Sensors for missions

An onboard payload may be seen in most instances as the “Raison d’Etre” for a UAV. It will define its capabilities, usability and hence market value. Large and medium UAV payloads exhibit significant differences in size and computing capability when compared with small UAVs. The latter have stringent size, weight, and power requirements, typically referred as SWaP, while the former still exhibit endless appetite for compute capability. The tendency for this type of UAVs (Global Hawk, Hunter, Fire Scout, etc.) is to increase payload density and hence processing capability. An example of this approach is the Northrop Grumman MQ-8 Fire Scout helicopter, which has a modular payload architecture that incorporates off-the-shelf components. Regardless of the UAV size and capabilities, advances in miniaturization of electronics are enabling the replacement of multiprocessing, power-hungry general-purpose processors for more integrated and compact electronics (e.g., FPGAs). Payloads play a significant role in the quality of ISR (intelligent, surveillance, and reconnaissance) data, and also in how quick that information can be delivered to the end user. At a high level, payloads are important enablers of greater mission autonomy, which is the ultimate aim in every UAV. This section describes common payload sensors and introduces two examples cases in which onboard payloads were used to solve real-world problems. A collision avoidance payload based on electro optical (EO) sensors is first introduced, followed by a remote sensing application for power line inspection and vegetation management.

[1]  Jason J. Ford,et al.  Control of Aircraft for Inspection of Linear Infrastructure , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology.

[2]  Gerhard Ehret,et al.  Estimation of boundary layer humidity fluxes and statistics from airborne differential absorption lidar (DIAL) , 1997 .

[3]  George W. Stimson,et al.  Introduction to Airborne Radar , 1983 .

[4]  Dah-Jye Lee,et al.  Real-Time Optical Flow Calculations on FPGA and GPU Architectures: A Comparison Study , 2008, 2008 16th International Symposium on Field-Programmable Custom Computing Machines.

[5]  Jean Ponce,et al.  Computer Vision: A Modern Approach , 2002 .

[6]  Fredrik Gustafsson,et al.  Recursive Bayesian estimation: bearings-only applications , 2005 .

[7]  Plamen P. Angelov,et al.  A Passive Approach to Autonomous Collision Detection and Avoidance , 2008, Tenth International Conference on Computer Modeling and Simulation (uksim 2008).

[8]  Michael Deschenes,et al.  Development of a Sense and Avoid System , 2005 .

[9]  R. Dubayah,et al.  Lidar Remote Sensing for Forestry , 2000, Journal of Forestry.

[10]  Wright Patterson Afb,et al.  Test and Integration of a Detect and Avoid System , 2004 .

[11]  YangQuan Chen,et al.  Autopilots for small unmanned aerial vehicles: A survey , 2010 .

[12]  Rodney A. Walker,et al.  Fixed‐wing attitude estimation using temporal tracking of the horizon and optical flow , 2011, J. Field Robotics.

[13]  Jason J. Ford,et al.  Airborne vision‐based collision‐detection system , 2011, J. Field Robotics.

[14]  W. Cohen,et al.  Lidar Remote Sensing for Ecosystem Studies , 2002 .

[15]  Wayne Luk,et al.  A comparison of CPUs, GPUs, FPGAs, and massively parallel processor arrays for random number generation , 2009, FPGA '09.

[16]  Rodney A. Walker,et al.  Classification of Airborne LIDAR Intensity Data Using Statistical Analysis and Hough Transform with Application to Power Line Corridors , 2009, 2009 Digital Image Computing: Techniques and Applications.

[17]  Oussama Khatib,et al.  Experimental Robotics IV, The 4th International Symposium, Stanford, California, USA, June 30 - July 2, 1995 , 1997, ISER.

[18]  Jason J. Ford,et al.  Compensation of unmodeled aircraft dynamics in airborne inspection of linear infrastructure assets , 2011, 2011 Australian Control Conference.

[19]  Richard Szeliski,et al.  Computer Vision - Algorithms and Applications , 2011, Texts in Computer Science.

[20]  Paul Chow,et al.  Proceedings of the ACM/SIGDA International Symposium on Field Programmable Gate Arrays, FPGA 2000, Monterey, CA, USA, February 10-11, 2000 , 2000, FPGA.

[21]  Yu-Jiun Ren,et al.  ADS-B based collision avoidance radar for unmanned aerial vehicles , 2009, 2009 IEEE MTT-S International Microwave Symposium Digest.

[22]  Sanjiv Singh,et al.  Prototype Sense-and-Avoid System for UAVs , 2009 .

[23]  Rodney A. Walker,et al.  Airborne systems laboratory for automation research , 2010 .

[24]  Simone Duranti,et al.  Autonomous Landing of an Unmanned Helicopter based on Vision and Inertial Sensing , 2004, ISER.

[25]  B.C. Karhoff,et al.  Eyes in the Domestic Sky: An Assessment of Sense and Avoid Technology for the Army's "Warrior" Unmanned Aerial Vehicle , 2006, 2006 IEEE Systems and Information Engineering Design Symposium.

[26]  Jason J. Ford,et al.  Toward automated power line corridor monitoring using advanced aircraft control and multisource feature fusion , 2012, J. Field Robotics.

[27]  Cindy Cappelle,et al.  GPS and Stereovision-Based Visual Odometry: Application to Urban Scene Mapping and IntelligentVehicle Localization , 2011 .

[28]  Jason J. Ford,et al.  Field-of-view, detection range, and false alarm trade-offs in vision-based aircraft detection , 2012 .

[29]  Mehrdad Soumekh,et al.  Synthetic Aperture Radar Signal Processing with MATLAB Algorithms , 1999 .

[30]  Charles W. Antill,et al.  Lidar In-Space Technology Experiment (LITE): NASA's first in-space lidar system for atmospheric research , 1991 .

[31]  Mohinder S. Grewal,et al.  Global Positioning Systems, Inertial Navigation, and Integration , 2000 .

[32]  Luis Mejías Alvarez,et al.  Error analysis and attitude observability of a monocular GPS/visual odometry integrated navigation filter , 2012, Int. J. Robotics Res..