This application claims priority to European patent application 08168257.7 filed 4 Nov. 2008.
The present invention relates to collision avoidance systems for controlling the manoeuvreing of an aircraft to avoid a collision with an object likely to collide with the aircraft if it maintains current course, altitude and speed. In particular it relates to collision avoidance systems for aerial vehicles having limited manoeuvreability. Even in more particular it relates to such systems for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), and Autonomous Aerial Vehicles (AAVs) that can take decisions by themselves without consulting a pilot on the ground, being controlled by limited remote control or no remote control at all.
Low manoeuvreability aircraft like UAVs can be remotely controlled or fly autonomously based on pre-programmed flight plans or having more complex dynamic automation systems. UAVs are currently used in a number of military roles, including reconnaissance and attack. They are also used in a small but growing number of civil applications such as fire fighting where a human observer would be at risk, police observation of civil disturbances and crime scenes, and reconnaissance support in natural disasters. UAVs are often preferred for missions that are too “dull, dirty, or dangerous” for manned aircraft.
There is a general desire and requirement that UAVs, in particular civil UAVs, operate safely and do not collide into other UAVs or other aircraft or objects. It is therefore an object of the present invention to provide a system for avoiding the UAV to collide with another object.
For a collision threat sense and avoidance system (sense & avoid system) to actually perform the avoid portion, an aircraft involved must at some point make an avoidance manoeuvre in order to quickly leave the trajectory having a high sensed and/or calculated risk of collision.
In a case where the system utilizes a last instant manoeuvre, i.e., a manoeuvre that is not performed until the very last instant to avoid collision, such manoeuvre must use the maximum safe manoeuvre capability available to the aircraft. For high performance aircraft, there is usually enough manoeuvre performance available to obtain sufficient path curvature by a so called roll-and-pull manoeuvre, in order to quickly leave the trajectory having the sensed and/or calculated risk of collision
However, for contemporary UAVs, the manoeuvre performance is generally very poor. In fact, the capabilities are commonly poorer than would be acceptable in a manned aircraft.
Also for other low or medium performance aircraft, manned or not, manoeuvre performance is poor.
One of the functions of a sense & avoid system is to select a suitable manoeuvre to be performed in a case of a potential collision. Such a function may be realised by a manoeuvre generator. For some existing types of system the selection of manoeuvre is limited, e.g. only using pure climb or sink, but typically a high performance sense and avoid system must be able to select a multitude of manoeuvres.
For a high manoeuvreability aircraft, a manoeuvre generator can select the roll-and-pull manoeuvre, since this manoeuvre will adequately fulfill the above requirements. For a low manoeuvreability aircraft however, the manoeuvre generator must operate in some other manner.
US 2007/0210953 discloses an aircraft collision sense and avoidance system and method for UAVs. The system comprises among other things an image sensor connected to a target detection unit further connected to a threat assessment unit for assessing the threat of a target detected in the image provided by the sensor by the target detection unit. An avoidance manoeuvre unit connected to the threat assessment unit provides flight control and guidance with a manoeuvre to avoid any identified collision threat.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,510,388 disclose a system and a method for avoidance of collision between vehicles, wherein a possible avoidance manoeuvre trajectory for the respective vehicle is calculated and compared with the avoidance manoeuvre trajectories calculated for the other vehicles for controlling whether the avoidance manoeuvre trajectory of the vehicle in every moment during its calculated lapse is located at a stipulated or predetermined minimum distance from the avoidance manoeuvre trajectories of the other vehicles. Further, it discloses a method of obtaining suitable avoidance manoeuvre directions for two aircrafts, each provided with the system, and with a communications link between them.
According to a first aspect there is provided a method for automatically determining an avoidance manoeuvre in an automatic collision avoidance system of an aircraft, the method comprising the following steps:
The maximum kinematic acceleration envelope may approximated by an analytical expression.
The adjusted kinematic acceleration envelope may be approximated by an analytical expression and wherein the kinematic acceleration (α) is calculated by using said analytical expression.
The normal load may be determined as a square root expression.
