Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “UAS vehicles”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2014

Enabling a Science Support Structure for NASAs Global Hawk UASs

In this paper we describe the information technologies developed by NASA for the Winter/Spring 2013/2014, and Fall 2014, NASA Earth Venture Campaigns, Hurricane and Severe Storm Sentinel (HS3) and Airborne Tropical TRopopause EXperiment (ATTREX). These campaigns utilized Global Hawk UAS vehicles equipped at the NASA Armstrong (previously Dryden) Flight Research Facility (AFRC), Edwards Air Force Base, California, and operated from there, the NASA Wallops Flight Facility (WFF), Virginia, and Anderson Air Force Base (AAFB), Guam. Part of this enabling infrastructure utilized a layer 2 encrypted terrestrial Virtual Local Area Network (VLAN) that, at times, spanned greater than ten thousand miles (AAFB <-> AFRC <-> WFF) and was routed over geosynchronous Ku band communication Satellites directly to the aircraft sensor network. This infrastructure enabled seamless hand off between Satellites, and Satellite ground stations in Guam, California and Virginia, so allowing simultaneous Aircraft Command and Control and Science operations from remote locations. Additionally, we will describe the other elements of this infrastructure, from on-board geo-enabled databases, to real time communications directly from the instruments (in some cases, more than twelve were carried, and simultaneously operated, on one aircraft) to the researchers and other interested parties, world wide.

Virtual Local Area Network (VLAN)↗
NASA NTRS2017

Development of a High-Fidelity Simulation Environment for Shadow-Mode Assessments of Air Traffic Concepts

This paper will describe the purpose, architecture, and implementation of a gate-to-gate, high-fidelity air traffic simulation environment called the Shadow Mode Assessment using Realistic Technologies for the National Airspace System (SMART-NAS) Test Bed.The overarching purpose of the SMART-NAS Test Bed (SNTB) is to conduct high-fidelity, real-time, human-in-the-loop and automation-in-the-loop simulations of current and proposed future air traffic concepts for the Next Generation Air Transportation System of the United States, called NextGen. SNTB is intended to enable simulations that are currently impractical or impossible for three major areas of NextGen research and development: Concepts across multiple operational domains such as the gate-to-gate trajectory-based operations concept; Concepts related to revolutionary operations such as the seamless and widespread integration of large and small Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) vehicles throughout U.S. airspace; Real-time system-wide safety assurance technologies to allow safe, increasingly autonomous aviation operations. SNTB is primarily accessed through a web browser. A set of secure support services are provided to simplify all aspects of real-time, human-in-the-loop and automation-in-the-loop simulations from design (i.e., prior to execution) through analysis (i.e., after execution). These services include simulation architecture and asset configuration; scenario generation; command, control and monitoring; and analysis support.

human-in-the-loop↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Remote Pilot Handoffs in Large UAS Multi-Vehicle Operations: Best Practices and Supportive Technologies

In response to pilot shortages and increasing air cargo demands, NASA's Pathfinding for Airspace with Autonomous Vehicles (PAAV) sub-project conducted the fourth in a series of tabletop studies investigating scalable solutions for integrating large Uncrewed Aircraft Systems (UAS) into the National Airspace System (NAS). This study solicited subject matter expertise to identify solutions to potential challenges for a further term vision, guiding participants through scenario-based discussions where the remote pilot (RP)-to-vehicle ratio has been scaled from 1:1 to m:N. Of those challenges, remote pilot handoffs were found throughout all phases of flight, both in nominal and non-nominal scenarios. The current paper details participant-suggested procedural and technological solutions for overcoming the handoff challenge, including determining the accepting RP, which aircraft to release, the location and timing of the transition, and options for supporting personnel, tools, and automation that could facilitate safe and efficient handoffs.

unmanned aircraft systems (UAS)↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Remote Pilot Handoffs in Large UAS Multi-Vehicle Operations: Best Practices and Supportive Technologies

