SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Avionics”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 595 records · Page 33

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS1998

Evaluating Flight Crew Operator Manual Documentation

Aviation and cognitive science researchers have identified situations in which the pilot s expectations for the behavior of the avionics are not matched by the actual behavior of the avionics. Researchers have attributed these "automation surprises" to the complexity of the avionics mode logic, the absence of complete training, limitations in cockpit displays, and ad-hoc conceptual models of the avionics. Complete canonical rule-based descriptions of the behavior of the autopilot provide the basis for understanding the perceived complexity of the autopilots, the differences between the pilot s and autopilot s conceptual models, and the limitations in training materials and cockpit displays. This paper compares the behavior of the autopilot Vertical Speed/Flight Path Angle (VS-FPA) mode as described in the Flight Crew Operators Manual (FCOM) and the actual behavior of the VS-FPA mode defined in the autopilot software. This example demonstrates the use of the Operational Procedure Model (OPM) as a method for using the requirements specification for the design of the software logic as information requirements for training.

Sherry, Lance↗

NASA NTRS2009

Case Study of Using High Performance Commercial Processors in a Space Environment

The purpose of the Space Shuttle Cockpit Avionics Upgrade project was to reduce crew workload and improve situational awareness. The upgrade was to augment the Shuttle avionics system with new hardware and software. A major success of this project was the validation of the hardware architecture and software design. This was significant because the project incorporated new technology and approaches for the development of human rated space software. An early version of this system was tested at the Johnson Space Center for one month by teams of astronauts. The results were positive, but NASA eventually cancelled the project towards the end of the development cycle. The goal to reduce crew workload and improve situational awareness resulted in the need for high performance Central Processing Units (CPUs). The choice of CPU selected was the PowerPC family, which is a reduced instruction set computer (RISC) known for its high performance. However, the requirement for radiation tolerance resulted in the reevaluation of the selected family member of the PowerPC line. Radiation testing revealed that the original selected processor (PowerPC 7400) was too soft to meet mission objectives and an effort was established to perform trade studies and performance testing to determine a feasible candidate. At that time, the PowerPC RAD750s where radiation tolerant, but did not meet the required performance needs of the project. Thus, the final solution was to select the PowerPC 7455. This processor did not have a radiation tolerant version, but faired better than the 7400 in the ability to detect failures. However, its cache tags did not provide parity and thus the project incorporated a software strategy to detect radiation failures. The strategy was to incorporate dual paths for software generating commands to the legacy Space Shuttle avionics to prevent failures due to the softness of the upgraded avionics.

Ferguson, Roscoe C.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Case Study of Using High Performance Commercial Processors in Space

The purpose of the Space Shuttle Cockpit Avionics Upgrade project (1999 2004) was to reduce crew workload and improve situational awareness. The upgrade was to augment the Shuttle avionics system with new hardware and software. A major success of this project was the validation of the hardware architecture and software design. This was significant because the project incorporated new technology and approaches for the development of human rated space software. An early version of this system was tested at the Johnson Space Center for one month by teams of astronauts. The results were positive, but NASA eventually cancelled the project towards the end of the development cycle. The goal to reduce crew workload and improve situational awareness resulted in the need for high performance Central Processing Units (CPUs). The choice of CPU selected was the PowerPC family, which is a reduced instruction set computer (RISC) known for its high performance. However, the requirement for radiation tolerance resulted in the re-evaluation of the selected family member of the PowerPC line. Radiation testing revealed that the original selected processor (PowerPC 7400) was too soft to meet mission objectives and an effort was established to perform trade studies and performance testing to determine a feasible candidate. At that time, the PowerPC RAD750s were radiation tolerant, but did not meet the required performance needs of the project. Thus, the final solution was to select the PowerPC 7455. This processor did not have a radiation tolerant version, but had some ability to detect failures. However, its cache tags did not provide parity and thus the project incorporated a software strategy to detect radiation failures. The strategy was to incorporate dual paths for software generating commands to the legacy Space Shuttle avionics to prevent failures due to the softness of the upgraded avionics.

