonstrate test methods and capabilities. The first year of this project focused on a series of"pathfinder" testing tasks to develop the test plans, test facility requirements, trajectories, math model architecture, simulation platform, and processes that will be used to evaluate the Contractor-proposed sensors. Four candidate sensors were used in the first phase of the testing. The second phase of testing used four sensors simultaneously: two Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Advanced Video Guidance Sensors (AVGS), a laser-based video sensor that uses retroreflectors attached to the target vehicle, and two commercial laser range finders. The multi-sensor testing was conducted at MSFC's Flight Robotics Laboratory (FRL) using the FRL's 6-DOF gantry system, called the Dynamic Overhead Target System (DOTS). The target vehicle for "docking" in the laboratory was a mockup that was representative of the proposed CEV docking system, with added retroreflectors for the AVGS. The multi-sensor test configuration used 35 open-loop test trajectories covering three major objectives: (1) sensor characterization trajectories designed to test a wide range of performance parameters; (2) CEV-specific trajectories designed to test performance during CEV-like approach and departure profiles; and (3) sensor characterization tests designed for evaluating sensor performance under more extreme conditions as might be induced during a spacecraft failure or during contingency situations. This paper describes the test development, test facility, test preparations, test execution, and test results of the multi-sensor series of trajectories.

Brewster, L.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Multi-Sensor Testing for Automated Rendezvous and Docking Sensor Testing at the Flight Robotics Lab

The Exploration Systems Architecture defines missions that require rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) of two spacecraft both in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO). Uncrewed spacecraft must perform automated and/or autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations and docking operations (commonly known as AR&D). The crewed missions may also perform rendezvous and docking operations and may require different levels of automation and/or autonomy, and must provide the crew with relative navigation information for manual piloting. The capabilities of the RPOD sensors are critical to the success ofthe Exploration Program. NASA has the responsibility to determine whether the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) contractor-proposed relative navigation sensor suite will meet the requirements. The relatively low technology readiness level of AR&D relative navigation sensors has been carried as one of the CEV Project's top risks. The AR&D Sensor Technology Project seeks to reduce the risk by the testing and analysis of selected relative navigation sensor technologies through hardware-in-the-Ioop testing and simulation. These activities will provide the CEV Project information to assess the relative navigation sensors maturity as well as demonstrate test methods and capabilities. The first year of this project focused on a series of "pathfinder" testing tasks to develop the test plans, test facility requirements, trajectories, math model architecture, simulation platform, and processes that will be used to evaluate the Contractor-proposed sensors. Four candidate sensors were used in the first phase of the testing. The second phase of testing used four sensors simultaneously: two Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Advanced Video Guidance Sensors (AVGS), a laser-based video sensor that uses retroreflectors attached to the target vehicle, and two commercial laser range finders. The multi-sensor testing was conducted at MSFC's Flight Robotics Laboratory (FRL) using the FRL's 6-DOF gantry system, called the Dynamic Overhead Target System (DOTS). The target vehicle for "docking" in the laboratory was a mockup that was representative of the proposed CEV docking system, with added retroreflectors for the AVGS.' The multi-sensor test configuration used 35 open-loop test trajectories covering three major objectives: (l) sensor characterization trajectories designed to test a wide range of performance parameters; (2) CEV-specific trajectories designed to test performance during CEV-like approach and departure profiles; and (3) sensor characterization tests designed for evaluating sensor performance under more extreme conditions as might be induced during a spacecraft failure or during contingency situations. This paper describes the test development, test facility, test preparations, test execution, and test results of the multisensor series oftrajectories

Brewster, Linda L.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Fully automatic guidance and control for rotorcraft nap-of-the-Earth flight following planned profiles. Volume 1: Real-time piloted simulation

Developing a single-pilot, all-weather nap-of-the-earth (NOE) capability requires fully automatic NOE (ANOE) navigation and flight control. Innovative guidance and control concepts are investigated in a four-fold research effort that: (1) organizes the on-board computer-based storage and real-time updating of NOE terrain profiles and obstacles in course-oriented coordinates indexed to the mission flight plan; (2) defines a class of automatic anticipative pursuit guidance algorithms and necessary data preview requirements to follow the vertical, lateral, and longitudinal guidance commands dictated by the updated flight profiles; (3) automates a decision-making process for unexpected obstacle avoidance; and (4) provides several rapid response maneuvers. Acquired knowledge from the sensed environment is correlated with the forehand knowledge of the recorded environment (terrain, cultural features, threats, and targets), which is then used to determine an appropriate evasive maneuver if a nonconformity of the sensed and recorded environments is observed. This four-fold research effort was evaluated in both fixed-based and moving-based real-time piloted simulations, thereby, providing a practical demonstration for evaluating pilot acceptance of the automated concepts, supervisory override, manual operation, and re-engagement of the automatic system. Volume one describes the major components of the guidance and control laws as well as the results of the piloted simulations. Volume two describes the complete mathematical model of the fully automatic guidance system for rotorcraft NOE flight following planned flight profiles.

