Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Contingency”

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 1,549 records · Page 86

Planning and Execution of the Three Mid-Course Correction Maneuvers for the James Webb Space Telescope

The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) was successfully launched on December 25, 2021 12:20 UTC on an Ariane 5 rocket out of Kourou, French Guiana on a direct, lower energy manifold transfer out to the Sun Earth-Moon (SEM) L2 point. Three mid-course correction (MCC) maneuvers, designated MCC-1, MCC-1b, and MCC-2, were required to provide the energy necessary to reach L2 due to a purposeful biasing down of the launch vehicle. This paper will document the prelaunch preparation, nominal planning, contingency preparation, and successful execution of the three mid-course correction maneuvers.

Jeremy Peterson↗

Flight Dynamics Planning and Operations Support for the JWST Mission

The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) was launched from Kourou Spaceport on December 25, 2021, at 12:20 UTC on an Ariane 5 launch vehicle. The launch vehicle inserted JWST into a 30-day transfer trajectory to the Sun-Earth-Moon (SEM) Lagrange point L2 region. JWST executed three mid-course correction maneuvers (MCCs) to insert the spacecraft into a quasi-halo orbit about SEM L2; JWST will maintain its trajectory about L2 for at least 5.5 years, with a goal of at least 10.5 years. This paper summarizes the flight dynamics support for JWST, including the prelaunch nominal trajectory design, the launch window analysis, contingency planning for trajectory-related anomalies, mission operations support for the first 6 months, and a comparison of the planned and achieved actual JWST trajectory results. The orbit determination strategy, both planned and executed, will be summarized, and the method of addressing the anomalies as they occurred will be included.

Karen Richon↗

NASA's Moon to Mars Autonomous Habitat Status

NASA is developing a strategy for sending humans to the Mars vicinity, known broadly as the Moon to Mars (M2M) Campaign. A critical part of this campaign is the development of in-space and surface habitation systems capable of substantially extending human presence beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO). Mars missions feature an in-space transit habitat capable of supporting crews of four on ~850-1200-day missions, including transit to and from Mars and time in Mars orbit. Surface and transit habitats are complex elements which must keep crewmembers healthy and productive in deep-space environments with limited resources, long rescue times in contingency situations, and communication delays; all within constrained mass, volume, and power budgets. These habitats provide crew both living and workspace as well as most of the resources needed to support crew life. For deep space habitats, automation needs to be employed due to latency and for significant amounts of time when the habitats are uncrewed. Automation of systems is possible in space applications, but there are limitations. Outside of the Earth’s (or any) magnetosphere, radiation environments are harsh to both the physical hardware and the software components. Radiation (charged particles and ionizing electromagnetic waves) degrades and damages the hardware and causes single event upsets (SEUs) in software. If the hardware is damaged, data can be lost, or control actions not made. For software, SEUs cause algorithms to result in different solutions, or incorrect commands to be sent out. This means that algorithms and hardware used for deep space systems are different than what is used on Earth. Radiation-tolerant hardware is generations behind the current state-of-the-art hardware. Recent NASA missions, such as James Webb Space Telescope, continue to rely on older technologies such as the RAD750 processor, and the most advanced processors are still single core and less than 1.5 GHz. There have been attempts to use higher performance processors, but these often take multiple mitigation steps to handle the radiation environments, which limits the processing power and/or throughput. Current techniques for radiation mitigation have been redundancies, voting, physical separation of hardware, encasing materials, under-clocking hardware, and more. Some radiation mitigation techniques do provide benefits such as having a redundant system to improve the probability that a system will be available when needed. Autonomous software systems will have fewer interactions with humans on deep space missions and therefore need to be able to handle more off-nominal conditions. Microgravity also complicates the autonomous aspects of the mission because autonomous systems are usually built from known deterministic states, but microgravity causes physical objects to shift and move changing the location an autonomous system placed the object. Not only does the software need to be reliable and deterministic, losing resources due to a software error is not only costly but detrimental to reputation. The combination of having lower performance hardware and having to be able to verify and deterministically run software and an ever-changing environment makes deep space autonomous systems more complicated. Multiple gaps have been identified including verification of autonomous software algorithms (including artificial intelligence and machine learning), higher performance processors (graphics and general purpose), high speed networks (onboard and transmissions), memory, power distribution, data security, and variations from these. These gaps need to be closed for more advanced systems to be deployed and reduce the size, weight, and power impacts on the habitats.