Ferguson, Roscoe C.↗

NASA NTRS2011

The Legacy of Space Shuttle Flight Software

The initial goals of the Space Shuttle Program required that the avionics and software systems blaze new trails in advancing avionics system technology. Many of the requirements placed on avionics and software were accomplished for the first time on this program. Examples include comprehensive digital fly-by-wire technology, use of a digital databus for flight critical functions, fail operational/fail safe requirements, complex automated redundancy management, and the use of a high-order software language for flight software development. In order to meet the operational and safety goals of the program, the Space Shuttle software had to be extremely high quality, reliable, robust, reconfigurable and maintainable. To achieve this, the software development team evolved a software process focused on continuous process improvement and defect elimination that consistently produced highly predictable and top quality results, providing software managers the confidence needed to sign each Certificate of Flight Readiness (COFR). This process, which has been appraised at Capability Maturity Model (CMM)/Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Level 5, has resulted in one of the lowest software defect rates in the industry. This paper will present an overview of the evolution of the Primary Avionics Software System (PASS) project and processes over thirty years, an argument for strong statistical control of software processes with examples, an overview of the success story for identifying and driving out errors before flight, a case study of the few significant software issues and how they were either identified before flight or slipped through the process onto a flight vehicle, and identification of the valuable lessons learned over the life of the project.

Hickey, Christopher J.↗

NASA NTRS2014

Regulatory Compliance in Multi-Tier Supplier Networks

Over the years, avionics systems have increased in complexity to the point where 1st tier suppliers to an aircraft OEM find it financially beneficial to outsource designs of subsystems to 2nd tier and at times to 3rd tier suppliers. Combined with challenging schedule and budgetary pressures, the environment in which safety-critical systems are being developed introduces new hurdles for regulatory agencies and industry. This new environment of both complex systems and tiered development has raised concerns in the ability of the designers to ensure safety considerations are fully addressed throughout the tier levels. This has also raised questions about the sufficiency of current regulatory guidance to ensure: proper flow down of safety awareness, avionics application understanding at the lower tiers, OEM and 1st tier oversight practices, and capabilities of lower tier suppliers. Therefore, NASA established a research project to address Regulatory Compliance in a Multi-tier Supplier Network. This research was divided into three major study efforts: 1. Describe Modern Multi-tier Avionics Development 2. Identify Current Issues in Achieving Safety and Regulatory Compliance 3. Short-term/Long-term Recommendations Toward Higher Assurance Confidence This report presents our findings of the risks, weaknesses, and our recommendations. It also includes a collection of industry-identified risks, an assessment of guideline weaknesses related to multi-tier development of complex avionics systems, and a postulation of potential modifications to guidelines to close the identified risks and weaknesses.

Goossen, Emray R.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Deploying a Route Optimization EFB Application for Commercial Airline Operational Trials

The Traffic Aware Planner (TAP), developed for NASA Langley Research Center to support the Traffic Aware Strategic Aircrew Requests (TASAR) project, is a flight-efficiency software application developed for an Electronic Flight Bag (EFB). Tested in two flight trials and planned for operational testing by two commercial airlines, TAP is a real-time trajectory optimization application that leverages connectivity with onboard avionics and broadband Internet sources to compute and recommend route modifications to flight crews to improve fuel and time performance. The application utilizes a wide range of data, including Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B) traffic, Flight Management System (FMS) guidance and intent, on-board sensors, published winds and weather, and Special Use Airspace (SUA) schedules. This paper discusses the challenges of developing and deploying TAP to various EFB platforms, our solutions to some of these challenges, and lessons learned, to assist commercial software developers and hardware manufacturers in their efforts to implement and extend TAP functionality in their environments. EFB applications (such as TAP) typically access avionics data via an ARINC 834 Simple Text Avionics Protocol (STAP) server hosted by an Aircraft Interface Device (AID) or other installed hardware. While the protocol is standardized, the data sources, content, and transmission rates can vary from aircraft to aircraft. Additionally, the method of communicating with the AID may vary depending on EFB hardware and/or the availability of onboard networking services, such as Ethernet, WIFI, Bluetooth, or other mechanisms. EFBs with portable and installed components can be implemented using a variety of operating systems, and cockpits are increasingly incorporating tablet-based technologies, further expanding the number of platforms the application may need to support. Supporting multiple EFB platforms, AIDs, avionics datasets, and user interfaces presents a challenge for software developers and the management of their code baselines. Maintaining multiple baselines to support all deployment targets can be extremely cumbersome and expensive. Certification also needs to be considered when developing the application. Regardless of whether the software is itself destined to be certified, data requirements in support of the application and user interface elements may introduce certification requirements for EFB manufacturers and the airlines. The example of TAP, the challenges faced, solutions implemented, and lessons learned will give EFB application and hardware developers insight into future potential requirements in deploying TAP or similar flight-deck EFB applications.

