Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Detect And Avoid”

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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2014

Pilot Evaluation of a UAS Detect-and-Avoid System's Effectiveness in Remaining Well Clear

Unmanned aircraft will equip with a detect-and-avoid (DAA) system that enables them to comply with the requirement to "see and avoid" other aircraft, an important layer in the overall set of procedural, strategic and tactical separation methods designed to prevent mid-air collisions. Regulators will establish minimum operating standards for DAA effectiveness, but different combinations of algorithms, displays and procedures could be used to meet those standards. The research presented in this paper indicates the effectiveness of the combined pilot-DAA system as a function of the DAA design requirements and provides data that may be used to model the behavior of pilots when employing such systems. Two simulations involving 21 professional unmanned aircraft system (UAS) pilots evaluated eight different DAA system designs in order to assess their ability to maintain the "well clear" separation standard, i.e., the state of maintaining a safe distance from other aircraft that would not normally cause the initiation of a collision avoidance maneuver by either aircraft. When the traffic display was integrated with the primary mission map directly in front of the pilot, there were fewer losses of well clear. Greater warning time provided to the pilot was strongly correlated with success in remaining well clear. Pilots' ability to separate from aircraft with cooperative and non-cooperative surveillance systems was nearly the same after accounting for the amount of alert time provided in each encounter, although the limited surveillance volume for the airborne-equipped aircraft meant alerts tended to occur later and therefore were more difficult to resolve.

detect-and-avoid↗
NASA NTRS2015

Pilot Evaluation of a UAS Detect-and-Avoid System's Effectiveness in Remaining Well Clear

Unmanned aircraft will equip with a detect-and-avoid (DAA) system that allows them to comply with the requirement to see and avoid other aircraft, an important layer in the overall set of procedural, strategic and tactical separation methods designed to prevent mid-air collisions. Although the effectiveness of the DAA system will be set to a minimum threshold by regulators, different combinations of algorithms, displays and procedures could be used to meet that minimum. The research presented in this paper indicates the effectiveness of the combined pilot-DAA system as a function of the DAA design requirements and provides data that may be used to model the behavior of pilots when employing such systems. Over the course of two simulations 21 professional UAS pilots evaluated eight different DAA system designs and metrics were collected on their ability to maintain the well clear separation standard. The independent variables were the time horizon at which pilots were alerted to potential losses of well clear, the location of the traffic display, and the tools and informational elements available on the display to aid the pilot in detecting and resolving those potential losses. In the second experiment the UAS encountered two categories of aircraft: those equipped with simulated transponders that could be seen dozens of miles away and those without that were only detectable by a simulated radar within a range of six nautical miles. The data indicate that integrating the traffic display with the primary mission map directly in front of the pilot reduced the frequency of losses of well clear. Improved detection and resolution tools, including explicit maneuver guidance and a trial planning capability, had less of an effect in reducing the frequency of losses but significantly reduced the time in loss when they occurred. The amount of warning time provided to the pilot had a strong effect on their ability to remain well clear: when alerts were first presented with less than about 15 seconds to a predicted loss of well clear pilots were able to maneuver successfully in only 26 percent of encounters, whereas they were about 83 percent successful when they had more than 15 seconds. Pilots' ability to separate from the two categories of aircraft was nearly the same after accounting for the amount of alert time provided in each encounter, although the limited surveillance volume for the non-transponder equipped aircraft meant alerts tended to occur later and therefore were more difficult to resolve.

loss of well clear↗
NASA NTRS2016

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

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

unmanned aircraft system↗
NASA NTRS2016

Air Traffic Controller Acceptability of Unmanned Aircraft System Detect-and-Avoid Thresholds

A human-in-the-loop experiment was conducted with 15 retired air traffic controllers to investigate two research questions: (a) what procedures are appropriate for the use of unmanned aircraft system (UAS) detect-and-avoid systems, and (b) how long in advance of a predicted close encounter should pilots request or execute a separation maneuver. The controller participants managed a busy Oakland air route traffic control sector with mixed commercial/general aviation and manned/UAS traffic, providing separation services, miles-in-trail restrictions and issuing traffic advisories. Controllers filled out post-scenario and post-simulation questionnaires, and metrics were collected on the acceptability of procedural options and temporal thresholds. The states of aircraft were also recorded when controllers issued traffic advisories. Subjective feedback indicated a strong preference for pilots to request maneuvers to remain well clear from intruder aircraft rather than deviate from their IFR clearance. Controllers also reported that maneuvering at 120 seconds until closest point of approach (CPA) was too early; maneuvers executed with less than 90 seconds until CPA were more acceptable. The magnitudes of the requested maneuvers were frequently judged to be too large, indicating a possible discrepancy between the quantitative UAS well clear standard and the one employed subjectively by manned pilots. The ranges between pairs of aircraft and the times to CPA at which traffic advisories were issued were used to construct empirical probability distributions of those metrics. Given these distributions, we propose that UAS pilots wait until an intruder aircraft is approximately 80 seconds to CPA or 6 nmi away before requesting a maneuver, and maneuver immediately if the intruder is within 60 seconds and 4 nmi. These thresholds should make the use of UAS detect and avoid systems compatible with current airspace procedures and controller expectations.