Scott B. Tashakkor↗

PAAV Concept Document

The Pathfinding for Airspace with Autonomous Vehicles (PAAV) Concept Document, version 1.0, lays out the key challenges and potential solutions for the use of uncrewed aircraft (UA) technology for future regional air cargo operations. The challenges and solutions described in this document were informed by communications with the UA industry community (e.g., RTCA, the Federal Aviation Administration, and regional air cargo business operators), as well as the PAAV team’s research activities during the last two years including four tabletop exercises, a human-in-the-loop simulation study, a numerical simulation study, a functional allocation study, and flight data analysis (Appendix A). This document first describes the expected operational context of PAAV (Section 2), such as the flight mission, baseline UAS components, nominal operations, m:N operations (i.e., "m" remote pilots per "N" aircraft), and off-nominal operations. This context sets the scope for the PAAV concept development work. PAAV concept development assumes that UA operations will be increasingly autonomous. Thus, near- and far-term assumptions are defined (Section 3). PAAV identified seven key challenges for UA operations (Section 4): - Flight route planning - Separation and flow management - Traffic pattern integration - Contingency management - Taxi, takeoff, and landing - m:N operations - Communications operations The following 13 potential solutions to these challenges are then described (Section 5): - Scalable communications architecture - Data link - Designated UAS corridors - Crew planning for m:N operations - Flight route optimization - Traffic load-level control - Trajectory solutions with data link - Automated hazard avoidance for m:N operations - Traffic pattern integration (TPI) tool - Standard lost command and control (C2) link (LC2L) procedures - Automated hazard avoidance under LC2L - Auto-taxi, auto-takeoff, and auto-land - Ground control station (GCS) user interface for m:N operations The document attempts to link each of these solutions to one or more of the challenge areas. Novel solutions involving numerous automation technologies are needed to mitigate traffic and airspace management challenges, especially for realizing m:N operations and ensuring safety under LC2L conditions. The purpose of this document is to help understand alternatives and tradeoffs among potential solutions and provide a foundation for a cohesive PAAV concept that will be described and refined in subsequent concept versions.

Unmanned aircraft, uncrewed aircraft, regional air↗

Gateway Integrated Environmental Control and Life Support System Overview and Status

The Gateway will be a lunar orbiting platform that is a critical element in establishing a sustainable, long-term human presence on the lunar surface and beyond to deep space exploration. As part of this mission, the Gateway Environmental Control and Life Support Subsystem (ECLSS), employs its capabilities to: - Support two to four-person crew expeditions for at least 30 days, approximately once every one to three years with extended periods of dormancy, - Provide life support functionality during nominal and contingency scenarios, - Support crew expeditions to the Lunar surface by providing a Habitable volume, from which staging, or preparation can take place for missions to the Lunar surface or to deep space destinations, and - Facilitate a platform to demonstrate the necessary capabilities to expand a sustainable human presence into Deep Space, including the surface of the Moon and Mars. The Gateway consists of an assembly of modules provided by commercial and international partnerships with varied capability that, together, achieve these objectives. The Habitation and Logistics Outpost (HALO) and International Habitat (I-Hab) modules provide the air revitalization and conditioning capabilities for the Gateway with some ECLSS functionality provided in the other modules to support crew operations. This paper explains the architecture of the Gateway ECLSS and provides the status of its development.

