Haptically Enhanced Emergency Recovery Operations
General Aviation Safety
Team Name: H.E.R.O.
Supporting Academic Institution
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
77 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 0213
Contact Information:
michaelh@mit.edu
Michael Heiman
516-524-4553
Supervisor Contact Information:
Col. Peter W Young
pwyoung@mit.EDU
(617) 253-5340
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Room 33-240
77 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02139
Team Members
1
Isabel Bernal, Junior, Aerospace Engineering, Human Factors and Outreach
Michael Heiman, Junior, Aerospace Engineering, Project Manager
Craig Morales, Senior, Aerospace Engineering, Hardware Design and Construction
Bo Shi, Sophomore, EECS, Software Development and Integration
Abstract:
In unstable flight, especially in instrument flight rules (IFR) conditions,
pilots must trust their instruments to make a safe recovery. In a standard
general aviation aircraft, these instruments are visual in nature. The
artificial horizon, altimeter, vertical speed indicator, and heading indicator
must all be individually scanned by the eye and then interpreted by the pilot
before action may be taken. In unstable flight, when the vestibular and
somatosensory systems may provide false information regarding the direction of
gravity, while visual cues convince the pilot that he or she is flying
right-side-up, this process may prove to be difficult, if not impossible.
The purpose of this project will be to study the effects of haptic display
integration on unstable flight recovery. Test subjects will be required to
recover from simulated unstable flight conditions in micro-gravity with varying
levels of haptic interface to their flight instruments. The purpose of
micro-gravity is to safely recreate the disorientation experienced by a pilot
during unstable flight.
Hypothesis
A novice pilot who finds him or herself flying in IFR conditions can become
spatially disoriented when attempting to perform emergency maneuvers. A haptic
feedback system will augment the information provided by the pilot's visual
instruments and enhance the pilot's ability to recover to a desired flight
condition.
Purpose of Research
The purpose of conducting this experiment in micro-gravity is to safely
recreate the disorientation experienced by a pilot during unstable flight. Use
will also be made of the intervals in which the test subjects will experience
2Gs of gravitational acceleration, again to simulate the extreme environment of
unstable flight.
Background
Humans obtain information about their position and motion with
the aid of the central nervous system. The central nervous
system works by integrating redundant information from multiple
sensory channels (visual cues, vestibular system, and the
somatosensory system) and combining them into a single accurate
reading of the surroundings. In the accelerated environments
faced by pilots these systems may provide a false sense of what
is actually happening. For instance, the vestibular and
somatosensory systems may provide false information regarding
the direction of gravity, while visual cues convince the pilot
that he or she is flying right-side-up (varying gravitoinertial
force fields can produce visual illusions of motion and
position). Given these adverse situations and conflicting
information, it is normal for a seasoned pilot and even more so
for a novice to experience disorientation. For this reason, it
is desirable to test a tactile interface that acquires
veridical information about roll and pitch through a
gyro-stabilized attitude indicator and then clearly maps this
information onto the torso of the test subject using a matrix
of tactile vibrators, or ``tactors''. This device will allow
the test subject to be continuously aware of the aircraft's
attitude without the aid of visual cues and by using a sensory
channel that normally only works on the subconscious level.
Although originally developed to aid pilots, this device has
many other possible applications, such as: simulation and training,
non-visual tracking of targets, environments where there are
minimal somatosensory cues (diving) [7], environments
where there are minimal gravitational cues (space), patients
with problems in the vestibular system, and patients recovering
from ablative inner ear surgery.
Spatial disorientation has been identified as a major cause of
accidents in both civil and military environments. Surveys
indicate that 4 to 10% of Class A mishaps and 10 to 20% of
fatal accidents over the past 30 years and spanning all
branches of the United States military were directly caused by
spatial disorientation (SD) [6]. The United
States Air Force alone calculates an average cost of $140
million per year due to SD [1]. A non-visual method
of conveying aircraft attitude information is desirable,
especially in the military environment where a pilot's
attention is divided among a multitude of tasks.
Spatial disorientation has remained largely a military concern
over the past half-century. This situation stems in part from
the fact that only 2.5% of all civil aviation accidents are
caused either directly or indirectly by spatial
disorientation [2]. This statistic is misleading,
however, and the true dangers of SD come to light when
examining fatal aviation accidents in particular. According to
a 1978 study of National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)
records from 1970 through 1975 [2], 90% of all
accidents that were caused, entirely or in part, by SD were
fatal. The same study also found that SD is the third leading
cause in all fatal accidents (16%), after failing to
maintain/obtain flight speed (26.3%), and initiated or
continued visual flight rules (VFR) flight into adverse weather
(22.2%). Furthermore, SD was found to be closely associated
with accidents caused by continued VFR flight into adverse
weather.