unmanned aircraft systems↗
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 NTRS2024

Route-Recapturing State-Based Horizontal Maneuver Strategy for Automated Detect-and-Avoid

This report describes a novel approach to the development of a horizontal maneuver guidance strategy for Detect-and-Avoid systems. The maneuver guidance strategy provides a directive turn action that can be automatically executed by the vehicle’s auto-pilot system, taking into account the cost of recapturing the flight plan path. Pairwise conflict scenarios with non-accelerating intruders are simulated to validate the effectiveness of the maneuver guidance strategy. Initial results suggest the strategy is more effective for faster ownship than for slower ownship, which is unable to avoid conflict in certain scenarios against fast intruders. These findings indicate this novel approach shows great potential, but improvement to its performance is necessary and will be future work.

detect-and-avoid↗
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 NTRS2016

The Impact of Suggestive Maneuver Guidance on UAS Pilots Performing the Detect and Avoid Function

This presentation discusses the results of a recent UAS Integration into the NAS human-in-the-loop simulation. In the study, 16 active UAS pilots flew a UAS through civil airspace and were tasked with maintaining well clear from other aircraft in the area. Pilots performed the task with four different detect and avoid (DAA) traffic displays, each of which varied in the form of guidance it provided to pilots The present findings focus on how the different displays impacted pilots' measured response to scripted conflicts with their aircraft. Measured response is made up of several components, each of which help inform our understanding of the pilots' role in the overall detect and avoid task.

detect and avoid↗
NASA NTRS2015

The Impact of Integrated Maneuver Guidance Information on UAS Pilots Performing the Detect and Avoid Task

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 the '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 a significant impact on how long pilot's spent interacting with the interface (i.e., edit times).

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 NTRS2018

An Exploratory Evaluation of UAS Detect and Avoid Operations in the Terminal Environment

New technical standards for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) detect and avoid (DAA) systems mark recent progress toward realizing the goal of full integration of UAS into the National Airspace System (NAS). The DAA system is intended to provide a means of compliance with operating regulations that required pilots on board manned aircraft to remain "well clear" of other aircraft which is accomplished through out-the-window visual acquisition of other aircraft and application of a subjective judgment of safe separation. The requirements for the DAA system, including the specification of a DAA well clear threshold as well as functional requirements for detecting, tracking, alerting and guidance processing, and displays, are specified in DO-365, Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for DAA Systems developed within RTCA (Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics) Special Committee 228 (SC-228). Intended as the first in a series of phased versions, these requirements are frequently referred to as the "Phase 1" DAA system. The Phase 1 DAA system is limited for use by aircraft transitioning to and from Class A or special use airspace, through Class D, E, and G airspace. In particular, the Phase 1 DAA MOPS are not intended for terminal airspace operations, a critical gap for enabling a full range of UAS operations. The application of the Phase 1 DAA system and DAA well clear threshold within the terminal area is predicted to result in a high number of unnecessary alerts when the UAS is safely separated from other traffic. The goal of the present study was to examine pilot performance and operational issues related to the operation of the Phase 1 DAA system in a terminal area. This experiment was intended as an exploratory study that would be used to inform the development of a new terminal area-specific DAA well clear definition, and associated alerting and guidance requirements. The two main objectives of this study were to: 1) characterize pilot behavior in the terminal environment with the Phase 1 DAA system, and 2) investigate the effect of modifications to the Phase 1 DAA alerting and guidance structure. In particular, the authors were interested in determining whether the removal of specific alerting and guidance levels, without changing the DAA well clear definition or alerting thresholds, would impact pilot performance while conducting terminal operations. The results indicate that the Phase 1 well clear definition and alerting and guidance resulted in frequent alerting that degraded pilots' ability to discriminate between encounters where another aircraft was safely separated versus when a maneuver was necessary. The resulting impact on pilot performance was slower response times and higher frequency and severity of losses of DAA well clear compared to those observed for experiments examining pilot performance in the en route environment. There was no significant effect of alerting and guidance display configuration on pilot performance.