Gateway↗

Assured Vehicle Automation 1 Sim - Results Outbrief

In early 2022, the Human Autonomy Teaming Lab (NASA Ames Research Center) conducted a manned, human-in-the-loop (HITL) simulation. This part-task HITL began the lab’s Hazard Perception and Avoidance (HPA) technical work under NASA’s Advanced Air Mobility (AAM), Automated Flight and Contingency Management (AFCM) Sub-Project. The results of that sim guided the objectives of the current study, which were to examine pilots’ use of the Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS) rotorcraft variant (Xr) v2 in multiple phases of flight with two separate Xr Modes, fully leverage Xr v2 features (e.g., use radar altimeter data to inform low altitude Resolution Advisory [RA] behavior, utilize the ability to designate “terminal-area intruders,” and display airspeed-based Detect and Avoid [DAA] guidance), emulate a “Traffic Advisory” (TA), and present Xr in a higher-fidelity environment. Therefore, this study was conducted in the Vertical Motion Simulator, and the variables included Phase of Flight (En-route, Hover, and Approach) as well as ACAS Xr Mode (TA/RA and DAA). The data collected included response times, losses of well clear, and maneuver sizes and durations as well as subjective ratings like acceptability and usability. Additional details and future anticipations are also discussed.

air taxis↗

Gulf of Mexico Health & Air Quality: Mapping Methane Emission Plumes Using Sunglint-configured Imagery for Monitoring Offshore Oil and Gas Activity

We had three project objectives that we set out to accomplish. The first objective is to demonstrate how remote sensing can complement the current bottom-up methane emission assessments. Currently, quantities of disposed gas vented and flared are self-reported by operators to BOEM and BSEE. Meanwhile, inspections are uncommon, and ground sensors are non-existent. Therefore, remote sensing may be the agencies' best bet in verifying these operator accounts. The second objective is to identify methane plumes in the Gulf of Mexico, Asia, and elsewhere using Sentinel-2, LandSat, and PRISMA images, and then present an estimate of their emission rate. While methane retrievals from oil and gas infrastructure on-shore has been relatively well-documented, doing so on the offshore oil and gas platforms is more difficult, less prevalent, and contingent on the presence of specific conditions. The final objective is to give our partners, BOEM and BSEE, a more robust understanding of methane emissions from oil and gas production in the Gulf of Mexico. This increased knowledge, paired with a demonstration of methane monitoring, is intended to help our partners think about how they can incorporate remote sensing into their monitoring, regulatory and enforcement framework.

Ben Dahan↗

Exploration Extra-Vehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) Composite Hard Upper Torso (CHUT) Development

The xEMU is the Exploration Mobility Unity or space suit designed for microgravity (cislunar and low earth orbit (LEO)) and lunar surface operations. This suit design allows crewmembers to perform extravehicular exploration, science, construction, maintenance, and contingency operations while unattached to a vehicle for life support in pressure and thermal environments that exceed human capability. The xEMU provides life support, environmental protection, and communications capabilities to the EVA crewmember while allowing sufficient mobility and visibility to perform dexterous EVA tasks. The effort documented in this paper, addressed the design, analysis, manufacturing, full-scale test article testing and validation for a Composite Hard Upper Torso(CHUT)unit. Design and analysis of the CHUT was based on measured B-basis properties of the selected S-glass/epoxy composite, and established final geometry, composite layup and interface details that met requirements. A complete manufacturing and assembly protocol was established for the CHUT starting from composite layup in the tool, to final assembly of all interface metal hardware prior to delivery to NASA for suit integration. Full-scale CHUT test articles underwent static and fatigue pressure testing (2 lifetimes), impact testing at critical stress locations for tool drop/microgravity scenarios, followed by post-impact fatigue testing. Effect of manufacturing defects was evaluated by manufacturing a full-scale CHUT with 0.375”/0.5” defects at critical stress locations, followed by static and life-cycle fatigue testing. In all cases, the CHUT design met or exceeded mass, structural, interface and functional requirements. Two (2) complete CHUT articles were delivered to NASA for full-scale suit integration and testing.