In response to pilot shortages and increasing air cargo demands, NASA's Pathfinding for Airspace with Autonomous Vehicles (PAAV) sub-project conducted the fourth in a series of tabletop studies investigating scalable solutions for integrating large Uncrewed Aircraft Systems (UAS) into the National Airspace System (NAS). This study solicited subject matter expertise to identify solutions to potential challenges for a further term vision, guiding participants through scenario-based discussions where the remote pilot (RP)-to-vehicle ratio has been scaled from 1:1 to m:N. Of those challenges, remote pilot handoffs were found throughout all phases of flight, both in nominal and non-nominal scenarios. The current paper details participant-suggested procedural and technological solutions for overcoming the handoff challenge, including determining the accepting RP, which aircraft to release, the location and timing of the transition, and options for supporting personnel, tools, and automation that could facilitate safe and efficient handoffs.

uncrewed aircraft systems↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Enhanced UAS Availability via Vehicle to Vehicle Routing Scaled Experiments

The safe integration of modern unmanned aerial systems into the national airspace requires the ability to be able to confirm that the vehicles are working as planned. This means the availability of the vehicle and latency of the communication is critical. These requirements, along with a complex and multifaceted environment as well as the unmanned air traffic management framework, present a unique optimization problem. In this paper, we articulate our envisioned problem space and create a scaled-down version to test the functional feasibility of utilizing the vehicle to vehicle communication as a secondary communication assurance mechanism. We present our framework, experimental approach, and some lessons learned through the process.

Nicholas B Cramer↗
NASA NTRS2006

HSI Guidelines Outline for the Air Vehicle Control Station. Version 2

This document provides guidance to the FAA and manufacturers on how to develop UAS Pilot Vehicle Interfaces to safely and effectively integrate UASs into the NAS. Preliminary guidelines are provided for Aviate, Communicate, Navigate and Avoid Hazard functions. The pilot shall have information and control capability so that pilot-UA interactions are not adverse, unfavorable, nor compromise safety. Unfavorable interactions include anomalous aircraft-pilot coupling (APC) interactions (closed loop), pilot-involved oscillations (categories I, II or III), and non-oscillatory APC events (e.g., divergence). - Human Systems Integration Pilot-Technology Interface Requirements for Command, Control, and Communications (C3)

Source record↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Aerial Vehicle Routing and Scheduling for UAS Traffic Management: A Monte Carlo Tree Search Approach

Numerous unmanned aircraft systems operating at low altitudes to deliver goods and services may one day become ubiquitous in our cities. In the Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) framework, such a concept is envisioned, where aerial vehicles operate beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS) within specifically reserved and time stamped “corridors” in the airspace. For example, these corridors or operational intent volumes can connect an aerial vehicle’s origin site to its destination site for package delivery operations. There may also be more than one corridor available for an aerial vehicle to choose from and often different corridors may intersect with one another. Thus, it is imperative to ensure flight trajectories belonging to different aerial vehicles are not in conflict. Per the UTM CONOPs, we assume that a vehicle almost always stays inside its corridor or operational volume. This work provides a framework for strategic deconfliction of UTM or package delivery drones, where we schedule the departure time of all vehicles subject to various temporal constraints (including the corridor deconfliction at the intersections). We present the “multi-route weighted package delivery problem” which serves as an exemplifying model for strategic deconfliction in UTM. In the multi-route weighted package delivery problem, a graph network is given which consists of a set of depots (source) and drop-off (destination) nodes, with multiple routes (defined as a sequence of waypoints) connecting the depots to drop-off nodes. In addition, routes are weighted by the associated ground risk and total travel distance for package delivery. The goal is for a known set of aerial vehicles to depart from the depots, choose a route and take off time, while avoiding conflicts with other aerial vehicles, and minimizing both risk and distance traveled. We provide a mixed integer linear programming (MILP) formulation of the problem, as well as a heuristic solution based on Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) – a method used in game theory and artificial intelligence – to overcome limitations inherent to optimal solvers. Computational results show the advantages of using MCTS over the MILP formulation; the former can provide a sub-optimal solution quickly, and may sometimes even reach an optimal solution, whereas the latter may not even produce a solution in reasonable time. Furthermore, results from both the MILP formulation and MCTS methods were validated using a preliminary agent-based simulator implementing the UTM concept of operations. Thus, the MCTS method can be seen as a scalable solution to the complex multi-route weighted package delivery problem and may possibly be extended to similar complex optimization problems.

