Results for “System Safety” — Page 12

NASA NTRS1995

Safety-Enclosure System For MOCVD Process Chamber

Safety-enclosure system filled with nitrogen surrounds reaction chamber in which metallo-organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD) performed. Designed to protect against explosions and/or escaping toxic gases and particulates. Gas-purification subsystem ensures during loading and unloading of process materials, interior of MOCVD chamber exposed to less than 1 ppm of oxygen and less than 5 ppm of water in nitrogen atmosphere. Toxic byproducts of MOCVD process collected within inert atmosphere. Enclosure strong enough to contain any fragments in unlikely event of explosion.

Singletery, James, Jr.↗

NASA NTRS1980

Analysis of general aviation single-pilot IFR incident data obtained from the NASA aviation safety reporting system

Data obtained from the NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) data base were used to determine problems in general aviation single pilot IFR operations. The data examined consisted of incident reports involving flight safety in the National Aviation System. Only those incidents involving general aviation fixed wing aircraft flying under IFR in instrument meteorological conditions were analyzed. The data were cataloged into one of five major problem areas: (1) controller judgement and response problems; (2) pilot judgement and response problems; (3) air traffic control intrafacility and interfacility conflicts; (4) ATC and pilot communications problems; and (5) IFR-VFR conflicts. The significance of the related problems, and the various underlying elements associated with each are discussed. Previous ASRS reports covering several areas of analysis are reviewed.

Bergeron, H. P.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Collaborative Communications Between a Human and a Resilient Safety Support System

Successful introductory UAM integration into the NAS will be contingent on resilient safety systems that support reduced-crew flight operations. In this paper, we present a system that performs three functions: 1) monitors an operator’s physiological state; 2) assesses when the operator is experiencing anomalous states; and 3) mitigates risks by a combination of dynamic, context-based unilateral or collaborative dynamic function allocation of operational tasks. The monitoring process receives high data-rate sensor values from eye-tracking and electrocardiogram sensors. The assessment process takes these values and performs a classification that was developed using machine learning algorithms. The mitigation process invokes a collaboration protocol called DFACC to which, based on context, performs vehicle operations that the operator would otherwise routinely execute. This system has been demonstrated in a UAM flight simulator for an operator incapacitation scenario. The methods and initial results as well as relevant UAM and AAM scenarios will be described.

Advanced Air Mobility,↗

NASA NTRS2021

Collaborative Communications Between A Human and A Resilient Safety Support System

Successful introductory UAM integration into the NAS will be contingent on resilient safety systems that support reduced-crew flight operations. In this paper, we present a system that performs three functions: 1) monitors an operator’s physiological state; 2) assesses when the operator is experiencing anomalous states; and 3) mitigates risks by a combination of dynamic, context-based unilateral or collaborative dynamic function allocation of operational tasks. The monitoring process receives high data-rate sensor values from eye-tracking and electrocardiogram sensors. The assessment process takes these values and performs a classification that was developed using machine learning algorithms. The mitigation process invokes a collaboration protocol called DFACCto which, based on context, performs vehicle operations that the operator would otherwise routinely execute. This system has been demonstrated in a UAM flight simulator for an operator incapacitation scenario. The methods and initial results as well as relevant UAM and AAM scenarios will be described.

Advanced air mobility↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Defining Services, Functions, and Capabilities for an Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) In-time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS)

NASA’s vision for Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) Mission is to help emerging aviation markets to safely develop an air transportation system that moves people and cargo between places previously not served or underserved by aviation. The integration of new operational paradigms and vehicle classes in this system requires a transformation of the National Airspace System (NAS) that includes substantive changes critical for assuring safety. These changes are compelled by unique challenges posed by AAM to the safety management system (SMS). These challenges were assessed by committees of the National Academies in their reports on a vision for an In-time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS) and a blueprint for AAM [1,2]. In their description of an IASMS, the top recommendation was development of a concept of operations (ConOps) for IASMS. This paper describes the high-priority recommendations from the National Academies for its IASMS vision and how they are addressed through a distributed system-of-systems architecture. The IASMS architecture is structured on the services, functions, and capabilities (SFCs) necessary for In-time System-wide Safety Assurance (ISSA)initially developed for urban air mobility (UAM). The paper then posits where these SFCs would reside across vehicles, airspace, or service suppliers such as Supplemental Data Service Providers (SDSPs), and how SFCs scale with increasing complexity in design and operations of AAM. SFCs are foundational building blocks for a system that targets an individual or family of risks using a Monitor-Assess-Mitigate risk paradigm for anomalies, precursors and trends. An IASMS could be conceived that uses a portfolio of SFCs for AAM in general or prioritizes SFCs for a specific domain or operation.

