Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “model reporting protocol”

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.

94 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2019

Advancing the Standards for Unmanned Air System Communications, Navigation and Surveillance

Under NASA program NNA16BD84C, new architectures were identified and developed for supporting reliable and secure Communications, Navigation and Surveillance (CNS) needs for Unmanned Air Systems (UAS) operating in both controlled and uncontrolled airspace. An analysis of architectures for the two categories of airspace and an implementation technology readiness analysis were performed. These studies produced NASA reports that have been made available in the public domain and have been briefed in previous conferences. We now consider how the products of the study are influencing emerging directions in the aviation standards communities. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Communications Panel (CP), Working Group I (WG-I) is currently developing a communications network architecture known as the Aeronautical Telecommunications Network with Internet Protocol Services (ATN/IPS). The target use case for this service is secure and reliable Air Traffic Management (ATM) for manned aircraft operating in controlled airspace. However, the work is more and more also considering the emerging class of airspace users known as Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS), which refers to certain UAS classes. In addition, two Special Committees (SCs) in the Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics (RTCA) are developing Minimum Aviation System Performance Standards (MASPS) and Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for UAS. RTCA SC-223 is investigating an Internet Protocol Suite (IPS) and AeroMACS aviation data link for interoperable (INTEROP) UAS communications. Meanwhile, RTCA SC-228 is working to develop Detect And Avoid (DAA) equipment and a Command and Control (C2) Data Link MOPS establishing LBand and C-Band solutions. These RTCA Special Committees along with ICAO CP WG/I are therefore overlapping in terms of the Communication, Navigation and Surveillance (CNS) alternatives they are seeking to provide for an integrated manned- and unmanned air traffic management service as well as remote pilot command and control. This paper presents UAS CNS architecture concepts developed under the NASA program that apply to all three of the aforementioned committees. It discusses the similarities and differences in the problem spaces under consideration in each committee, and considers the application of a common set of CNS alternatives that can be widely applied. As the works of these committees progress, it is clear that the overlap will need to be addressed to ensure a consistent and safe framework for worldwide aviation. In this study, we discuss similarities and differences in the various operational models and show how the CNS architectures developed under the NASA program apply.

Ponchak, Denise S.↗
NASA NTRS2024

Testing of Advanced Capabilities to Enable In-time Safety Management and Assurance for Future Flight Operations

In order to refine an initial Concept of Operations, explore Concepts of Use, and expose/validate requirements for future In-Time Aviation Safety Management Systems (IASMS), testing architectures were created, along with a set of capabilities and underlying information exchange protocols. These systems were conceived and developed based on hazards associated with two envisioned urban area flight domains: (1) highly autonomous small uncrewed aerial systems (sUAS) operating at low altitudes, and (2) highly autonomous air taxis. The initial scope of this development is described in [1]; this report provides an update, focusing on the subsequent developments and test activities. As stated in [1], it is important to note that there are many capabilities already in use by the industry (or soon to be in use) that will play critical roles in future IASMS designs. Those reported here were developed to address a gap in the current state-of-the-art regarding specific hazards/risks, and/or to allow for investigation of the interplay between and across hazard types — particularly regarding how overall safety risk can be reduced or managed effectively. Results of testing and development activities are organized by the operational phase wherein a particular capability would be employed (i.e., preflight, in-flight, and post-flight/off-line). Pre-flight: A set of capabilities were developed to help mitigate safety risk prior to flight (e.g., during flight and mission planning). Results of testing summarize (1) validation activities to raise the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and (2) evaluation activities where the capabilities were applied to flight/mission planning procedures and used by operators/pilots. For the latter, flight plans were automatically assessed, and operators/pilots were notified of hazardous flight segments so as to enable adjustment of the flight plan and re-evaluation, and/or to better inform go/no-go decisions. Capabilities addressed hazards associated with power consumption, third-party risk, wind, navigation system performance, radiofrequency interference, and proximity to geo-spatial threats (e.g., buildings, trees, and no-fly zones). In-flight: Flight experiments tested capabilities that detect and respond to hazards encountered during flight. In the first series, safety hazards were monitored and assessed onboard, and system-generated mitigation maneuvers were recorded (but not acted upon by the vehicle). In the second series, mitigation maneuver commands directed the aircraft in response to safety hazards (i.e., auto-mitigation). The sUAS used for testing is described in full, as is the test architecture, which included commercial avionics, research avionics, and onboard software designed to detect, assess, and respond to hazards. The onboard system was designed as a run-time assurance framework, consistent with [2] and supportive of both supervisory and automated modes. The primary functions included: real-time risk assessment (RTRA), auto-pilot monitoring, constraint monitoring, and contingency select/triggering. RTRA performs integrated risk assessment considering data from several hazard-related monitors (e.g., battery, motors, navigation, communications, population density, and loss-of-control). Post-flight/off-line: Data monitored and recorded during flights can enable IASMS capabilities that execute after flights have completed (or “off-line”). These include: (1) the ability to identify anomalies and trends that may only be observable when comparing data spanning a number of similar flights; (2) the ability to update and validate pre-flight and in-flight capabilities and any underlying models to improve their performance; (3) the ability to report anomalies/off-nominals that may indicate design changes or maintenance actions are needed; and (4) the ability for humans involved in operations to report safety-relevant observations to help in understanding the flight data and/or the operational context of a flight. Progress on three such capabilities is summarized; the first investigates anomaly detection given a limited set of flight logs and applies an approach previously used for space operations. The second explores what could be identified using a larger set of flight logs, including from web-based forums where flight logs are posted by sUAS autopilot users. The third creates a new means of collecting information on UAS incidents and accidents via the Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS).

