Engineering topics

Kevin Gregory

Publications and source records attributed to Kevin Gregory.

8 records

NASA NTRS2021

NASA Ames Fatigue Countermeasures Laboratory and AA FRMS - A Working Relationship

American Airlines and NASA Ames Research Center have a long-standing partnership to conduct human factors fatigue research in airline operations. Since 2016, using a mechanism known as a Space Act Agreement, NASA Ames’ Fatigue Countermeasures Laboratory has worked with the American’s Fatigue Risk Management team to gather sleep and alertness data from volunteer flight crew members. Operations studied include long-range transpacific flights, timing of inflight rest breaks during augmented flights, and rates of acclimation related to flights making theater changes. This mutually beneficial collaborative working arrangement allows American to conduct operations of specific interest under the FAA’s Alternative Means of Compliance process and provides NASA with a means to gather and analyze data that can be used to inform operational safety-related decisions. Earlier this year, results from the study of inflight rest breaks was published in the journal Aerospace Medicine and Human Performance. A total of 500 American pilots responded to a survey with landing crew reporting more and better-quality sleep during break 2 than break 3. Subsequent ratings of sleepiness and alertness at TOD were significantly better for crew who used break 2. Findings from this study were reported to the FAA leading to an inflight fatigue mitigation capability for many pilots in the industry. An upcoming study is to evaluate workload and alertness levels during Caribbean Turn (DFW-SJO-DFW) operations. For this study, the FRMS team and NASA will ask volunteers to collect data on sleep, workload, performance, and alertness using scientifically valid methods The information gained in this study will help inform how workload and fatigue interact with duty duration during short-haul, daytime operations.

in-flight rest↗

NASA NTRS2021

Is the Last Inflight Rest Break Really the Best?

As pilots experienced in augmented long-haul flights know, current FAA regulations limit options for scheduling in-flight rest periods, such that on many long-haul operations the landing pilot needs to use the final bunk period, closest to top of descent (TOD). However, the logistics of a particular flight (e.g., timing of the flight, timing of passenger service) and the pilot’s own physiology may mean that the last rest break isn’t always the best. To study this, we conducted a large survey of pilots flying these operations. Pilots completed the survey after eligible flights and provided us with information on which rest break they used, how much sleep they received, factors that disrupted sleep and ratings on the quality of their sleep, and they also provided fatigue and alertness ratings at top-of-descent. Pilots from another US-based carrier were also surveyed, in collaboration with our research partners at Washington State University, to increase the sample size and gather insights between operations.

in-flight rest↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Shiftwork and Managing Fatigue

There are physiological limits to human performance influenced by the internal programming of the sleep homeostat and circadian rhythms. The presentation will provide information about the physiology underlying fatigue, and provide some strategies for better sleep and for managing alertness on the job. This presentation was originally provided to engineers, technicians and other personnel at Stennis Space Center supporting the accelerated Green Run project (March 2020).

shiftwork↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Examining Circadian Disadvantages in the National Basketball Association's (NBA) Playoffs

Introduction: Prior research on travel in the National Basketball Association’s (NBA) regular season has shown that teams journeying west relative to their home base face circadian disadvantages for evening games, while those traveling east have advantages. The current study extends previous research by examining these effects within the NBA playoffs. We hypothesized that teams would have a greater circadian advantage during eastward compared to westward travel. Methods: In 2013, the NBA implemented a 7-game series playoff structure, in which teams play an alternating home/away 2-2-1-1-1 format for the Finals. Data for all 499 postseason games played during the 2013-14 to 2018-2019 seasons were collected from Basketball-Reference and FiveThirtyEight. We investigated the impact of direction of travel based on home base city (same time zone, westward, eastward) and time zones traveled on actual game outcomes, Elo rating differences (i.e., a team quality metric based on wins and losses), Elo predicted win probability, and team scoring for visiting teams. Results: Teams had lower Elo predicted win probabilities following 3-hour westward than same time zone and all eastward travel, while 3-hour eastward travel related to higher probabilities of winning compared to same time zone and all westward travel (p < .02, d > .95). Teams travelling westward with 2-hour time changes lost significantly more games than those experiencing 1-hour westward (p = .04, OR = 2.45), 1-hour eastward (p = .05, OR = 2.34), and 3-hour eastward changes (p = .02, OR = 4.68). Scoring was significantly higher following eastward travel compared to both westward (p = .001, d = 0.60) and same time zone travel (p = .003, d = 0.44). There were no statistically clear differences in team quality based on overall direction of travel or number of time zones traveled, and game outcomes based on direction of travel (p > .05). Conclusion: Overall direction of travel was related to team scoring, while number of time zones traveled was associated with Elo predicted win probability and game outcomes. Generally, teams travelling eastward and within the same time zone gained an advantage over those travelling westward. Adjustment to travel and time zone changes appear to influence certain aspects of in-game performances and outcomes in the NBA playoffs.