spacesuit↗

HAT m:N Activity Overview

Since 2020, researchers from the Human Autonomy Teaming (HAT) Laboratory at NASA Ames Research Center have conducted human-in-the-loop (HITL) simulation research to study a new control paradigm for operations involving multiple remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS). Colloquially referred to as "m:N," this paradigm is characterized by multiple operators collaboratively controlling multiple vehicles between them. The m:N name expresses a ratio whereby m is the number of operators and N is the number of vehicles shared between them. In this presentation, HAT Lab researchers provide a high-level overview of the m:N studies that have been performed to-date. These include a study of the m:N concept of operations (CONOPS) and the attending roles and responsibilities ("ConOps/R&R Sim"), a study focused on contingency management involving dynamic, inter-operator transfers of vehicles ("Handoff Sim"), and a study examining the effects of pilot-ATC communication systems on workload ("UAM Comms Sim"). A selection of key results are provided. The presentation concludes with a brief discussion of planned research into m:N operations.

m:N↗

NAS Automation Enabled Pilot (AEP): AEP-1 Study

This presentation describes work perform under the Advanced Air Mobility project - Automated Flight and Contingency Management subproject on developing industry representative powered lift aircraft and aircraft automation capabilities for the purpose of developing evaluation methods and Means of Compliance.

powered-lift aircraft↗

Recommendations for Developing Space Suit Integrated Food Systems and Delivering Nutrition Before, During, and After Lunar EVA

The concept of providing hydration and nutrition during extravehicular activity (EVA) is nearly as old as the space program itself. Astronauts currently have access to 32 ounces of water through a disposable in-suit drink bag (DIDB) while they are confined to their space suit. During the Apollo program, methods for providing food/nutrition to crewmembers in space suits were included as contingency solutions (1) but were eventually abandoned. The main reasons that provision of in-suit nutrition beyond water was discontinued after Apollo were the complicated engineering requirements, the additional mass and volume that was required for the applicable food formulations, hardware needed for a suit-specialized food system, and because the perceived need for in-suit nutrition during EVAs was not sufficient during the Space Shuttle and the International Space Station (ISS) eras. A custom-made 165-kcal fruit bar was fitted into the EVA suit during the Space Shuttle program, but crewmembers rarely consumed it during the EVA and rather chose to consume it before or after suited activities (2). Since 2011, between 4 and 13 EVAs have been conducted from the ISS each year, with durations ranging from 1:32 to 8:17 hours (https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/spacewalks ). It has been acceptable for the crewmembers to schedule food intake around these relatively infrequent suited activities. Because upcoming Artemis missions will include nominal 8-hour lunar exploration EVAs that are expected to increase in frequency to several (4 to 5) sorties per week (3), the desire for an in-suit nutrition system has increased. In preparation for these missions, requirements to provide in-suit nutrition has been outlined in the most recent NASA Human Spaceflight Standards documents (4). Establishing general recommendations for in-suit nutrition systems precedes the selection of a lunar EVA pressure suit system. The current document is intended to define the rationale for nutrition to support EVA (whether in-suit or from the pantry in the habitat), document the requirements, constraints, and crewmember preferences, and recommend necessary next steps for developing an in-suit EVA nutrition system. Assessments presented in this report include a review of commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) food products as potential in-suit formulations, a comparison of conceptual designs for delivering nutrition to a crewmember while confined to a space suit, an evaluation of space suit volume constraints for the placement of in-suit nutrition systems, and feedback from astronauts regarding preferences for nutrition support during EVA. Based on these assessments, recommendations were formulated that can be used to help develop a method to deliver nutrition safely and acceptably to a crewmember while they are confined to a space suit for an EVA duration of up to 8 hours, and a total time in the suit of up to 12 hours.

space suit↗

Airspace Automation Flight Tabletop Exercise

Interconnections of new systems are needed for airspace automation capabilities required in Urban Air Mobility (UAM). FAA Concept of Operations (CONOPS) V1.0 shows Provider of Services for UAM (PSU) at the center of the notional architecture; however, the functional role of the PSU in data exchange and the path to get there is unclear. In partnership with Wisk Aero, Avision, ANRA, Collins Aerospace, OneSky, SkyGrid, and AURA, the NASA National Campaign held discussions and tabletop exercises to test the functional allocations and work flows between an aircraft operator, airspace providers, Command and Control Communication Service Providers (C2CSP), and FAA air traffic in a real-world scenario. The exercise included preplanning and execution of a passenger mission with nominal, contingency, and conflict management scenarios for initial UAM operations. This working paper describes initial conditions for the flight tabletop exercise, exercise summaries, lessons learned, and recommendations for future work.