An important result of this study is that it indicates that
85% of all fatal accidents that in some way involved SD also
involved non-instrument-rated pilots. These pilots were unable
to react properly when the information given to them was based
solely on visual instrumentation. It is clear that any device
which improves the ability of a pilot to fly under IFR
conditions could potentially reduce a large portion of the
fatalities due to SD.
A final vital piece of information that results from the
aforementioned study, is that far more SD related accidents
occurred in small fixed-wing aircraft than in any other type of
civil flight vehicle. For this reason, the current experiment
was designed around the piloting of a small fixed-wing
aircraft.
This study will attempt to use recovery performance as a
measure of pilot ability. Two of the most common unstable
flight conditions are stalls and spins.
Stall occurs when an aircraft reaches its critical angle of
attack. At this point, airflow over the wings becomes
turbulent, and lift is dramatically reduced. Control surfaces
become ineffective, and if proper action is not taken, a spin
may develop. Four types of stalls commonly practiced in
General Aviation training are power off, power on, accelerated,
and crossed-control [13]. Power off stalls
simulate a stall on approach and landing, while power on stalls
are taught to simulate a stall on takeoff. Accelerated stalls
refer to stalls at higher airspeeds than usual, and
crossed-control stalls are associated with cross-controlled
conditions: rudder opposite aileron. Cross-controlled
approaches are commonly used in cross-wind landing conditions.
According to the Jeppeson Private Pilot's manual, stall
recovery consists of three steps:
- Decrease angle of attack
- Apply throttle
- Recover and adjust power.
If stalls are not corrected in a timely manner, a spin can
develop. Described by Jeppeson as ``an aggravated stall which
results in the airplane descending in a helical, or corkscrew,
path,'' spins are more dangerous and more difficult to recover
from than stalls. Spins develop when wings are unevenly
stalled. The wing with less lift drops before the other, and
the nose tends to yaw towards the stalled wing.
stalled. The wing that is creating less lift will drop before
the other, and the nose tends to yaw towards the stalled wing.
Spins are the result of uncoordinated flight, which is often
caused by pilot distractions. According to Jeppeson,
preoccupation with situations inside or outside the cockpit,
maneuvering to avoid other aircraft, and maneuvering to clear
obstacles during takeoffs, climbs, approaches, or landings''
can initiate spins.
There are three types of spins:
- Erect: yaw and roll in the same direction
- Inverted: yaw and roll in opposite directions
- Flat: yaw only
The flat spin is the most dangerous because it allows for the
least flow over aircraft control surfaces. As a result,
recovery is difficult if not impossible. Fortunately, this
maneuver does not usually apply to general aviation aircraft
because of center of gravity location and weight and balance
considerations.
There are three phases of a complete spin maneuver. The first
is the incipient spin. This is the time between a stall and
fully developed spin when the aircraft has an increasing rate
of rotation. The second phase is a fully developed spin which
is characterized by constant rates of angular rotation,
airspeed, and vertical speed. A typical rate of altitude loss
for a small, general aviation aircraft in this phase is 500
feet per 3 second turn. The third phase of a spin is recovery;
forces are applied to stop the spin, rotation and angle of
attack decrease, and stable flight is achieved. In a general
aviation aircraft, recovery should take place in 1/4 to 1/2 of
a turn.
The Jeppeson steps for spin recovery are as follows:
- Idle throttle
- Neutralize the ailerons
- Determine direction of rotation (use turn coordinator)
- Apply full opposite rudder.
- Elevator- neutral to full forward (depends on aircraft)
- Rotation stops-neutralize rudder.
- Elevator- gently back and level off
Dizzyiness and disorientation are caused by problems with the
human vestibular system. Statistics have shown that 6.2
million Americans report chronic
dizziness [12]. Medical causes of
vestibular disfunction include congenital defects, ototoxic
drugs, injury, disease, ablative surgery of the inner ear, and
the decay of the vestibular system due to
age [12]. Another well documented cause of
disorientation is gravitational variation.
The otolith organs that comprise the inner ear work like a
``carpenter's plumb'' in the sense that they keep track of the
total sum of accelerations acting at any given
time [14]. As a result, they cannot distinguish
between the effects of gravity and induced forces due to linear
acceleration.
