Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Detect and Avoid (DAA)”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Applying Sensor Uncertainty Mitigation Schemes to Detect-and-Avoid Systems

Impact of sensor noise on the performance of Detect-And-Avoid (DAA) systems can be reduced by implementing various mitigation schemes. This paper evaluates the Sensor Uncertainty Mitigation (SUM) method, implemented in the Detect and Avoid Alerting Logic for Unmanned Systems (DAIDALUS) algorithm, a reference implementation in the DAA minimum operational performance standards. DAIDALUS SUM performance is evaluated using a few safety and operational suitability metrics and compared with more traditional approaches using static safety buffers. A large number of encounters representative of low-speed unmanned aircraft against non-cooperative manned aircraft are simulated and evaluated. An air-to-air radar model produces representative sensor noise for the DAA system. Results show that increasing the tunable parameters for horizontal and vertical uncertainty in DAIDALUS SUM improves the safety metric at the cost of increasing the number of system alerts leading to increased workload. A range of SUM parameters is recommended as suitable values for the type of operations considered for this work. General trends and optimal SUM configurations were found to be nearly the same for two large and very different encounter data sets.

detect and avoid↗
NASA NTRS2021

Detect-and-Avoid Surveillance Range Requirements for Electro-Optical/Infra-Red Sensors

A detect-and-avoid (DAA) system provides surveillance, alerting, and maneuver guidance (referred to as guidance in this report) that are critical to an unmanned aircraft system’s (UAS) ability to maintain separation from manned aircraft and other unmanned aircraft. The last decade has seen significant progress in the development of DAA requirements, spearheaded by RTCA Special Committee 228 (SC228) and subsequently by other standards organizations such as EUROCAE and ASTM. SC-228’s development of DAA requirements assumes the UAS follows instrument flight rules (IFR) and has a remote pilot or operator in the loop. As of the publication of this document, the SC-228’s latest Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for DAA, versioned as DO-365B [1], DAA systems use onboard and/or ground surveillance systems to detect traffic. The surveillance systems must detect both cooperative and non-cooperative air traffic. Cooperative traffic are vehicles that have a broadcasting transponder, while non-cooperative traffic do not, and so must be detected via radar or other sensors. A DAA system’s alerting and guidance functions alert the pilot/operator in the loop of potential hazards, such as intruder aircraft, and provide maneuver solutions which help the pilot/operator avoid or mitigate observed hazards. A UAS pilot is expected to coordinate with air traffic control (ATC) before executing a conflict avoidance maneuver if the type of alert is not urgent enough to require an immediate maneuver.

uncrewed aviation systems↗
NASA NTRS2021

Evaluation of Sensor Uncertainty Mitigation Methods for Detect-and-Avoid Systems

The impact of sensor noise on the performance of Detect-And-Avoid (DAA) systems can be reduced by implementing various mitigation schemes. This paper evaluates two such methods. One of them is the Sensor Uncertainty Mitigation (SUM) method, implemented in the Detect and Avoid Alerting Logic for Unmanned Systems (DAIDALUS) algorithm, a reference implementation in the DAA minimum operational performance standards. The second method is the Virtual Intruder State Aggregation (VISA), which averages multiple subsequent intruder states extrapolated to the current (most recent) time into a single ``aggregated`` intruder state. The VISA method can be used either individually as a sensor noise mitigation method in its own right, or in combination with DAIDALUS SUM. The performance of these methods is evaluated using three safety and operational suitability metrics and compared with a baseline configuration using static safety buffers. A large number of encounters representative of low-speed unmanned aircraft against non-cooperative manned aircraft, not equipped with a broadcasting transponder or ADS-B out system, are simulated and evaluated. An air-to-air radar model produces representative sensor noise for the DAA system. Results show that increasing the DAIDALUS SUM parameters for horizontal and vertical uncertainty improves the safety metric at the cost of increasing the number of actionable alerts leading to increased workload. A range of SUM parameters is recommended as suitable values for the type of operations considered for this work. VISA was found to be almost as effective as other noise mitigation methods even when it was used alone. Combining VISA with DAIDALUS SUM achieved the best performance among all investigated methods used with DAIDALUS. General trends and optimal SUM configurations were found to be nearly the same for two large and very different encounter data sets.

Detect-and-Avoid Systems↗
NASA NTRS2018

Sensor Uncertainty Mitigation and Dynamic Well Clear Volumes in DAIDALUS

This paper presents recent updates to DAIDALUS (Detect & Avoid Alerting Logic for Unmanned Systems), a detect and avoid (DAA) software package for the integration of civil UAS into the airspace. DAIDALUS is the reference implementation of detect and avoid for unmanned aircraft systems chosen by RTCA Special Committee 228 (SC-228), and it is included in its corresponding Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) document, DO-365. This paper reports on the integration into DAIDALUS of two new capabilities, namely dynamic well clear volumes and sensor uncertainty mitigation.'