Roscoe, David A.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

TPSAS-NF1676L-18030-DND

This study investigated the relative acceptance of different avionics implementations that present Flightdeck Interval Management (FIM) speeds and speed deviations to commercial pilots, and for indications of conditions that require action. Each crew evaluated four Avionics conditions: (1) Integrated in which the FIM target speed was presented in the upper left corner of the primary flight display (PFD) and speed profile deviation information was implicitly indicated as the deviation between current speed and an instantaneous speed profile bug on the PFD speed tape. In this Avionics condition, clearance information would have been entered, and could be referenced, on the FIM page in the MCDU. This page also gave a digital readout of speed profile deviation. Significant deviations from the speed profile triggered a message on the EICAS system. (2) EFB-Aft in which an aft-mounted EFB was used as the device housing the FIM algorithm and presented all the relevant information for the operation, including speed targets, speed deviation information, and all elements of the IM clearance. Significant deviations from the speed profile triggered messages on the same EFB display. (3) EFB-Fore in which the same information was presented as in the EFB-Aft condition, but the display was mounted in a more forward location, just under the outboard window. (4) EFB-Aft-AGD in which the EFB-Aft condition was augmented with the ADS-B Guidance Display (AGD). The AGD repeats the same FIM target speed and speed deviation information provided on the EFB. This study compares the efficacy of these Avionics Conditions as well as three methods of annunciating FIM events (a new speed, a reminder that a new speed occurred, and a deviation from the FIM speed profile), using only visual indications, visual indications and an aural for all events, or visual indications for all events plus an aural for speed deviations only. Results show clear preference for the Integrated condition and the use of aural indications. Other metrics of performance using these conditions and methods are mixed.

Kara Latorella↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

High-Altitude ADS-B Flight Tests on a NASA ER-2 Research Airplane

Researchers at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Armstrong Flight Research Center (Edwards, California); the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA); and Regulus Group, LLC (Atlantic City, New Jersey) collaborated for the flight-test demonstration of an Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) system equipped on a high-altitude Earth Resources-2 (ER-2) research airplane. The unique ER-2 airplane is a NASA-owned and operated airborne science version of the United States Air Force / Lockheed Martin Aeronautics (Bethesda, Maryland) U-2S airplane. The FAA has mandated that by the year 2020, aircraft operating within certain sections of the United States National Airspace system be equipped with ADS-B Out technology; the research presented in this paper is the first to show how the NASA ADS-B architecture satisfies the mandate for a unique high-altitude aircraft. An exceptional military aircraft design, security protocols, and the performance envelope of the ER-2 airplane made the avionics integration remarkably challenging. The design required the ADS-B avionics to survive the harsh flight environment of the ER-2 airplane. The most prominent challenge was the functional integration of modern civilian avionics into federated military legacy avionics. Flight-test objectives were to certify an ADS-B Out (1090ES) passive surveillance integrated with a Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) I active surveillance system on an ER-2 platform for high-altitude cruise operations. In April 2022, NASA conducted three flights at Edwards Air Force Base (Edwards, California) - each greater than one-hour flight reaching altitudes above 60,000 ft.