Kenny Chour↗
NASA NTRS2019

UAS Concept of Operations and Vehicle Technologies Demonstration

In 2017 and 2018, under National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) sponsorship, the New York Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Test Site and Northeast UAS Airspace Integration Research (NUAIR) Alliance conducted a year-long research project that culminated in a UAS technology flight demonstration. The research project included the creation of a concept of operations, and development and demonstration of UAS technologies. The concept of operations was focused on an unmanned aircraft transiting from cruise through Class E airspace into a high-density urban terminal environment. The terminal environment in which the test was conducted was Griffiss International Airport, under Syracuse Air Traffic Control (ATC) approach control and Griffiss control tower. Employing an Aurora Centaur optionally piloted aircraft (OPA), this project explored six scenarios aimed at advancing UAS integration into the National Airspace System (NAS) under both nominal and off-nominal conditions. Off-nominal conditions were defined to include complete loss of the communications link between the remote pilot’s control station on the ground and the aircraft. The off-nominal scenarios that were investigated included lost-link conditions with and without link recovery, an automated ATC initiated go-around, autonomous rerouting around a dynamic airspace obstruction (in this case simulated weather), and autonomous taxi operations to clear the runway.

Swieringa, Kurt↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Aerial Vehicle Routing and Scheduling for UAS Traffic Management: A Hybrid Monte Carlo Tree Search Approach

We present the Multi-Route Weighted Package Delivery Problem (MRWPDP) and a scalable solution methodology as a major step towards enabling an airspace deconfliction service for drone delivery operations. The problem is motivated by Strategic deconfliction under the FAA’s “Unmanned Aircraft Systems Traffic Management” Concept of Operations. MRWPDP falls under a class of vehicle routing and scheduling problems, and as such is NP-Hard. In MRWPDP, a graph network is given which consists of depots, drop-off sites, and multiple routes connecting the two. In addition, routes are weighted by the associated ground risk and total travel distance for package delivery. The goal is to optimally schedule the departure time and assign routes to a known set of vehicles at the depot. We propose a heuristic solution to the problem by borrowing techniques from Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP), Constraint Programming, and Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS). The resulting hybrid framework is MCTS with Bound-and-Prune (BP) and rapid simulated updates (U), or MCTS-BP-U. This approach is able to quickly provide a feasible solution for MRWPDP, even for large problem instances up to 1000 vehicles. We provide a MILP formulation of MRWPDP and compare its performance against MCTS-BP-U in terms of solution quality. An agent-based model simulation is conducted as a final step to validate the efficacy of our approach.

air traffic scheduling↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Aerial Vehicle Routing and Scheduling for UAS Traffic Management: A Hybrid Monte Carlo Tree Search Approach

We present the Multi-Route Weighted Package Delivery Problem (MRWPDP) and a scalable solution methodology as a major step towards enabling an airspace deconfliction service for drone delivery operations. The problem is motivated by Strategic deconfliction under the FAA’s “Unmanned Aircraft Systems Traffic Management” Concept of Operations. MRWPDP falls under a class of vehicle routing and scheduling problems, and as such is NP-Hard. In MRWPDP, a graph network is given which consists of depots, drop-off sites, and multiple routes connecting the two. In addition, routes are weighted by the associated ground risk and total travel distance for package delivery. The goal is to optimally schedule the departure time and assign routes to a known set of vehicles at the depot. We propose a heuristic solution to the problem by borrowing techniques from Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP), Constraint Programming, and Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS). The resulting hybrid framework is MCTS with Bound-and-Prune (BP) and rapid simulated updates (U), or MCTS-BP-U. This approach is able to quickly provide a feasible solution for MRWPDP, even for large problem instances up to 1000 vehicles. We provide a MILP formulation of MRWPDP and compare its performance against MCTS-BP-U in terms of solution quality. An agent-based model simulation is conducted as a final step to validate the efficacy of our approach.

