Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “flight rules.”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2020

A Flight Rule Checker for the LADEE Lunar Spacecraft

As part of the design of a space mission, an important part is the design of so-called flight rules. Flight rules express constraints on various parts and processes of the mission, that if followed, will reduce the risk of failure. One such set of flight rules constrain the format of command sequences regularly (e.g. daily) sent to the spacecraft to con- trol its next near term behavior. We present a high-level view of the automated flight rule checker Frc for checking command sequences sent to NASA’s LADEE Lunar mission spacecraft, used throughout its entire mission. A command sequence is in this case essentially a program (a sequence of commands) with no loops or conditionals, and it can there- fore be verified with a trace analysis tool. Frc is implemented using the TraceContract runtime verification tool, an internal Scala DSL for checking event sequences against “formal specifications”. The paper illustrates this untraditional use of runtime verification in a real con- text, with strong demands on the expressiveness and flexibility of the specification language, illustrating the advantages of an internal DSL.

Kurklu, Elif↗
NASA NTRS2020

A Flight Rule Checker for the LADEE Lunar Spacecraft

As part of the design of a space mission, an important part is the design of so-called flight rules. Flight rules express constraints on various parts and processes of the mission, that if followed, will reduce the risk of failure. One such set of flight rules constrain the format of command sequences regularly (e.g. daily) sent to the spacecraft to con-trol its next near term behavior. We present a high-level view of the automated flight rule checker FRC for checking command sequences sent to NASA’s LADEE Lunar mission spacecraft, used throughout its entire mission. A command sequence is in this case essentially a program (a sequence of commands) with no loops or conditionals, and it can there-fore be verified with a trace analysis tool. FRC is implemented using the TraceContract runtime verification tool, an internal Scala DSL for checking event sequences against “formal specifications”. The paper illustrates this untraditional use of runtime verification in a real con-text, with strong demands on the expressiveness and flexibility of the specification language, illustrating the advantages of an internal DSL.

LADEE↗
NASA NTRS2011

Checking Flight Rules with TraceContract: Application of a Scala DSL for Trace Analysis

Typically during the design and development of a NASA space mission, rules and constraints are identified to help reduce reasons for failure during operations. These flight rules are usually captured in a set of indexed tables, containing rule descriptions, rationales for the rules, and other information. Flight rules can be part of manual operations procedures carried out by humans. However, they can also be automated, and either implemented as on-board monitors, or as ground based monitors that are part of a ground data system. In the case of automated flight rules, one considerable expense to be addressed for any mission is the extensive process by which system engineers express flight rules in prose, software developers translate these requirements into code, and then both experts verify that the resulting application is correct. This paper explores the potential benefits of using an internal Scala DSL for general trace analysis, named TRACECONTRACT, to write executable specifications of flight rules. TRACECONTRACT can generally be applied to analysis of for example log files or for monitoring executing systems online.

temporal logic↗
NASA NTRS2022

Flight Rule Design, Implementation, Verification, and Validation for the Psyche Mission

NASA Jet Propulsion Lab (JPL)’s upcoming mission Psyche will begin its journey to the asteroid (16) Psyche in late 2022 in an effort to better understand its origins and, in turn, better understand our own. Operating the spacecraft safely will require the dedicated efforts of a small team that understands the spacecraft’s operational constraints, as well as a set of powerful spacecraft models designed to catch command errors that can pose risks to mission success. One of the responsibilities of the operations team is to ensure adherence to a set of Flight Rules written by spacecraft and instrument experts that are designed to mitigate these risks. Psyche’s innovations in Flight Rule design principles and advancements in the tools and processes used to implement and check Flight Rules are discussed. A comparison of Psyche’s approach to Flight Rules to other JPL missions will provide lessons learned for future missions that must perform constraint checking during operations. Flight Rule development faces several major challenges. First, flight rule developers must work with Subject Matter Experts (SME) to write the rules in a way that captures the intent of the constraint in a straightforward, enforceable manner. Second, software implementers must correctly interpret flight rules into code so that it meets the original intent of the SME. Finally, a means must be provided for SMEs to validate flight rule implementations without requiring them to understand the underlying software. Innovative processes intended to efficiently close the loop between stakeholders and software developers are described, such as the use of test-driven development to provide stakeholders with easy-to-review implementations. New guidelines for flight rule writing, designed to address these challenges, are described for future missions to adopt and build upon. Psyche Mission System has a variety of new and heritage tools that improve in the Flight Rule validation and checking process. Psyche developed a powerful, new tool called RandSEQ and made significant improvements to Octopusjam, two valuable tools that aid the development of Flight Rule unit tests. Advancements in the models and processes for performing sequence validation with SEQuence GENerator (SEQGEN), the primary, high-heritage tool used for automated flight rule checks on Psyche, are described. The development of new software and the advancements to existing software put Psyche at the forefront of Flight Rule technology. All missions must perform detailed constraint checking, so a comparison of Psyche’s approach to some of these items to the approaches taken by other missions such as Dawn, M2020, and Europa Clipper is done, specifically to examine SME-developer communication, tools used, and development process. Lessons learned from this comparison will be provided.