K Ellis↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Approach to Identifying Aspects of Positive Pilot Behavior within the Aviation Safety Reporting System

The National Airspace System (NAS) is constantly evolving as air traffic continues to ramp up to pre-pandemic numbers and projected to grow to unprecedented levels in the coming years. As well as increasing demand to the current system, emerging operations such as Unmanned Autonomous Systems are also expected to add to complexity in the airspace. To address these issues, the industry and government agencies supporting the NAS will need to rely upon additional automation and new technologies to address future operational requirements, while continuing to be a world-leading safe transportation system. As these new technologies are implemented, the system continues to rely on human pilots and controllers in the loop to monitor the system and intervene in situations the automation cannot handle. The goal of proactively addressing safety is of foremost concern to ensure passenger confidence. The industry has implemented various Safety Monitoring Systems to identify safety risks and proactively address them before they result in a serious incident or accident. One such program is the Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS). ASRS is a long-established system where pilots and controllers voluntarily and anonymously report safety incidents they experienced and observed during line operations by providing rich text narratives describing the events, the environment, and conditions leading to the safety event of concern. These narratives provide insight and context around events of interest and can be used to identify emerging problems. They can trigger investigations within Flight Operational Quality Assurance or Flight Data Monitoring programs. However, this process typically focuses on the adverse events and the unsafe aspects of the operations surrounding the reported or detected events. This perspective of investigating factors that went wrong around an adverse event is commonly referred to as Safety I. Alternatively, characterizing successful actions that operators perform every day under varying conditions that keep the system within safe operating bounds is a concept referred to as Safety II. The benefit of the Safety II view is that the scope is much larger than that of Safety I since a vast majority of the operations result in successful flights. Many of the successful techniques used to manage operational threats are not documented in standard operating procedures or taught during training. They are typically acquired over time by working with experienced pilots during line operations or in many cases after experiencing a problem for the first time and reacting to it in situ, drawing from years of experience to manage the threat. In an attempt to quantify these positive actions, we are proposing an approach to extracting key behaviors within ASRS reports that can support the Safety II concept. Our analysis assumes that ASRS reports contain some descriptions of corrective actions that operators performed to prevent a situation from leading to an accident. Leveraging recent advances in Natural Language Process modeling, we have developed an approach to extract positive sentiment from reports, embed these positive statements in a vector space where they can be numerically analyzed, and clustering these statements into similar contextual categories. From these contextualized categories we can attempt to summarized and distilled aspects of the positive behavior. The goal is to identify categories of behavior that describe consistent operator techniques that supports the Safety II concept. With this information, airlines may enable learning from these positive actions, or address procedures that need to be changed to avoid having pilots implement a workaround. These insights can provide a lens into what is “going right” in the operations that may otherwise not be known widely within the community. It is envisioned that this approach can be extended to other narrative programs such as Line Operation Safety Audit or Learning Improvement Team reports where similar observed behavior can be analyzed to extract positive actions and inform the overall operations.

NLP↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Approach to Identifying Aspects of Positive Pilot Behavior within the Aviation Safety Reporting System

The National Airspace System (NAS) is constantly evolving as air traffic continues to ramp up to pre-pandemic numbers and projected to grow to unprecedented levels in the coming years. As well as increasing demand to the current system, emerging operations such as Unmanned Autonomous Systems are also expected to add to complexity in the airspace. To address these issues, the industry and government agencies supporting the NAS will need to rely upon additional automation and new technologies to address future operational requirements, while continuing to be a world-leading safe transportation system. As these new technologies are implemented, the system continues to rely on human pilots and controllers in the loop to monitor the system and intervene in situations the automation cannot handle. The goal of proactively addressing safety is of foremost concern to ensure passenger confidence. The industry has implemented various Safety Monitoring Systems to identify safety risks and proactively address them before they result in a serious incident or accident. One such program is the Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS). ASRS is a long-established system where pilots and controllers voluntarily and anonymously report safety incidents they experienced and observed during line operations by providing rich text narratives describing the events, the environment, and conditions leading to the safety event of concern. These narratives provide insight and context around events of interest and can be used to identify emerging problems. They can trigger investigations within Flight Operational Quality Assurance or Flight Data Monitoring programs. However, this process typically focuses on the adverse events and the unsafe aspects of the operations surrounding the reported or detected events. This perspective of investigating factors that went wrong around an adverse event is commonly referred to as Safety I. Alternatively, characterizing successful actions that operators perform every day under varying conditions that keep the system within safe operating bounds is a concept referred to as Safety II. The benefit of the Safety II view is that the scope is much larger than that of Safety I since a vast majority of the operations result in successful flights. Many of the successful techniques used to manage operational threats are not documented in standard operating procedures or taught during training. They are typically acquired over time by working with experienced pilots during line operations or in many cases after experiencing a problem for the first time and reacting to it in situ, drawing from years of experience to manage the threat. In an attempt to quantify these positive actions, we are proposing an approach to extracting key behaviors within ASRS reports that can support the Safety II concept. Our analysis assumes that ASRS reports contain some descriptions of corrective actions that operators performed to prevent a situation from leading to an accident. Leveraging recent advances in Natural Language Process modeling, we have developed an approach to extract positive sentiment from reports, embed these positive statements in a vector space where they can be numerically analyzed, and clustering these statements into similar contextual categories. From these contextualized categories we can attempt to summarized and distilled aspects of the positive behavior. The goal is to identify categories of behavior that describe consistent operator techniques that supports the Safety II concept. With this information, airlines may enable learning from these positive actions, or address procedures that need to be changed to avoid having pilots implement a workaround. These insights can provide a lens into what is “going right” in the operations that may otherwise not be known widely within the community. It is envisioned that this approach can be extended to other narrative programs such as Line Operation Safety Audit or Learning Improvement Team reports where similar observed behavior can be analyzed to extract positive actions and inform the overall operations.

