Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “TBFM”

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 NTRS2016

NY TBO Research: Integrated Demand Management (IDM): IDM Concept, Tools, and Training Package

A series of human-in-the-loop simulation sessions were conducted in the Airspace Operations Laboratory (AOL) to evaluate a new traffic management concept called Integrated Demand Management (IDM). The simulation explored how to address chronic equity, throughput and delay issues associated with New Yorks high-volume airports by operationally integrating three current and NextGen capabilities the Collaborative Trajectory Options Program (CTOP), Time-Based Flow Management (TBFM) and Required Time of Arrival (RTA) in order to better manage traffic demand within the National Air Traffic System. A package of presentation slides was developed to describe the concept, tools, and training materials used in the simulation sessions. The package will be used to outbrief our stakeholders by both presenting orally and disseminating of the materials via email.

trajectory-based operations↗
NASA NTRS2015

Scheduling and Delivering Aircraft to Departure Fixes in the NY Metroplex with Controller-Managed Spacing Tools

In this paper, successful Time-Based Flow Management (TBFM) scheduling systems for arrivals are considered and adapted to apply to departures. We present a concept of operations that integrates Controller-Managed Spacing tools for departures (CMS-D) with existing tactical departure scheduling tools to coordinate demand at departure fixes in a metroplex environment. We tested our concept in a Human-in-the-Loop simulation and compared the effect of two scheduling conditions: 1) "Departure Scheduling" consisting of an emulation of the Integrated Departure and Arrival Capability (IDAC) where Towers and a Planner (Traffic Management Coordinator at the appropriate facility) coordinate aircraft scheduled takeoff times to departure fixes; and 2) "Arrival Sensitive Departure Scheduling" where, in addition, the Tower and Planner also consider arrival Scheduled Time of Arrivals (STAs) at the airport's dependent runway. Results indicate little difference between the two scheduling conditions, but a large difference between the No Tools and the two scheduling conditions with CMS-D tools. The scheduling/CMS-D tools conditions markedly reduced heading, speed clearances, and workload for controllers who were merging flows at the departure fixes. In the tool conditions, departure controllers conditioned departures earlier rather than later when aircraft were tied near the departure fixes. In the scheduling/CMS-D tools conditions, departures crossed the departure fixes 50 seconds earlier and with an 8% error rate (consisting of time ahead or behind desired time of arrival) compared to a 19% error rate in the No Tool condition. Two exploratory runs showed that similar beneficial effects can be obtained only with the CMS-D tools without scheduling takeoff times, but at the cost of a somewhat higher workload for controllers, indicating the benefits of pre-departure scheduling of aircraft with minimal delays. Hence, we found that CMS-D tools were very beneficial in the metroplex environment we tested but that further research is needed to clarify the benefits of the various scheduling approaches.

terminal airspace↗
NASA NTRS2017

Development and Validation of an Automated Simulation Capability in Support of Integrated Demand Management

Integrated Demand Management (IDM) is a near- to mid-term NASA concept that proposes to address mismatches in air traffic system demand and capacity by using strategic flow management capabilities to pre-condition demand into the more tactical Time-Based Flow Management System (TBFM). This paper describes an automated simulation capability to support IDM concept development. The capability closely mimics existing human-in-the-loop (HITL) capabilities, while automating both the human components and collaboration between operational systems, and speeding up the real-time aircraft simulations. Such a capability allows for parametric studies to be carried out that can inform the HITL simulations, identifying breaking points and parameter values at which significant changes in system behavior occur. The paper describes the initial validation of the automated simulation capability against results from previous IDM HITL experiments, quantifying the differences. The simulator is then used to explore the performance of the IDM concept under the simple scenario of a capacity constrained airport under a wide range of wind conditions.

Traffic Flow Management↗
NASA NTRS2019

ATD-2 Update for TBFM/TFDM Ops Teams

This presentation was developed to update the TBFM/TFDM operational teams on ATD-2 Phase 2 progress and Phase 3 plans. It includes top-level compliance data and APREQ delay data, processes for data exchange between ATD-2 and TBFM and surface metering, and potential benefits of EOBTs.