The bank angle may be determined as arcus sinus function of an expression. The normal load (nz) may be determined as
nz=√{square root over (α2+2αg cos ε cos θg2 cos2 θ)}
The bank angle may be determined as
According to a second aspect there is a method provided capable of automatically performing a collision avoidance manoeuvre for selecting the two collision avoidance manoeuvre parameters normal load, and bank angle, the method comprising the following steps:
Case 1: If the absolute value of desired avoidance manoeuvre angle is greater than zero but less than the value of the first transition point then the suggested parameters for an avoidance manoeuvre is set as follows:
Case 2: If the absolute value of desired avoidance manoeuvre angle ε is greater than the value of the first transition point but less than the value of the second transition point then the suggested parameters for avoidance manoeuvre is set as follows:
Case 3: If the absolute value of desired avoidance manoeuvre angle is greater than the value of the second transition point then the suggested parameters for a collision avoidance manoeuvre is set as follows:
Further is provided a sense and avoidance system for an unmanned aerial vehicle comprising an avoidance manoeuvre parameter generator realizing the steps of the first aspect above.
Still further is provided a sense and avoidance system for a manned aerial vehicle comprising an avoidance manoeuvre parameter generator realizing the steps of the first aspect above.
Finally is provided an avoidance manoeuvre parameter generator realizing the steps of the first aspect above.
According to a final aspect there is provided a sense and avoidance system and an avoidance manoeuvre parameter generator realizing the steps of the second aspect above.
Preferred embodiments of the invention is described below with the aid of the accompanying drawings, of which
a is a diagram defining a coordinate system and a kinematic acceleration plane in which plane a desired avoidance manoeuvre angle is defined.
b is a graphical representation of a cascade of avoidance manoeuvre angles in the kinematic acceleration plane of
The purpose of the invention is to provide a method and a system to select an effective collision avoidance manoeuvre for an aircraft, said aircraft may be a vehicle with limited propulsive power and limited manoeuvreability (limited, e.g., as to magnitude of roll angles), which in turn makes avoidance manoeuvre selection more difficult. Thus, a more particular purpose of the present invention is to provide an effective collision avoidance manoeuvre generator for an UAV with strongly limited propulsive power and limited manoeuvreability.
To maximize the performance of the sense & avoid system, the selected manoeuvres, the inventor has realised, should posses the following qualities:
With a “low manoeuvreability aircraft” is for the purpose of the present application meant an aircraft having a limited roll angle, i.e., an aircraft not being able to roll 360 degrees, but instead being able to roll less than 180 degrees to the right and less than 180 degrees to the left. To this category of aircraft belong most UAVs but also most passenger aircraft.
Terminology And Definitions
In the following, for the purposes of the present application, the phrases “collision avoidance manoeuvre”, “avoidance manoeuvre”, “evasive manoeuvre” and “escape manoeuvre” are used synonymously. So are their corresponding derivatives. The phrases “maximum kinematic acceleration vector envelope”, “maximum kinematic acceleration envelope”, and “maximum envelope” are used synonymously.
The following symbols are used to denote certain parameters.
With reference now to
The acceleration plane normal (Z-axle) is along the current velocity vector of the aircraft. (That is, into the paper of
The acceleration plane Y-axle is parallel to the local earth plane, and such that the acceleration plane X-axle will point away from the ground when following the right hand rule. For an aircraft heading straight up or down, the Y-axle is chosen parallel to the body Y-axle to avoid an undefined state.
In an acceleration plane diagram, the state of continuing the current trajectory is found in the origin of the acceleration plane. Pitching the aircraft upward is represented along the X-axle, using an acceleration unit for the magnitude (e.g. m/s2 or g:s). Making a coordinated turn to the right is represented along the Y-axle. Combinations of turning and pitching/descending can then be represented in the acceleration plane plot.
In the acceleration plane we also define an Avoidance Manoeuvre Angle (AMA) denoted by the Greek letter ε (epsilon) as the angle around the Z-axle, counted clockwise from the X-axle, in which we would like to consider an avoidance manoeuvre. The Avoidance Manoeuvre Angle is provided from another unit of the sense & avoid system to the manoeuvre generator. Such a unit may suitably function as disclosed in the document U.S. Pat. No. 6,510,388 with or without the following modifications:
In the document is disclosed how to obtain suitable avoidance manoeuvre directions for two aircrafts, each provided with the system, and with a communications link between them. This may be done by minimizing the function
f=sum(1/(∥Ci−Cj∥) over i and j, i≠j
where Ci is the completion point (also closest point of approach) of the avoidance manoeuvre trajectory Tri for the vehicle “i” with regard to the (avoidance) manoeuvre trajectory Trj for the vehicle j. The function f is consequently the sum of the inverted distance between the completion points Ci, Cj of the avoidance manoeuvre trajectories Tri, Trj of all vehicles. In the case of a non-cooperative operation where manoeuvre selection of other aircraft are not known, Tr of other aircraft is selected as a straight line in space over time. The vehicle may also be a fixed or slow moving object such as a stationary balloon, paraglider, moving balloon, parachuter, helicopter or the like. For a stationary object Tr is a point in space over time.
