Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “AIRCRAFT SAFETY”

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.

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

At least 163 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2017

Quantifying Pilot Contribution to Flight Safety during Drive Shaft Failure

Accident statistics cite the flight crew as a causal factor in over 60% of large transport aircraft fatal accidents. Yet, a well-trained and well-qualified pilot is acknowledged as the critical center point of aircraft systems safety and an integral safety component of the entire commercial aviation system. The latter statement, while generally accepted, cannot be verified because little or no quantitative data exists on how and how many accidents/incidents are averted by crew actions. A joint NASA/FAA high-fidelity motion-base simulation experiment specifically addressed this void by collecting data to quantify the human (pilot) contribution to safety-of-flight and the methods they use in today's National Airspace System. A human-in-the-loop test was conducted using the FAA's Oklahoma City Flight Simulation Branch Level D-certified B-737-800 simulator to evaluate the pilot's contribution to safety-of-flight during routine air carrier flight operations and in response to aircraft system failures. These data are fundamental to and critical for the design and development of future increasingly autonomous systems that can better support the human in the cockpit. Eighteen U.S. airline crews flew various normal and non-normal procedures over a two-day period and their actions were recorded in response to failures. To quantify the human's contribution to safety of flight, crew complement was used as the experiment independent variable in a between-subjects design. Pilot actions and performance during single pilot and reduced crew operations were measured for comparison against the normal two-crew complement during normal and non-normal situations. This paper details the crew's actions, including decision-making, and responses while dealing with a drive shaft failure - one of 6 non-normal events that were simulated in this experiment.

Kramer, Lynda J.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Quantifying Pilot Contribution to Flight Safety during Hydraulic Systems Failure

Accident statistics cite the flight crew as a causal factor in over 60% of large transport aircraft fatal accidents. Yet, a well-trained and well-qualified pilot is acknowledged as the critical center point of aircraft systems safety and an integral safety component of the entire commercial aviation system. The latter statement, while generally accepted, cannot be verified because little or no quantitative data exists on how and how many accidents/incidents are averted by crew actions. A joint NASA/FAA high-fidelity motion-base human-in-the-loop test was conducted using a Level D certified Boeing 737-800 simulator to evaluate the pilot's contribution to safety-of-flight during routine air carrier flight operations and in response to aircraft system failures. To quantify the human's contribution, crew complement (two-crew, reduced crew, single pilot) was used as the independent variable in a between-subjects design. This paper details the crew's actions, including decision-making, and responses while dealing with a hydraulic systems leak - one of 6 total non-normal events that were simulated in this experiment.

Kramer, Lynda J.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Spacecraft Fire Safety

Fire detection, fire standards and testing, fire extinguishment, inerting and atmospheres, fire-related medical science, aircraft fire safety, Space Station safety concerns, microgravity combustion, spacecraft material flammability testing, and metal combustion are among the topics considered.

Margle, Janice M.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Experimental Validation: Subscale Aircraft Ground Facilities and Integrated Test Capability

Experimental testing is an important aspect of validating complex integrated safety critical aircraft technologies. The Airborne Subscale Transport Aircraft Research (AirSTAR) Testbed is being developed at NASA Langley to validate technologies under conditions that cannot be flight validated with full-scale vehicles. The AirSTAR capability comprises a series of flying sub-scale models, associated ground-support equipment, and a base research station at NASA Langley. The subscale model capability utilizes a generic 5.5% scaled transport class vehicle known as the Generic Transport Model (GTM). The AirSTAR Ground Facilities encompass the hardware and software infrastructure necessary to provide comprehensive support services for the GTM testbed. The ground facilities support remote piloting of the GTM aircraft, and include all subsystems required for data/video telemetry, experimental flight control algorithm implementation and evaluation, GTM simulation, data recording/archiving, and audio communications. The ground facilities include a self-contained, motorized vehicle serving as a mobile research command/operations center, capable of deployment to remote sites when conducting GTM flight experiments. The ground facilities also include a laboratory based at NASA LaRC providing near identical capabilities as the mobile command/operations center, as well as the capability to receive data/video/audio from, and send data/audio to the mobile command/operations center during GTM flight experiments.

Bailey, Roger M.↗
NASA NTRS1978

Overview of NASA aerial applications research

Aerial applications research conducted by NASA seeks improvements in environmental safety, fuel efficiency, and aircraft productivity and safety. From 1976 to 1978, NASA studied the technology needs of the aerial applications industry and developed in-house research capabilities for meeting those needs. This paper presents the research plans developed by NASA. High potential appears to exist for near term contributions to the industry from existing NASA research capabilities in drift reduction, stall departure safety, and dry materials dispersal system technology. A brief, annotated bibliography is included listing documents recently produced as a result of NASA aerial applications research efforts.

