Source: SKYWARD, LTD. submitted to NRP
TASKING, COLLECTION, PROCESSING, EXPLOITATION, AND DISSEMINATION (TCPED) ARCHITECTURE TO FACILITATE MANAGEMENT OF FOREST WILDFIRES.
Sponsoring Institution
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
Project Status
COMPLETE
Funding Source
Reporting Frequency
Annual
Accession No.
1012713
Grant No.
2017-33610-26643
Cumulative Award Amt.
$99,993.00
Proposal No.
2017-00549
Multistate No.
(N/A)
Project Start Date
Jul 15, 2017
Project End Date
Mar 14, 2018
Grant Year
2017
Program Code
[8.1]- Forests & Related Resources
Recipient Organization
SKYWARD, LTD.
5717 HUBERVILLE AVE STE 300
DAYTON,OH 45431
Performing Department
(N/A)
Non Technical Summary
The astronomical costs of wildfires to our nation impact our environment, economy, and our very lives. According to summary of suppression costs compiled by the National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC) for 2015 alone, there were more than 68 thousand wildfires, impacting over 10 million acres, and resulting in more than 2 billion dollars in expenditures across all agencies. On a more personal note, between 1990 and 2015, an average of 17 firefighters lost their lives during fire suppression efforts; twenty-one percent of those deaths were due to entrapment. Further, according to some sources, primary concerns from the firefighting community related to fatalities include a lack of tactical knowledge of escape routes and safety zones (the "black"), and real-time data for decision makers.The national wildfire management community faces many challenges, including detecting and managing wildfires, discovering and reducing fuel loads, ensuring the efficacy and safety of firefighters, and communication and navigation for fire management activities. Remote sensing and geospatial data have been used for many years to help address these challenges. However, current methods for collecting, analyzing, and disseminating remote sensing data are primarily focused on locating and characterizing fires and not on real-time fire operations (i.e., the firefighters). Additionally, these methods are too slow and not of sufficient fidelity to address the time-critical, dynamic nature of real-time, operationally focused wildfire management activities. The objective of this study is to apply advances in geospatial data collection, processing, and visualization, coupled with recent improvements in small Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) and sensor technologies, to address these challenges more effectively by facilitating the collection, visualization, and sharing of operationally relevant data in real-time. This effort also includes the transition of long-standing Department of Defense (DoD) Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) practices, such as Tasking, Collection, Processing, Exploitation, and Dissemination (TCPED, aka PED) methodologies. We propose to research the development of a deployable, open-architecture PED system comprised of a combination of Commercial-Off-the-Shelf and innovative technologies, including a small UAS with electro-optical (EO) and infrared (IR) sensors, a radio relay and range extension capability, a ground-based asset (i.e., firefighter) tracking system, an integrated Ground Control Station (GCS), and a geospatial data fusion and visualization software environment. Phase I research will result in data demonstrating the feasibility of the approach, in addition to comprehensive test plans, specific recommendations for subsystem components, elements of architectural design, and maturation of some elements of the overall solution. The overall system resulting from this study proposes to significantly enhance the management of real-time wildfire operations activities so as to improve efficiency, effectiveness, and to ultimately save lives.