Weise, Tim↗
NASA NTRS2022

Feedback-Directed Random Sequence Generation for Verifying Spacecraft Flight Rule Violations

The Psyche: Journey to a Metal World mission will be launched in 2022 to study the largest metal asteroid in the main asteroid belt, (16) Psyche. The spacecraft will perform a Mars Flyby in 2023 and enter (16) Psyche’s orbit in 2026. Throughout the mission, safely operating the spacecraft will require abiding by a set of flight rules that can be defined at any point in the mission lifecycle. These flight rules ensure that the spacecraft is operating within allowed regimes and a discrete event simulation tool, SEQGEN, will be used to model all command sequences prior to uplink. One of SEQGEN’s responsibilities is to determine if a command sequence violates any flight rules. For each flight rule, the necessary logic to determine if a violation has occurred is implemented in the SEQGEN adaptation, which is maintained by the mission. This adaptation must be tested thoroughly to ensure that the flight rule logic was interpreted and implemented correctly. This work describes a tool, RandSEQ, that autogenerates a suite of flight rule violating test sequences for each flight rule implemented in SEQGEN, and can be used by any mission using SEQGEN. The Psyche SEQGEN adaptation is still being developed, but so far, RandSEQ has been used to generate 532 test cases, that can be reviewed by various stakeholders, for 40 flight rules. The ability to autogenerate these test cases has significantly reduced the amount of time required to implement and test each flight rule.

Su, Laura↗
NASA NTRS2011

For Spacious Skies: Self-Separation with "Autonomous Flight Rules" in US Domestic Airspace

Autonomous Flight Rules (AFR) are proposed as a new set of operating regulations in which aircraft navigate on tracks of their choice while self-separating from traffic and weather. AFR would exist alongside Instrument and Visual Flight Rules (IFR and VFR) as one of three available flight options for any appropriately trained and qualified operator with the necessary certified equipment. Historically, ground-based separation services evolved by necessity as aircraft began operating in the clouds and were unable to see each other. Today, technologies for global precision navigation, emerging airborne surveillance, and onboard computing enable traffic conflict management to be fully integrated with navigation procedures onboard the aircraft. By self-separating, aircraft can operate with more flexibility and fewer flight restrictions than are required when using ground-based separation. The AFR concept proposes a practical means in which self-separating aircraft could share the same airspace as IFR and VFR aircraft without disrupting the ongoing processes of Air Traffic Control. The paper discusses the context and motivation for implementing self-separation in US domestic airspace. It presents a historical perspective on separation, the proposed way forward in AFR, the rationale behind mixed operations, and the expected benefits of AFR for the airspace user community.

Wing, David J.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Cassini Attitude Control Operations Flight Rules and How They are Enforced

The Cassini spacecraft was launched on October 15, 1997 and arrived at Saturn on June 30, 2004. It has performed detailed observations and remote sensing of Saturn, its rings, and its satellites since that time. Cassini deployed the European-built Huygens probe which descended through the Titan atmosphere and landed on its surface on January 14, 2005. Operating the Cassini spacecraft is a complex scientific, engineering, and management job. In order to safely operate the spacecraft, a large number of flight rules were developed. These flight rules must be enforced throughout the lifetime of the Cassini spacecraft. Flight rules are defined as any operational limitation imposed by the spacecraft system design, hardware, and software, violation of which would result in spacecraft damage, loss of consumables, loss of mission objectives, loss and/or degradation of science, and less than optimal performance. Flight rules require clear description and rationale. Detailed automated methods have been developed to insure the spacecraft is continuously operated within these flight rules. An overview of all the flight rules allocated to the Cassini Attitude Control and Articulation Subsystem and how they are enforced is presented in this paper.

Burk, Thomas↗
NASA NTRS2010

Flight Rules Critical Readiness Review

The increment 23/24 Critical Readiness Review (CRR) flight rules are presented. The topics include: 1) B13-152 Acoustic Constraints; 2) B13-113 IFM/Corrective Action Prioritization Due to Loss of Exercise Capability; 3) B13-116 Constraints on Treadmill VIS Failure; 4) B13-201 Medical Management of ISS Fire/Smoke Response; 5) ARED and T2 Exercise constraints Flight rules (flight and stage specific); 6) FYI: B14 FR to be updated with requirement to sample crew sleep locations prior to receiving a "recommendation" from SRAG on where to sleep.