Clement, Warren F.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Fully Automatic Guidance and Control for Rotorcraft Nap-of-the-earth Flight Following Planned Profiles. Volume 2: Mathematical Model

Developing a single-pilot, all-weather nap-of-the-earth (NOE) capability requires fully automatic NOE (ANOE) navigation and flight control. Innovative guidance and control concepts are investigated in a four-fold research effort that: (1) organizes the on-board computer-based storage and real-time updating of NOE terrain profiles and obstacles in course-oriented coordinates indexed to the mission flight plan; (2) defines a class of automatic anticipative pursuit guidance algorithms and necessary data preview requirements to follow the vertical, lateral, and longitudinal guidance commands dictated by the updated flight profiles; (3) automates a decision-making process for unexpected obstacle avoidance; and (4) provides several rapid response maneuvers. Acquired knowledge from the sensed environment is correlated with the forehand knowledge of the recorded environment (terrain, cultural features, threats, and targets), which is then used to determine an appropriate evasive maneuver if a nonconformity of the sensed and recorded environments is observed. This four-fold research effort was evaluated in both fixed-base and moving-base real-time piloted simulations; thereby, providing a practical demonstration for evaluating pilot acceptance of the automated concepts, supervisory override, manual operation, and re-engagement of the automatic system. Volume one describes the major components of the guidance and control laws as well as the results of the piloted simulations. Volume two describes the complete mathematical model of the fully automatic guidance system for rotorcraft NOE flight following planned flight profiles.

Clement, Warren F.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Automated Rendezvous and Docking Sensor Testing at the Flight Robotics Laboratory

The Exploration Systems Architecture defines missions that require rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) of two spacecraft both in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO). Uncrewed spacecraft must perform automated and/or autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations and docking operations (commonly known as Automated Rendezvous and Docking, AR&D). The crewed versions may also perform AR&D, possibly with a different level of automation and/or autonomy, and must also provide the crew with relative navigation information for manual piloting. The capabilities of the RPOD sensors are critical to the success of the Exploration Program. NASA has the responsibility to determine whether the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) contractor-proposed relative navigation sensor suite will meet the CEV requirements. The relatively low technology readiness of relative navigation sensors for AR&D has been carried as one of the CEV Projects top risks. The AR&D Sensor Technology Project seeks to reduce this risk by increasing technology maturation of selected relative navigation sensor technologies through testing and simulation, and to allow the CEV Project to assess the relative navigation sensors.

Mitchell, J.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Automated Rendezvous and Docking Sensor Testing at the Flight Robotics Laboratory

The Exploration Systems Architecture defines missions that require rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) of two spacecraft both in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO). Uncrewed spacecraft must perform automated and/or autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations and docking operations (commonly known as Automated Rendezvous and Docking, (AR&D).) The crewed versions of the spacecraft may also perform AR&D, possibly with a different level of automation and/or autonomy, and must also provide the crew with relative navigation information for manual piloting. The capabilities of the RPOD sensors are critical to the success of the Exploration Program. NASA has the responsibility to determine whether the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) contractor-proposed relative navigation sensor suite will meet the CEV requirements. The relatively low technology readiness of relative navigation sensors for AR&D has been carried as one of the CEV Projects top risks. The AR&D Sensor Technology Project seeks to reduce this risk by increasing technology maturation of selected relative navigation sensor technologies through testing and simulation, and to allow the CEV Project to assess the relative navigation sensors.

Howard, Richard T.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Validation of an Automated System for Arrival Traffic Management

The fuel-efficiencies of arrival flights that were managed by an automated system were compared to the fuel-efficiencies of arrival flights that were managed by air traffic controllers. It was infeasible to have the automated system control arrivals in real operations, so the comparison was accomplished by setting up a fast-time simulation where the automated system could manage arrivals with the same initial conditions and flight plans as those that operated in real operations during a selected comparison period and in the same background traffic. For this study, Newark Liberty International Airport was selected as the arrival airport because its high traffic load and constrained arrival procedures were expected to highlight fuel-efficiency benefits of an automated system. In the simulation, the automated system managed Newark arrivals, and the other flights (arrivals to other airports, departures, and overflights) composed the background traffic. To match the simulation and the real operations background traffic, the other flights flew in simulation the same trajectory that they flew in real operations during the comparison period. Fuel-efficiency was measured by calculating fuel burns of the arrival trajectories. The fuel-efficiencies of arrival trajectories produced in the simulation were compared with the estimated fuel-efficiencies of arrival trajectories recorded from real operations during the comparison period. Results showed that automation managed arrivals burned 346 lbs less fuel per flight on average than controller managed arrivals.