Animal Health Component
(N/A)
Research Effort Categories
Basic
(N/A)
Applied
(N/A)
Developmental
100%
Classification

Knowledge Area (KA)Subject of Investigation (SOI)Field of Science (FOS)Percent
12272102020100%
Goals / Objectives
The major goals of this Phase I project are to 1) illustrate the efficacy of traditional Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTPs) as applied to supporting field deployed personnel (fire fighters) and Incident Command Center (ICC) leadership during real-time wild fire management operations; and 2) to identify and demonstrate the capabilities of appropriate technologies to include a Small Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (sUAS) with control systems, a full motion video (FMV) sensor, a man-portable Asset Position/Status Reporting (ASR) Technology, a UAS mounted radio transceiver (i.e., radio relay/repeater), and a back-end data processing and visualization environment that will layer data within a Processing, Exploitation, and Dissemination (PED) system architecture. The end result will culminate in the form of a technical feasibility study that outlines an overall proposed architecture for a PED system and details the results of research and testing to demonstrate the value of the overall approach and effectiveness of representative technologies. The major objectives of the Phase I project are:Gather operational requirements from the wild fire community in order to develop and test the most appropriate technical solutions in the most operationally relevant manner.Illustrate the capability for a sUAS (surrogate) to maintain a loiter pattern (i.e., 1 mile radius circle) at a relevant altitude (e.g., 3000' AGL) over a suitable area for significant period of time (i.e., depending upon operational requirements) while;carrying required payloads to achieve mission requirements; andmaintaining communications with ground control equipment; anddownlinking FMV, telemetry, and other applicable data.Identify and test a (surrogate) FMV sensor and 3-axis gimbal system in order to demonstrate the ability to collect and downlink real-time video data at an operationally sufficient resolution (e.g., 6" Ground Sample Distance) for the entire duration of a test flight, and;Control the camera and gimbal in real-timeIdentify an existing solution or develop a concept for a system to generate and transmit firefighter ground position data while meeting the following conditions;Man-portableDoes not add significant weight or require significant spaceIs hardened so as to withstand wild fire related environmental factorsIntegrates into existing clothing and equipmentMakes use of available power sources as possibleTransmits highly accurate geo-position data at 1 hz per second over a distance of 3 kmProduces data that may be converted to shape file format (or similar)Identify an existing solution for a sUAS mountable radio transceiver that will receive and transmit (approved) fire radio signals over a distance of 5 km.Illustrate the capability of a software environment to ingest, layer, and display FMV data, aircraft telemetry data, and geospatial data (e.g., KML/KMZ and shape files) simultaneously
Project Methods
Skyward will focus Phase I efforts on researching the best technical solutions, maturing the system integration, and demonstrating the capability of transmitting sUAS-accessed information in near-real time. Our Team will meet the objectives of this SBIR, leveraging our experience and previous ongoing sUAS developments to initiate the development of a baseline system that supports cost model development, preparations for Phase II, and identifying risk areas. Our Phase I efforts will culminate in a feasibility study demonstrating the value of the approach and identifies the technology required for a Phase II. The Phase I work plan consists of five primary tasks.Task 1 - System and Design ResearchSkyward will begin this research program by coordinating with various technical and operational representatives (i.e., NIFC, Fire & Aviation Management, etc.) through a survey of questions in order to reach as many stake holders as possible. The expected result of the survey is a refined set of Phase I research goals and objectives.Skyward is already doing similar Material and Design research under IR&D, so we will be able to quickly provide an engineered baseline that will meet Phase I requirements while anticipating the challenges of Phase II desired goals. This task will initially involve identifying and down-selecting materials and design configurations to act as the matrix for the final trades and acquiring those components which we do not currently possess. Skyward's existing aircraft and sensors will serve as surrogates for testing.During Phase I the Skyward team will conduct research and develop design concepts for the radio transceiver and asset tracking solutions. These solutions; however, will not undergo testing until Phase II. We believe there areacceptable Commercial Off-the-Shelf (COTS) technologies for the radio transceiver solution, but significant work will be required to integrate the components into a sUAS platform. Additionally, our current proposal focuses on the use of a surrogate platform in Phase I, so this sort of integration work is neither appropriate, nor does it fit into the scope of the Phase I project. Similarly, the asset tracking solution is a new technology for which there is no end-to-end solution presently available. We believe; however, that the components of this solution exist in the