Onboard Autonomous Sense and Avoid of Non-Conforming Unmanned Aerial Systems
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Sense and Avoid↗
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.
Onboard Autonomous Sense and Avoid of Non-Conforming Unmanned Aerial Systems
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Sense and Avoid↗
Investigating the Impacts of a Separation Standard for UAS Operations in Enroute and Transition Airspace
Unmanned aircraft systems will be required to equip with a detect and avoid system in order to satisfy the federal aviation regulations to remain well clear of other aircraft. To comply with regulations in today’s operations manned aircraft must “see and avoid” other aircraft and use subjective judgment to determine whether those aircraft are well clear. For a detect-and- avoid (DAA) system to satisfy the requirement to stay well clear, a quantitative definition of well clear needs to be defined and evaluated. Definitions for the boundary of well clear have been proposed by the Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Executive Committee Science and Research Panel (SaRP) and the Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics (RTCA) Special Committee 228 on Detect and Avoid Systems. This study investigates the interoperability implications of UAS using proposed well clear definitions as a separation standard for conducting operations in the national airspace system. The first analysis in the study focuses on the effect of variations in well clear definition parameters on the rate of losses of well clear per flight hour. The second analysis considers three well clear definitions and presents the relative state conditions of intruder aircraft as they encroach upon the well clear boundary. The third analysis focuses on the definition of the alerting criteria needed to inform the UAS operator of a potential loss of well clear. All three analyses are conducted in a NAS-wide fast-time simulation environment using UAS aircraft models, proposed UAS missions, and historical air defense radar data to populate the background traffic operating under visual flight rules. The results from the three analyses presented in this study inform the safety case, requirements development, and the operational environment for the DAA minimum operational performance standards.
UAS Seperation Standard↗
FT-01: Autonomous Helicopter Flight Testing Over Long Island Sound Special Session - Hazard Perception and Avoidance Tech Area
This presentation is included as part of a panel reporting on the Integration of Automated Systems (IAS) flight test series. The IAS series concluded in October 2023 and was conducted under NASA’s Advanced Air Mobility project and in partnership with Sikorsky and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). The flight test effort included two crewed rotorcraft platforms. The first, a modified S-76B helicopter, served as the “ownship” for the duration of the flight test. The second vehicle, a modified S-70, served as the intruder aircraft. One Sikorsky pilot and one NASA test pilot was onboard each aircraft for every test point, with the NASA test pilot responsible for interacting with the research systems under test. This portion of the panel presentation focuses on the results of the flight test that assessed the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) next-generation collision avoidance system, the Airborne Collision Avoidance System X for Rotorcraft (ACAS Xr). The two configurations available within ACAS Xr – the Collision Avoidance System (CAS) configuration and the Detect and Avoid (DAA) configuration – were flown with an onboard pilot under Visual Flight Rules in controlled airspace over the Long Island Sound (Connecticut, USA). A total of 33 flight test cards were flown with ACAS Xr active. Results showed that the ACAS Xr alerting and guidance was largely effective and rated positively by the NASA test pilots, exemplified by zero instances of the pilots overriding an ACAS Xr Resolution Advisory (RA). Key areas of improvement, however, were noted, particularly with regards to the lack of an aural alert indicating a need to accelerate when receiving an RA at low speed and the occurrence of multiple RAs that the pilots found to be unacceptable.
detect and avoid↗
UAS Integration into the NAS: HSI Display Evaluation Overview
This is a HSI (Horizontal Situation Indicator) display evaluation overview presented to the RTCA (Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics) SC-228 Detect and Avoid Working group. The goal of the presentation is to provide data on the effect of various Detect and Avoid (DAA) display and guidance features with respect to pilot performance of the self-separation function in order to determine the minimum information requirements for DAA displays.