NLP↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Approach to Identifying Aspects of Positive Pilot Behavior within the Aviation Safety Reporting System

The National Airspace System (NAS) is constantly evolving as air traffic continues to ramp up to pre-pandemic numbers and projected to grow to unprecedented levels in the coming years. As well as increasing demand to the current system, emerging operations such as Unmanned Autonomous Systems are also expected to add to complexity in the airspace. To address these issues, the industry and government agencies supporting the NAS will need to rely upon additional automation and new technologies to address future operational requirements, while continuing to be a world-leading safe transportation system. As these new technologies are implemented, the system continues to rely on human pilots and controllers in the loop to monitor the system and intervene in situations the automation cannot handle. The goal of proactively addressing safety is of foremost concern to ensure passenger confidence. The industry has implemented various Safety Monitoring Systems to identify safety risks and proactively address them before they result in a serious incident or accident. One such program is the Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS). ASRS is a long-established system where pilots and controllers voluntarily and anonymously report safety incidents they experienced and observed during line operations by providing rich text narratives describing the events, the environment, and conditions leading to the safety event of concern. These narratives provide insight and context around events of interest and can be used to identify emerging problems. They can trigger investigations within Flight Operational Quality Assurance or Flight Data Monitoring programs. However, this process typically focuses on the adverse events and the unsafe aspects of the operations surrounding the reported or detected events. This perspective of investigating factors that went wrong around an adverse event is commonly referred to as Safety I. Alternatively, characterizing successful actions that operators perform every day under varying conditions that keep the system within safe operating bounds is a concept referred to as Safety II. The benefit of the Safety II view is that the scope is much larger than that of Safety I since a vast majority of the operations result in successful flights. Many of the successful techniques used to manage operational threats are not documented in standard operating procedures or taught during training. They are typically acquired over time by working with experienced pilots during line operations or in many cases after experiencing a problem for the first time and reacting to it in situ, drawing from years of experience to manage the threat. In an attempt to quantify these positive actions, we are proposing an approach to extracting key behaviors within ASRS reports that can support the Safety II concept. Our analysis assumes that ASRS reports contain some descriptions of corrective actions that operators performed to prevent a situation from leading to an accident. Leveraging recent advances in Natural Language Process modeling, we have developed an approach to extract positive sentiment from reports, embed these positive statements in a vector space where they can be numerically analyzed, and clustering these statements into similar contextual categories. From these contextualized categories we can attempt to summarized and distilled aspects of the positive behavior. The goal is to identify categories of behavior that describe consistent operator techniques that supports the Safety II concept. With this information, airlines may enable learning from these positive actions, or address procedures that need to be changed to avoid having pilots implement a workaround. These insights can provide a lens into what is “going right” in the operations that may otherwise not be known widely within the community. It is envisioned that this approach can be extended to other narrative programs such as Line Operation Safety Audit or Learning Improvement Team reports where similar observed behavior can be analyzed to extract positive actions and inform the overall operations.