Disorientation is gravitational variation. The human
vestibular system actively accounts for the force of gravity in
a 1g environment. In the microgravity environment of space,
this substantial force vector is removed, and the vestibular
system usually takes 3-5 days to adjust. On re-entry, the
problems of disorientation can resurface. Professor Charles
Oman, director of the M.I.T. MVL, states:
As the force of gravity reasserts itself,
crew members discover that normal head movements now cause a
prominent vertigo. Shuttle pilots must be particularly
cautious while flying the vehicle manually. Some find that
tilting their head to one side produces an illusion of
translation in the opposite direction, exactly what one would
expect if they had learned to interpret otolith cues as
indicating acceleration rather than tilt. [5]
In order to replace lost vestibular function, researchers are
developing prosthetic devices. There are two kinds of
vestibular prosthesis on the drawing board: implantable and
non-invasive. Implanted devices directly stimulate the central
nervous system, with the added advantage of replacing lost
vestibular function [12]. The inherent
risks of surgery, however, give added appeal to non-invasive
methods such as a vibrotactile display. The non invasive
measures, however, will not serve to cure the symptoms of
vestibular disfunction. Rather, they can provide cues that
bypass their vestibular systems to help patients maintain
balance. In this manner, vibrotactile displays are comparable
to the walking dogs that commonly assist the blind.
A wide array of solutions have been investigated in order to
compensate for vestibular illnesses, ranging from subsensory
mechanical noise applied to the feet [8] to an
array of electromechanical tactors that is worn around the
waist [10], to proposals for balance prostheses
that will bypass the faulty vestibular organs and send balance
information directly to the brain [9]. One
of the reasons for tactile feedback's popularity is the fact
that it acts on a relatively low level of consciousness, which
allows for a fast response from the body. It is for this
reason that the current experiment is being conducted using
tactile feedback.
Research into the application of tactile feedback to military
piloting has been performed for several years through the Naval
Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory (NAMRL) located in
Pensacola NAS, FL. Specifically, the design of a haptic
feedback device which provides aircraft
attitude information to the pilot has been developed and flight
tested [3]. The device used was a vest covered in
electromechanical tactile motors, or tactors, which was worn
beneath the pilot's flight suit. Results included the ability
of a pilot to fly a loop while deprived of vision outside of
the craft, and using only the feedback system as an instrument.
Other applications that were explored included the use of a
tactile feedback system as a non-visual targeting system.
NAMRL's research continues with investigation into the use of
electromagnetic tactors located in the aircraft seat and seat
back, and other possibilities for size reduction of the haptic
system.
The search for better interfaces between pilot and craft has
been going on since the beginning of flight and continues even
now. National Research Council, Canada's Flight Research
Laboratory, is studying the effects of different
attitude indicator shapes and layouts in an attempt to find
better unusual attitude recovery systems [4].
This is just one of a vast number of approaches that can be
used to help solve the problems associated with spatial
disorientation.
Prolonged exposure to microgravity impairs basic human
functions that aid in posture, gaze, and balance. Other
negative side-effects of space flight are re-entry and landing
vertigo, severe space motion sickness, and in-flight spatial
orientation. The cause of all these unfavorable reactions can
be closely linked to problems with the visual, somatosensory,
and vestibular systems. Therefore, a possible use for a tactile
interface is as an aid for astronauts that are experiencing
some or all of the symptoms described above.
A possible application of haptic feedback that is being
explored by NAMRL is for Navy SEAL divers. In this
application, feedback was used to guide a diver through a
predefined course in shallow water
conditions [7]. The diver was given a
tactile warning each time he deviated from the course. Not
only was the diver able to navigate the course more easily, but
he was able to do so while a strong current was added to the
simulation. This application has possibilities for application
in rescue and recreational diving.
New Information Expected
NAMRL's research is focused on experienced naval pilots. This
experiment will build on their work by testing the applications of the
technology in other areas, especially to determine the usefulness of
haptic feedback for relatively inexperienced civilian pilots. Ground
based trials (with and without forced disorientation) will provide
information that can be compared with in-flight data.
Statistical Analysis
Flight data will be logged into an Excel importable text file. The flight
simulator will feed the data to the log file during each trial for later
analysis.
Particular interest will be taken in the following values:
- recovery time
- the time required for the test subject to fly the
plane into final specified flight conditions
- change in altitude
- the loss or gain of altitude while performing
recover maneuvers
- error
- between final flight conditions and final specified flight
conditions
- RMS of pitch and roll
-
The number of test subjects will be either 2 or 4. Selection will be based on:
- Difficulty of switching test subject with investigator in flight
- Subject Pilot Skill
- Demonstrated subject Piloting Consistency
Rationale for use of Human Subjects
Human subjects are required for this research study to test the haptic feedback
device in order to determine how it enhances pilot ability to recognize and
recover from unstable flying conditions. In order for the data to be useful
and applicable to the hypothesis, testing must be performed on human subjects.
Research Plan and Schedule
The main objective of this research is to evaluate the effects of a
haptic feedback system on the emergency response performance of an
novice pilot.
The experiment is designed to allow a quantitative analysis of the
pilot's performance with a haptic feedback system versus his or her
performance without one. Specific performance measurements will
include recovery time, loss of altitude, and the root mean square
values of the aircraft pitch and roll. Special interest will be taken
in the recovery time and the root mean square values, as they are the
most direct measurements of the pilot's performance.