Holmes, B. J.↗
NASA NTRS1998

Low-Cost Quality Control and Nondestructive Evaluation Technologies for General Aviation Structures

NASA's Advanced General Aviation Transport Experiments (AGATE) Program has as a goal to reduce the overall cost of producing private aviation aircraft while maintaining the safety of these aircraft. In order to successfully meet this goal, it is necessary to develop nondestructive inspection techniques which will facilitate the production of the materials used in these aircraft and assure the quality necessary to maintain airworthiness. This paper will discuss a particular class of general aviation materials and several nondestructive inspection techniques that have proven effective for making these inspections. Additionally, this paper will discuss the investigation and application of other commercially available quality control techniques applicable to these structures.

Cramer, K. Elliott↗
NASA NTRS2011

A Risk Management Architecture for Emergency Integrated Aircraft Control

Enhanced engine operation--operation that is beyond normal limits--has the potential to improve the adaptability and safety of aircraft in emergency situations. Intelligent use of enhanced engine operation to improve the handling qualities of the aircraft requires sophisticated risk estimation techniques and a risk management system that spans the flight and propulsion controllers. In this paper, an architecture that weighs the risks of the emergency and of possible engine performance enhancements to reduce overall risk to the aircraft is described. Two examples of emergency situations are presented to demonstrate the interaction between the flight and propulsion controllers to facilitate the enhanced operation.

McGlynn, Gregory E.↗
NASA NTRS2017

The Power for Flight: NASA's Contributions to Aircraft Propulsion

The New York Times announced America's entry into the 'long awaited' Jet Age when a Pan American (Pan Am) World Airways Boeing 707 airliner left New York for Paris on October 26, 1958. Powered by four turbojet engines, the 707 offered speed, more nonstop flights, and a smoother and quieter travel experience compared to newly antiquated propeller airliners. With the Champs-Elysees only 6 hours away, humankind had entered into a new and exciting age in which the shrinking of the world for good was no longer a daydream. Fifty years later, the New York Times declared the second coming of a 'cleaner, leaner' Jet Age. Decades-old concerns over fuel efficiency, noise, and emissions shaped this new age as the aviation industry had the world poised for 'a revolution in jet engines'. Refined turbofans incorporating the latest innovations would ensure that aviation would continue to enable a worldwide transportation network. At the root of many of the advances over the preceding 50 years was the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). On October 1, 1958, just a few weeks before the flight of that Pan Am 707, NASA came into existence. Tasked with establishing a national space program as part of a Cold War competition between the United States and the Soviet Union, NASA is often remembered in popular memory first for putting the first human beings on the Moon in July 1969, followed by running the successful 30-year Space Shuttle Program and by landing the Rover Curiosity on Mars in August 2012. What many people do not recognize is the crucial role the first 'A' in NASA played in the development of aircraft since the Agency's inception. Innovations shaping the aerodynamic design, efficient operation, and overall safety of aircraft made NASA a vital element of the American aviation industry even though they remained unknown to the public. This is the story of one facet of NASA's many contributions to commercial, military, and general aviation: the development of aircraft propulsion technology, which provides the power for flight.

Kinney, Jeremy R.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Analysis and Testing of a Composite Fuselage Shield for Open Rotor Engine Blade-Out Protection

The Federal Aviation Administration is working with the European Aviation Safety Agency to determine the certification base for proposed new engines that would not have a containment structure on large commercial aircraft. Equivalent safety to the current fleet is desired by the regulators, which means that loss of a single fan blade will not cause hazard to the Aircraft. The NASA Glenn Research Center and The Naval Air Warfare Center (NAWC), China Lake, collaborated with the FAA Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention Program to design and test lightweight composite shields for protection of the aircraft passengers and critical systems from a released blade that could impact the fuselage. In the test, two composite blades were pyrotechnically released from a running engine, each impacting a composite shield with a different thickness. The thinner shield was penetrated by the blade and the thicker shield prevented penetration. This was consistent with pre-test predictions. This paper documents the live fire test from the full scale rig at NAWC China Lake and describes the damage to the shields as well as instrumentation results.

safety↗
NASA NTRS2015

Dynamic Open-Rotor Composite Shield Impact Test Report

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is working with the European Aviation Safety Agency to determine the certification base for proposed new engines that would not have a containment structure on large commercial aircraft. Equivalent safety to the current fleet is desired by the regulators, which means that loss of a single fan blade will not cause hazard to the aircraft. NASA Glenn and Naval Air Warfare Center (NAWC) China Lake collaborated with the FAA Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention Program to design and test a shield that would protect the aircraft passengers and critical systems from a released blade that could impact the fuselage. This report documents the live-fire test from a full-scale rig at NAWC China Lake. NASA provided manpower and photogrammetry expertise to document the impact and damage to the shields. The test was successful: the blade was stopped from penetrating the shield, which validates the design analysis method and the parameters used in the analysis. Additional work is required to implement the shielding into the aircraft.