air traffic scheduling↗
NASA NTRS2024

m:N Working Group Meeting Summary November 2023

From November 28th to 30th, 2023 the m:N UAS working group and its subgroups [small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS), Large UAS, High Altitude Platform Systems (HAPS), and Urban Air Mobility (UAM)] met at the NASA Langley Research Center in Hampton, VA for an in person meeting. The subgroups meet multiple times throughout the year, virtually. Twice a year however, participants from all the subgroups come together in person to further identify and discuss challenges, and path forward ideas for incorporating UAS into the airspace. The m:N UAS working group is run by Jay Shively (Adaptive Aerospace) and Andy Thurling (Thurling Aero Consulting) and is comprised of members from government, industry, and academia in an effort to identify and reduce barriers to m:N operations. This effort also includes identifying requirements, use cases, and metrics to support organizations and groups including the FAA, RTCA, and ASTM. Each subgroup is run by a government/industry team (see below). sUAS Subgroup Garrett Sadler (NASA) Scott Scheff (HF Designworks) Large UAS Subgroup Conrad Rory (NASA) Brandon Suarez (Reliable Robotics) HAPS Subgroup Andy Thurling (Thurling Aero Consulting) Jeff Homola (NASA) UAM Subgroup Mike Politowicz (NASA) Scott Scheff (HF Designworks), member-at-large

m:N operations↗
NASA NTRS2022

m:N Working Group

On November 29th and 30th, 2022, the m:N UAS working group and its subgroups [small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS), Large UAS, High Altitude Platform Systems (HAPS), and Urban Air Mobility (UAM)] met at the NASA Ames Research Center in Mountain View, CA for an in person meeting. The option to dial in remotely and use Conference.IO to engage with questions was offered as well. The subgroups meet multiple times throughout the year, virtually. Twice a year however, participants from all the subgroups come together to brief each other on progress, challenges, and path forward ideas for incorporating UAS into the airspace. The m:N UAS working group is run by Jay Shively (Adaptive Aerospace) and Andy Thurling (Thurling Aero Consulting) and is comprised of members from government, industry, and academia in an effort to identify and reduce barriers to m:N operations. This effort also includes identifying requirements, use cases, and metrics to support organizations and groups including the FAA and RTCA’s SC-228 Detect and Avoid. Each subgroup is run by a government/industry team.

multi-vehicle↗
NASA NTRS2023

m:N Working Group Annual Status Report

This document serves as an annual report of m:N Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) subgroup activities, addressed challenges, and roadmaps for the future. The subgroups consist of small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (sUAS), Large UAS, High Altitude Platform Systems (HAPS), and Urban Air Mobility (UAM). Also included in this report are participant lists for each subgroup (Appendix B) and future roadmap and outreach plans.The subgroups meet in a virtual format multiple times throughout the year. Twice a year, participants from all the subgroups come together as part of the m:N working group to brief each other in person on progress, challenges, and path forward ideas for successful incorporation of UAS into the airspace. Recent m:N in person meetings include: - November 29-30, 2022 at the NASA Ames Research Center in Mountain View, CA - May 9 & 11, 2023 at AUVSI’s Xponential conference in Denver, CO - The next in person working group meeting is planned for November 28-30, 2023 at NASA Langley in Hampton, Virginia The m:N UAS working group is run by Jay Shively (Adaptive Aerospace) and Andy Thurling (Thurling Aero Consulting) and is comprised of members from government, industry, and academia in an effort to identify and reduce barriers to m:N operations. This effort also includes identifying requirements, use cases, and metrics to support organizations and groups including the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics (RTCA’s) SC-228 Detect and Avoid committee.

