Engineering PapersSearch

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “hazard perception and avoidance”

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.

22 records · Page 2

Target Trailing With Safe Navigation for Maritime Autonomous Surface Vehicles

This software implements a motion-planning module for a maritime autonomous surface vehicle (ASV). The module trails a given target while also avoiding static and dynamic surface hazards. When surface hazards are other moving boats, the motion planner must apply International Regulations for Avoiding Collisions at Sea (COLREGS). A key subset of these rules has been implemented in the software. In case contact with the target is lost, the software can receive and follow a "reacquisition route," provided by a complementary system, until the target is reacquired. The programmatic intention is that the trailed target is a submarine, although any mobile naval platform could serve as the target. The algorithmic approach to combining motion with a (possibly moving) goal location, while avoiding local hazards, may be applicable to robotic rovers, automated landing systems, and autonomous airships. The software operates in JPL s CARACaS (Control Architecture for Robotic Agent Command and Sensing) software architecture and relies on other modules for environmental perception data and information on the predicted detectability of the target, as well as the low-level interface to the boat controls.

Wolf, Michael

Planetary Rover local navigation and hazard avoidance

A Planetary Rover will have to be able to navigate through its local environment autonomously, due to communication delays. This implies that the vehicle must be able to sense its environment, plan a course through that environment, and react appropriately to unexpected situations as they appear. All this must be done while guiding the vehicle toward the goals that have been given to it from its operators on the earth. This paper describes research at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory which concentrates on the sensing, perception, planning and execution monitoring that must be carried out by the rover to ensure that a safe and efficient path is found by the rover, and that that path is performed correctly.

Miller, David P.

Automatic Hazard Detection for Landers

Unmanned planetary landers to date have landed 'blind'; that is, without the benefit of onboard landing hazard detection and avoidance systems. This constrains landing site selection to very benign terrain,which in turn constrains the scientific agenda of missions. The state of the art Entry, Descent, and Landing (EDL) technology can land a spacecraft on Mars somewhere within a 20-100km landing ellipse.Landing ellipses are very likely to contain hazards such as craters, discontinuities, steep slopes, and large rocks, than can cause mission-fatal damage. We briefly review sensor options for landing hazard detection and identify a perception approach based on stereo vision and shadow analysis that addresses the broadest set of missions. Our approach fuses stereo vision and monocular shadow-based rock detection to maximize spacecraft safety. We summarize performance models for slope estimation and rock detection within this approach and validate those models experimentally. Instantiating our model of rock detection reliability for Mars predicts that this approach can reduce the probability of failed landing by at least a factor of 4 in any given terrain. We also describe a rock detector/mapper applied to large-high-resolution images from the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO) for landing site characterization and selection for Mars missions.

hazard detection

Manual Crew Override of Vehicle Landings Following G-Transitions

BACKGROUND Manual control during exploration spaceflight consists of both planned automated supervisory control and unplanned crew override. This crew override capability is critical to enable overall mission success during landing contingencies. However, the introduction of manual override capabilities must be implemented to enable crews to mitigate risks introduced by human error. Adaptive changes in the sensorimotor system can manifest during g-transitions as spatial disorientation. While training and landing aids enable successful landing through disorientation, these adaptive changes may increase cognitive demand that needs to be accounted for in the manual control strategy. It is important to characterize these effects as soon as possible following the G-transition to develop appropriate countermeasures. METHODS In this study, we will examine operational piloting tasks following International Space Station (ISS) missions in a simulated lunar landing using a six-degree-of-freedom (6DOF) motion base. The motion-based simulation will be implemented in our laboratory at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) and will be available within hours following the return from commercial crew landings. The primary goals of this study are (1) to understand the impact of spaceflight on crew ability to perform manual crew override tasks, (2) to examine how adaptive changes in vestibular and cognitive function relate to changes in manual crew override proficiency, and (3) compare performance during late “just-in-time” on-board training with early post-flight crew performance. The impact of spaceflight on piloting capability will be assessed from pre- versus post-flight changes in crewmembers assigned to either short duration (< 30 day) or long duration (~6- month) missions to the International Space Station (ISS). Individual differences in post-flight vestibular and cognitive changes include motion sickness reports, measures of tilt motion perception accuracy and precision, and dual-task tracking. During the 6DOF lunar simulation, the crew will manually takeover attitude and rate-of-descent to the nominal or re-designated landing aim point during the approach phase. The outcome measures for the lunar crew override tasks will be the percent time maintaining actual vehicle states, e.g., attitude and rate-of-descent, within recommended guidance during the landing approach, number and maximum deviation outside limits, and root mean square error (RMSE). Given that “just-in-time” (JIT) training is an operational expectation for the Human Landing System (HLS) program, all participants will perform late inflight JIT training for each manual crew override task in which they will participate. Crew proficiency will be captured inflight during JIT training that will be implemented on a laptop with hand controllers to allow the crewmember to practice the landing task procedures like the approach implemented for JIT training with Shuttle landing and ISS telerobotic tasks. COUNTERMEASURE UPDATES The lunar lander simulation has been implemented onto a two-laptop display system where subjects select from alternative landing points, based upon avoiding hazards that the on-board system identifies during the landing. The subject makes inputs using a rotational hand controller (i.e., joystick) and a translational hand controller, which are processed by simulated vehicle dynamics to update the vehicle attitude and rate of descent. Subjects will utilize a combination of flight, situation, and status displays to monitor the state of the simulated vehicle. The simulation exports tilt and translation movements to a 6DOF motion base synced to visual movements and provides representative vestibular cues to the subject while performing the task inside an enclosed cabin featuring a simulated lunar out-the-window view and a heads-down lander cockpit view. RELEVANCE This project will deliver an operational demonstration of crew override capability following spaceflight and identify potential deficits that may require remediation. Comparison of individual vestibular and cognitive changes with crew override performance will help better characterize the manual control risks associated with sensorimotor alterations. The inclusion of “just-in-time” on-board training will ensure we are characterizing changes in override proficiency with this expected countermeasure in place. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: The authors acknowledge contributions from Draper, HLS Joint Test Panel, Crew HLS Interfaces for Piloting Working Group, and Dynamic Skills Trainer (DST) Lab toward the development of the lunar landing simulation. This project is funded by the Human Health Countermeasures Element.

Austin M Bollinger