Shielding↗
NASA NTRS2016

Analysis and Testing of a Composite Fuselage Shield for Open Rotor Engine Blade-Out Protection

The Federal Aviation Administration is working with the European Aviation Safety Agency to determine the certification base for proposed new engines that would not have a containment structure on large commercial aircraft. Equivalent safety to the current fleet is desired by the regulators, which means that loss of a single fan blade will not cause hazard to the Aircraft. The NASA Glenn Research Center and The Naval Air Warfare Center (NAWC), China Lake, collaborated with the FAA Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention Program to design and test lightweight composite shields for protection of the aircraft passengers and critical systems from a released blade that could impact the fuselage. LS-DYNA® was used to predict the thickness of the composite shield required to prevent blade penetration. In the test, two composite blades were pyrotechnically released from a running engine, each impacting a composite shield with a different thickness. The thinner shield was penetrated by the blade and the thicker shield prevented penetration. This was consistent with pre-test LS-DYNA predictions. This paper documents the analysis conducted to predict the required thickness of a composite shield, the live fire test from the full scale rig at NAWC China Lake and describes the damage to the shields as well as instrumentation results.

Composite↗
NASA NTRS1994

Differential GPS and system integration of the Low Visibility Landing and Surface Operations (LVLASO) demonstration

The LVLASO Flight Demonstration of ASTA concepts (FDAC) integrates NASA-Langley's electronic moving map display and Transport Systems Research Vehicle (TSRV) (a modified Boeing 737 aircraft); ARINC's VHF data link, GPS ground station, and automated controller workstation; and Norden's surface radar/airport movement safety system. Aircraft location is shown on the electronic map display in the cockpit. An approved taxi route as well as other aircraft and surface traffic are also displayed. An Ashtech Z12 Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver on the TSRV estimates the aircraft's position. In Differential mode (DSPS), the Ashtech receiver accepts differential C/A code pseudorange corrections from a GPS ground station. The GPS ground station provides corrections up to ten satellites. The corrections are transmitted on a VHF data link at a 1 Hz. rate using the RTCM-104 format. DGPS position estimates will be within 5 meters of actual aircraft position. DGPS position estimates are blended with position, velocity, acceleration, and heading data from the TSRV Air Data/Inertial Reference System (ADIRS). The ADIRS data is accurate in the short-term, but drifts over time. The DGPS data is used to keep the ADIRS position accurate. Ownship position, velocity, heading, and turn rate are sent at a 20 Hz. rate to the electronic map display. Airport traffic is detected by the airport surface radar system. Aircraft and vehicles such as fuel trucks and baggage carts are detected. The traffic's location, velocity, and heading are sent to the TSRV. To prevent traffic symbology from jumping each second when a location update arrives, velocity and heading are used to predict a new traffic location for each display update. Possible runway incursions and collisions can be shown on the electronic map. Integrating the different systems used in the FDAC requires attention to the underlying coordinate systems. The airport diagram displayed on the electronic map is obtained from published navigational charts. The charts reference the North American Datum of 1927 (NAD27) or a local state-plane coordinate system. GPS uses the World Geodetic Standard of 1984 (WGS84). Both NAD27 and WGS84 model the Earth as an ellipsoid, however, they use a different origin and different size ellipsoids. Latitudes and longitudes given in these systems can be converted to a Cartesian system with the origin at the Earth's center. The surface radar detects traffic in a locally-level, rho-theta coordiante system. The electronic airport diagram is stored using a flat XY coordinate system. The map origin is at the tower and is referenced as True North up. All ownship and other traffic positions must be converted to the electronic map's frame of reference for display.

Rankin, James M.↗
NASA NTRS2023

Safety Case for Small Uncrewed Aircraft Systems (sUAS) Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) Operations at NASA Langley Research Center