Both the test subject and the test controller will require
training before they will be able to perform any trials. The
test subjects will need to be familiar with the flight
simulator interface and will have to be experienced enough
pilots that they are comfortable flying in VFR conditions. The
controller will require training and experience working with
the interface that will be created with the flight simulator.
They will be responsible for setting up each adverse condition
and for beginning the data collection for each trial. Due to
the time restraints while on board the KC-135, the controller
will have to be able to set up each new trial within a few
seconds of the previous one. This ability will require much
practice on the part of the controller. Also during the
experiment the controller will be responsible for the safety of
his or herself and that of the test subject.
Both the controller and the test subjects will require training
in the use of the haptic feedback system, both for ease of use
and to avoid possible injuries due to the system.
Preliminary data collection will include an evaluation of each
potential test subject's baseline flight abilities, an
evaluation of the haptic system, and a comparison of
ground-based disorientation techniques. Test subjects will be
selected in part according to their basic flight abilities.
Desired subjects have enough experience to comfortably fly in
VFR conditions, while being inexperienced enough that they are
not IFR qualified. It is believed that subjects of this level
of ability will benefit the most from a haptic feedback system.
The exact haptic system that will be used has yet to be
determined. It is possible that a tactor vest can be obtained
through the generosity of the Naval Aerospace Medical Research
Lab. If so, the vest will require testing to ensure that it is
in proper working order and has not suffered any damage during
transport. Also, it will be desirable to know the exact
response characteristics of the tactor system. If the vest
cannot be borrowed from NAMRL, a device will be constructed
using low-cost pager motors. This unit must comply with all
safety regulations outlined in the TEDP in order to ensure
adequate safety.
Finally, several disorientation techniques will be researched
and compared in order to select the method most appropriate for
the ground-based disoriented trials. Advice on and equipment
for these techniques may be obtained through the Massachusetts
Eye and Ear Infirmary and the M.I.T. Manned Vehicle Laboratory.
The purpose of this experiment is to determine the influence of
a tactile feedback system on the performance of VFR qualified
pilots. Therefore, it will be necessary for all team members
to take a private pilots ground school course or its
equivalent. All test subjects will receive at least 40 hours
of simulator training, corresponding as closely as possible to
lessons in an FAA certified course.
One test subject and one controller will be on each flight.
The controller will set up each simulation and troubleshoot any
problems that may occur. For each simulation, the controller
will instruct the test subject of the desired final flight
conditions. The software will handle all logging of flight
data and time data. The test subject will inform the
controller when (s)he believes that the task has been completed
and the controller will then kill the timer and simulation and
move on to the next simulation.
Subjects will be videotaped along with the controller
throughout the course of the experiments. For ground testing,
this will exclude possible time spent on a centrifuge or any
other device meant to cause disorientation in the test subject.
While on-board the KC-135, videotaping will last for the entire
duration of the experimental portion of the flight. The videos
will provide an extra source of information regarding the
reactions of the test subject. This plan is tentative and may
be reduced to videotaping only certain trials under each test
condition due to the cost restrictions of taping a large number
of preliminary trials.
Table 1 shows the proposed activity schedule.
Table 1:
Tentative schedule for the next few months
| Activity |
Date |
Duration |
| COUHES Application Due |
October 30 |
Milestone |
| COUHES Review Date |
November 20 |
Milestone |
| Build & Test Hardware |
January |
1 Month |
| Baseline Data Collection |
January |
3 Months |
| MVL Testing |
March |
1 Month |
| Outreach |
January |
7 Months |
|
This experiment will be using two subjects between the ages of
19-22 who are members of the M.I.T. flight team. Screening for
eligibility will take place during the baseline data collection
period of the experiment. The two test subjects will have to
be proficient using the flight simulator. In order
to determine proficiency, each team member will be
trained in using the flight simulator and then tested by the
other team members and advisors. This experiment is designed
to help novice pilots: it would be useless to use test subjects
not apt to fly properly. Another screening will take place
during the baseline testing regarding motion sickness. All
four team members will undergo several runs on the MVL (Manned
Vehicle Lab) facilities centrifuge at M.I.T.. The team members
that can best perform better under these conditions and who
give the most consistent flight data will be chosen as the test
subjects. It is understood that there is no direct correlation
between motion sickness induced by ground based techniques and
the KC-135. However, the team feels that data derived from
ground tests in the centrifuge will still be a viable measure of a
team members' potential as a test subject.
- M.I.T.
- All equipment will be built/prepared at M.I.T.. Once
this has been completed, baseline testing will begin.
- MVL
- Facilities at the MVL will be used to perform
disorientation procedures to further conduct the baselines
testing described in section 8.0.
