SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Aircraft/instrumentation”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

7 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS1998

Virtual acoustics, aeronautics, and communications

An optimal approach to auditory display design for commercial aircraft would utilize both spatialized (3-D) audio techniques and active noise cancellation for safer operations. Results from several aircraft simulator studies conducted at NASA Ames Research Center are reviewed, including Traffic alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) warnings, spoken orientation "beacons" for gate identification and collision avoidance on the ground, and hardware for improved speech intelligibility. The implications of hearing loss among pilots is also considered.

NASA Center ARC↗

NASA NTRS1995

Dynamics and control of instrumented harmonic drives

Since torque in harmonic drives is transmitted by a pure couple, harmonic drives do not generate radial forces and therefore can be instrumented with torque sensors without interference from radial forces. The installation of torque sensors on the stationary component of harmonic drives (the Flexipline cup in this research work) produce backdrivability needed for robotic and telerobotic compliant maneuvers. Backdrivability of a harmonic drive, when used as torque increaser, means that the output shaft can be rotated via finite amount of torque. A high ratio harmonic drive is non-backdrivable because its output shaft cannot be turned by applying a torque on it. This article first develops the dynamic behavior of a harmonic drive, in particular the non-backdrivability, in terms of a sensitivity transfer function. The instrumentation of the harmonic drive with torque sensor is then described. This leads to a description of the control architecture which allows modulation of the sensitivity transfer function within the limits established by the closed-loop stability. A set of experiments on an active hand controller, powered by a DC motor coupled to an instrumented harmonic drive, is given to exhibit this method's limitations.

NASA Discipline Space Human Factors↗

NASA NTRS1996

High-power graphic computers for visual simulation: a real-time--rendering revolution

Advances in high-end graphics computers in the past decade have made it possible to render visual scenes of incredible complexity and realism in real time. These new capabilities make it possible to manipulate and investigate the interactions of observers with their visual world in ways once only dreamed of. This paper reviews how these developments have affected two preexisting domains of behavioral research (flight simulation and motion perception) and have created a new domain (virtual environment research) which provides tools and challenges for the perceptual psychologist. Finally, the current limitations of these technologies are considered, with an eye toward how perceptual psychologist might shape future developments.

NASA Discipline Space Human Factors↗

NASA NTRS1995

At the intersection of automation and culture

The crash of an automated passenger jet at Nagoya, Japan, in 1995, is used as an example of crew error in using automatic systems. Automation provides pilots with the ability to perform tasks in various ways. National culture is cited as a factor that affects how a pilot and crew interact with each other and equipment.

NASA Discipline Space Human Factors↗

NASA NTRS1997

Team play with a powerful and independent agent: operational experiences and automation surprises on the Airbus A-320

Research and operational experience have shown that one of the major problems with pilot-automation interaction is a lack of mode awareness (i.e., the current and future status and behavior of the automation). As a result, pilots sometimes experience so-called automation surprises when the automation takes an unexpected action or fails to behave as anticipated. A lack of mode awareness and automation surprises can he viewed as symptoms of a mismatch between human and machine properties and capabilities. Changes in automation design can therefore he expected to affect the likelihood and nature of problems encountered by pilots. Previous studies have focused exclusively on early generation "glass cockpit" aircraft that were designed based on a similar automation philosophy. To find out whether similar difficulties with maintaining mode awareness are encountered on more advanced aircraft, a corpus of automation surprises was gathered from pilots of the Airbus A-320, an aircraft characterized by high levels of autonomy, authority, and complexity. To understand the underlying reasons for reported breakdowns in human-automation coordination, we also asked pilots about their monitoring strategies and their experiences with and attitude toward the unique design of flight controls on this aircraft.

NASA Discipline Space Human Factors↗

NASA NTRS1997

Automation-induced monitoring inefficiency: role of display location

Operators can be poor monitors of automation if they are engaged concurrently in other tasks. However, in previous studies of this phenomenon the automated task was always presented in the periphery, away from the primary manual tasks that were centrally displayed. In this study we examined whether centrally locating an automated task would boost monitoring performance during a flight-simulation task consisting of system monitoring, tracking and fuel resource management sub-tasks. Twelve nonpilot subjects were required to perform the tracking and fuel management tasks manually while watching the automated system monitoring task for occasional failures. The automation reliability was constant at 87.5% for six subjects and variable (alternating between 87.5% and 56.25%) for the other six subjects. Each subject completed four 30 min sessions over a period of 2 days. In each automation reliability condition the automation routine was disabled for the last 20 min of the fourth session in order to simulate catastrophic automation failure (0 % reliability). Monitoring for automation failure was inefficient when automation reliability was constant but not when it varied over time, replicating previous results. Furthermore, there was no evidence of resource or speed accuracy trade-off between tasks. Thus, automation-induced failures of monitoring cannot be prevented by centrally locating the automated task.

Automation↗

NASA NTRS1996

Effects of adaptive task allocation on monitoring of automated systems

The effects of adaptive task allocation on monitoring for automation failure during multitask flight simulation were examined. Participants monitored an automated engine status task while simultaneously performing tracking and fuel management tasks over three 30-min sessions. Two methods of adaptive task allocation, both involving temporary return of the automated engine status task to the human operator ("human control"), were examined as a possible countermeasure to monitoring inefficiency. For the model-based adaptive group, the engine status task was allocated to all participants in the middle of the second session for 10 min, following which it was again returned to automation control. The same occurred for the performance-based adaptive group, but only if an individual participant's monitoring performance up to that point did not meet a specified criterion. For the nonadaptive control groups, the engine status task remained automated throughout the experiment. All groups had low probabilities of detection of automation failures for the first 40 min spent with automation. However, following the 10-min intervening period of human control, both adaptive groups detected significantly more automation failures during the subsequent blocks under automation control. The results show that adaptive task allocation can enhance monitoring of automated systems. Both model-based and performance-based allocation improved monitoring of automation. Implications for the design of automated systems are discussed.

Task Performance and Analysis↗