This Technical Memorandum (TM) is written to provide for dissemination of the methods and safety considerations for operations of small Uncrewed Aerial Systems (sUAS) Beyond Visual Line-of-Sight (BVLOS)at NASA Langley Research Center. It includes the Safety Case used to acquire a BVLOS Certificate of Authorization (COA) from the FAA and is being published to enable others to benefit from this work. The intended operations, subject to approval from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), will include a combination of Within Visual Line of Sight (WVLOS) and Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) flights, comprising of at most five sUAS operating concurrently, with no more than three operating BVLOS. Flights will occur in a subset of the Langley Air Force Base (LAFB) Class D airspace (KLFI) at a maximum altitude of 400 ft AGL. Most operations within this subset will take place in the City Environment Range Testing for Autonomous Integrated Navigation (CERTAIN) Range. The CERTAIN Range includes airspace inside the borders of NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC). Additional airspace over the northern section of CERTAIN will be requested as part of the Certificate of Authorization (COA). NASA LaRC BVLOS operations on the CERTAIN Range can be broken down into five critical components needed to meet the 14 CFR § 91.113 see and avoid requirement: 1) procedural deconfliction with LAFB for UAS operations at or below 400 ft and manned aircraft at or above 900’ AGL; 2) ground equipment for detection of intruder aircraft and to support communications between crewmembers ; 3) sUAS vehicles with advanced onboard automation capable of autonomously maintaining safe separation; 4) BVLOS standardized operating procedures (SOPs); 5) and personnel to execute the flight operations in accordance with the SOPs and respond to airborne contingencies. The introduction of new ground equipment includes the use of the Remote Operations for Autonomous Missions (ROAM) UAS Operations Center, development and use of an Integrated Airspace Display (IAD), use of the L-STAR and GA-9120 radars, and the incorporation of standardized Vertiports. The ROAM Operations Center will be the central point for all BVLOS sUAS operations. All command and control (C2), voice communications and airspace awareness displays will reside inside ROAM. The IAD will provide raw data from ADS-B, FLARM, radar tracks and telemetered GPS vehicle positions for interpretation by an Airspace Monitor. The radars will search the class D airspace around the CERTAIN Range and serve as a backup to procedural deconfliction procedures coordinated with LAFB. In the event of a procedural deconfliction breakdown, radar detections of non-participating aircraft will be available so that the 91.113 see and avoid requirement can still be safely met. Finally, the incorporation of Vertiports will have video and network connectivity that enables large numbers of sUAS launches and recoveries from a single location. This is a continuation of the remote command and control of unpiloted aircraft component focused on evaluating unpiloted aircraft flight crew roles and responsibilities, control interfaces and the associated data links needed to operate a fleet of aircraft within a UAM Ecosystem. This work supports the development of future aviation operational concepts based on an Urban Air Mobility Maturity Level (UML) 4 environment (Patterson, 2020). It is assumed that future airspace will include hundreds of simultaneous aircraft operations within the airspace, therefore scalable operations are essential for enabling this future airspace to become a reality. Follow on work includes envisioned flights that expand operations beyond the CERTAIN range and lead to an effective Maritime Surveillance capability.

Matthew W Coldsnow↗
NASA NTRS2010

Projection Operator: A Step Towards Certification of Adaptive Controllers

One of the major barriers to wider use of adaptive controllers in commercial aviation is the lack of appropriate certification procedures. In order to be certified by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), an aircraft controller is expected to meet a set of guidelines on functionality and reliability while not negatively impacting other systems or safety of aircraft operations. Due to their inherent time-variant and non-linear behavior, adaptive controllers cannot be certified via the metrics used for linear conventional controllers, such as gain and phase margin. Projection Operator is a robustness augmentation technique that bounds the output of a non-linear adaptive controller while conforming to the Lyapunov stability rules. It can also be used to limit the control authority of the adaptive component so that the said control authority can be arbitrarily close to that of a linear controller. In this paper we will present the results of applying the Projection Operator to a Model-Reference Adaptive Controller (MRAC), varying the amount of control authority, and comparing controller s performance and stability characteristics with those of a linear controller. We will also show how adjusting Projection Operator parameters can make it easier for the controller to satisfy the certification guidelines by enabling a tradeoff between controller s performance and robustness.

Larchev, Gregory V.↗
NASA NTRS1982

Fireworthiness of transport aircraft interior systems

The fire worthiness of air transport interiors was evaluated. The effect of interior systems on the survival of passengers and crew in an uncontrolled transport aircraft fire is addressed. Modification of aircraft interior subsystem components which provide improvements in aircraft fire safety are examined. Three specific subsystem components, interior panels, seats and windows, offer the most immediate and highest payoff by modifying interior materials of existing aircrafts. It is shown that the new materials modifications reduce the fire hazards because of significant reduction in their characteristic flame spread, heat release, and smoke and toxic gas emissions.

Parker, J. A.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Aircraft signal definition for flight safety system monitoring system

A system and method compares combinations of vehicle variable values against known combinations of potentially dangerous vehicle input signal values. Alarms and error messages are selectively generated based on such comparisons. An aircraft signal definition is provided to enable definition and monitoring of sets of aircraft input signals to customize such signals for different aircraft. The input signals are compared against known combinations of potentially dangerous values by operational software and hardware of a monitoring function. The aircraft signal definition is created using a text editor or custom application. A compiler receives the aircraft signal definition to generate a binary file that comprises the definition of all the input signals used by the monitoring function. The binary file also contains logic that specifies how the inputs are to be interpreted. The file is then loaded into the monitor function, where it is validated and used to continuously monitor the condition of the aircraft.

Gibbs, Michael↗