air traffic control↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Validation of an Automated System for Arrival Traffic Management

The fuel-efficiencies of arrival flights that were managed by an automated system were compared to the fuel-efficiencies of arrival flights that were managed by air traffic controllers. It was infeasible to have the automated system control arrivals in real operations, so the comparison was accomplished by setting up a fast-time simulation where the automated system could manage arrivals with the same initial conditions and flight plans as those that operated in real operations during a selected comparison period and in the same background traffic. For this study, Newark Liberty International Airport was selected as the arrival airport because its high traffic load and constrained arrival procedures were expected to highlight fuel-efficiency benefits of an automated system. In the simulation, the automated system managed Newark arrivals, and the other flights (arrivals to other airports, departures, and overflights) composed the background traffic. To match the simulation and the real operations background traffic, the other flights flew in simulation the same trajectory that they flew in real operations during the comparison period. Fuel-efficiency was measured by calculating fuel burns of the arrival trajectories. The fuel-efficiencies of arrival trajectories produced in the simulation were compared with the estimated fuel-efficiencies of arrival trajectories recorded from real operations during the comparison period. Results showed that automation managed arrivals burned 346 lbs less fuel per flight on average than controller managed arrivals.

air traffic control↗
NASA NTRS2024

Integration of Automated Systems Test Campaign NC-IAS

NASA’s 2022 strategic plan included the goal to catalyze economic growth and drive innovation in the aviation industry, and to address challenges in air transportation and airspace management within the National Airspace System (NAS). The Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) specifically was tasked with leading aviation innovation to enable safe and sustainable air transportation through revolutionary vehicle advances and efficient flight operations. As a part of meeting these objectives and advancing air mobility concepts, NASA initiated the National Campaign (NC) in the Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) Project within the Airspace Operations and Safety Program (AOSP). The NC was designed to support operational demonstrations with industry as well as the research and development needed to support NASA-led research flight demonstrations. Within NC, the Integration of Automated Systems (IAS), an NC activity, tested and evaluated flight deck automation and airspace operations management functions needed to enable Urban Air Mobility (UAM) operations. This was accomplished through a partnership with Sikorsky Aircraft (specifically Sikorsky Innovations), a Lockheed Martin company, and DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), by leveraging two automation-enabled helicopters equipped with unique capabilities that enabled NASA to develop and test two-ship conflict encounters to demonstrate flight path management and hazard avoidance technologies. The enabler in this testing was NASA-developed “Middleware” (MW) software (also known as Expandable Variable Autonomy Architecture, or EVAA), which among other things allowed multiple algorithms to be incorporated into one software build that was hosted on the dissimilar-type Sikorsky helicopters. The IAS test campaign period of performance was from March 2022 through October 2023 and was structured as a phased, or spiral, approach that ultimately led to the first-ever demonstration of two-ship UAM/AAM operations designed to safely choreograph specific conflict encounters and mission scenarios to test the research algorithms for strategic and tactical aircraft deconfliction. Lessons learned are included in the body of the report. Data collected will be used to inform FAA and industry standards groups on the increasingly automated systems needed for future AAM operations. The test encounters developed for these flight tests were proven to be highly predictable, repeatable, and safely exercised flight path planning and Detect and Avoid (DAA) algorithms. These same test encounters should be leveraged by future flight test campaigns to verify that operational safety is not compromised as the AAM architecture matures. Next steps include repeating similar encounters using unmanned aircraft carrying DAA sensors in the National Airspace.

AAM↗
NASA NTRS2022

Run Time Assurance for Electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing Aircraft