ADS-B↗

NASA NTRS1997

Co-Op Tour Summary Report

While on assignment at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, I participated in the development of the X-33 Avionics Flight Experiment (AFE). This ideal opportunity not only gave me an insider's look at the design and operation of modern aerospace avionics, but also allowed be to interact with others in the industry in an effort to stay on the cutting edge of the new technologies being incorporated into existing avionics architectures.

Avionics flight Experiment aerospace avionics new ↗

NASA NTRS1973

Effectiveness evaluation of STOL transport operations

A short-takeoff and landing (STOL) systems simulation model has been developed and implemented in a computer code (known as STOL OPS) which permits evaluation of the operation of a STOL aircraft and its avionics in a commercial airline operating environment. STOL OPS concentrated on the avionics functions of navigation, guidance, control, communication, hazard aviodance, and systems management. External world factors influencing the operation of the STOL aircraft include each airport and its geometry, air traffic at each airport, air traffic control equipment and procedures, weather (including winds and visibility), and the flight path between each airport served by the route. The development of the STOL OPS program provides NASA a set of computer programs which can be used for detailed analysis of a STOL aircraft and its avionics and permit establishment of system requirements as a function of airline mission performance goals.

Hitt, E. F.↗

NASA NTRS1973

Fleet retrofit report

Flight tests are evaluated of an avionics system which aids the pilot in making two-segment approaches for noise abatement. The implications are discussed of equipping United's fleet of Boeing 727-200 aircraft with two-segment avionics for use down to Category 2 weather operating minima. The experience is reported of incorporating two-segment approach avionics systems on two different aircraft. The cost of installing dual two-segment approach systems is estimated to be $37,015 per aircraft, including parts, labor, and spares. This is based on the assumption that incremental out-of-service and training costs could be minimized by incorporating the system at airframe overhaul cycle and including training in regular recurrent training. Accelerating the modification schedule could add up to 50 percent to the modification costs. Recurring costs of maintenance of the installation are estimated to be of about the same magnitude as the potential recurrent financial benefits due to fuel savings.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1978

The prediction of lightning-induced voltages on metallic and composite aircraft

Various government agencies have put forth effort to enable the prediction of what lightning current will do to aircraft avionic systems. Ongoing and future efforts of predicting avionic voltages and currents caused by electromagnetic fields external to the aircraft are illustrated. The Intrasystem Analysis Program (IAP) was put to use to predict lightning-induced voltages on avionic systems. Presently funded programs are investigating the modification nonmetallic composite materials will cause to the metallic IAP program predictions. The various factors involved in designing prediction techniques are discussed.

Birken, J.↗

NASA NTRS1983

Role of simulation and emulation in the development of Shuttle-Centaur (STS-Centaur)

To support the task of integrating the Centaur liquid-fueled upper-stage space vehicle into the space shuttle program. A system to simulate and emulate the STS-Centaur avionic flight system and its supporting ground control and checkout equipment was selected and designated the systems integration facility (SIF). Located in San Diego, California, the SIF is composed of integrated simulators that form a composite control system complement to the STS-Centaur airborne and avionic support equipment. An off-line capability to verify the system design of the Centaur airborne support equipment (CASE) and the Centaur avionic flight system is provided as well as a realistic medium for the development and integration of ground checkout and airborne control software programs. Each simulator is composed of prototype hardware, where feasible, to maximize configuration likeness. Where emulated flight or ground hardware is used, it provides physical characteristics (loads, signals, etc.) equivalent to those of the flight hardware. The hardware and software implementation of the SIF are described.

Gordan, A. L.↗

NASA NTRS1983

A Definition of STS Accommodations for Attached Payloads

An input to a study conducted to define a set of carrier avionics for supporting large structures experiments attached to the Space Shuttle Orbiter is reported. The "baseline" Orbier interface used in developing the avionics concept for the Space Technology Experiments Platform, STEP, which Langley Research Center has proposed for supporting experiments of this sort is defined. Primarily, flight operations capabilities and considerations and the avionics systems capabilities that are available to a payload as a "mixed cargo" user of the Space Transportation System are addressed. Ground operations for payload integration at Kennedy Space Center, and ground operations for payload support during the mission are also discussed.

