Advanced Methods for Intelligent Flight Guidance and Planning in Support of Pilot Decision Making

This project develops intelligent flight guidance and planning systems to assist pilots in making optimal decisions during on-board emergencies

Responsibility for the safe completion of a flight ultimately rests with the pilot-in-command. Especially during emergencies, this responsibility can be demanding due to the large number of tasks to which the pilot must attend, including: detecting and resolving failures in aircraft systems; continuing to monitor aircraft system health; coordinating with cabin crew, airline dispatchers and air traffic control; controlling the aircraft; and planning (and then following) a trajectory that will result in a safe landing. This inherent difficulty is compounded by a significant number of stressors, including physical danger, an uncomfortable physical environment (heat, smoke, noise, etc.), an overwhelming amount of information to consider, and the need to make decisions in a short period of time. In addition, the aircraft may have degraded performance and handling qualities, limiting the extent to which the pilot’s past experience is relevant to the present problem.

The aim of this project is to develop an intelligent system that would be able to assist/advise the pilot for the correct action to land the airplane safely in case of an on-board emergency. In contrast to current “strategic” planners (eg FMS) that use a low-fidelity model of the airplane and merely provide waypoint and altitude crossings, our ultimate goal is to provide an emergency generation architecture that will blend smoothly and seamlessly short-term actions with long-term optimization objectives.

The B747 navigation-display control panel: rotary selectors for radio and barometric minima, flight-path vector and metres, an airport-selection knob reading from AIRLINE PREFERD to ALL FIELDS, a range knob, and a row of mode buttons including APRT, EMRG and TERRThe control display unit showing a KINV INFO page: time to arrival, fuel remaining, weather conditions and runway length, each with a score between 0.4 and 1.0 and its raw value, with ALTN and DIVERT NOW along the bottomThe B747 navigation display in heading-up mode, showing nearby airports KSPB, KLOZ, KKDR, KJMP and KNUT as circles, with green boundaries partitioning the airspace into a region around each one The APA interface: the control panel for selecting candidate airports (left), the scored comparison of the alternates (centre), and the navigation display showing which airport is reachable from where (right).

The proposed APA interface is based on a traditional (B-777) FMS system, with the addition of buttons that allow the pilot to (down)select the list of available airports to land. The list of the most promising airports is computed on-line by a trajectory optimization solver. For robustness, the initial screening uses an extension of the Dubins path problem in the three-dimensional space.

A three-dimensional plot of a descending flight path in x, y and z over a 140 by 60 km ground area, drawn with aircraft icons along it; the path turns, runs a long straight descent, and turns again onto final approach, with vertical hatching dropping to the ground planeTwo panels. The upper shows the landing path in three dimensions as two circular arcs in separate horizontal planes joined by a straight descending segment through a height drop, with the flight-path angle marked. The lower shows the same path projected onto the x-y plane as two circles of radius R0 and Rf joined by a common tangent, with the initial and final velocity vectors The three-dimensional Dubins-like descent used for the initial screening: a horizontal Dubins path lifted into a continuous descent (left), and its construction from two circular arcs and a connecting tangent (right).

The approach consists of the following tasks: First, we introduce a geometric framework for the generation of length-suboptimal, curvature-constrained, three-dimensional curves, which satisfy the following requirements: 1) the projection of the curve on the horizontal plane corresponds to a Dubins-like path, and 2) an aircraft traveling along this curve is descending continuously until it reaches its final destination. Subsequently, we assign a speed profile along the path that captures succinctly the motion constraints of the aircraft, thus inducing a time-parameterization of the geometric path. After this time parameterization is attached to the path, the time histories of the control inputs required so that the aircraft can traverse the geometric path with the assigned speed profile are computed through inverse dynamics. The resulting time-parameterized path (along with the control input time histories) can be fed as an initial guess into a numerical optimal control solver, such as DENMRA.

Sponsors

This project is funded by NASA.

Selected Publications and Presentations

1.

Jain, S. and Tsiotras, P., “Trajectory Optimization Using Multiresolution Techniques,” AIAA Journal of Guidance Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 31, No. 5, pp. 1424-1436, 2008.

2.

Zhao, Y. and Tsiotras, P., “Mesh Refinement for Solving Optimal Control Problems Using Grid Density Functions,” AIAA Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 271-277, 2010.

3.

Cowlagi, R. and Tsiotras, P., “Shortest Distance Problems in Graphs Using History-Dependent Transition Costs with Application to Kinodynamic Path Planning,” American Control Conference, St. Louis, MO, June 10-12, 2009, pp. 414-419, (Best Student Paper Award).

4.

Bakolas, E., and Tsiotras, P., “Multiresolution Path Planning Via Sector Decompositions Compatible to On-Board Sensor Data,” AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference, Honolulu, HI, Aug. 18-21, 2008, AIAA Paper 2008-7238.

5.

Bakolas, E. and Tsiotras, P., “Minimum-Time Paths for a Light Aircraft in the Presence of Regionally-Varying Strong Winds,” Infotech at Aerospace, Atlanta, GA, April 20-22, 2010.

6.

Zhao, Y. and Tsiotras, P., “A Density-Function Based Mesh Refinement Algorithm for Solving Optimal Control Problems,” Infotech at Aerospace Conference, Seattle, WA, April 6-9, 2009, AIAA Paper 2009-2019 (invited).

7.

Bakolas, E. and Tsiotras, P., “On the Generation of Nearly Optimal, Planar Paths of Bounded Curvature and Curvature Gradient,” American Control Conference, St. Louis, MO, June 10-12, 2009, pp. 385-390.

8.

Zhao, Y. and Tsiotras, P., “Time-Optimal Parameterization of Geometric Path for Fixed-Wing Aircraft,” Infotech at Aerospace, Atlanta, GA, April 20-22, 2010.

9.

Cowlagi, R. and Tsiotras, P., “Kinematic Feasibility Guarantees in Geometric Path Planning using History-based Transition Costs over Cell Decompositions,” American Control Conference, Baltimore, MD, June 30-July 2, 2010.

10.

Cowlagi, R., and Tsiotras, P., “Multi-resolution Path Planning: Theoretical Analysis, Efficient Implementation, and Extensions to Dynamic Environments,” 49th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Atlanta, GA, Dec. 15-17, 2010, pp. 1384-1390.

11.

Zhao, Y. and Tsiotras, P., “A Quadratic Programming Approach to Path Smoothing,” American Control Conference, San Francisco, CA, June 29-July 1, 2011, pp. 5324-5329.

12.

Bakolas, E., Zhao, Y. and Tsiotras, P., “Initial Guess Generation for Aircraft Landing Trajectory Optimization,” AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference, Portland, OR, Aug. 8-11, 2011, AIAA Paper 2011-6689.