NLP↗

NASA NTRS2014

Analysis of Aviation Safety Reporting System Incident Data Associated with the Technical Challenges of the Atmospheric Environment Safety Technology Project

This study analyzed aircraft incidents in the NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) that apply to two of the three technical challenges (TCs) in NASA's Aviation Safety Program's Atmospheric Environment Safety Technology Project. The aircraft incidents are related to airframe icing and atmospheric hazards TCs. The study reviewed incidents that listed their primary problem as weather or environment-nonweather between 1994 and 2011 for aircraft defined by Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Parts 121, 135, and 91. The study investigated the phases of flight, a variety of anomalies, flight conditions, and incidents by FAR part, along with other categories. The first part of the analysis focused on airframe-icing-related incidents and found 275 incidents out of 3526 weather-related incidents over the 18-yr period. The second portion of the study focused on atmospheric hazards and found 4647 incidents over the same time period. Atmospheric hazards-related incidents included a range of conditions from clear air turbulence and wake vortex, to controlled flight toward terrain, ground encounters, and incursions.

Withrow, Colleen A.↗

NASA NTRS2010

Models Extracted from Text for System-Software Safety Analyses

This presentation describes extraction and integration of requirements information and safety information in visualizations to support early review of completeness, correctness, and consistency of lengthy and diverse system safety analyses. Software tools have been developed and extended to perform the following tasks: 1) extract model parts and safety information from text in interface requirements documents, failure modes and effects analyses and hazard reports; 2) map and integrate the information to develop system architecture models and visualizations for safety analysts; and 3) provide model output to support virtual system integration testing. This presentation illustrates the methods and products with a rocket motor initiation case.

Malin, Jane T.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Interfaces and Management of Information (HIMI) Challenges for “In-time” Aviation Safety Management Systems (IASMS)

The envisioned transformation of the National Airspace System to integrate an In-time Aviation Safety Management System(IASMS)to assure safety in Advanced Air Mobility(AAM)brings unprecedented challenges to the design of human interfaces and management of safety information. Safety in design and operational safety assurance are critical factors for how humans will interact with increasingly autonomous systems. The IASMS Concept of Operations builds from traditional commercial operator safety management and scales in complexity to AAM. The transformative changes in future aviation systems pose potential new critical safety risks with novel types of aircraft and other vehicles having different performance capabilities, flying in increasingly complex airspace, and using adaptive contingencies to manage normal and non-normal operations. These changes compel development of new and emerging capabilities that enable innovative ways for humans to interact with data and manage information. In-creasing complexity of AAM corresponds with use of predictive modeling, data analytics, machine learning, and artificial intelligence to effectively address known hazards and emergent risks. The roles of humans will dynamically evolve in increments with this technological and operational evolution. The interfaces for how humans will interact with increasingly complex and assured systems designed to operate autonomously and how information will need to be presented are important challenges to be resolved.

Lawrence J Prinzel↗

NASA NTRS1971

Consumer product safety: A systems problem

The manufacturer, tester, retailer, consumer, repairer disposer, trade and professional associations, national and international standards bodies, and governments in several roles are all involved in consumer product safety. A preliminary analysis, drawing on system safety techniques, is utilized to distinguish the inter-relations of these many groups and the responsibilities that they are or could take for product safety, including the slow accident hazards as well as the more commonly discussed fast accident hazards. The importance of interactive computer aided information flow among these groups is particularly stressed.

Carl C. Clark↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Kaona: Deep Searching and Curating Aviation Safety Reporting Systems

Context: Several works in the literature have examined how safety narrative databases can be leveraged to share lessons learned. However, less attention has been given in augmenting existing processes of safety reporting systems. Aim: In this work, we introduce Kaona: An interface that weaves machine learning in existing aviation safety reporting systems activities. Method: We provide a use case of search, curation and newsletter writing to showcase how Kaona features build on existing processes and on its own to enhance information retrieval, curation and synthesis of narratives. Results: We created two instances of Kaona internally for evaluation, one using all public NASA's ASRS narratives and another using all public C3RS narratives. Data ranged from 1998 to 2024. Conclusion: Our tool provides a new way to explore safety narratives, serving to re-imagine how text databases can benefit of novel information retrieval mechanisms in the era of large language models.

asrs↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Kaona: Deep Searching and Curating Safety Reporting Systems

Context: Several works in the literature have examined how safety narrative databases can be leveraged to share lessons learned. However, less attention has been given in augmenting existing processes of safety reporting systems. Aim: In this work, we introduce Kaona: An interface that weaves machine learning in existing aviation safety reporting systems activities. Method: We provide a use case of search, curation and newsletter writing to showcase how Kaona features build on existing processes and on its own to enhance information retrieval, curation and synthesis of narratives. Results: We created two instances of Kaona internally for evaluation, one using all public NASA's ASRS narratives and another using all public C3RS narratives. Data ranged from 1998 to 2024. Conclusion: Our tool provides a new way to explore safety narratives, serving to re-imagine how text databases can benefit of novel information retrieval mechanisms in the era of large language models.

