Thursday, November 8, 2012

Proposal to Identify Design and Implementation Criteria for Low Cost Two-Person Supervisory Small Unmanned Aerial System Control

Download in PDF format...

14 Nov Update: I just received word that I have been awarded internal funding from Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University to pursue this research project. Check back for details as the research is developed and I post the status.

Description
First person view (FPV) equipped model aircraft are a form of small unmanned aerial systems (sUAS), developed and flown by private operators for recreational hobby purposes (Federal Aviation Administration, 2010; Kumar, Ramesh, & Srinivasa, 2011; Schneider, 2010).  FPV operation involves affixing a wireless camera to a remote control (R/C) aircraft and flying the vehicle using the live transmitted video feed as an egocentric view from the aircraft (Finch, 2012; Reyes, 2012; Schneider, 2010).  The legislated rules and recommended regulations set for the operation of FPV aircraft are also inclusive of sUAS developed and flown for research (e.g., academia, Government, and industry) and Government approved missions (e.g., law enforcement, search and rescue, geological surveying, etc.) with a certificate of waiver or authorization (COA; Academy of Model Aeronautics, 2012; Federal Aviation Administration, 2010; Kumar, Ramesh, & Srinivasa, 2011). 

Historically, the flight of FPV aircraft required the use of a spotter (i.e., pilot in command) equipped with a buddy box control to assume command of the aircraft, operated within visual line of sight (LOS; Academy of Model Aeronautics, 2012; Finch, 2012; Lucidity, 2012).  A buddy box setup requires the use of a two linked R/C transmitters (TX) to provide dual control of a single onboard receiver (RX) for supervisory control and manipulation of aircraft servos (AvionicsRC.com, 2012; Cory & Tedrake, 2008; Han, Straw, Dickinson, & Murray, 2009; Hazeldene, Sloan, Wilkin, & Price, 2004; Schneider, 2010).  A noteworthy aspect of using a commercially-off-the-shelf (COTS) buddy box configuration is the reliance on a single RX (AvionicsRC.com, 2012), which represents a single point of failure for control (2icrc.com, 2009).

With the release of the new Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA; 2012) document, AMA guidelines for radio controlled model aircraft operations utilizing first person view, failsafe, stabilization and autopilot systems, the need for use of a buddy box has been removed for experienced operators (Finch, 2012; Lucidity, 2012).  While a buddy box is no longer required for approved AMA FPV operations (Academy of Model Aeronautics, 2012; Lucidity, 2012), inclusion of a low-cost, easy to implement control solution capable of seamless control hand off while providing a secondary control interface (i.e., second RX) merits consideration based on the safety and operational benefits. The benefits of including a secondary RX and buddy box operational configuration include:

1)      capability to integrate a personal computer (PC) control system with a conventional hobby R/C radio system (data logging, alternate human-machine-interface [HMI] interaction methods, and extended communication range)
2)      decreased timing for spotter (i.e., primary operator) control acquisition/hand off
3)      secondary control in the case of signal loss for primary TX/RX (control redundancy)
4)      capability for manual operator control when integrated with an autopilot/autonomous control system

This research study is proposed to examine the needs and limitations of sUAS operators and recommend a low cost control solution (i.e., system and procedures) for two person supervisory operations within established legal boundaries for increased safety and operational benefits. For the purpose of this research, sUAS are defined as R/C model aircraft weighing 15 pounds (lbs) or less with a maximum speed of 70 miles per hour (mph; Academy of Model Aeronautics, 2012) and operators are defined as researchers, Government agencies, and first person view (FPV) remote control (RC) model aircraft hobbyist.

Estimated Equipment Costs (to prove functionality and perform evaluation of design and procedures; see following)

Eight-channel hobby radio system (TX/RX)         
Futaba8JH 8-Channel 2.4GHz S-FHSS Heli Radio System
$279.99 (1 unit):  $279.9
http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXBWGS&P=0

sUAS Platform
Heli-MaxAxe 400 3D Rx-R w/4 Futaba S3114 Servos       
$249.99 (1 unit): $249.99
http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXUTP0&P=0

$44.99 (2 units): $89.98
http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXVPF3&P=V

$53.95 (1 unit): $53.95          
http://www.lynxmotion.com/p-707-micro-pan-and-tilt-kit-black.aspx

$179.98 (1 unit):  $179.98
http://hobbywireless.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=88_89&products_id=22