ATD-2↗
NASA NTRS2017

Current Safety Nets Within the U.S. National Airspace System

There are over 70,000 flights managed per day in the National Airspace System, with approximately 7,000 aircraft in the air over the United States at any given time. Operators of each of these flights would prefer to fly a user-defined “4D” trajectory (4DT), which includes arrival and departure times; preferred gates and runways at the airport; efficient, wind-optimal routes for departure, cruise and arrival phase of flight; and fuel efficient altitude profiles. To demonstrate the magnitude of this achievement a single flight from Los Angeles to Baltimore, accesses over 35 shared or “constrained” resources that are managed by roughly 30 air traffic controllers (at towers, approach control and en route sectors); along with traffic managers at 12 facilities, using over 22 different, independent automation system (including TBFM, ERAM, STARS, ASDE-X, FSM, TSD, GPWS, TCAS, etc.). In addition, dispatchers, ramp controllers and others utilize even more systems to manage each flight’s access to operator-managed resources. Flying an ideal 4DT requires successful coordination of all flight constraints among all flights, facilities, operators, pilots and controllers. Additionally, when conditions in the NAS change, the trajectories of one or more aircraft may need to be revised to avoid loss of flight efficiency, predictability, separation or system throughput. The Aviation Safety Network has released the 2016 airliner accident statistics showing a very low total of 19 fatal airliner accidents, resulting in 325 fatalities1. Despite several high profile accidents, the year 2016 turned out to be a very safe year for commercial aviation, Aviation Safety Network data show. Over the year 2016 the Aviation Safety Network recorded a total of 19 fatal airliner accidents [1], resulting in 325 fatalities. This makes 2016 the second safest year ever, both by number of fatal accidents as well as in terms of fatalities. In 2015 ASN recorded 16 accidents while in 2013 a total of 265 lives were lost. How can we keep it that way and not upset the apple cart by premature insertion of innovative technologies, functions, and procedures? In aviation, safety nets function as the last system defense against incidents and accidents. Current ground-based and airborne safety nets are well established and development to make them more efficient and reliable continues. Additionally, future air traffic control safety nets may emerge from new operational concepts.

Smith, Brian E.↗
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

A Scheduling Algorithm Compatible with a Distributed Management of Arrivals in the National Airspace System

The current system used by the FAA to schedule arrivals is the Traffic Based Flow Manager (TBFM). It is a centralized system that gives an operator (airline) no influence over scheduled times of arrival assigned to its flights. Future systems for managing arrival scheduling are proposed as distributed systems. Such a system is called upon to give operators influence to schedule and negotiate resources for their flights, and to resolve other technical challenges, such as eliminating a single point of failure. A distributed system for managing diverse air traffic will need the capability of computing a schedule for the given arriving flights in a way that complies with the operational constraints. This paper contributes an algorithm that computes such a schedule. Although developed as part of an effort toward a distributed system, the algorithm itself is neither inherently distributed nor inherently centralized and can be used in either type of system.

negotiation↗
NASA NTRS2019

A Scheduling Algorithm Compatible with a Distributed Management of Arrivals in the National Airspace System

The current system used by the FAA to schedule arrivals is the Traffic Based Flow Manager (TBFM). It is a centralized system that gives an operator (airline) no influence over scheduled times of arrival assigned to its flights. Future systems for managing arrival scheduling are proposed as distributed systems. Such a system is called upon to give operators influence to schedule and negotiate resources for their flights, and to resolve other technical challenges, such as eliminating a single point of failure. A distributed system for managing diverse air traffic will need the capability of computing a schedule for the given arriving flights in a way that complies with the operational constraints. This paper contributes an algorithm that computes such a schedule. Although developed as part of an effort toward a distributed system, the algorithm itself is neither inherently distributed nor inherently centralized and can be used in either type of system.