Echols, F. L.↗

NASA NTRS1984

Small Payload Flight Systems (SPFS)

The Small Payload Flight System (SPFS) provides a simple and cost-effective approach to carrying small size experiments on the space shuttle. The system uses a bridge-like structure which spans the orbiter cargo bay but is only 3 feet in length. The structure can carry up to 4300 lb of payload weight and can be positioned at any location along the length of the cargo bay. In addition to the structural support, the SPFS provides avionics services to experiments. These include electrical power distribution and control, command and telemetry for control of the experiments and subsystem health monitoring, and software computations. The avionics system includes a flight qualified electrical power branching distributor, and a system control unit based on the Intel 8086 microprocessor. Data can be recorded on magnetic tape or transmitted to the ground. Finally, a Freon pump and cold plate system provides environmental control for both the avionics hardware and the experiments as necessary.

Mitchell, R. A. K.↗

NASA NTRS1986

All-digital jets are taking off

The functions and advantages of second-generation digital avionics systems are described. These digital systems have increased integration, increased reliability and flexibility, and improved man-machine interface, and they provide increases in the mean time between removal of line-replacable units and fuel savings. Different redundant processors and software are utilized to achieve fault-tolerance performance of flight control systems. The improved landing capabilities, front-panel instruments, sidestick controllers, back-lighted liquid-crystal displays, and fly-by-wire system possible with digital avionics are examined. The applications of digital avionics to military and commercial aircraft are discussed and examples are provided.

Spitzer, C. R.↗

NASA NTRS1990

Systems Engineering and Integration (SE and I)

The issue of technology advancement and future space transportation vehicles is addressed. The challenge is to develop systems which can be evolved and improved in small incremental steps where each increment reduces present cost, improves, reliability, or does neither but sets the stage for a second incremental upgrade that does. Future requirements are interface standards for commercial off the shelf products to aid in the development of integrated facilities; enhanced automated code generation system slightly coupled to specification and design documentation; modeling tools that support data flow analysis; and shared project data bases consisting of technical characteristics cast information, measurement parameters, and reusable software programs. Topics addressed include: advanced avionics development strategy; risk analysis and management; tool quality management; low cost avionics; cost estimation and benefits; computer aided software engineering; computer systems and software safety; system testability; and advanced avionics laboratories - and rapid prototyping. This presentation is represented by viewgraphs only.

Chevers, ED↗

NASA NTRS1990

Systems engineering and integration: Cost estimation and benefits analysis

Space Transportation Avionics hardware and software cost has traditionally been estimated in Phase A and B using cost techniques which predict cost as a function of various cost predictive variables such as weight, lines of code, functions to be performed, quantities of test hardware, quantities of flight hardware, design and development heritage, complexity, etc. The output of such analyses has been life cycle costs, economic benefits and related data. The major objectives of Cost Estimation and Benefits analysis are twofold: (1) to play a role in the evaluation of potential new space transportation avionics technologies, and (2) to benefit from emerging technological innovations. Both aspects of cost estimation and technology are discussed here. The role of cost analysis in the evaluation of potential technologies should be one of offering additional quantitative and qualitative information to aid decision-making. The cost analyses process needs to be fully integrated into the design process in such a way that cost trades, optimizations and sensitivities are understood. Current hardware cost models tend to primarily use weights, functional specifications, quantities, design heritage and complexity as metrics to predict cost. Software models mostly use functionality, volume of code, heritage and complexity as cost descriptive variables. Basic research needs to be initiated to develop metrics more responsive to the trades which are required for future launch vehicle avionics systems. These would include cost estimating capabilities that are sensitive to technological innovations such as improved materials and fabrication processes, computer aided design and manufacturing, self checkout and many others. In addition to basic cost estimating improvements, the process must be sensitive to the fact that no cost estimate can be quoted without also quoting a confidence associated with the estimate. In order to achieve this, better cost risk evaluation techniques are needed as well as improved usage of risk data by decision-makers. More and better ways to display and communicate cost and cost risk to management are required.

Dean, ED↗