$29.95 (1 unit): $29.95          
http://www.pololu.com/catalog/product/1352

$149.00 (1 unit): $149.00
http://store.digi.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=product.display&Product_ID=2768

$19.95 (2 units): $39.90
http://www.pololu.com/catalog/product/721

$3.25 (1 unit):  $3.25
http://www.pololu.com/catalog/product/788

$34.99 (1 unit): $34.99          
http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXMGS7&P=V

$129.99 (1 unit): $129.99
http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXVRS6&P=V

USB Video Capture
DIAMONDVC500 One Touch Video Capture Edit Stream or Burn to DVD USB 2.0    
$49.99 (1 unit): $49.99          
http://www.diamondmm.com/VC500.php

Contingency  
To cover, shipping and handling, tax, and unforeseen costs 
12.50% subtotal: $161.37      
Total Estimated Costs: $1,452.33

Proposed Design Overview



















Estimated Timeline/Milestones
·         Performance of literature review and development of documentation identifying design criteria (duration: one month starting in January 2013)
·         Development of recommended design and associated documentation (e.g., architectural overview diagrams, theory of operation, and design decisions; duration: one month starting in February 2013)
·         Construction of proof of concept system (duration: two months starting in March 2013)
·         Component and integrated testing of system (duration: one month starting May 2013)
·         Development of conference ready whitepaper, documenting results and recommendations (eight to 10 pages, in Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers [IEEE] format; duration: two months starting in May 2013 and concluded by 30 June 2013)

REFERENCES
2icrc.com. (2009). Features of the wireless buddy box. Retrieved from http://www.2icrc.com/features.html

Academy of Model Aeronautics. (2012). AMA guidelines for radio controlled model aircraft
operationsutilizing first person view, failsafe, stabilization and autopilot systems [Adobe Acrobat reader]. Retrieved from http://www.modelaircraft.org/files/REPORT_ON_REVISED-550-560-OCT-8-2012.pdf

AvionicsRC.com (2012). Wireless head tracker instruction manualv1.0 [Adobe Acrobat
Reader]. Retrieved from http://www.fpvsystems.com/userfiles/W-tracker%20Manual.pdf

Cory, R., & Tedrake, R. (2008). Experiments in fixed-wing UAV perching [Adobe Acrobat
Reader]. Paper presented at the AIAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference and Exhibit, Honolulu, HI. Retrieved from http://groups.csail.mit.edu/robotics-center/public_papers/Cory08.pdf

Federal Aviation Administration. (2010). Fact sheet – unmanned aircraftsystems (UAS).
Retrieved from http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsid=6287

Fitch, G. (2012 October). Changesin FPV restrictions. Model Aviation, 38(10), 139-142.
Retrieved from https://library.modelaviation.com/ma/2012/10

Han, S., Straw, A.D., Dickinson, M.H., & Murray, R.M. (2009). A real-time helicopter testbed
for insect-inspired visual flight control. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 3055-3060. doi: 10.1109/ROBOT.2009.5152667

Hazeldene, A., Sloan, A., Wilkin, C., & Price, A. (2004). In-flight orientation, object
identification andlanding support for an unmanned air vehicle [Adobe Acrobat Reader]. Paper presented at the 2nd International Conference on Autonomous Robots and Agents, Palmerston North, New Zealand. Retrieved from http://www-ist.massey.ac.nz/conferences/icara2004/files/Papers/Paper58_ICARA2004_333_338.pdf

Kumar, K.S., Ramesh, G., & Srinivasa, K.V. (2011). First pilot view (FPV) flying UAV test bed
for acoustic andimage data generation [Adobe Acrobat Reader]. Paper presented at the Symposium on Applied Aerodynamics and Design of Aerospace Vehicle, Bangalore, India. Retrieved from http://nal-ir.nal.res.in/10157/1/133_G01.pdf

Lucidity. (2012, October 12). FPV: Legal, or what? [Web log post]. Retrieved from
http://roswellflighttestcrew.typepad.com/

Reyes, C. (2012a). Definition: FPV aircraft. Retrieved from http://rcadvisor.com/definition-fpv-
aircraft

Schneider, D. (2010). DIY eye in the sky: How to get a pilot’s-eye view while keeping both feet
on the ground. IEEE Spectrum, 47(2), 20-22. doi: 10.1109/MSPEC.2010.5397773

If you are interested in potential collaboration on this topic/proposal or have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

No comments:

Post a Comment