A set comprising avoidance manoeuvre directions Di per participating aircraft is then calculated for which the resulting function f is minimal. Due to calculational constraints it may be required and sufficient to assume a finite number of variations of Di for each aircraft and chose the respective Di:s for which f is minimized. For the non-cooperative case only the own Di is calculated since all other objects are assumed to be on a straight trajectory.
The system may easily be expanded for the non-cooperative case to use trajectories other than straight provided this information can be obtained from some sensor or other source of information.
Possible Manoeuvres
Considering an aircraft that is limited by a maximum bank angle and a maximum and a minimum normal load, there are three limit manoeuvres that can be performed. (In this context a limit manoeuvre is a manoeuvre that takes the aircraft to one or more of its limits)
The combination of these three limit manoeuvres allows for a complete revolution of Avoidance Manoeuvre Angles ε to be obtained by the below described procedure. It is assumed that the minimum normal load is greater 0 and that the maximum bank angle is less than 90 degrees.
A) How to Determine Type of Manoeuvre to Use.
b shows a graphical representation of a cascade of Avoidance Manoeuvre Angles (AMAs) ε in the kinematic acceleration plane and possible for a manoeuvre to the right, 0<=ε<180 degrees. A corresponding figure can be drawn for left hand manoeuvres, 0>ε>−180. For descriptive purposes however, only the right hand case will be studied. It is assumed that a desired Avoidance Manoeuvre Angle ε is already determined, for example as described above from U.S. Pat. No. 6,510,388. According to the invention, for a zero Avoidance Manoeuvre Angle ε, a maximum normal load manoeuvre will be selected with zero bank angle. For a low Avoidance Manoeuvre Angle ε greater than zero, a maximum normal load manoeuvre will be selected, with a bank angle that gives the desired AMA ε. For greater AMAs ε, as the angle increases, there will be a first transition point located where the maximum bank angle is reached and the normal load selected by the system will transit from being maximal to be not maximal but reduced, more for greater AMAs. As the AMA increases further, another transition point is found, at which point the normal load will be at its minimum, and the bank angle selected will be varied back to zero.
The transition points are given by:
εt1=arctan2 (nz,max sin φmax,nz,max cos φmax−g cos φ)
εt2=arctan2 (nz,min sin φmax,nz,min cos φmax−g cos φ)
It is understood from the formulae that a transition point is expressed as an angle. The first transition point εt1 is the point (angle) corresponding to a case where maximum bank angle and maximum normal load under current pitch angle (and speed) are adopted. The εt1-angle may be determined as the arcus tangens two (atan2), wherein the two input arguments to the atan2 function are:
The second transition point εt2 is the angle corresponding to a minimum normal load and a maximum bank angle. The εt2-angle may be determined as the arcus tangens two (atan2), wherein the two input arguments to the atan2 function are:
B) Find the Magnitude of the Parameter to Vary
For each avoidance manoeuvre angle ε there is implicitly a maximum kinematic acceleration α that can be obtained given the limiting maximum bank angle, minimum normal load and maximum normal load. The kinematic acceleration α corresponding to a particular avoidance manoeuvre angle ε may be determined by calculation where it is taken into account the features of the aircraft model in question, or by adequate simulation, or by a combination thereof.
When the kinematic acceleration is determined for each, or a representative number of avoidance manoeuvre angles, a maximum kinetic acceleration envelope can be drawn up in the kinematic acceleration plane using avoidance manoeuvre angle and kinematic acceleration respectively as polar coordinates for points on said envelope. The gap between points can be interpolated.
When manoeuvreing according to the maximum normal load, maximum bank angle or minimum normal load method outlined above the bank angle and normal load can be obtained in closed form without explicitly calculating the resulting kinematical acceleration. How to calculate these parameters follow below.
In the case of maximum normal load:
|ε|≦εt1
φ=ε−arcsin (g cos θ sin ε/nz)(I)
nz=nz,max
In this case bank angle Φ is determined as the difference between the avoidance manoeuvre angle ε and an expression taking into account the effect of the g-force. In particular, bank angle may be determined as the difference between the avoidance manoeuvre angle e and a term built from arcus sinus of the product formed by multiplying g with the cosine of the current pitch angle further multiplied with the sine of the avoidance manoeuvre angle ε, divided by normal load.