Sadovsky, A.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Airspace Technology Demonstration 2 (ATD-2) Phase 2 Technology Description Document (TDD)

This Technology Description Document (TDD) provides an overview of the technology for the Phase 1 Baseline and Phase 2 Fused demonstrations of the Integrated Arrival, Departure, and Surface (IADS) prototype system of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Airspace Technology Demonstration 2 (ATD-2) project, which has been demonstrated since October of 2017 at Charlotte Douglas International Airport (CLT). Development, integration, and field demonstration of relevant technologies of the IADS system directly address recommendations made by the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) Integration Working Group (NIWG) on Surface and Data Sharing and the Surface Collaborative Decision Making (Surface CDM) concept of operations developed jointly by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and aviation industry partners. NASA has been developing the IADS traffic management system under the ATD-2 project in coordination with the FAA, flight operators, CLT airport operators, and the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA). The primary goal of ATD-2 is to improve the predictability and operational efficiency of the air traffic system in metroplex environments, through the enhancement, development, and integration of the nation’s most advanced and sophisticated arrival, departure, and surface prediction, scheduling, and management systems. The ATD-2 project is a 5-year research activity beginning in 2015 and extending through 2020. The Phase 1 Baseline IADS capability resulting from the ATD-2 research has been demonstrated at the CLT airport since the beginning of October 2017. Phase 1 provided data exchange and integration with the initial demonstration of the integrated system of strategic and tactical scheduling, collaborative tactical surface metering, tactical departure scheduling to an en route meter point and overhead stream insertion, initial integration of a TFDM SWIM prototype feed, and an early implementation prototype of a Terminal Flight Data Manager (TFDM) Electronic Flight Data (EFD) system. The strategic surface scheduling element of the capability is consistent with the Surface CDM Concept of Operations published in 2014 by the FAA Surface Operations Directorate.1 The Phase 2 Fused IADS system provided substantial updates to baseline IADS Demonstration capability. Improvements were made to the IADS modeler; tactical surface scheduling, and metering; tactical departure scheduling for overhead stream insertion; Electronic Flight Data (EFD) and the integration with the FAA Advanced Electronic Flight Strip (AEFS); RTC/RMTC, and departure trajectories. New capabilities included a TFDM SWIM prototype feed and delivery of IADS data via the TFDM Terminal Publication (TTP) service of the FAA’s SWIM system; strategic surface scheduling and metering as well as fusion with tactical surface metering; integration and ingestion of data from TTP-connected Mobile App and texting industry for General Aviation (GA) flights; and expansion of airspace deployments to include adjacent Center automation, in particular interface with the Atlanta Center (ZTL) arrival metering TBFM system to evaluate pre-scheduling of flights. Improvements in Data Analysis and System Health (DASH) monitoring and updates were completed as well.

Talebi, Ehsan↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Demonstrating Early-Adopter Benefits of Submitting Multiple Trajectory Options for Airlines

A workshop at NASA Ames Research Center was held with airline industry stakeholders to demonstrate the impact of using Trajectory Options Sets (TOSs) during a Collaborative Trajectory Options Program (CTOP) for severe weather operations. The demonstration was conducted using apart-task Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) simulation of the Integrated Demand Management (IDM) concept, which is an air traffic management method that uses CTOP to deliver preconditioned traffic to the Time-Based Flow Management (TBFM) region. The demonstration addressed the following research objectives: first, determine who receives a greater benefit, TOS-participating or TOS-excluded airlines? Second, determine which method of trajectory selection yields a better solution, human/manual selection or automation? Finally, obtain feedback from stakeholders on their impression of the concept and recommendations for future work. The results showed that TOS-participating airlines received greater benefit in terms of total ground delay, ground delay savings, number of reroute options, and additional flight time, compared to TOS-excluded airlines. However, this result was dependent on the situational context, such as the number and location of flights. We found that all airlines benefitted when just a subset of airlines submitted TOS, but the greatest benefit went to the TOS-participating airlines. These benefits to the TOS-participating airlines were diminished as the number of TOS-participants in the system increased. Therefore, there was an “early-adopter” effect that suggested airlines could benefit by becoming the first to equip TOS without causing unfair disadvantages to those who do not equip TOS. In addition, we found that manual selection of trajectory options performed similarly to CTOP, but the CTOP solution was more efficient in terms of number of reroutes, additional flight time, and average ground delay for rerouted flights. Feedback from the stakeholders was solicited, and their overall impressions of the demonstrations were positive. They remarked that CTOP could do a better job than current day solutions, and they thought airlines could benefit from continuing to develop TOS capabilities.