Kim, E.↗
NASA NTRS2020

New Flight Rules to Enable the Era of Aerial Mobility in the National Airspace System

In the 21st Century, new aviation markets, vehicle types, and technologies are fast emerging, inspiring new operational concepts for the National Airspace System such as Unmanned Aircraft Systems Traffic Management and Urban Air Mobility. These novel operations envision a dramatic increase in aerial mobility, or the ability to navigate freely through the airspace with unprecedented access and operational flexibility. Implementing these concepts presents a major challenge to the existing operational modes of Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and Instrument Flight Rules (IFR), developed under the limitations of early 20th Century technology and procedures to ensure safe navigation and separation from traffic. To meet this challenge and to support the needs of operators in the 21st Century and beyond, this paper proposes that VFR and IFR be augmented by new flight rules – Digital Flight Rules (DFR) – that leverage modern and emerging technologies and are not bound by restrictions borne of the state of technology 75-100 years ago. The objective of DFR is to provide safe and unfettered access to the airspace to all participating vehicle operators under all visibility conditions without incurring the limitations in operational flexibility inherent to IFR and even VFR. Advancements in communications, navigation, surveillance, aircraft connectivity, information access, automation technology, and supporting ground infrastructure provide the opportunity for the vehicle operator to engage at an unprecedented level in managing their flights regardless of flight visibility. Under DFR, these advancements enable the vehicle operator to assume full responsibility for traffic separation and therefore full trajectory management authority in all visibility conditions and airspace regions. The changes in roles and responsibilities are expected to enable greater airspace access and operational flexibility than afforded by IFR and VFR, thus enabling the emergence of new operations and a new era of advanced aerial mobility.

Mobility↗
NASA NTRS2011

Autonomous Flight Rules - A Concept for Self-Separation in U.S. Domestic Airspace

Autonomous Flight Rules (AFR) are proposed as a new set of operating regulations in which aircraft navigate on tracks of their choice while self-separating from traffic and weather. AFR would exist alongside Instrument and Visual Flight Rules (IFR and VFR) as one of three available flight options for any appropriately trained and qualified operator with the necessary certified equipment. Historically, ground-based separation services evolved by necessity as aircraft began operating in the clouds and were unable to see each other. Today, technologies for global navigation, airborne surveillance, and onboard computing enable the functions of traffic conflict management to be fully integrated with navigation procedures onboard the aircraft. By self-separating, aircraft can operate with more flexibility and fewer restrictions than are required when using ground-based separation. The AFR concept is described in detail and provides practical means by which self-separating aircraft could share the same airspace as IFR and VFR aircraft without disrupting the ongoing processes of Air Traffic Control.

Wing, David J.↗
NASA NTRS1981

Development and evaluation of a prototype in-flight instrument flight rules (IFR) procedures trainer

An in-flight instrument flight rules (IFR) procedures trainer capable of providing simulated indications of instrument flight in a typical general aviation aircraft independent of ground based navigation aids was developed. The IFR navaid related instruments and circuits from an ATC 610J table top simulator were installed in a Cessna 172 aircraft and connected to its electrical power and pitot static systems. The benefits expected from this hybridization concept include increased safety by reducing the number of general aviation aircraft conducting IFR training flights in congested terminal areas, and reduced fuel use and instruction costs by lessening the need to fly to and from navaid equipped airports and by increased efficiency of the required in-flight training. Technical feasibility was demonstrated and the operational feasibility of the concept was evaluated. Results indicated that the in-flight simulator is an effective training device for teaching IFR procedural skills.

Aaron, J. B., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS2024

Updates to NASA’S Break-in-Prebreathe Flight Rules Due to Type II Decompression Sickness Risk Considerations

Investigation of a central neurological decompression sickness (DCS) case during hypobaric ground testing at Johnson Space Center (JSC) identified a ~3 min break-in-prebreathe (BiP) late in the prebreathe (13 min prior to depressurization) as the leading credible cause for the DCS case. This occurred despite applicable prebreathe payback rules being followed. Applicable NASA rules, for ground and flight, directed 2:1 payback of breaks up to 10 min in duration, regardless of when a break occurs relative to depress. Breaks lasting longer than 10 min require a complete restart of the prebreathe protocol. The adequacy of NASA’s BiP rules was evaluated prior to resuming any hypobaric ground testing or International Space Station (ISS) extravehicular activity (EVA). Of particular interest to the authors was the timing of the BiP in relation to the overall prebreathe timeline. Although there exists no agreed-upon definition, a ‘late’ BiP means towards the end of the prebreathe period, and in particular, the last hour prior to depressurization. The following information sources were reviewed prior to formulating recommendations: i) the type II DCS case report and findings from the investigation; ii) documented rationale for existing flight rules, iii) consultations with subject matter experts involved in definition of existing flight rules (several of whom had since left NASA); iv) relevant published literature; v) tissue gas loading model estimates; and vi) NASA’s operational experience with late breaks in prebreathe.