Narkawicz, Anthony↗
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

Evaluating Alerting and Guidance Performance of a UAS Detect-And-Avoid System

A key challenge to the routine, safe operation of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) is the development of detect-and-avoid (DAA) systems to aid the UAS pilot in remaining "well clear" of nearby aircraft. The goal of this study is to investigate the effect of alerting criteria and pilot response delay on the safety and performance of UAS DAA systems in the context of routine civil UAS operations in the National Airspace System (NAS). A NAS-wide fast-time simulation study was conducted to assess UAS DAA system performance with a large number of encounters and a broad set of DAA alerting and guidance system parameters. Three attributes of the DAA system were controlled as independent variables in the study to conduct trade-off analyses: UAS trajectory prediction method (dead-reckoning vs. intent-based), alerting time threshold (related to predicted time to LoWC), and alerting distance threshold (related to predicted Horizontal Miss Distance, or HMD). A set of metrics, such as the percentage of true positive, false positive, and missed alerts, based on signal detection theory and analysis methods utilizing the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves were proposed to evaluate the safety and performance of DAA alerting and guidance systems and aid development of DAA system performance standards. The effect of pilot response delay on the performance of DAA systems was evaluated using a DAA alerting and guidance model and a pilot model developed to support this study. A total of 18 fast-time simulations were conducted with nine different DAA alerting threshold settings and two different trajectory prediction methods, using recorded radar traffic from current Visual Flight Rules (VFR) operations, and supplemented with DAA-equipped UAS traffic based on mission profiles modeling future UAS operations. Results indicate DAA alerting distance threshold has a greater effect on DAA system performance than DAA alerting time threshold or ownship trajectory prediction method. Further analysis on the alert lead time (time in advance of predicted loss of well clear at which a DAA alert is first issued) indicated a strong positive correlation between alert lead time and DAA system performance (i.e. the ability of the UAS pilot to maneuver the unmanned aircraft to remain well clear). While bigger distance thresholds had beneficial effects on alert lead time and missed alert rate, it also generated a higher rate of false alerts. In the design and development of DAA alerting and guidance systems, therefore, the positive and negative effects of false alerts and missed alerts should be carefully considered to achieve acceptable alerting system performance by balancing false and missed alerts. The results and methodology presented in this study are expected to help stakeholders, policymakers and standards committees define the appropriate setting of DAA system parameter thresholds for UAS that ensure safety while minimizing operational impacts to the NAS and equipage requirements for its users before DAA operational performance standards can be finalized.

UAS Detect-and-Avoid (DAA) System↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Detect-and-Avoid Maneuver Planning: Benefits of Including Route Recapture

Development of Detect-and-avoid (DAA) systems’ maneuver guidance requirements at RTCA has centered on tactical maneuvers away from the intruder. Recapturing the flight-plan route the initial maneuver is not directly taken into account by most DAA maneuver guidance algorithms. This work demonstrates potential challenges and inefficiencies that can arise in recapturing the route after resolving a conflict. Horizontal resolution trajectories for a test matrix of encounters with varying aircraft speeds and geometries are computed by minimizing either flight time or deviation to serve as a baseline. Turn directions computed from a reference DAA algorithm coupled with a pilot selection model and a second algorithm called Autoresolver (AR) are compared to these baseline resolution trajectories. Baseline results show that turning into the intruder yields favorable cost for most encounters. Additional analysis of pilot response data shows that only three-fourths of pilots’ horizontal maneuvers turn into intruders, a percentage much lower than the baseline results. Improvement to a DAA guidance algorithm based on findings in this work is discussed.

Route Recapture↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Detect-and-Avoid Maneuver Planning: Benefits of Including Route Recapture

Development of Detect-and-avoid (DAA) systems’ maneuver guidance requirements at RTCA has centered on tactical maneuvers away from the intruder. Recapturing the flight-plan route the initial maneuver is not directly taken into account by most DAA maneuver guidance algorithms. This work demonstrates potential challenges and inefficiencies that can arise in recapturing the route after resolving a conflict. Horizontal resolution trajectories for a test matrix of encounters with varying aircraft speeds and geometries are computed by minimizing either flight time or deviation to serve as a baseline. Turn directions computed from a reference DAA algorithm coupled with a pilot selection model and a second algorithm called Autoresolver (AR) are compared to these baseline resolution trajectories. Baseline results show that turning into the intruder yields favorable cost for most encounters. Additional analysis of pilot response data shows that only three-fourths of pilots’ horizontal maneuvers turn into intruders, a percentage much lower than the baseline results. Improvement to a DAA guidance algorithm based on findings in this work is discussed.