National Campaign↗

Hazard Perception & Avoidance (HPA), Assured Vehicle Automation 1 Simulation (AVA-1h) Results Outbrief

In late 2022, the Human Autonomy Teaming Lab (NASA Ames Research Center) conducted a manned, human-in-the-loop (HITL) simulation. This HITL was the lab’s second Hazard Perception and Avoidance (HPA) technical work under NASA’s Advanced Air Mobility (AAM), Automated Flight and Contingency Management (AFCM) Sub-Project. The goals were to assess detect and avoid technology for manned, electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft. This simulation tested Resolution Advisory (RA) responses and return-to-course (RTC) maneuvers for the second version of the Airborne Collision Avoidance System’s (ACAS) rotary-wing (Xr) variant. This was conducted at the center's Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS), on a motion-based platform, and was configured to fly eVTOL aircraft while maneuvering for intruding traffic. Variables for this study included ACAS Xr modes (i.e., TA/RA and DAA) and phases of flight (i.e., Cruise, Hover, and Approach). The data collected included response times, losses of well clear, and pilots' noncompliances to alerts and guidance as well as subjective ratings like acceptability and perceived workload. Additional details and future anticipations are also discussed.

ACAS Xr↗

Preparation for an Earth Independent Medical Operations Demonstration using the Tempus ALS™ Medical Device

NASA’s exploration-class missions have severe resource constraints, long return trip durations, significant communication delays and limited resupply opportunities. Validation on the International Space Station (ISS) of medical devices that fit within Earth-Independent Medical Operations (EIMO) systems is a necessary preparation step. Key features of an EIMO medical system include: 1) technologies that support the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of spaceflight medical events; 2) components that meet mass, volume, power and crew time/training constraints; 3) consideration of the medical skill level of the astronaut caregiver; 4) collection, storage and analysis of medical data within a central data architecture; and 5) incorporation of appropriate guidance and support tools that allow crew autonomy. The Human Research Program’s (HRP) Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) Element and the Exploration Medical Integrated Product Team (XM-IPT) are planning an ISS technology demonstration to determine the feasibility of including a multifunctional medical device into an EIMO medical system. Demonstration Preparations: The Tempus ALS (Remote Diagnostic Technologies, Ltd., Philips Corp., Farnborough, UK) is a commercial-off-the-shelf medical device, with United States Food and Drug Administration clearance and is Conformité Européene marked in Europe. Several thousand units have been sold and are successfully operating in pre-hospital and in remote settings, such as by European Space Agency (ESA) flight surgeons and some of NASA’s commercial partners during post-flight medical operations. The Tempus ALS provides vital sign measurements such as blood pressure, electrocardiograms, heart rate, end tidal CO2, respiration rate, pulse oximetry and temperature. The device has ultrasound imaging and video laryngoscopy capabilities and has automatic or manual defibrillation modes for treating cardiac arrhythmias. It includes procedural guidance capabilities to assist in the collection of the vital sign measurements and it has various data transmission and report generation features. NASA’s HRP ExMC and XM-IPT are partnering with the ESA to demonstrate the Tempus ALS on ISS, with ESA manifesting the Tempus ALS and its accessories. ESA will compare performance of periodic health status exams and medical contingency drills performed nominally and with the Tempus ALS. NASA’s EIMO demonstration will include the use of Tempus ALS to diagnose a complaint of abdominal pain under increasingly independent circumstances. The caregiver must assess the present illness, collect vital sign measurements, and perform an abdominal ultrasound, under one of three communication situations, including real-time, with a several second delay and with a delay on the order of minutes. Expected Outcomes: Information will be gained about the feasibility, benefits, and challenges of using a multifunctional, all-in-one, medical device for medical diagnosis instead of separate devices with singular functionalities. Information will also be collected about performance differences as communication delays increase and available ground support decreases. Gaining this understanding will allow for further development of exploration medical system capabilities which takes the EIMO construct into consideration.