Normal load nz is determined as maximum normal load for the aircraft model in question.
It may also be advantageous to determine parameters such as maximum normal load, maximum bank angle etc, taking not only into account the situation for the aircraft model in question, but the situation for the particular individual aircraft in question and during the situation of the particular mission.
In the case of maximum bank angle
In the case of minimum normal load
εt2<|ε|
φ=ε−sgn (ε)π+arcsin (g cos θ sin ε/nz)
nz=nz,min The definition of the two argument function arctan2, also known as “atan2” is the conventional one, well known in the art, which can be found in any comprehensive computer science textbook or programming manual. Other mentioned functions are also defined as they conventionally are.
An avoidance manoeuvre parameter generator 230, 430 is provided. The avoidance manoeuvre parameter generator is realizing a method according to the invention for determining manoeuvre parameters (bank angle, normal load) based on a desired escape angle=desired avoidance manoeuvre angle ε as defined above, in the following denoted DAMA. The input to the avoidance manoeuvre parameter generator 230, 430 is thus a first value representing an avoidance manoeuvre angle ε. The output from the avoidance manoeuvre parameter generator 230, 430 is thus both a second value representing a normal load nz, and a third value representing a bank angle Φ, see
With reference to
Case 1: If 350 the absolute value of desired avoidance manoeuvre angle ε is greater than zero but less than the value of transition point εt1 then the suggested parameters for avoidance manoeuvre is set as follows:
Case 2: If 360 the absolute value of desired avoidance manoeuvre angle ε is greater than the value of the first transition point εt1 but less than the value of the second transition point εt2 then the suggested parameters for avoidance manoeuvre is set as follows:
Case 3: If 370 the absolute value of desired avoidance manoeuvre angle ε is greater than the value of the second transition point εt2 then the suggested parameters for avoidance manoeuvre is set as follows
Sometimes it may prove advantageous not to use the full manoeuvreing capabilities of the aircraft in question. One known reason for this is that an optimizer or an optimizing function of a collision avoidance manoeuvre selector may need a smoother function to work with than that provided by the aforementioned method, otherwise it may happen that a suboptimal Avoidance Manoeuvre Angle eventually may be chosen. There may also be a need to optimize the manoeuvre envelope to provide a bias toward a desired type of avoidance manoeuvres.
However, once the aforementioned method has been used to determine a maximum[kinematic acceleration envelope in the kinematic acceleration plane, this envelope can then be adjusted to any general envelope shape that fulfils the requirements that; there shall only be one magnitude of the kinematic acceleration α for a given Avoidance Manoeuvre Angle ε and such an adjusted envelope described shall lie inside the maximum envelope formed by the aforementioned method. An adjusted envelope may be an analytical function or a tabulated function. The selection of the envelope may be manual or it may be optimized by automated means such as for example parameter variation using a steepest gradient method.
x=A cos ε+h
y=B sin ε+k
Where A and B are the magnitudes of the half axis and h and k are offsets of the ellipse foci. For the
After such an envelope has been defined, the manoeuvre parameters as per above is selected by determining the magnitude of the kinematic acceleration α to the defined envelope for a given Avoidance Manoeuvre Angle ε
In the exemplary case of the ellipse envelope the magnitude is then described by:
α=√{square root over ((A cos ε+h)2+(B sin ε+k)2)}{square root over ((A cos ε+h)2+(B sin ε+k)2)}
After the magnitude of the kinematic acceleration α has been determined the manoeuvreing parameters can regardless of the shape of the envelope be determined by the steps:
Other Cases of Less than Full (Limit) Manoeuvreing
An adjusted kinematic acceleration envelope may be created in the kinematic acceleration plane by forming a new envelope, the new envelope at each point laying closer to or at the same distance from the origin (0,0) as the points of the maximum kinematic acceleration envelope and such that there is only one value of the kinematic acceleration a for a given avoidance manoeuvre angle ε. In
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
08168257 | Nov 2008 | EP | regional |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
6168117 | Shinagawa | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6510388 | Sporrong et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
20070210953 | Abraham | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20080021647 | Deveze et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0609162 | Aug 1994 | EP |
2876483 | Apr 2006 | FR |
Entry |
---|
European Search Report—Apr. 15, 2009. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20100179760 A1 | Jul 2010 | US |