Well Clear↗
Defining the Collision Avoidance Region for DAA Systems
Unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) will be required to equip with a detect-‐and-‐avoid (DAA) system in order to satisfy the federal aviation regulations to maintain well clear of other aircraft, some of which may be equipped with a Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) to mitigate the possibility of mid-‐air collisions. As such, the minimum operational performance standards (MOPS) for UAS DAA systems are being designed with TCAS interoperability in mind by a group of industry, government, and academic institutions named RTCA Special Committee-228 (SC-228). This document will discuss the development of the spatial-‐temporal volume known as the collision avoidance region in which the DAA system is not allowed to provide vertical guidance to maintain or regain DAA well clear that could conflict with resolution advisories (RAs) issued by the intruder aircraft's TCAS system. Three collision avoidance region definition candidates were developed based on the existing TCAS RA and DAA alerting definitions. They were evaluated against each other in terms of their interoperability with TCAS RAs and DAA alerts in an unmitigated factorial encounter analysis of 1.3 million simulated pairs.
collision avoidance region↗
A Hazard Detection Sensor for Landing on Europa
Based on the limited imagery available, the surface topography of Jupiter’s icy moon Europa is expected to be hazardous for robotic landers. The Europa Lander Concept Pre-Project Team has therefore concluded that onboard hazard detection (and avoidance) using an imaging light detection and ranging (lidar) system is an enabling technology. In this paper we describe the challenges, requirements, technical solution space, and our maturation strategy to advance lidar technology for a Europa Lander mission concept to TRL 6 by 2021. JPL is confident that the resulting technology will be of value to a wide range of lunar and planetary landing missions.
Katake, Anup↗
Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Integration in the National Airspace System (NAS) Project
Phase 1 of the UAS-NAS (Unmanned Aircraft Systems-National Airspace System) project focused on MOPS (Minimum Operational Performance Standards) development for large UAS transitioning through Class D, E, and G airspace. Phase 2 activities are currently focused on extended UAS operations in Class D, E, and G airspace, as well as sensors and architectures that will enable DAA (Detect and Avoid) equipment to be installed on a wider range of UAS. Encounters with non-cooperative intruders in low altitude airspace under 10,000 feet will be explored for UAS with a low Size, Weight, and Power (SWaP) radar. New sensors for detecting non-cooperative intruder aircraft will have a more limited detection range and field of regard; therefore, the analysis of non-cooperative encounter geometries may help in developing the requirements for an onboard low SWaP radar (and electro-optical sensor). The current simulation, led by HSI (Human Systems Integration Division at NASA Ames Research Center) as part of the DAA subproject, will support efforts toward developing a modified DAA Well Clear (DWC) definition that would be more appropriate for UAS equipped with limited surveillance and aircraft performance capabilities compared to the Phase 1 DAA system. The findings will inform Phase 2 display requirements for alternative surveillance use cases.
Collision Avoidance↗
UAS-NAS NASA 870 Ikhana UAS No Chase COA (NCC) Flights, Flight Test Report
This document is a flight test report from the operational perspective for the No Chase Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) flights, or NCC flights, a major milestone of the Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Integration in the National Airspace System (NAS) project. Discussions of a demonstration event began as early as 2014 and the actual flight of the Ikhana UAS into the NAS without a safety chase vehicle in Class A, E, and D airspace was accomplished on 12 June, 2018. The major goal of this flight was to demonstrate an alternate means of compliance to the see and avoid regulations for a UAS using Detect and Avoid (DAA) technology. Participants in this flight activity and planning included the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Ames Research Center, NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center, General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI), Honeywell International, Inc., and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
Marston, Mike↗
Flight Test 4 Preliminary Results: NASA Ames SSI
Realization of the expected proliferation of Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) operations in the National Airspace System (NAS) depends on the development and validation of performance standards for UAS Detect and Avoid (DAA) Systems. The RTCA Special Committee 228 is charged with leading the development of draft Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for UAS DAA Systems. NASA, as a participating member of RTCA SC-228 is committed to supporting the development and validation of draft requirements as well as the safety substantiation and end-to-end assessment of DAA system performance. The Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Integration into the National Airspace System (NAS) Project conducted flight test program, referred to as Flight Test 4, at Armstrong Flight Research Center from April -June 2016. Part of the test flights were dedicated to the NASA Ames-developed Detect and Avoid (DAA) System referred to as JADEM (Java Architecture for DAA Extensibility and Modeling). The encounter scenarios, which involved NASA's Ikhana UAS and a manned intruder aircraft, were designed to collect data on DAA system performance in real-world conditions and uncertainties with four different surveillance sensor systems. Flight test 4 has four objectives: (1) validate DAA requirements in stressing cases that drive MOPS requirements, including: high-speed cooperative intruder, low-speed non-cooperative intruder, high vertical closure rate encounter, and Mode CS-only intruder (i.e. without ADS-B), (2) validate TCASDAA alerting and guidance interoperability concept in the presence of realistic sensor, tracking and navigational errors and in multiple-intruder encounters against both cooperative and non-cooperative intruders, (3) validate Well Clear Recovery guidance in the presence of realistic sensor, tracking and navigational errors, and (4) validate DAA alerting and guidance requirements in the presence of realistic sensor, tracking and navigational errors. The results will be presented at RTCA Special Committee 228 in support of final verification and validation of the DAA MOPS.