form of various COTS technologies. So, our efforts in Phase I will focus on designing a solution, identifying the various pieces, and developing an integration plan.We are also preparing for other contingencies which may accelerate some activities. We have already begun work toward researching the two solutions discussed, and we have also identified a strong sUAS platform candidate for our final recommendation. Rapid development and resource sharing/acquisition are possible through relationships with our current partners during Phase I. So, there is a possibility that we may be able to develop, integrate, and test one or both technologies during Phase I. We will; therefore, develop our test plan based upon proposed testing, but remain flexible so as to account for any new developments.Task 2 - Test PreparationTask 2 will involve preparations for experimental testing. Skyward's current efforts will allow this to occur in tandem with Task 1. Skyward has already begun forming relationships with numerous test sites to ensure that testing can be accomplished on schedule, and to provide backup sites in the event of weather, range schedule, or other conditions. A Commercial Test Agreement with the Ohio/Indiana UAS Test Center has already been established, which provides access to the various sites. We've also begun research in cooperation with our partners to identify potential technical solutions for asset tracking, radio relay, and GCS integration. And because of Skyward's IR&D efforts to date, our team is currently conducting subsystem testing and multisensory flight tests that will ensure surrogate systems are mature enough for this effort. Test planning will focus on accomplish the following tests:Multiple test flights in surveillance patterns over simulated events to determine best resolutions and transmission parameters for various forms of data in a variety of operating conditions (i.e., varying loiter patterns, altitudes, speeds, stand-off distances, etc.);Multiple tests of the integration of flight controls, data transmission, and data visualization systems;Multiple air and ground-based data transmission tests to show the ability to ingest, layer, and visualize data within a software environment;Task 3 - TestingSome Task 3 experimental testing will begin the first month (in concert with Tasks 1 and 2) as our surrogate systems are already under evaluation. The purpose of testing is to accomplish the planning described in Task 2. The goal of testing is to demonstrate the capability to collect, transmit, and visualize various forms of data in order to determine the best parameters for each and to demonstrate the feasibility of the approach. The results of all tests will be documented. Testing will include the following objectives at a minimum:Ground Testing ObjectivesUAS and sensors:Verify data links between UAS and GCS components;Frequency interferences;Link stability and effects on data transmission;Data throughput capacity and back-end storage requirements;Data processing and visualization (software) environmentTest the ability to ingest and visualize sUAS telemetry data and FMV data layered with geospatial data layers (i.e., maps, other imagery, shapefiles, etc.)Flight Test ObjectivesUAS and Sensors:Verify data links between UAS and GCS components;Test UAS Flight CharacteristicsTest link conditions at various distances (altitude and stand-off distances) from GCS components;Test integration of flight control, data transmission, and data visualization systems;Assess sensor capabilities and resolutions using resolution target under various distances and conditions (e.g., smoke and haze, various lighting);Test and document data handling techniques, data hand-off & retrieval, and storage capability on the ground system;Data processing and visualization (software) environmentTest the ability to ingest and visualize sUAS telemetry data and FMV data layered with geospatial data layers (i.e., maps, other imagery, shapefiles, etc.)Task 4 - Data AnalysisTask 4 will involve characterizing findings from Phase I. Evidence will be documented to show advantages of the system in terms of weight, cost, maintenance, retrofit ability, etc. Design criteria, based upon Phase I discoveries, will also be documented, including desired growth options of the architectures. Maintenance issues will be discussed including how the materials and systems hold up to the operational environment (moisture absorption, vibration, thermal capability, etc.). Integration and attachment concepts will be discussed, including requirements for retrofitting, swapping, removal, and replacement. The weight trades of particular system elements will be addressed.Task 5 - ReportingTwo progress reports will be preparedper USAD guidance. The final report will document the efforts of Phase I and establish a baseline systems design and representative cost model, which will serve as the basis for entering Phase 2. The draft Phase I report will be provided for review in month 7. Following the incorporation of customer comments, a final report will be delivered for publication in month 8. Cost analysisfor commercialization will be included, based on the established baseline design and estimated further development costs. Projected costs will use the Skyward model with known cost and estimated engineeringcosts for unknown elements. This includes all the major cost elements like development, capital, tooling, labor, ILS, preproduction test, required maintenance/repairs/consumables , insurance, warranty etc..