sUAS↗
NASA NTRS2013

The Digital Astronaut Project Computational Bone Remodeling Model (Beta Version) Bone Summit Summary Report

Under the conditions of microgravity, astronauts lose bone mass at a rate of 1% to 2% a month, particularly in the lower extremities such as the proximal femur [1-3]. The most commonly used countermeasure against bone loss in microgravity has been prescribed exercise [4]. However, data has shown that existing exercise countermeasures are not as effective as desired for preventing bone loss in long duration, 4 to 6 months, spaceflight [1,3,5,6]. This spaceflight related bone loss may cause early onset of osteoporosis to place the astronauts at greater risk of fracture later in their lives. Consequently, NASA seeks to have improved understanding of the mechanisms of bone demineralization in microgravity in order to appropriately quantify this risk, and to establish appropriate countermeasures [7]. In this light, NASA's Digital Astronaut Project (DAP) is working with the NASA Bone Discipline Lead to implement well-validated computational models to help predict and assess bone loss during spaceflight, and enhance exercise countermeasure development. More specifically, computational modeling is proposed as a way to augment bone research and exercise countermeasure development to target weight-bearing skeletal sites that are most susceptible to bone loss in microgravity, and thus at higher risk for fracture. Given that hip fractures can be debilitating, the initial model development focused on the femoral neck. Future efforts will focus on including other key load bearing bone sites such as the greater trochanter, lower lumbar, proximal femur and calcaneus. The DAP has currently established an initial model (Beta Version) of bone loss due to skeletal unloading in femoral neck region. The model calculates changes in mineralized volume fraction of bone in this segment and relates it to changes in bone mineral density (vBMD) measured by Quantitative Computed Tomography (QCT). The model is governed by equations describing changes in bone volume fraction (BVF), and rates of changes in bone cell populations that remove and replace bone in packets within the bone region. The DAP bone model is unique in several respects. In particular in takes former models of volume fraction changes one step higher in fidelity and separates BVF into separate equations for mineralized and osteoid volume fractions governed by a mineralization rate. This more closely follows the physiology of the remodeling unit cycles where bone is first resorbed and then followed by the action of osteoblasts to lay down collagen matrix which eventually becomes mineralized. In another respect, the modules allow the functional description of the time rate of change of other parameters and variables in the model during a computational simulation. More detailed description of the model, preliminary validation results, current limitation and caveats, and planned advancements are provided in sections 2 through 5. The DAP bone model is being developed primarily as a research tool, and not as a clinical tool like QCT. Even if it transitions to a clinical tool, it is not intended to replace QCT or any other clinical tool. Moreover, the DAP bone model does not predict bone fracture. Its purpose is to provide valuable additional data via "forward prediction" simulations for during and after spaceflight missions to gain insight on, (1) mechanisms of bone demineralization in microgravity, and (2) the volumetric changes at the various bone sites in response to in-flight and post-flight exercise countermeasures. This data can then be used as input to the Keyak [8] (or equivalent) FE analysis method to gain insight on how bone strength may change during and after flight. This information can also be useful to help optimize exercise countermeasure protocols to minimize changes in bone strength during flight, and improve regain of bone strength post-flight. To achieve this goal, the bone model will be integrated with DAP's exercise countermeasure models to simulate the effect of exercise prescriptions on preserving bone. More specifically, the model will accept loading history due to muscle and joint force on bone and produce quantified remodeling within the bone region under influence of the applied stress. Furthermore, because they tend to respond differently, the bone remodeling model includes both trabecular bone and cortical bone.