- JSC
- We will purchase a chair and assemble all the
pieces and run mock experiments to ensure everything is running
smoothly. In flight experiments will take place at this
facility.
All in-flight recorded data will be stored in text format on the laptop
and will only be accessible by investigators and collaborating parties.
Any information identifying the test subject will be stripped from the
data. All data will ultimately be stored at M.I.T. in the Andrew File
System. This information will not be shared without written consent
from the test subjects. When this study has been completed, all data
will be archived.
All subjects will be monitored for at least 24 hours after all tests
for adverse effects. If deemed necessary, medical attention will be
requested without hesitation. In the event of unexpected medical
conditions resulting from this study, COUHES (the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology Institutional Review Board) will be informed
through their office. Contact information is: (617) 253-6787,
mede@med.mit.edu.
Equipment that will be obtained `off the shelf' will be the laptop and
the controllers for the flight simulator. These include a joystick,
throttle, rudder pedals and an accelerometer and a chair to mount the
controls for the flight simulator. The two pieces of custom equipment
are the software and the haptic system.
Two options exist for the flight simulator. We are leaning toward
the use of FlightGear as the simulator to customize for our purposes.
FlightGear is a mature Open Source flight simulator. Furthermore, as
an open source project, it allows the team greater flexibility and
access to all the flight telemetry data. Modifications to FlightGear
to make the simulation dump flight data to standard out have been
completed as a proof of concept. Microsoft Flight Simulator is
the other option. Microsoft has a better graphics engine and the
scenery in the simulation looks better. Unfortunately, we have no
access to Flight Simulator source code and would require other programs
such as FSUIPC to extract the data out of the simulation. FlightGear
provides us with a cleaner solution.
NAMRL has given us access to quite a few models of their vests. The
vests have an update rate of around 100hz; this is more than enough for
use in real time. Their better models use a mixture of pneumatic and
electromagnetic tactors. One of their main challenges has been
managing the weight of the tactors. As a consequence, they have
integrated the tactile feedback systems into the cockpit rather than on
the uniforms of the pilots in some models. There are 3 or 4 full body
suits each containing a 12x6 grid of tactors on the suit. Their
underarmor suits (made of lycra or some other compression material) use
pager motors, which are much cheaper than the pneumatic or
electromagnetic tactors used in the flight systems and the lab systems.
We have opted to attempt to build our own haptic vest because the
process of doing so would be very educational and because we would be
able to more effectively troubleshoot any last minute problems that may
come up. Troubleshooting in particular would be difficult with third party
hardware such as what NAMRL has offered - never the less, NAMRL has kindly
offered to advise and collaborate with us in building the vest. Should we
encounter major problems, we will fall back to using a loaned vest.
A pager motor system will be used to generate haptic feedback due to
the relatively low price of pager motors. The vest will be assembled
from some close fitting garment (such as a wet-suit or shark-suit).
After the wiring and circuitry has been completed for the tactors, they
will be sewn onto the vest.
The vest and simulation will communicate via a standard serial port (EIA232
standard, previously called RS232) communication. EIA232 is quite an old
protocol, but it supports everything necessary for simulation/vest
communication. Newer protocols such as USB were
considered, but we did not require the multitude of features and
furthermore, those features complicate the programming of the vest's
controller and the simulation code considerably.
No samples will be collected, biological or otherwise.
In order to test the hypothesis each test subject will be asked to
recover from an unstable flight condition to a specific recovery
condition. Once the subject reaches what he or she believes is the
recovery condition, he or she will end the simulation. Each unstable
condition will be flown twice, once with the aid of the haptic system
and once without it. Conditions will be encountered randomly in order
to avoid the possibility of the subject improving his or her
performance through repetition and practice. As a control, one flight
condition will be straight and level flight. Flight data including
aircraft attitude, altitude, heading, and simulation time will be
recorded continuously throughout each flight.
The experiment will proceed as follows:
- Test subject is disoriented either forcibly
(ground-based) or by exposure to changing gravitational
conditions (KC-135).
- Controller specifies an unstable condition and a desired
recovery condition and initializes the simulation.
- Test subject recovers to what he or she believes is the
specified recovery condition. Once in this condition the
subject ends the simulation by pressing a preassigned key or
button.
- The controller specifies a new condition and desired recovery
condition and initializes the simulation.
- Steps 3 and 4 are repeated until all of the trials have
been run.
Preflight training will include instruction in the use of the haptic
system for regular flight in order to allow the test subjects time to
grow accustomed to the system. Once each test subject is proficient in
the use of the haptic system, trials will be run without disorienting
the test subjects. An initial number of 5 to 10 adverse conditions
will be tried by an initial number of 4 test subjects. Each subject
will fly a total of 40 repetitions of each adverse condition, 20
without the haptic system, and 20 with the haptic system. This initial
data will allow the number of adverse conditions to be reduced,
according to the repeatability of the results from each condition.