Progress 07/15/17 to 03/14/18

Outputs
Target Audience:During this reporting period we initiated contact with higher offices in the U.S. Forest Service wildfire management community. Specifically, we've reached out to Bob Baird, the Director of Region 5; Lisa Elenz, Assistant Director of Capability Development and Integration; Evans Kuo, Primary Member of the Interagency Fire Unmanned Aircraft Systems Subcomittee. We also initiated contact with Senators Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Cory Gardner (R-Colo.), who are the leads on a new Senate subcommittee driving the establishment of a new act called the "Wildfire Management Technology Advancement Act of 2018." We are attempting to give presentations to all of these contacts in an effort to gain varying levels of support for this project. We also reached out to groups outside of the wildfire management community, but within the State of Ohio. Changes/Problems:Our initial plans for testing included conducting both air and ground tests of all testable system components. Aerial testing was to occur under specific operational conditions. These conditions included flying our platform Beyond Line of Site (BLOS) and at 5,000' AGL. Achieving these goals would require the FAA to either grant us an exemption from Part 107 rules regarding BLOS flight and operating above 400' AGL, or establishment of a new Certificate of Authorization (COA) at an approved flight test range. We opted for the establishment of a new COA, which included the required operational conditions, at an authorized flight test range. Taking this approach was risky from a project perspective, but it seemed more likely to gain approval based upon conversations with the FAA and partner organizations. Additionally, it would provide us more schedule flexibility, allow us to test in tandem with other projects that could increase commercialization potential, and establish a site for Phase II testing and demonstration. We were unable to establish the required approvals in time for Phase I testing. We began the process early in the project; however, there were more steps than expected and the entire process is taking more time than anticipated. Skyward is not a public organization, so we had to work with our partners at Clark State Community College and the Ohio/Indiana UAS Test Center. The time required establishing formal agreements under this program, as well as the time required to file all required paperwork for the COA, pushed the approval beyond the scope of Phase I. Additionally, the time for equipment acquisition and systems integration pushed our test schedule back. We had hoped to conduct air and ground tests in early December, but had to conduct initial ground integration tests of the aircraft, sensor, and flight control systems in mid-February. The ground tests were accomplished at a partner site in Colorado where initial integration work occurred in order to avoid further schedule slips. Aerial tests occurred at the same location shortly after. We could not; however, test under the desired operational conditions due to a lack of appropriate COAs or exemptions at that site as well. Aerial tests were conducted in compliance with FAA Part 107 rules, but some allowable concessions were made in order to achieve flight duration and data downlink objectives. The schedule slip also affected integration and testing of the geospatial database and software. We were able to execute all database and software development goals on time, but we could not integrate the database with the aircraft and sensor on schedule. This was due in part to the slip in schedule for equipment acquisition, integration, and testing described above, and because the geospatial systems were located in Ohio. We had to wait for activities to conclude in Colorado and for the system to ship. Once the aircraft, sensor, and GCS components arrived in Ohio we were able to quickly integrate and test the systems on the ground. Testing was successful despite challenges and demonstrated effective systems integration and operation. This represented the final test objectives for the program. We were able to adjust to these challenges due to flexible test planning. We anticipated possible challenges driven by schedule and cost and then developed test requirements that could be easily modified in the event that we met with these challenges. This included selecting multiple test sites, establishing objectives for multiple test scenarios, and staying in close communication with partners. As a result we illustrated the technical feasibility of the system by demonstrating successful systems integration, while also achieving limited operational objectives. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided? Nothing Reported How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?We have been establishing relationships with leaders in the U.S. Forest Service and developed a conduit with advocates in the U.S. Senate to provide information on the results of our study. We believe the results of our study can enhance community knowledge and help to facilitate the acceptance and implementation of new technologies within the forest wildfire management community, as well as garner support for continuation of our project. We believe our findings may strengthen support for a new bill introduced by U.S. Senators Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and Senator Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) by illustrating the connection between operational needs and emerging technological solutions. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? Nothing Reported