terminal area↗
NASA NTRS2018

An Exploratory Evaluation of UAS Detect and Avoid Operations in the Terminal Environment

New technical standards for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) detect and avoid (DAA) systems mark recent progress toward realizing the goal of full integration of UAS into the National Airspace System (NAS). The DAA system is intended to provide a means of compliance with operating regulations that required pilots on board manned aircraft to remain "well clear" of other aircraft which is accomplished through out-the-window visual acquisition of other aircraft and application of a subjective judgment of safe separation. The requirements for the DAA system, including the specification of a DAA well clear threshold as well as functional requirements for detecting, tracking, alerting and guidance processing, and displays, are specified in DO-365, Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for DAA Systems developed within RTCA Special Committee 228 (SC-228). Intended as the first in a series of phased versions, these requirements are frequently referred to as the "Phase 1" DAA system. The Phase 1 DAA system is limited for use by aircraft transitioning to and from Class A or special use airspace, through Class D, E, and G airspace. In particular, the Phase 1 DAA MOPS are not intended for terminal airspace operations, a critical gap for enabling a full range of UAS operations. The application of the Phase 1 DAA system and DAA well clear threshold within the terminal area is predicted to result in a high number of unnecessary alerts when the UAS is safely separated from other traffic. The goal of the present study was to examine pilot performance and operational issues related to the operation of the Phase 1 DAA system in a terminal area. This experiment was intended as an exploratory study that would be used to inform the development of a new terminal area-specific DAA well clear definition, and associated alerting and guidance requirements. The two main objectives of this study were to: 1) characterize pilot behavior in the terminal environment with the Phase 1 DAA system, and 2) investigate the effect of modifications to the Phase 1 DAA alerting and guidance structure. In particular, the authors were interested in determining whether the removal of specific alerting and guidance levels, without changing the DAA well clear definition or alerting thresholds, would impact pilot performance while conducting terminal operations. The results indicate that the Phase 1 well clear definition and alerting and guidance resulted in frequent alerting that degraded pilots' ability to discriminate between encounters where another aircraft was safely separated versus when a maneuver was necessary. The resulting impact on pilot performance was slower response times and higher frequency and severity of losses of DAA well clear compared to those observed for experiments examining pilot performance in the en route environment. There was no significant effect of alerting and guidance display configuration on pilot performance.

Rorie, Conrad↗
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 NTRS2016

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

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

flight test↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

DANTi: A Tool for Assistive Detect and Avoid Research

This paper presents DANTi, a research tool developed at NASA Langley Research Center to support the validation of Assistive Detect and Avoid (ADAA) requirements for General Aviation (GA). ADAA is a future on-board aircraft technology intended to augment a pilot’s see-and-avoid capability by helping them identify and resolve traffic conflicts earlier and more efficiently. DANTi includes a realistic Electronic Flight Bag (EFB) display and a fast-time simulation environment that can be fully customized to meet different research requirements. DANTi is currently used within NASA efforts such as the Air Mobility Pathfinders project on future air transportation systems and a joint NASA/FAA Laboratory Integrated Test Environment (NFLITE) on next-generation airspace operations in urban environments. These efforts investigate ADAA requirements in advanced urban air mobility settings where new aircraft types, new services, and new traffic patterns will be integrated in an overall crowded airspace.

Detect and Avoid↗
NASA NTRS2014

Real-Time Hazard Detection and Avoidance Demonstration for a Planetary Lander

The Autonomous Landing Hazard Avoidance Technology (ALHAT) Project is chartered to develop and mature to a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of six an autonomous system combining guidance, navigation and control with terrain sensing and recognition functions for crewed, cargo, and robotic planetary landing vehicles. In addition to precision landing close to a pre-mission defined landing location, the ALHAT System must be capable of autonomously identifying and avoiding surface hazards in real-time to enable a safe landing under any lighting conditions. This paper provides an overview of the recent results of the ALHAT closed loop hazard detection and avoidance flight demonstrations on the Morpheus Vertical Testbed (VTB) at the Kennedy Space Center, including results and lessons learned. This effort is also described in the context of a technology path in support of future crewed and robotic planetary exploration missions based upon the core sensing functions of the ALHAT system: Terrain Relative Navigation (TRN), Hazard Detection and Avoidance (HDA), and Hazard Relative Navigation (HRN).

Epp, Chirold D.↗
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)↗