Route Recapture↗
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 NTRS2018

Detect and Avoid: Efforts from NASA's UAS Integration into the NAS Project

NASA's Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) integration into the National Air Space (NAS) project has been working closely with the FAA and RTCA Special Committee 228 to identify and break down barriers to UAS integration. A focus of this work is on detect and avoid (DAA) technologies. A pilot has responsibility to see and avoid other aircraft and to remain "well clear," using their best judgment (Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Sec. 91.113). For UAS to perform this function, the see function is replaced by sensors to detect the other aircraft. Secondly, the pilot judgment of well clear has to be replaced by a mathematical expression. For Phase 1 of this effort, a well clear violation was defined if all three of these conditions are true: a) the horizontal clearance is less than 4000 ft., and b) the vertical clearance is less than 450 ft., and c) the time to loss of well clear is less than 35 seconds. This definition was developed with a great deal of community input and testing to ensure interoperability with Air Traffic Control (ATC) and pilots of manned aircraft. Appropriate guidance, alerting and displays were developed to allow UAS, with the appropriate sensors, to effectively maintain well clear. This work contributed to FAA Technical Standard Orders: TSO-C211, Detect and Avoid and TSO-C212, ATAR for Traffic Surveillance. Phase 2 of this work extends the operational environment to include the terminal area and lesser capable aircraft that might not have the payload capability to carry the RADAR defined in Phase 1. This session reports on work from Phase 1 and initial work in Phase 2.

Detect and Avoid (DAA)↗
NASA NTRS2019

A Detect and Avoid System in the Context of Multiple-Unmanned Aircraft Systems Operations

NASA's Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration into the National Airspace System (UAS in the NAS) project examines the technical barriers associated with the operation of UAS in civil airspace. For UAS, the removal of the pilot from onboard the aircraft has eliminated the ability of the ground-based pilot in command (PIC) to use out-the-window visual information to make judgements about a potential threat of a loss of well clear with another aircraft. NASA's Phase 1 research supported the development of a Detect and Avoid (DAA) system that supports the ground-based pilot's ability to detect potential traffic conflicts and determine a resolution maneuver, but existing display/alerting requirements did not account for multiple UAS control (1:N). Demands for increased scalability of UAS in the NAS operations are expected to create a need for simultaneous control of UAs, and thus, a new DAA HMI design will likely be necessary. Previous research, however, has found performance degradations as the number of vehicles under operator control has increased. The purpose of the current human-in-the-loop (HITL) simulation was to examine the viability of 1:N operations with the Phase 1 DAA alerting and guidance. Sixteen UAS pilots flew three scenarios with varying number of UAs under their control (1:1, 1:3, 1:5). In addition to their supervisory and sensor mission responsibilities, pilots were to utilize the DAA system to remain DAA well clear (DWC) during scripted conflicts of mixed severity. Measured response times, separation performance, mission task data, and subjective feedback were collected to assess how the multi-UAS control configuration impacted pilots' ability to maintain DAA well clear and perform the mission tasks. Overall, the DAA system proved surprisingly adaptive to multi-UAS control for preventing losses of DAA well clear (LoDWC). The findings suggest that, while multi-UAS operators are able to maintain safe separation (DWC) from other traffic, their ability to efficiently perform missions drastically decreases with their number of controlled vehicles. Pilot feedback indicated that, for this context, the use of automation support tools for completing and managing mission tasks would be appropriate and desired, especially for ensuring efficient use of assets. Finally, human-machine interface (HMI) design considerations for multi-UAS operations are discussed.

Monk, Kevin J.↗
NASA NTRS2016

NASA UAS Integration into the NAS Project Detect and Avoid Display Evaluations

As part of the Air Force - NASA Bi-Annual Research Council Meeting, slides will be presented on phase 1 Detect and Avoid (DAA) display evaluations. A series of iterative human-in-the-loops (HITL) experiments were conducted with different display configurations to objectively measure pilot performance on maintaining well clear. To date, four simulations and two mini-HITLs have been conducted. Data from these experiments have been incorporated into a revised alerting structure and included in the RTCA SC 228 Phase 1 Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) proposal. Plans for phase 2 are briefly discussed.

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

DANTi, DAA in the Cockpit

DANTi is a prototype Electronic Flight Bag which incorporates an assistive Detect and Avoid (DAA) capability developed by NASA.

Maria Consiglio↗
NASA NTRS2014

Investigating Detect-and-Avoid Surveillance Performance for Unmanned Aircraft Systems

Most unmanned aircraft systems will be required to be equipped with a Detect-and-Avoid (DAA) system with a surveillance component. The surveillance performance requirements of the DAA system to detect and track intruder aircraft will depend on the encounter geometries that unmanned aircraft are expected to have with other aircraft in the airspace. This presentation shows the analysis of the encounter geometries that were simulated using historical low-altitude traffic data and some proposed UAS missions. This analysis suggests how the overall safety and performance of a surveillance system may relate to surveillance parameters such as surveillance range, horizontal and vertical fields or regard. This study proposed and investigated potential safety and performance metrics for evaluating the performance of a surveillance system, such as the ratio of undetected and late-detected separation violations, and the time to violation at first detection for given sets of surveillance parameters.

UAS↗
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 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 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↗