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? The primary goal of our combined objectives was to illustrate the technical feasibility of the integrated PED system technical architecture (i.e., hardware and software). This was accomplished for all but one technical area. Details of our findings will be illustrated in the final Technical Feasibility Study. As discussed below, we have demonstrated successful systems development and integration of testable components under some operational conditions. While we were not able to evaluate the current test-system under all operational constraints within the scope of Phase I due to a variety of factors (i.e., schedule, funding, current FAA rules, etc.), we were able to illustrate the ability of all system components to meet operational requirements based upon previous tests and use-cases. We have also fully developed technical concepts for solutions that do not yet exist. These will require development during follow-on phases of this project. From a technical perspective, Skyward achieved all of the major objectives of this study. The Technical Feasibility Study report will also explain the effects of operational conditions upon technical requirements and subsequent development and integration required in follow-on phases. Objective #1: 1) Major activities completed/experiments conducted: Conducted interviews of key players to refine requirements. Reached out to U.S. Forest Service command level management for project support. Also reached out to new Congressional group to gather support for project and potentially tie into new funding sources. 2) Data collected: Aspects of ICP, fire line operations, and air and reconnaissance operations. 3) Summary statistics and discussion of results: Validated approaches, tightened requirements, and focused solutions. Gained new points of contact within top levels of wildfire management and within the Federal government. Discovered new requirement for need to place GCS as far as 20 miles from Fire Traffic Area (FTA). 4) Key outcomes or other accomplishments realized: Developed new content for final report. Redesigned concept for employment of the communications transceiver; moved from onboard the UAS to a tethered dirigible. Identified upgrade to data transmission radios and antennas for the aircraft and GCS to meet the new 20 mile requirement (above). Objective #2: 1) Major activities completed/experiments conducted: Finalized platform, sensor, and GCS integration. Conducted initial ground tests in order to assure successful integration and flight readiness. Conducted flight tests under some operational conditions. 2) Data collected: Full Motion Video (FMV) data and aircraft telemetry data. 3) Summary statistics and discussion of results: Accomplished ground and aerial tests demonstrating successful integration of platform, sensor, and GCS components. 4) Key outcomes or other accomplishments realized: Results of testing demonstrate successful integration of all the systems evaluated, the ability to collect and analyze data, and the ability of the platform to meet the minimum test requirements. Objective #3: 1) Major activities completed/experiments conducted: Finalized platform, sensor, and GCS integration. Conducted ground tests to assure successful integration and flight readiness. Conducted flight tests under some operational conditions. 2) Data collected: Sensor video and telemetry data. 3) Summary statistics and discussion of results: Accomplished ground and aerial tests demonstrating successful integration of platform, sensor, and GCS components. 4) Key outcomes or other accomplishments realized: Results of testing demonstrate successful integration of all the systems evaluated, the ability to collect and analyze data, and the ability of the platform to meet the minimum test requirements. Objective #4: 1) Major activities completed/experiments conducted: Developed the technical concept for the main asset tracking system. 2) Data collected: Technical requirements of the system as well as data supporting the cost model. 3) Summary statistics and discussion of results: A report was provided by Spectra Research which will be included in the draft of the final Technical Feasibility Study report. 4) Key outcomes or other accomplishments realized: Nothing to report. Objective #5: 1) Major activities completed/experiments conducted: Researched new methods of employment for the cellular transceiver; elected to develop the concept of employment around a tethered aerostat for employment. 2) Data collected: Technical specifications of the cellular transceiver system. 3) Summary statistics and discussion of results: This has been a major area of challenge throughout the project. Determined neither the radio transceiver, nor the cellular transceiver are achievable during the scope of Phase I or Phase II. 4) Key outcomes or other accomplishments realized: We formed a new partnership with DRS Leonardo and were able to acquire all technical specifications for the cellular transceiver in the event that the community shows interest through another program. Objective #6: 1) Major activities completed/experiments conducted: This final reporting period focused on obtaining and preparing the workstation to host the database and software application, finalizing development work on the database and software, and running ground-based tests to demonstrate successful development and integration with the candidate sensor system. 2) Data collected: Full Motion Video data and the results of integration through ground-based tests. 3) Summary statistics and discussion of results: Full Motion Video data was pushed from the sensor into the geospatial database and stored. Tables were updated with appropriate sensor data. The geospatial software engine then read the database tables and served the video data into the visualization environment. This was ground-based testing, so we were unable to verify accurate geographic position of data (per pixel). 4) Key outcomes or other accomplishments realized: Ground-based testing illustrated successful database and software development and successful integration between the sensor and database.

Publications

  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Other Year Published: 2018 Citation: Rowley, Christopher. Tasking, Collection, Processing, Exploitation, and Dissemination (TCPED) Architecture to Facilitate Management of Forest Wildfires (Concept of Operations) USDA-NIFA-SBIR-005277, topic 8.1, Priority 6. Dayton, OH. 2018. Presentation.