Beth Lewandowski↗

BioSentinel: Mission Summary and Lessons Learned From the First Deep Space Biology CubeSat Mission

Launched on Artemis-1, BioSentinel carries a biology experiment into deep space for the first time in 50 years. A 6U CubeSat form factor was utilized for the spacecraft which included technologies newly developed or adapted for operations beyond Earth orbit. The spacecraft carries onboard budding yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, as an analog to human cells to test the biological response to deep space radiation. This was the maiden deep-space voyage for many of the subsystems, and the first time to evaluate their performance in flight operation. Flying a CubeSat beyond LEO comes with unique challenges with respect to trajectory uncertainty and mission operations planning. The nominal plan was a lunar fly-by, followed by an insertion into Heliocentric orbit. However, some possible scenarios included lunar eclipses that could have severely impacted the power budget during that phase of the mission, while others could have resulted in a “Retrograde” hyperbola at swing-by resulting in the spacecraft traveling inward toward Earth or even towards a collision with the lunar surface. The commissioning phase of the mission was successful and completed a week ahead of schedule. It did not come without its exciting moments and challenges. First contact with the spacecraft uncovered that the vehicle was unexpectedly tumbling after deployment, a situation that needed to be corrected urgently. The mission operations team executed a contingency plan to stabilize the spacecraft, with just moments to spare before the battery ran out of power. The BioSensor payload onboard the spacecraft is a complex instrument that includes microfluidics, fluid systems, sensor control electronics, as well at the living yeast cells. BioSentinel also included a TimePix radiation sensor implemented by JSC’s RadWorks group. Dose and Linear Energy Transfer (LET) data is compared directly to the rate of DSB-and repair events measured by the S. cerevisiae cells. BioSentinel mature nanosatellite technologies included: deep space communications and navigation, autonomous attitude control and momentum management, and micro-propulsion systems, to provide an adaptable nanosatellite platform for deep space uses. This paper discusses the performance of the BioSentinel spacecraft through the mission phase, and includes lessons learned from challenges and anomalies. BioSentinel had many successes and will be a pathfinder for future deep space CubeSats and biology missions.

BioSentinel↗

Safety Case for Small Uncrewed Aircraft Systems (sUAS) Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) Operations at NASA Langley Research Center

