AHFE Open AccessHuman-Centered Aerospace Systems and Sustainability Applications
Editors: Pedro Arezes, Susana Costa
Topics: Systems Engineering
Publication Date: 2022
ISBN: 978-1-958651-02-5
DOI: 10.54941/ahfe1001426
Articles
NASA’s Identified Risks of Adverse Outcomes Due to Inadequate Human Systems Integration Architecture in Human Spaceflight
The NASA Human System Risk Board (HSRB) has the overall responsibility for tracking the evolution of the top ~30 human system risks that it has identified to be associated with human spaceflight. As part of this process, the Board is charged with maintaining a consistent, integrated process to mitigate those risks, and developing evidence-based risk posture recommendations. One of the identified risks is due to inadequate human systems integration architecture (HSIA) and a driving factor of this risk is that given decreasing real-time ground support for execution of complex operations during future exploration missions, there is a possibility of adverse performance outcomes including that crew are unable to adequately respond to unanticipated critical malfunctions or detect safety critical procedural errors. The HSRB uses Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAGs) as a communication tool for describing how astronaut exposure to spaceflight hazards leads to meaningful mission-level health and performance outcomes and as the basis for understanding intermediate causal relationships between risk contributing factors and countermeasures that link hazards to outcomes. The HSIA risk DAG will be presented and described. Historically, critical malfunctions requiring Crew/MCC management occurred at a rate of 1.7 times per year for ISS averaged over the lifetime and 3-4 times per year in the burn in phase for the vehicle. These averages do not include EVA data, which greatly increases the incident rate. Prior experience from the Apollo program showed 10/11 crewed missions experienced significant anomalies where crew relied heavily on MCC expertise in real-time. These failure patterns are in line with those observed in other complex engineered systems (e.g., oil rigs, launch systems, commercial aviation, etc.) It is likely that general malfunction and error rates are > 10% for short duration missions (<30 days), based on past and current spaceflight operations data. Likelihood of adverse outcomes has the potential to increase as crew conduct work with new, complex systems and with less ground support. For Low Earth Orbit missions and Lunar missions less than 30 days, assuming minimal comm delays, disruptions and bandwidth limitations, malfunctions and errors can affect mission objectives and crew health but may be mitigated by ground support. For Lunar missions greater than 30 days and any potential Mars mission malfunctions and errors can have Loss of Crew and Loss of Mission consequences due to reduced ground support (communication delays, constraints and blackouts) for more complex operations, as well as reduced resupply and evacuation options.
Daniel Buckland, Megan Parisi, Kaitlin Mctigue, Shu-Chieh Wu, Tina Panontin, Gordon Vos, Devan Petersen, Alonso Vera
Open Access
Article
Conference Proceedings
Method to Assist Zonal Safety Analysis for Large Civil Aircrafts
The zonal safety analysis (ZSA) of civil aircraft is part of the safety assessment process. It is a safety analysis method related to installation, inter-system interference, and potential maintenance errors that can affect system safety. One of the traditional methods is to combine digital prototype inspection and on-board inspection. The zonal safety conduct compliance check according to design and installation guidelines , considering system equipment installation, maintenance errors, internal and external environmental changes, etc. in the divided area. Due to the low operational efficiency of digital prototype inspection and the limited visible area for on-board inspection, the ZSA efficiency of civil aircraft based on traditional methods needs to be improved. This article put forward several improvement measures for ZSA, combining with the engineering practice of the flat rear projection virtual reality laboratory. Taking a certain type of aircraft for example, the article compares the problem-finding efficiency of the new method and traditional method, and prospects the new technology that may be combined with ZSA in the future.
Xiaoyu Song
Open Access
Article
Conference Proceedings
Model-based flight phase suppression safety design and evaluation process for crew warnings
The crew warning information provides the crew with status indication information that they need to know during normal or abnormal flight, accurately and effectively inform the crew of the aircraft status, and guide the crew to take corresponding measures or establish situational awareness to reduce the impact of failure.However, in some critical flight stages, the flight crew needs to concentrate on manipulating the aircraft. The appearance of inappropriate warning messages will cause interference to the flight crew and affect flight safety. Therefore, in the warning design of civil aircraft, a flight phase suppression plan for warnings is generally formulated to suppress part of the crew warning information in some specific flight phases.The design of the flight phase suppression of the crew warning information will lead to the failure of the crew warning information during the flight phase of the crew warning information suppression when the warning function is normal. notice".Therefore, the flight phase suppression plan for the crew warning information should be evaluated by the safety engineer to ensure that the suppressed warning information will not affect the pilot's current flight control and meet the safety requirements.In the process of safety assessment, the analysis of the impact of "unannounced" failures is to consider that the crew is not aware of the failure during the entire flight phase, and the crew is unable to perform mitigation procedures or establish situational awareness, resulting in the impact of "unannounced" failures than "announced" failures. Bigger. However, the flight phase suppression of the crew warning information does not mean that the flight phase does not fail. The crew can know the failure after the suppression phase; therefore, the "unannounced" effect of the flight phase suppression phase may be the same as the "unannounced" effect during the entire flight phase. It's not the same. Used directly, the "unannounced" failure impact level of the entire phase is used as the "unannounced" impact level of the flight phase suppression phase, which may be too conservative.This paper presents a safety assessment method for the suppression of civil aircraft crew warning information during flight phase. Through determining the establishment of a list of factors affecting the failure; establishing one by one the corresponding relationship matrix between the factors and the failure impact levels and the relationship matrix of the factors changing with time; finally establishing the relationship matrix of the civil aircraft's various failure impact levels with time. As a criterion for the safety of civil aircraft crew warning information during flight phase suppression.
