Engineering topics

Feary, Michael S.

Publications and source records attributed to Feary, Michael S..

12 records

NASA NTRS2019

Best Practices for Evaluating Flight Deck Interfaces for Transport Category Aircraft with Particular Relevance to Issues of Attention, Awareness, and Understanding CAST SE-210 Output 2 Report 6 of 6

Attention, awareness, and understanding of the flight crew are a critical contributor to safety and the flight deck plays a critical role in supporting these cognitive functions. Changes to the flight deck need to be evaluated for whether the changed device provides adequate support for these functions. This report describes a set of diverse evaluation methods. The report recommends designing the interface-evaluation to span the phases of the device development, from early to late, and it provides methods appropriate at each phase. It describes the various ways in which an interface or interface component can fail to support awareness as potential issues to be assessed in evaluation. It summarizes appropriate methods to evaluate different issues concerning inadequate support for these functions, throughout the phases of development.

Billman, Dorrit O.↗

NASA NTRS2019

A Summary of Results from Technologies for Aircraft State Awareness Safety Enhancement 210 Output 2

In 2014, the Commercial Aviation Safety Team produced a report describing the results of an analysis intended to understand and mitigate airplane incidents and accidents associated with flight crew loss of attitude or energy state awareness. That report described several "Safety Enhancements" including a new category of "Research Safety Enhancements". This paper focuses on Safety Enhancement (SE) 210 Output 2, investigating improvements in design methods and guidelines to "assess flight crew performance in situations associated with loss of energy and/or attitude state awareness".

Feary, Michael S.↗

NASA NTRS2018

Urban Air Mobility Airspace Integration Concepts and Considerations

Urban Air Mobility (UAM) - defined as safe and efficient air traffic operations in a metropolitan area for manned aircraft and unmanned aircraft systems - is being researched and developed by industry, academia, and government. Significant resources have been invested toward cultivating an ecosystem for Urban Air Mobility that includes manufacturers of electric vertical takeoff and landing aircraft, builders of takeoff and landing areas, and researchers of the airspace integration concepts, technologies, and procedures needed to conduct Urban Air Mobility operations safely and efficiently alongside other airspace users. This paper provides high-level descriptions of both emergent and early expanded operational concepts for Urban Air Mobility that NASA is developing. The scope of this work is defined in terms of missions, aircraft, airspace, and hazards. Past and current Urban Air Mobility operations are also reviewed, and the considerations for the data exchange architecture and communication, navigation, and surveillance requirements are also discussed. This paper will serve as a starting point to develop a framework for NASA's Urban Air Mobility airspace integration research and development efforts with partners and stakeholders that could include fast-time simulations, human-in-the-loop (HITL) simulations, and flight demonstrations.

airspace integration↗

NASA NTRS2018

Airplane Capabilities: Translating Non-Normal Information for Operational Decision-Making

We consider how a jet transport airplane interface supports the flight crew in managing airplane system failures (or non-normals) for continued safe flight and landing. The existing state of the art starts with a list of airplane system component failures and asks the flight crew to determine, with the help of non-normal procedures, the operational consequences of those failures. As airplane systems become more complex and interconnected, the flight crew's ability to determine operational consequences will become inadequate. We describe an approach that attempts to translate airplane system failures directly into airplane "capabilities," which is a set of basic airplane functions, such as the ability to stop after landing. This paper describes the overall framework for supporting flight crews in operational decision making and the initial efforts to develop a language and display concepts.

managing airplane system non-normals↗

NASA NTRS2018

Autonomous Systems Taxonomy

The purpose of this taxonomy is to provide common definitions and a functional decomposition of the technology that is required for NASA's autonomous systems. The taxonomy serves as a framework for: (1) assessing the state of NASA's autonomous systems capability (workforce, technology, etc.) and (2) assessing the state of the art in autonomy technology.

Fong, Terrence W.↗

NASA NTRS2018

Aircraft Exceedances Vary According to Time of Day and Workload

The Flight Operational Quality Assurance (FOQA) programs have been implemented in US and Europe to identify anomalous flights based on data recorded on board an aircraft in an effort to improve flight safety. Numerous methods have been developed to support the analysis of FOQA data. However, it is unclear how FOQA data relates to the performance of the pilot. We sought to characterize the frequency and type of flight exceedances extracted from FOQA data during a controlled pilot schedule in order to determine whether patterns of exceedances related to human control of the aircraft would change according to scheduling factors.

flight data↗

NASA NTRS2016

Vertical Compliance Trends in KBOS OPD Arrival Redesign

This report is a high-level summary of vertical compliance trends and overall rates of Area Navigation Optimized Profile Descent (RNAV OPD) utilization for Boston Logan International Airport. Specifically, we investigated trends from three RNAV OPDs and the subsequent redesigned iterations of those procedures: OOSHN3 to OOSHN4, ROBUC1 to ROBUC2, and QUABN3 to JFUND1.