Integrated Demand Management↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Demonstrating the Early Adopter Benefits of Submitting Multiple Trajectory Options for Airlines

Integrated Demand Management (IDM), is a NASA developed Traffic Flow Management (TFM) concept that uses Collaborative Trajectory Options Program (CTOP) to precondition traffic flows into the Time Based Flow Management (TBFM) region, helping traffic planners manage imbalances between demand and capacity in the National Airspace (NAS). A workshop held at NASA was conducted to demonstrate how individual airlines can be impacted by using Trajectory Options Sets (TOS) during IDM operations. A primary concern that was specifically addressed in a part-task Human-in-the-Loop simulation was who received the greater benefit, TOS participating or non-TOS participating airlines? The results showed that TOS participating airlines received greater benefit in terms of ground delay, number of reroute options, and additional flight time, than non-TOS participating airlines. However, this result was dependent on the number and location of flights. Therefore, it was advantageous for airlines to equip TOS. In addition, we found that non-TOS participating airlines also benefitted from other airlines participating in TOS, because the total system-wide ground delay was reduced as more TOS were introduced into the system. The evidence suggests that the benefits were distributed fairly, and there were no unfair disadvantages for airlines who did not equip TOS.

Integrated Demand Management↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Trajectory Based Operations (TBO)

Today, the FAA is fully engaged in the development and deployment of TBO for the NAS. To realize TBO, the FAA and NAS user community recognize the importance of systems-of-systems thinking and of greater integration across systems, programs, teams, and between research and the field. The ATD-1 Operational Integration Assessment (OIA), helped blaze the trail for this important transition while moving TBFM Terminal Sequencing and Spacing (TSAS) down the path to deployment. Only a few years later, a comprehensive flight test of Flight Deck Interval Management (FIM) capabilities was executed, complementary and interoperable with traffic flow capabilities that were then emerging for TBO. Together, the ATD-1 tech transfers helped pave the way for the highly integrated systems-of-systems development and acquisition being undertaken for TBO. This session will chart that path to where we are today, and where we are going in the future.

ATD-1, TSAS, FIM, trajectory based operations↗
NASA NTRS2020

Integrated Demand Management: Annotated Bibliography

NASA has developed the Integrated Demand Management (IDM) concept over a five-year long project lifespan. During that time period, IDM researchers, both at NASA and outside organizations funded by NASA, published approximately forty conference papers and other technical publications associated with the IDM concept. In this document, these publications are cited and annotated for their content and their relevance to the IDM concept development.

IDM↗
NASA NTRS2020

Integrated Demand Management: The FCA Balancing Algorithm

The Collaborative Trajectory Options Program (CTOP) is a new NextGen function that resides within the FAA’s Traffic Flow Management System (TFMS) software. CTOP was designed to be used in the United States’ national airspace to control the distribution of air traffic demand, both temporally and geographically, through a set of Flow Constrained Areas (FCAs). Each FCA is assigned capacity values that represent an estimated upper limit of manageable demand, and CTOP controls to that capacity by using Expect Departure Clearance Time (EDCT) air traffic control clearances, and/or rerouting flights to an alternate FCA or out of the CTOP completely. CTOP’s decisions about which control options best meet system and user needs are based on the Trajectory Options Set (TOS) submitted by airline operators for each flight. The FCA Balancing Algorithm (FBA) described in this document is a proposed decision support capability that generates CTOP capacity entries for FCAs controlling traffic to a common downstream constraint. The FBA provides an equitable distribution of impact, and addresses the added complexity of assigning FCA capacity values for this specific type of use case, greatly simplifying the FAA air traffic manager’s task.

IDM↗
NASA NTRS2020

Integrated Demand Management: CTOP User Interface Enhancements

NASA's Integrated Demand Management research activity developed a concept for a novel use of the FAA's Collaborative Trajectory Options Program (CTOP) decision support software to support a particular type of traffic management use case. The research team used an emulation of CTOP software to prototype and test the concept, and developed several enhancements to the CTOP user interface that were well received by the stakeholder community. This document provides a detailed description of these enhancements and their operation that could be used to support their incorporation into the official CTOP software.

IDM↗