Subjects will then proceed to run the trials using the chosen adverse
conditions after being forcibly disoriented. Again, each subject will
fly 20 repetitions of each adverse condition while using the haptic
system, and 20 repetitions without it. This extra data will help to
broaden our statistical analysis by adding repetitions, and will again
aid in choosing only those adverse conditions which provide the most
repeatable and consistent data. Only these conditions will be run
while on the KC-135, due to the time constraint.
One more result of this preliminary data will be to narrow down the
number of test subjects to 2. Only these subjects will fly the
simulations while on-board the KC-135, again due to limited flight
time. The subjects will be selected based on the consistency of the
data that they provide and also based on their ability to sustain
repeated disorientation.
Simulation parameters will be determined before the flights begin. See
section 9.4 for details.
We will have a total of 40 periods of 0G and 40 periods of 2G available
to us. We should be able to run at least one simulation during
each of those periods. There will be two test subjects, one per day,
so each test subject will be able to run through at least twenty
simulations in 0G and 2G situations.
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Institutional Review Board,
the Council On the Use of Humans as Experimental Subjects (COUHES),
regulates all M.I.T. related research that involves the use of humans as
subjects. The council holds monthly meetings to review all
applications for human research. For studies that involve minimal
risk, annual renewal is required. All investigators involved in a
study are required to take and pass a training course that covers the
ethical and legal guidelines for human subjects studies.
COUHES also requires that IRB approval be issued from all collaborating
institutions. This means that full COUHES approval is dependent on
both the Reduced Gravity and Navy Institutional Review Boards accepting
the terms of this proposal.
As outlined in the Samples and Examples document provided from the
RGSFOP web page, there are multiple steps involved in getting approval
from NASA. The first occurs in the proposal stage, where hardware and
safety are evaluated by Ellington Field Test Directors. Projects are
rated either Red, Yellow, or Green. Projects that receive a Red rating
are ineligible for the program. Yellow rated projects must correct
indicated safety issues or risk being permanently grounded. In
addition, the CPHS will examine proposed hardware and report any
unanticipated safety issues.
A Test Equipment Data Package (TEDP) will be submitted no later than
April 9, 2004. The purpose of this document is to provide Test
Directors a final description of test hardware and protocols. JSC
safety rules and guidelines, outlined in the TEDP Requirements
Guidelines AOD 33896 document, will be followed.
On arrival at Ellington Field, equipment will be inspected by test
directors and compared to the submitted TEDP. All relevant JSC
organizations will review the experiment and ensure its compliance to
regulations. On the Monday of flight week, the experiment will undergo
a final Test Readiness Review. Flight test clearance is dependent on
passing this final review.
- Hazard Number 1
- Title
- : sharp edges/edges/protuberances
- Description
- : Subjects and Investigators
may come into contact with sharp edges,
protrusions, and protuberances that can cause
abrasions, cuts, lacerations, bruising,
punctures, and penetrations.
- Cause(s)
- :
- Exposed sharp edges on experimental equipment
- Equipment not properly secured
- Control(s)
- :
- Eliminate sharp edges with a durable blunting material
- Preflight inspect for loose objects and missed sharp edges
- Hazard Number 2
- :
- Title
- : Pinch Points
- Description
- : Investigators' and
subjects' extremities may become caught in
pinch points, leading to crushing injuries.
- Cause(s)
- : Exposed and improperly
designed joints and latches are potential pinch
points.
- Control(s)
- : Experimental equipment will
be designed to minimize pinch points. If it is
necessary to include a potential pinch point,
it will be clearly labeled with a warning.
- Hazard Number 3
- :
- Title
- : Inadequate Design/Structural Failure
- Description
- : If the haptic system is
incorporated into a seat/harness setup,
inadequate design could result in structural
failure. Test equipment would be lost, and
test subject would be at risk of injury. In
addition, structural failure could result in
components becoming free and interfering with
neighboring projects.
- Cause(s)
- :
- Improper calculation of expected stresses and strains
- Lack of an adequate safety margin
- Use of materials weaker than required
- Control(s)
- :
- Adequate safety margin incorporated into design
- Incorporate off-the-shelf flight
proven hardware as the main load
bearing structures
- Preflight simulation of expected
flight stresses to verify structural
integrity.
- Hazard Number 4
- :
- Title
- : Wire entanglement
- Description
- : Multiple sets of cables are
required by the current experiment design to
power and operate the tactile feedback system.
Loose lengths of wire may become entangled with
each other, test equipment, subjects, and
investigators. Entanglement may create excess
stress on the wires, which could cause
fracture, thereby creating a potential shock
hazard.
- Cause(s)
- :
- Wires not bundled, clamped, and secured properly.