NASA is conducting research to demonstrate and evaluate the application of Run Time Assurance (RTA) as a means to assure safety in Electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOL) aircraft with highly automated or autonomous flight capability supervised by a single onboard pilot. The work described in this report demonstrates an application of RTA and examines the implications for design and analysis of aircraft functions and systems; aircraft safety hazards; safety assurance; development assurance; and pilot tasks and performance. This research effort also seeks to assess the efficacy of the combined application of traditional Functional Hazard Analysis (FHA) and the more modern System Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) techniques to perform hazard analyses on aircraft with complex automated and autonomous systems and an onboard pilot. During the research effort we developed architectural designs of two alternate eVTOL aircraft, generally following the process characterized in the SAE standards ARP4754 and ARP4761. The design has focused on the control architectures of these aircraft, which are identical except that one incorporates RTA techniques to reduce the criticality of some key software components. Artifacts of this process include a taxonomy of aircraft-level functions, aircraft-level architecture diagrams, aircraft-level functional hazard assessments (AFHA), function allocations onto aircraft systems and subsystems, functional block diagrams for a select set of control-related functions, and system-level functional hazard assessments (SFHA) for those functions. This project has highlighted the notion that DAL D is something of a sweet spot for low-confidence controllers in an RTA-based design. Among the many activities described in DO-178C, the activities related to requirement verifiability, algorithmic accuracy, and test coverage can be the most challenging for the kinds of advanced control techniques that may be desirable in novel UAM designs, such as adaptive control, machine-learning, artificial intelligence, numerical search, and Monte Carlo based algorithms. Moreover, the standard requires that development teams demonstrate that errors leading to unacceptable failure conditions have been removed from the software. The RTA architecture, which cordons off the low-confidence function, makes it much easier to show this for these kinds of algorithms. With regard to the use of STPA and FHA as complementary hazard analysis techniques, our research effort led us to the conclusion that STPA should be used to derive requirements for hardware and software systems and/or components. Also, STPA is a natural complement to other processes in ARP4754A involving design studies and iteration.

Run-time assurance↗
NASA NTRS1994

Risk reduction methodologies and technologies for the Earth Observing System (EOS) Operations Center (EOC)

This paper will discuss proposed Flight Operations methodologies and technologies for the Earth Observing System (EOS) Operations Center (EOC), to reduce risks associated with the operation of complex multi-instrument spacecraft in a multi-spacecraft environment. The EOC goals are to obtain 100 percent science data capture and maintain 100 percent spacecraft health, for each EOS spacecraft. Operations risks to the spacecraft and data loss due to operator command error, mission degradation due to mis-identification of an anomalous trend in component performance or mis-management of resources, and total mission loss due to improper subsystem configuration or mis-identification of an anomalous condition. This paper discusses automation of routine Flight Operations Team (FOT) responsibilities, Expert systems for real-time non-nominal condition decision support, and Telemetry analysis systems for in-depth playback data analysis and trending.

Hudson, Richard K.↗
NASA NTRS1981

Automation of On-Board Flightpath Management

The status of concepts and techniques for the design of onboard flight path management systems is reviewed. Such systems are designed to increase flight efficiency and safety by automating the optimization of flight procedures onboard aircraft. After a brief review of the origins and functions of such systems, two complementary methods are described for attacking the key design problem, namely, the synthesis of efficient trajectories. One method optimizes en route, the other optimizes terminal area flight; both methods are rooted in optimal control theory. Simulation and flight test results are reviewed to illustrate the potential of these systems for fuel and cost savings.

Erzberger, H.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Crew Autonomy through Self-Scheduling: Scheduling Performance Pilot Study

Within the domain of human spaceflight, crew scheduling for International Space Station (ISS) remains a human-driven planning task. Large teams of flight controllers (called Ops Planners) spend weeks creating violation-free schedules for all crewmembers. As NASA considers long-duration exploration missions, the necessary shift of scheduling and planning management from Ops Planners to crew members requires significant research and investigation of crew performance to complete these scheduling tasks. This pilot study was conducted to evaluate non-expert human performance for the task of planning and scheduling, focusing on scheduling problems that increased in complexity based on the number of activities to be scheduled and the number of planning constraints. Nine non-expert planners were recruited to complete scheduling tasks using Playbook, a scheduling software. The results of this pilot study show that scheduling performance decreased as scheduling workload (i.e. number of activities and percent of activities with planning constraints) increased. This paper provides evidence towards developing a model for scheduling task difficulty and identifies potential implications for future automated aids for flight crew scheduling.

planning↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Crew Autonomy Through Self-Scheduling: Scheduling Performance Pilot Study

Within the domain of human spaceflight, crew scheduling for International Space Station (ISS) remains a human-driven planning task. Large teams of flight controllers (called Ops Planners) spend weeks creating violation-free schedules for all crewmembers. As NASA considers long-duration exploration missions, the necessary shift of scheduling and planning management from Ops Planners to crew members requires significant research and investigation of crew performance to complete these scheduling tasks. This pilot study was conducted to evaluate non-expert human performance for the task of planning and scheduling, focusing on scheduling problems that increased in complexity based on the number of activities to be scheduled and the number of planning constraints. Nine non-expert planners were recruited to complete scheduling tasks using Playbook, a scheduling software. The results of this pilot study show that scheduling performance decreased as scheduling workload (i.e. number of activities and percent of activities with planning constraints) increased. This paper provides evidence towards developing a model for scheduling task difficulty and identifies potential implications for future automated aids for flight crew scheduling.

planning↗