Detect-And-Avoid (DAA)↗
Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) Integration into the National Airspace System (NAS)
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.
UAS↗
Aerobot Autonomy Architecture
An architecture for autonomous operation of an aerobot (i.e., a robotic blimp) to be used in scientific exploration of planets and moons in the Solar system with an atmosphere (such as Titan and Venus) is undergoing development. This architecture is also applicable to autonomous airships that could be flown in the terrestrial atmosphere for scientific exploration, military reconnaissance and surveillance, and as radio-communication relay stations in disaster areas. The architecture was conceived to satisfy requirements to perform the following functions: a) Vehicle safing, that is, ensuring the integrity of the aerobot during its entire mission, including during extended communication blackouts. b) Accurate and robust autonomous flight control during operation in diverse modes, including launch, deployment of scientific instruments, long traverses, hovering or station-keeping, and maneuvers for touch-and-go surface sampling. c) Mapping and self-localization in the absence of a global positioning system. d) Advanced recognition of hazards and targets in conjunction with tracking of, and visual servoing toward, targets, all to enable the aerobot to detect and avoid atmospheric and topographic hazards and to identify, home in on, and hover over predefined terrain features or other targets of scientific interest. The architecture is an integrated combination of systems for accurate and robust vehicle and flight trajectory control; estimation of the state of the aerobot; perception-based detection and avoidance of hazards; monitoring of the integrity and functionality ("health") of the aerobot; reflexive safing actions; multi-modal localization and mapping; autonomous planning and execution of scientific observations; and long-range planning and monitoring of the mission of the aerobot. The prototype JPL aerobot (see figure) has been tested extensively in various areas in the California Mojave desert.
Elfes, Alberto↗
NASA ACES V&V Alignment Briefing
Regulations to establish operational and performance requirements for unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) are being developed by a consortium of government, industry and academic institutions. Those requirements will apply to the new detect and avoid (DAA) systems and other equipment necessary to integrate UAS with the National Airspace System (NAS) and are determined according to their contribution to the overall safety case for such an integration. This briefing focuses on providing an overview of the Airspace Concept Evaluation System (ACES) platform, review of detect-and-avoid models incorprated in ACES, sumamry of two planned ACES studies, and a way forward to impact the SC-228 VV plan.
Santiago, Confesor↗
Flight test of a low-altitude helicopter guidance system with obstacle avoidance capability
Military aircraft regularly conduct missions that include low-atltitude, near-terrain flight in order to increase covertness and payload effectiveness. Civilian applications include airborne fire fighting, police surveillance, search and rescue, and helicopter emergency medical service. Several fixed-wing aircraft now employ terrain elevation maps and forward-pointed radars to achieve automated terrain following or terrain avoidance flight. Similar systems specialized to helicopters and their flight regime have not received as much attention. A helicopter guidance system relying on digitized terrain elevation maps has been developed that employs airborne navigation, mission requirements, aircraft performance limits, and radar altimeter returns to generate a valley-seeking, low-altitude trajectory between waypoints. The guidance trajectory is symbolically presented to the pilot on a helmet mounted display. This system has been flight tested to 150 ft (45.7 m) above ground level altitude at 80 kts, and is primarily limited by the ability of the pilot to perform manual detection and avoidance of unmapped hazards. In this study, a wide field of view laser radar sensor has been incorporated into this guidance system to assist the pilot in obstacle detection and avoidance, while expanding the system's operational flight envelope. The results from early flight tests of this system are presented. Low-altitude missions to 100 ft (30.5 m) altitude at 80n kts in the presence of unmapped natural and man-made obstacles were demonstrated while the pilot maintained situational awareness and tracking of the guidance trajectory. Further reductions in altitude are expected with continued flight testing.