Andrew F J Abercromby↗
NASA NTRS2014

Autonomous Flight Rules Concept: User Implementation Costs and Strategies

The costs to implement Autonomous Flight Rules (AFR) were examined for estimates in acquisition, installation, training and operations. The user categories were airlines, fractional operators, general aviation and unmanned aircraft systems. Transition strategies to minimize costs while maximizing operational benefits were also analyzed. The primary cost category was found to be the avionics acquisition. Cost ranges for AFR equipment were given to reflect the uncertainty of the certification level for the equipment and the extent of existing compatible avionics in the aircraft to be modified.

Cotton, William B.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Management of Operations under Visual Flight Rules in UTM for Disaster Response Missions

The disaster response domain has experienced an increased focus in recent years due to the rise in number and scale of events, lessons learned from past experience, and emerging technologies that make possible a more coordinated and effective response. As part of this focus, JAXA and NASA have been collaborating on the integration of manned and unmanned aircraft in support of disaster response operations through integrated testing of their respective mission planning and optimization system (Disaster Relief Aircraft Information Sharing Network, or D-NET) and an automated UAS traffic management system (e.g., UTM). In 2018, JAXA and NASA jointly participated in a large-scale disaster drill in Japan where the integration of systems was successfully demonstrated through real-time data exchanges, visualization, and decision making as part of the coordinated airspace management of a manned helicopter in VFR conditions and unmanned small UAS operating in common areas. This work details a flight test consisting of two flights that were conducted December 2019 near the Chofu Aerodrome in Tokyo, which focused on the evaluation of pilots operating under Visual Flight Rules (VFR) communicating through D-NET and sharing intent and position information within UTM. This work contributes to defining the necessary requirements for digital coordination between manned and unmanned operations. UTM requires the use of operation volumes, which are spatial and temporal volumes that encompass UAS flight trajectories and account for technical performance errors and deviations due to disturbances (e.g., wind). A series of flights, representing different missions, used landmark-based operation volumes and conformance of the aircraft to those operation volumes were tracked within UTM. Experienced disaster response helicopter pilots provided insight on the development of the operation plans and their usability during disaster response operations. Results from the flight test supported the suggested benefits of using landmarks for planning and positional awareness and highlighted the need for future research in advanced visualization capabilities to support operations that consider both system constraints and flight deck/airspace management interaction.

disaster response↗
NASA NTRS1987

The effects of display and autopilot functions on pilot workload for Single Pilot Instrument Flight Rule (SPIFR) operations

An analytical and experimental research program was conducted to develop criteria for pilot interaction with advanced controls and displays in single pilot instrument flight rules (SPIFR) operations. The analytic phase reviewed fundamental considerations for pilot workload taking into account existing data, and using that data to develop a divided attention SPIFR pilot workload model. The pilot model was utilized to interpret the two experimental phases. The first experimental phase was a flight test program that evaluated pilot workload in the presence of current and near-term displays and autopilot functions. The second experiment was conducted on a King Air simulator, investigating the effects of co-pilot functions in the presence of very high SPIFR workload. The results indicate that the simplest displays tested were marginal for SPIFR operations. A moving map display aided the most in mental orientation, but had inherent deficiencies as a stand alone replacement for an HSI. Autopilot functions were highly effective for reducing pilot workload. The simulator tests showed that extremely high workload situations can be adequately handled when co-pilot functions are provided.

Hoh, Roger H.↗
NASA NTRS2014

International Space Station Noise Constraints Flight Rule Process

Crewmembers onboard the International Space Station (ISS) live in a unique workplace environment for as long as 6 ‐12 months. During these long‐duration ISS missions, noise exposures from onboard equipment are posing concerns for human factors and crewmember health risks, such as possible reductions in hearing sensitivity, disruptions of crew sleep, interference with speech intelligibility and voice communications, interference with crew task performance, and reduced alarm audibility. The purpose of this poster is to describe how a recently‐updated noise constraints flight rule is being used to implement a NASA‐created Noise Exposure Estimation Tool and Noise Hazard Inventory to predict crew noise exposures and recommend when hearing protection devices are needed.

Limardo, Jose G.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Digital Flight Rules

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Digital Flight Rules↗
NASA NTRS1990

Analysis of general aviation accidents during operations under instrument flight rules

A report is presented to describe some of the errors that pilots make during flight under IFR. The data indicate that there is less risk during the approach and landing phase of IFR flights, as compared to VFR operations. Single-pilot IFR accident rates continue to be higher than two-pilot IFR incident rates, reflecting the high work load of IFR operations.

Bennett, C. T.↗