asrs↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Concept of Operations (ConOps) of an In-time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS) for Advanced Air Mobility (AAM)

The growth of new emerging operations involving Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) necessitates developing a perspective for an In-time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS). This perspective advances from the National Academies report on IASMS and its recommendation for developing a Concept of Operations (ConOps) for IASMS. A ConOps has been developed for In-time System-Wide Safety Assurance (ISSA) from which the IASMS ConOps pivots to provide a robust scope commensurate with the broad vision defined by the National Academies. The IASMS ConOps focuses on emerging operations and spans innovations in Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) and an increasingly complex ecosystem comprised of a widening mix of vehicles and technologies, Urban Air Mobility (UAM) with industry-federated services, traditional operations, as well as new supersonic aircraft and space launch systems.The challenge for the IASMS ConOps is to be broad to encompass innovations in the coming years and decades while agile to ensure levels of safety compatible with operational and certification requirements of the National Airspace System (NAS). The IASMS ConOps interweaves increasing complexity of operational safety capabilities and unlocking UAS Maturity Levels (UMLs). The relationships between increased complexity of automation and automated systems, fewer operators who are not as traditionally higher skilled, more complex operational environments, and aviation operations management with mixed aircraft and equipage pose a multi-dimensional space for IASMS capabilities essential for safety assurance and risk management. Instantiating IASMS capabilities and how they would be integral to AAM operations and increasing maturity of UAM could be accomplished through a series of Safety Demonstrators. These Safety Demonstrators could provide increased understanding and insight into use of controls for risk mitigation, means of compliance for certification, and operational experience with safety services such as in relation to contingency management. The IASMS capabilities can be viewed as initially residing with the vehicle, airspace, and Supplemental Data Service Provider (SDSP). For example, vehicle capabilities include communications including the command and control link, Remote Identification (ID), conflict advisory/alerting, and UAS system monitoring. These capabilities monitor and assess data such as battery health, aircraft state, and human performance. Complexity of ISAMS capabilities depends on a number of factors. These factors are intendedonly as a notional categorization with the purpose being to reflect the complexity of the AAM ecosystem that would drive up the complexity of ISSA capabilities including systems, sensors, models, standards, and controls. Factors could include the Vehicle Flight Management, Environment, Airspace, and Contingency Management. Each of these factors can be comprised of multiple sub-factors that contribute to increasing complexity. For example, Airspace at a lower level of complexity could be dedicated to UTM operations that are unmonitored, and at a higher level of complexity could involve mixed UTM and ATM operations. The IASMS concept includes safety services that provide data and information to different participants in AAM. The roles and responsibilities of participants can be defined using the Responsible-Accountable-Consulted-Informed (RACI) analysis. For example, for the safety service involving the Remote ID, the Operator would be accountable for providing the data, the Vehicle would be responsible for transmitting it, and the USS, SDSP, Vertiports, FIMS (FAA), and Public Entities such as safety services would be informed by receiving the data. The IASMS ConOps identifies the capabilities needed for risk mitigation and safety assurance in the increasingly complex national airspace. The ConOps serves as a pathway for engaging with industry to gain operational experience including through the Safety Demonstrator series, the RACI analysis, and operational complexity factors. The ConOps serves to integrate these different perspectives to build a cohesive and cogent approach to an AAM safety management system.

In-Time Aviation Safety Management System↗

NASA NTRS1978

Study of a safety margin system for powered-lift STOL aircraft

A study was conducted to explore the feasibility of a safety margin system for powered-lift aircraft which require a backside piloting technique. The objective of the safety margin system was to present multiple safety margin criteria as a single variable which could be tracked manually or automatically and which could be monitored for the purpose of deriving safety margin status. The study involved a pilot-in-the-loop analysis of several safety margin system concepts and a simulation experiment to evaluate those concepts which showed promise of providing a good solution. A system was ultimately configured which offered reasonable compromises in controllability, status information content, and the ability to regulate the safety margin at some expense of the allowable low speed flight path envelope.

Heffley, R. K.↗

NASA NTRS1993

Technology drivers for flight telerobotic system software

Viewgraphs on technology drivers for flight telerobotic system software are included. Topics covered include: flight software lines of code; flight computer architecture; system safety; safety critical parameters; system safety - software functions.

Labaugh, Robert↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

In-Time Aviation Safety Management Systems Overview

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Safety↗