multi-vehicle↗
NASA NTRS2024

m:N Working Group: Meeting Summary March 2024

From March 26th to 28th, 2024 the m:N UAS working group and its subgroups (Evaluation Methodologies, Exceptions/Interventions, and Initial Operating Capability for Airspace Integration) met at SAIC in Washington, D.C. for an in-person meeting. The subgroups meet virtually throughout the year, and twice a year participants from all the subgroups come together to further identify and discuss challenges and paths forward for incorporating UAS into the airspace. The m:N UAS working group is run by Jay Shively (Adaptive Aerospace) and Andy Thurling (DroneUp) and is comprised of members from government, industry, and academia in an effort to identify and reduce barriers to m:N operations. This includes identifying requirements, use cases, metrics, and the development of white papers to support organizations including the FAA, RTCA, and ASTM. A change from last year, the Large UAS and HAPS sub working groups have disbanded while the sUAS working group continues independently, currently working on a white paper titled Personnel Selection, Roles, and Training for sUAS. For 2024 the m:N sub working groups have been refocused to cover evaluation methodologies, interventions/exceptions, and initial operating capability for airspace integration; with the premise that the outcomes from these subgroups will be white papers. These white papers can inform one another to ultimately become a master whitepaper. Each subgroup lead is called out below: Evaluation Methodologies Subgroup Jay Shively, Adaptive Aerospace Interventions/Exceptions Subgroup Andy Thurling, DroneUp (Lead) Initial Operating Capability for Airspace Integration Subgroup Andy Lacher, NASA (Lead)

m:N operations↗
NASA NTRS2016

Applying Required Navigation Performance Concept for Traffic Management of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems

In anticipation of a rapid increase in the number of civil Unmanned Aircraft System(UAS) operations, NASA is researching prototype technologies for a UAS Traffic Management (UTM) system that will investigate airspace integration requirements for enabling safe, efficient low-altitude operations. One aspect a UTM system must consider is the correlation between UAS operations (such as vehicles, operation areas and durations), UAS performance requirements, and the risk to people and property in the operational area. This paper investigates the potential application of the International Civil Aviation Organizations (ICAO) Required Navigation Performance (RNP) concept to relate operational risk with trajectory conformance requirements. The approach is to first define a method to quantify operational risk and then define the RNP level requirement as a function of the operational risk. Greater operational risk corresponds to more accurate RNP level, or smaller tolerable Total System Error (TSE). Data from 19 small UAS flights are used to develop and validate a formula that defines this relationship. An approach to assessing UAS-RNP conformance capability using vehicle modeling and wind field simulation is developed to investigate how this formula may be applied in a future UTM system. The results indicate the modeled vehicles flight path is robust to the simulated wind variation, and it can meet RNP level requirements calculated by the formula. The results also indicate how vehicle-modeling fidelity may be improved to adequately verify assessed RNP level.

required navigation performance↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

TPSAS-NF1676L-13523-DND

Access to the National Airspace System entails policy, architectural and certification challenges for Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) as they are being developed. This talk identifies these challenges, builds upon past architectural change successes, and proposes a roadmap to allow small UAS (< 50lb vehicles) to operate in an airspace underlay experiment. The intent is to demonstrate robust operations that can be scaled up to more complex systems and airspace.

Dan Williams↗
NASA NTRS2019

Remote ID for Rapid Assessment of Flight and Vehicle Information

The ability to rapidly identify UAS (Unmanned Aircraft Systems) in the field has emerged as a critical need for the integration of small UASs into the national airspace and counter-UAS operations. This paper proposes an architecture for rapid retrieval of UAS information leveraging NASA's current Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) system. The proposed architecture utilizes UTM components: FIMS (Flight Information Management System), USS (UAS Service Supplier), and vehicle registration and model database in order to provide assessment of the UAS reported in the field including the ability to distinguish between participating and non- participating UTM actors. Detailed system descriptions are provided and preliminary results from field tests conducted during UTM TCL (Technical Capability Level) 3 are discussed. It is found that 94 percent of the remote ID look-ups were successful. The average time of a look-up is found to be 1.2 seconds. Failure cases are examined and recommendations on next steps to advance UAS remote identification are provided.

USS (UAS Service Supplier)↗