Pennline, James↗
NASA NTRS2001

Spatial orientation and balance control changes induced by altered gravitoinertial force vectors

To better understand the mechanisms of human adaptation to rotating environments, we exposed 19 healthy subjects and 8 vestibular-deficient subjects ("abnormal"; four bilateral and four unilateral lesions) to an interaural centripetal acceleration of 1 g (resultant 45 degrees roll-tilt of 1.4 g) on a 0.8-m-radius centrifuge for periods of 90 min. The subjects sat upright (body z-axis parallel to centrifuge rotation axis) in the dark with head stationary, except during 4 min of every 10 min, when they performed head saccades toward visual targets switched on at 3- to 5-s intervals at random locations (within +/- 30 degrees) in the earth-horizontal plane. Eight of the normal subjects also performed the head saccade protocol in a stationary chair adjusted to a static roll-tilt angle of 45 degrees for 90 min (reproducing the change in orientation but not the magnitude of the gravitoinertial force on the centrifuge). Eye movements, including voluntary saccades directed along perceived earth- and head-referenced planes, were recorded before, during, and immediately after centrifugation. Postural center of pressure (COP) and multisegment body kinematics were also gathered before and within 10 min after centrifugation. Normal subjects overestimated roll-tilt during centrifugation and revealed errors in perception of head-vertical provided by directed saccades. Errors in this perceptual response tended to increase with time and became significant after approximately 30 min. Motion-sickness symptoms caused approximately 25% of normal subjects to limit their head movements during centrifugation and led three normal subjects to stop the test early. Immediately after centrifugation, subjects reported feeling tilted 10 degrees in the opposite direction, which was in agreement with the direction of their earth-referenced directed saccades. Postural COP, segmental body motion amplitude, and hip-sway frequency increased significantly after centrifugation. These postural effects were short-lived, however, with a recovery time of several postural test trials (minutes). There were also asymmetries in the direction of postcentrifugation COP and head tilt which depended on the subject's orientation during the centrifugation adaptation period (left ear or right ear out). The amount of total head movements during centrifugation correlated poorly or inversely with postcentrifugation postural stability, and the most unstable subject made no head movements. There was no decrease in postural stability after static tilt, although these subjects also reported a perceived tilt briefly after return to upright, and they also had COP asymmetries. Abnormal subjects underestimated roll-tilt during centrifugation, and their directed saccades revealed permanent spatial distortions. Bilateral abnormal subjects started out with poor postural control, but showed no postural decrements after centrifugation, while unilateral abnormal subjects had varying degrees of postural decrement, both in their everyday function and as a result of experiencing the centrifugation. In addition, three unilateral, abnormal subjects, who rode twice in opposite orientations, revealed a consistent orthogonal pattern of COP offsets after centrifugation. These results suggest that both orientation and magnitude of the gravitoinertial vector are used by the central nervous system for calibration of multiple orientation systems. A change in the background gravitoinertial force (otolith input) can rapidly initiate postural and perceptual adaptation in several sensorimotor systems, independent of a structured visual surround.

Clinical Trial↗