- Excess wire length.
- Control(s)
- :
- Cables will be bundled and secured.
- The number of separate cable bundles will be minimized.
- A clearly marked emergency kill
switch will be used in the event of an
entanglement.
- Hazard Number 5
- :
- Title
- : Electrical Shock
- Description
- : Subjects and investigators
come into contact with surfaces at a
significantly different electrical potential
than their own. The resulting voltage gap
induces a potentially harmful current through
his or her body.
- Cause(s)
- :
- Exposed control and power wires
- Improperly grounded equipment
- Overloaded power supply
- Use of improper wire gauge
- Hazard Control(s)
- :
- All test equipment power will be run through a fuse or circuit breaker.
- Load tables, as described in
document AOD 22896, will be completed
for each electrical component requiring
an external power source.
- Test equipment will be grounded
to prevent charge buildup.
- Wire gauge will be selected based on maximum current expected.
The proposed study will not require direct supervision from a physician.
Test subjects will be performing relatively simple cognitive tasks that
require no biological sampling, medications, or invasive procedures. As a
result, there are no plans for physician supervision during or after the
study other than test subjects' and investigators' regularly scheduled
visits with their primary care providers.
Human subjects will not be permitted to take motion sickness
medications, medications that cause drowsiness, or drink alcohol within
48 hours of any experimentation. These drugs may influence the
performance of test subjects, thereby invalidating all
comparisons to ground based tests and rendering results inconclusive.
The microgravity inducing maneuvers performed on the KC-135 mission are
intended to disorient test subjects. All subjects and investigators will
be subjected to the symptoms of motion sickness, which may include
dizziness, nausea, and vomiting. If an investigator chooses to take motion
sickness medication, he or she may experience drymouth.
Test subjects may experience chafing and irritation from being strapped
into test apparatus. This will be minimized by requiring subjects to wear
adequate clothing and constructing the apparatus of non-abrasive material.
During the construction phase of the experiment, investigators will be
required to sew tactors onto fabric. As a result, there is the risk of
puncture by needles if care is not taken.
There will be no additional medical requirements beyond the standard physical
exam. This experiment focuses on general aviation safety, and therefore all test
subjects must be physically qualified to operate as a pilot-in-command of an
aircraft. Subjects will be screened based on the required flight physical, so
there is no need to include additional medical requirements.
Experimental procedures are non invasive, do not require subjects to take
medications, do not cause subjects significant physical stress, and do not
involve the use of hazardous materials. As a result, the investigators feel
that these procedures will not increase subjects' risk of medical problems.
Therefore, this experiment is considered to be of Level 3 or higher.
I have been asked to participate in a research study conducted by Col.
Peter Young, from the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (M.I.T.) I was selected as a
possible participant in this study because of my participation on the
M.I.T. Reduced Gravity Student Flight Opportunities Program Team. I must
read the information below, and ask questions about anything I do not
understand, before deciding whether or not to participate.
My participation in this study is completely voluntary and I am
free to choose whether to be in it or not. If I choose to be in
this study, I may subsequently withdraw from it at any time
without penalty or consequences of any kind. The investigator
may withdraw me from this research if circumstances arise which
warrant doing so.
In unstable flight, especially in instrument flight rules (IFR)
conditions, a pilot must trust his or her instruments to make a
safe recovery. In a standard general aviation aircraft, these
instruments are visual in nature. The artificial horizon,
altimeter, vertical speed indicator, and heading indicator must
all be individually scanned by the eye and then interpreted by
the pilot before action may be taken. In unstable flight, when
the inner ear of an unseasoned pilot is veritably screaming
that something is wrong, this process may prove to be
difficult, if not impossible.
The purpose of this project will be to study the effects of
haptic display integration on unstable flight recovery. Test
subjects will be required to recover from simulated unstable
flight conditions in micro-gravity with varying levels of
non-intrusive haptic interface to their flight instruments. The
purpose of micro-gravity is to safely recreate the
disorientation experienced by a pilot in unstable flight.
If I volunteer to participate in this study, I will be asked to
do the following things:
I will be subject to special disorientation on the ground in a
centrifuge and on-board a NASA KC-135 flying microgravity and
hypergravity inducing maneuvers.
While disoriented, I will operate a flight simulator using a
yoke, throttle, and pedals. In addition, I will receive
tactile stimulations via an array of pager-strength vibrators.
These vibrations will indicate my simulated aircraft's pitch
and roll. I will receive training on the use of this array
prior to experimentation.
I will be asked to participate at various times between
December 2003 and July 2004 for ground-based and in-flight
training. I will receive ample notification of when my
presence is required and have the right to refuse to
participate for any reason at any time.