compliance analysis↗

NASA NTRS2016

Multiple Views on Safety-Critical Automation: Aircraft, Autonomous Vehicles, Air Traffic Management and Satellite Ground Segments Perspectives

This SIG focuses on the engineering of automation in interactive critical systems. Automation has already been studied in a number of (sub-) disciplines and application fields: design, human factors, psychology, (software) engineering, aviation, health care, games. One distinguishing feature of the area we are focusing on is that in the field of interactive critical systems properties such as reliability, dependability, fault-tolerance are as important as usability, user experience or overall acceptance issues. The SIG targets at two problem areas: first the engineering of the user interaction with (partly-) autonomous systems: how to design, build and assess autonomous behavior, especially in cases where there is a need to represent on the user interface both autonomous and interactive objects. An example of such integration is the representation of an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) (where no direct interaction is possible), together with aircrafts (that have to be instructed by an air traffic controller to avoid the UAV). Second the design and engineering of user interaction in general for autonomous objects systems (for example a cruise control in a car or an autopilot in an aircraft). The goal of the SIG is to raise interest in the CHI community on the general aspects of automation and to identify a community of researchers and practitioners interested in those increasingly prominent issues of interfaces towards (semi)-autonomous systems. The expected audience should be interested in addressing the issues of integration of mainly unconnected research domains to formulate a new joint research agenda.

safety-critical automation↗

NASA NTRS2014

Some Challenges in the Design of Human-Automation Interaction for Safety-Critical Systems

Increasing amounts of automation are being introduced to safety-critical domains. While the introduction of automation has led to an overall increase in reliability and improved safety, it has also introduced a class of failure modes, and new challenges in risk assessment for the new systems, particularly in the assessment of rare events resulting from complex inter-related factors. Designing successful human-automation systems is challenging, and the challenges go beyond good interface development (e.g., Roth, Malin, & Schreckenghost 1997; Christoffersen & Woods, 2002). Human-automation design is particularly challenging when the underlying automation technology generates behavior that is difficult for the user to anticipate or understand. These challenges have been recognized in several safety-critical domains, and have resulted in increased efforts to develop training, procedures, regulations and guidance material (CAST, 2008, IAEA, 2001, FAA, 2013, ICAO, 2012). This paper points to the continuing need for new methods to describe and characterize the operational environment within which new automation concepts are being presented. We will describe challenges to the successful development and evaluation of human-automation systems in safety-critical domains, and describe some approaches that could be used to address these challenges. We will draw from experience with the aviation, spaceflight and nuclear power domains.

systems engineering↗

NASA NTRS2012

Evaluating Models of Human Performance: Safety-Critical Systems Applications

This presentation is part of panel discussion on Evaluating Models of Human Performance. The purpose of this panel is to discuss the increasing use of models in the world today and specifically focus on how to describe and evaluate models of human performance. My presentation will focus on discussions of generating distributions of performance, and the evaluation of different strategies for humans performing tasks with mixed initiative (Human-Automation) systems. I will also discuss issues with how to provide Human Performance modeling data to support decisions on acceptability and tradeoffs in the design of safety critical systems. I will conclude with challenges for the future.

Feary, Michael S.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Benefits of Matching Domain Structure for Planning Software: The Right Stuff

We investigated the role of domain structure in software design. We compared 2 planning applications, for a Mission Control group (International Space Station), and measured users speed and accuracy. Based on our needs analysis, we identified domain structure and used this to develop new prototype software that matched domain structure better than the legacy system. We took a high-fidelity analog of the natural task into the laboratory and found (large) periformance differences, favoring the system that matched domain structure. Our task design enabled us to attribute better periormance to better match of domain structure. We ran through the whole development cycle, in miniature, from needs analysis through design, development, and evaluation. Doing so enabled inferences not just about the particular systems compared, but also provided evidence for the viability of the design process (particularly needs analysis) that we are exploring.

Billman, Dorrit Owen↗

NASA NTRS2010

A Toolset for Supporting Iterative Human Automation: Interaction in Design

The addition of automation has greatly extended humans' capability to accomplish tasks, including those that are difficult, complex and safety critical. The majority of Human - Automation Interact~on (HAl) results in more efficient and safe operations, ho,,:,ever ~ertain un~~pected a~tomatlon behaviors or "automation surprises" can be frustrating and, In certain safety critical operations (e.g. transport~tion, manufacturing control, medicine), may result in injuries or. the loss of life.. (Mellor, 1994; Leveson, 1995; FAA, 1995; BASI, 1998; Sheridan, 2002). This pap~r describes ~he development of a design tool that enables on the rapid development and evaluation. of automat~on prototypes. The ultimate goal of the work is to provide a design platform upon which automation surprise vulnerability analyses can be integrated.

Feary, Michael S.↗