Lina Wu, Kai Liu
Open Access
Article
Conference Proceedings
The use of UAVs throughout time – A Safety retrospective
The use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) is growing exponentially extending the application of those principles to new areas (i.e.: construction industry, earthmoving, among others). Taking as starting point the research question “Based on scientific literature, which purposes are UAVs being used for?”, followed by a systematic literature review (SLR) and statistical analysis, it is possible to describe the actual trend on the scientific research areas of application and the identification of relevant studies that should be considered. The SLR was conducted based in all published studies related to UAVs and their application areas considering the Scopus database. At the beginning of the 2010’s the words regarding UAV were more linked to aircraft accidents, air traffic control, flight safety, collision avoidance. Then, around 2019, new applications emerge, including construction industry, architectural design, building information model, highway planning, project management, identifying new areas of applications of the UAVs, also new tools are identified to deal with the UAVs’ system model and problem formulation, in continuation of the primary method of probabilistic uncertainty used in the 2010’s.
Celina P Leão, Susana Costa
Open Access
Article
Conference Proceedings
Human Factors Hazards in aviation operating environment during COVID -19
COVID 19 has become a mayor and without precedent disruption in aviation, with a big impact in aviation front line operators, such as crews, air traffic controller and aircraft dispatchers. This new reality has generated unexperienced human factors consequences and ups and downs in the lives of these professionals. They had to deal with new environments in their personal and professional dimensions and changes in both the physical and also psychosocial conditions as a consequence of COVID -19 impacts.The complexity of restating a complex system such as global air transport affects the staff of all aviation supply chain and has the potential to generate new and emergent hazards, a different risk landscape, and new operational and safety challenges.This paper focuses on COVID-related human factors challenges for aviation professionals, how those challenges can generate hazards that jeopardize aviation safety levels, and what can be done to mitigate the derived risks.The paper revises situations faced by operators and service providers during the COVID lockdown and the reanimation of the operations, with a focus on the best practices applied by different organisations to cope with the challenges human factors derived issues while assuring continued high levels of safety as operations ramp up.The paper combines an assessment of the best practices implemented by the industry during the last two years with a classical safety risk assessment approach. The paper revised also the safety risk assessments, about COVID 19 operations-related human factors challenges, conducted by main international aviation organisation such as as the Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation (CANSO), the International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers’ Associations (IFATCA), the International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations (IFALPA) and the International Air Transport Association (IATA). Appropriate resources and tools to minimize the mental health impact of COVID-19 and ensure staff well-being throughout the lockdown and recovery phases are discussed.The paper offers a better understanding of the impact that post COVID-19 operations-related challenges could have on aviation human factors; outline new biological and psycho-social hazards and risks situation and their interactions with aviation safety; and finally identify and propose appropriate mitigation measurements for those negative consequences
Rosa Maria Arnaldo Valdés, Victor Fernando Gómez Comendador, Maria Zamarreño, Francisco Perez Moreno, Raquel Delgado-Aguilera
Open Access
Article
Conference Proceedings
Impact of Artificial Intelligence in the Certification of Human-Centered Aviation systems
In recent years we have witnessed the emergence of applications based on artificial intelligence in the aviation industry. This technology is said to be promoting a new era or evolution, such as the introduction of jet engines in the 1950s and fly-by-wire in the 1980s. To maintain aviation safety standards in this transition, civil aviation authorities responsible for certifying aerospace systems must anticipate the unprecedented impact of AI on human-centric aerospace systems and answer a number of critical questions:•How to establish public trust in human- centric AI-based systems?•How to integrate the ethical dimension of human- centric AI (transparency, non-discrimination, fairness, etc.) in safety certification processes? •How to prepare for the certification of human- centric AI systems? •What standards, protocols, methods needs to be developed to ensure that human- centric AI further improves the current level of air transport safety? EASA, the European Aviation Safety Agency, has recently developed a roadmap for the certification of AI applications in aviation, which analyzes the involvement of human- centric AI in the aviation sector and identifies the objectives that must be met and the actions that must be taken to respond to the previous questions. This effort constitutes a starting point for the certification of human- centric AI in aerospace systems. It develops in particular the core notion of trustworthiness of human- centric AI in human centered systems and proposes a framework based on four human- centric AI trustworthiness building block:— trustworthiness analysis — learning assurance — explainability — safety risk mitigation The presented paper syntheses the concept of human- centric AI applications, it also discusses and revises the 4 elements of the trustworthiness of human- centric AI framework proposed by EASA, and based on this discussion anticipates the possible impacts of the introduction of human- centric AI in the different Implementation Rules (IR), Certification Specifications (CS), Acceptable Means of Compliance (AMC) and guidance material (GM) in the domains covered by the EASA Basic Regulation.
Rosa Maria Arnaldo Valdés, Victor Fernando Gómez Comendador, Raquel Delgado-Aguilera, Francisco Perez Moreno, Maria Zamarreño
Open Access
Article
Conference Proceedings