This Technical Memorandum (TM) is written to provide for dissemination of the methods and safety considerations for operations of small Uncrewed Aerial Systems (sUAS) Beyond Visual Line-of-Sight (BVLOS)at NASA Langley Research Center. It includes the Safety Case used to acquire a BVLOS Certificate of Authorization (COA) from the FAA and is being published to enable others to benefit from this work. The intended operations, subject to approval from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), will include a combination of Within Visual Line of Sight (WVLOS) and Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) flights, comprising of at most five sUAS operating concurrently, with no more than three operating BVLOS. Flights will occur in a subset of the Langley Air Force Base (LAFB) Class D airspace (KLFI) at a maximum altitude of 400 ft AGL. Most operations within this subset will take place in the City Environment Range Testing for Autonomous Integrated Navigation (CERTAIN) Range. The CERTAIN Range includes airspace inside the borders of NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC). Additional airspace over the northern section of CERTAIN will be requested as part of the Certificate of Authorization (COA). NASA LaRC BVLOS operations on the CERTAIN Range can be broken down into five critical components needed to meet the 14 CFR § 91.113 see and avoid requirement: 1) procedural deconfliction with LAFB for UAS operations at or below 400 ft and manned aircraft at or above 900’ AGL; 2) ground equipment for detection of intruder aircraft and to support communications between crewmembers ; 3) sUAS vehicles with advanced onboard automation capable of autonomously maintaining safe separation; 4) BVLOS standardized operating procedures (SOPs); 5) and personnel to execute the flight operations in accordance with the SOPs and respond to airborne contingencies. The introduction of new ground equipment includes the use of the Remote Operations for Autonomous Missions (ROAM) UAS Operations Center, development and use of an Integrated Airspace Display (IAD), use of the L-STAR and GA-9120 radars, and the incorporation of standardized Vertiports. The ROAM Operations Center will be the central point for all BVLOS sUAS operations. All command and control (C2), voice communications and airspace awareness displays will reside inside ROAM. The IAD will provide raw data from ADS-B, FLARM, radar tracks and telemetered GPS vehicle positions for interpretation by an Airspace Monitor. The radars will search the class D airspace around the CERTAIN Range and serve as a backup to procedural deconfliction procedures coordinated with LAFB. In the event of a procedural deconfliction breakdown, radar detections of non-participating aircraft will be available so that the 91.113 see and avoid requirement can still be safely met. Finally, the incorporation of Vertiports will have video and network connectivity that enables large numbers of sUAS launches and recoveries from a single location. This is a continuation of the remote command and control of unpiloted aircraft component focused on evaluating unpiloted aircraft flight crew roles and responsibilities, control interfaces and the associated data links needed to operate a fleet of aircraft within a UAM Ecosystem. This work supports the development of future aviation operational concepts based on an Urban Air Mobility Maturity Level (UML) 4 environment (Patterson, 2020). It is assumed that future airspace will include hundreds of simultaneous aircraft operations within the airspace, therefore scalable operations are essential for enabling this future airspace to become a reality. Follow on work includes envisioned flights that expand operations beyond the CERTAIN range and lead to an effective Maritime Surveillance capability.

Matthew W Coldsnow↗

Adaptive Optimization for System Performance and Combined Bernstein Polynomial, Optimal Reciprocal Collision Avoidance, Differential Dynamic Programming for Trajectory Replanning and Collision Avoidance for UAM Vehicles

The emerging urban air mobility (UAM) sector in aerospace is driving development of unconventional multi-modal vehicle configurations and autonomous flight. The combination of multi-modal vehicle dynamics, complex environment, requirements to deal with flight contingencies in an efficient and safe manner, as well as necessity for precise trajectory following and performance, are the driving influence behind adaptive optimization for system performance. We are interested in trajectory optimization algorithm that would system parameter estimation and identifying the optimal switching time between modes of hybrid dynamical systems. This presentation discusses a parameterized optimal control trajectory optimization algorithm that is an extended and generalized version of Differential Dynamic Programming (DDP), titled Parameterized Differential Dynamic Programming (PDDP). DDP is an efficient trajectory optimization algorithm relying on second order approximations of a system’s dynamics and cost function and has recently been applied to optimize systems with time invariant parameters. Experiments are presented applying PDDP to solve model predictive control (MPC) and moving horizon estimation (MHE) tasks simultaneously. In particular, PDDP is used to determine the optimal transition point between flight regimes of a complex urban air mobility (UAM) class vehicle exhibiting multiple phases of flight and to identify and compensate for actuation faults.

optimization↗

A Systems Margin Metric for Capability Above Basic Estimates

A systems margin metric is described that indicates the total system performance capability above the basic estimates (CABE) for mass, power, energy, propellant, V, ISP, computer performance, and any other design parameter with a defined margin. This concept normalizes all terms for contingency, margin, growth allowance, and reserves to the amount that the basic mass of the vehicle could grow if each of those “room to grow” terms were released. The CABE metric is intended to provide a uniform indication of the total performance margin of a system at a given point in the project life cycle. The CABE metric can also provide a normalized means to trade the “room to grow” terms between various resources in order to solve system performance issues as they arise. For example, the CABE percentage for ISP margin could be equally traded with the CABE percentage for power margin.

Lepsch, Roger↗