Zelenka, Richard E.↗
Operational Overview for UAS Integration in the NAS Project Flight Test Series 3
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration in the National Airspace System Project has conducted a series of flight tests intended to support the reduction of barriers that prevent unmanned aircraft from flying without the required waivers from the Federal Aviation Administration. The 2015 Flight Test Series 3, supported two separate test configurations. The first configuration investigated the timing of Detect and Avoid alerting thresholds using a radar equipped unmanned vehicle and multiple live intruders flown at varying encounter geometries. The second configuration included a surrogate unmanned vehicle (flown from a ground control station, with a safety pilot on board) flying a mission in a virtual air traffic control airspace sector using research pilot displays and Detect and Avoid advisories to maintain separation from live and virtual aircraft. The test was conducted over an eight-week span within the R-2508 Special Use Airspace. Over 200 encounters were flown for the first configuration, and although the second configuration was cancelled after three data collection flights, Flight Test 3 proved to be invaluable for the purposes of planning, managing, and execution of this type of integrated flight test.
unmanned aircraft systems↗
Robotic Vision With Enhanced Detection Of Edges
Robotic vision subsystem provides enhanced detection of edges as it preprocesses image of target moving in six degrees of freedom. Subsystem designed to filter out high (spatial) frequency components in image, with frequency response tuned to size of object detected. Blurring and background noise reduced to avoid false detection of moving target. Image produced used by another vision subsystem guiding robot to mate with target. Produces less noise and operates more reliably.
Davis, V. L.↗
Formal Analysis of Extended Well-Clear Boundaries for Unmanned Aircraft
This paper concerns the application of formal methods to the definition of a detect and avoid concept for unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). In particular, it illustrates how formal analysis was used to explain and correct unexpected behaviors of the logic that issues alerts when two aircraft are predicted not to be well clear from one another. As a result of this analysis, a recommendation was proposed to, and subsequently adopted by, the US standards organization that defines the minimum operational requirements for the UAS detect and avoid concept.
Munoz, Cesar↗
Precision Landing and Hazard Avoidance Doman
The Precision Landing and Hazard Avoidance (PL&HA) domain addresses the development, integration, testing, and spaceflight infusion of sensing, processing, and GN&C functions critical to the success and safety of future human and robotic exploration missions. PL&HA sensors also have applications to other mission events, such as rendezvous and docking. Autonomous PL&HA builds upon the core GN&C capabilities developed to enable soft, controlled landings on the Moon, Mars, and other solar system bodies. Through the addition of a Terrain Relative Navigation (TRN) function, precision landing within tens of meters of a map-based target is possible. The addition of a 3-D terrain mapping lidar sensor improves the probability of a safe landing via autonomous, real-time Hazard Detection and Avoidance (HDA). PL&HA significantly improves the probability of mission success and enhances access to sites of scientific interest located in challenging terrain. PL&HA can also utilize external navigation aids, such as navigation satellites and surface beacons. Advanced Lidar Sensors High precision ranging, velocimetry, and 3-D terrain mapping Terrain Relative Navigation (TRN) TRN compares onboard reconnaissance data with real-time terrain imaging data to update the S/C position estimate Hazard Detection and Avoidance (HDA) Generates a high-resolution, 3-D terrain map in real-time during the approach trajectory to identify safe landing targets Inertial Navigation During Terminal Descent High precision surface relative sensors enable accurate inertial navigation during terminal descent and a tightly controlled touchdown within meters of the selected safe landing target.
Robertson, Edward A.↗