circadian misalignment↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Working Time and Fatigue Management

There are physiological limits to human performance, influenced by the internal programming of the sleep homeostat and circadian rhythms. This presentation will provide information about the physiology underlying fatigue, and provide some strategies for better sleep and for managing alertness on the job. This presentation will be provided to personnel at Kennedy Space Center.

fatigue↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Nasa Pilot Fatigue Research: Past, Present & Future

Pilot fatigue research at NASA Ames has a long history, initiated by a Congressional request to investigate the magnitude of fatigue, sleep loss and circadian disruption in flight operations, and how these factors impact crew performance. Research has been conducted in a broad range of aviation operations, including short-haul, long-haul, rotorcraft, overnight cargo, corporate/business, and regional airlines. Studies have been conducted in the field during actual flight operations, in simulated settings, focus group meetings, and with surveys. Other investigations have examined mitigation strategies including in-flight rest periods and lighting applications. Other activities have included education and training, publications, accident investigation support and the development of research methods and tools. Future research may include further lighting interventions, controlled rest strategies, use of automation, the effectiveness of modeling tools, and implementation of organizational fatigue management programs.

aviation↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The View From the Flight Deck: Pilot Perspectives on Fatigue in Short-Haul Operations

INTRODUCTION: There are few studies investigating the impact of fatigue in short-haul flight operations conducted under United States (US) Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 117 flight and duty limitations and rest requirements. In order to understand the fatigue factors unique to short-haul operations, we conducted a series of focus groups across four major commercial passenger airlines in the US. The outcomes of this study were intended to inform the scope of a larger study of fatigue in short-haul operations. METHODS: Ninety short-haul pilots were recruited through emails distributed by airline safety teams and labor representatives. Fourteen focus groups were conducted via an online conferencing platform in which participants were asked to identify, specific to short-haul: a) schedules and operations that lead to elevated fatigue; b) schedules and operations that are not fatiguing, and c) important fatigue factors to study. Data were collected anonymously and coded using conventional qualitative content analysis, with axial coding and summative analysis used to identify main themes and over-arching categories. RESULTS: Participants had an average of 12,348 (6,483) lifetime flying hours with 71 (14.5) hours of monthly flying. Forty-six percent of participants were captains. The six fatigue factor categories identified were: circadian disruption (e.g., circadian switches, redeyes), high workload (e.g., hassle factors, number of flights per duty), inadequate rest opportunity (e.g., minimum rest layovers, quality of rest facilities), schedule changes (e.g., unpredictability), regulation and policy issues (e.g., scheduling up to FAR 117 limits), and long sits (e.g., long wait times between flights). DISCUSSION: A field study informed by these results and designed to investigate the prevalence and impact of these factors in US short-haul operations is currently underway.

aviation↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Impact of Controlled Rest on Neurobehavioral Outcomes at Top-of-Descent

INTRODUCTION: Long and irregular working hours can lead to fatigue in aviation operations. In some regions, a short nap taken on the flight deck (known as controlled rest) can be used as a countermeasure to unexpected in-flight sleepiness. We aimed to investigate the impact of taking controlled rest on neurobehavioral measures at top-of-descent. METHODS: Data from 120 long-haul (> 6 h flight duration), unaugmented flights were analyzed (n = 31 pilots). Pilots wore actigraphs and completed sleep logs before and during trips. At pre-flight and top-of-descent, pilots completed a 5-minute psychomotor vigilance task (PVT) and Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS). A series of mixed-effects models were conducted to assess the impact of controlled rest on outcome measures at top-of-descent. Sleep duration in the prior 48 hours, timing of the flight, and pre-flight scores for each measure were included as covariates. RESULTS: Due to missing data, complete data from 76 flights (n = 28 participants) were available in the models examining the PVT metrics, and data from 83 flights (n = 29 participants) were available in the analyses of the KSS. Pilots who took controlled rest had faster response speeds at top-of-descent (p = .03, η2p = 0.07; estimated marginal mean [EMM] = 4.19, standard error [SE] = 0.07, 95% CI [4.08, 4.29]) than those who did not take controlled rest (EMM = 4.00, SE = 0.05, 95% CI [3.86, 4.14]). There were no differences by controlled rest status for KSS scores and PVT lapses (p values > .05, η2p values ≤ 0.01). DISCUSSION: Our results suggest that taking controlled rest may improve vigilant attention at critical phases of flight and, thus, may be a useful fatigue management tool during unaugmented flights. Further research is necessary to determine the impact of factors on the decision to take controlled rest (e.g., airline culture, personal preference) and how the controlled rest policy is applied in practice.

aviation↗