Trials will be run in a series of approximately 20 flight
simulations at a time. Each case will take approximately 30
seconds to complete. The location of tests will vary between
the M.I.T. campus, the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary,
Johnson Space Center, and the Gulf of Mexico on board a NASA
KC-135. There will initially be 4 test subjects, including
myself.
There is no requirement for follow-up examinations or studies,
and there will be no limitations of my physical activities
after this experiment is completed.
Motion sickness due to special disorientation is almost
certain. Common symptoms include (but are not limited to):
dizziness, nausea, and vomiting.
There is also the risk of equipment malfunction, which could
result in electric shock. This risk will be minimized by
taking all necessary safety precautions. These include
operating all electrical equipment well within manufacturer
specifications.
Finally, there is the slight possibility of KC-135 in-flight
mechanical failure. The risk is minimal due to the
professionalism and experience of the NASA Reduced Gravity
Program pilots and staff as well as the excellent safety record
of the KC-135.
The Naval Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory (NAMRL) Tactile
Situation Awareness System (TSAS) is one of the most advanced
forms of tactile display technology in existence. The military
is their chief customer, and as a result NAMRL has focused on
development for high-performance military uses such as target
acquisition and tracking, helicopter hovering, and enhanced
situational awareness.
According to a 1978 Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine
article entitled ``Spatial Disorientation in General Aviation
Accidents'', spatial disorientation is the third leading cause
of fatal aviation accidents. As such, there is an established
need to enhance pilots' ability to remain spatially oriented.
NAMRL test results and pilot testimony indicate potential for
the TSAS system to enhance pilot awareness, especially in poor
meteorological conditions. However, these are test pilots with
many years of experience. How well will a tactile display
system, specifically designed for general aviation economics,
work for an inexperience pilot who finds him or herself
unexpectedly in poor weather?
The ultimate goal of this project is to improve general
aviation safety. If investigation results in significant pilot
performance enhancement, then we have added yet another tool in
the ongoing pursuit of aviation accident prevention. Ideally,
manufacturers will one day consider incorporating such systems
into their products.
I will not receive payment for my participation.
Any information that is obtained in connection with this study
and that can identify me will remain confidential and will be
disclosed only with written permission or as required by law.
Flight Physicals will be released only to the Reduced Gravity
Student Flight Opportunities Program (RGSFOP) staff.
In-flight tests will be recorded on video-tape. I understand
that I will also be photographed, and I give my consent for
both of these activities.
I will be given a numerical identification code which will be
used to identify all test data. Test data will only be
referred to by this ID.
All electronic data will be stored on a secure distributed file
system provided by M.I.T., and only investigators will have direct
access. My personal information will not be shared without my
express written consent. If the secure file system becomes
unavailable due to student investigators' inevitable departure
from M.I.T., test data will be summarily destroyed.
If any other uses of my data are to be considered, I will be
notified before any action is taken. My written consent for
the sharing of any non-coded data will then be obtained.
If I have any questions or concerns about the research, I am
encouraged to contact Col Peter Young: Principal Investigator,
pwyoung@mit.edu, or the student investigators, hero@mit.edu.
In the unlikely event of physical injury resulting from
participation in this research I may receive medical treatment
from the M.I.T. Medical Department, including emergency
treatment and follow-up care as needed. My insurance carrier
may be billed for the cost of such treatment. M.I.T. does not
provide any other form of compensation for injury. Moreover,
in either providing or making such medical care available it
does not imply the injury is the fault of the investigator.
Further information may be obtained by calling the M.I.T.
Insurance and Legal Affairs Office at 1-617-253 2822.
There will be no additional wage, salary, or other remuneration
of any form paid, given, or in any manner delivered to the test
subjects of this investigation where the subjects are National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) employees or NASA
contractor employees, and the terms of the contractors with
NASA provided for participation as subjects in approved
experiments.
If the human research subjects are NASA employees, NASA
contractor employees or independent contractors, and the
training/testing is part of their employment or contractual
circumstances, NASA is responsible for compensation for injury,
death, or property damage to the extent required by the Federal
Employees Compensation Act or the Federal Tort Claims Act.
Since the KC-135 is considered to be a public aircraft within
the meaning of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended,
and as such does not hold a current airworthiness certificate
issued by the Federal Aviation Administration, any individual
manifested to board the KC-135 should determine before boarding
whether his/her personal life or accident insurance provides
coverage under such conditions.
I am not waiving
any legal claims, rights or remedies because of my
participation in this research study. If I feel I have been
treated unfairly, or I have questions regarding my rights as a
research subject, I may contact the Chairman of the Committee
on the Use of Humans as Experimental Subjects, M.I.T., Room
E32-335, 77 Massachusetts Ave, Cambridge, MA 02139, phone
1-617-253 6787.
I understand the procedures described above. My questions have been
answered to my satisfaction, and I agree to participate in this study.
I have been given a copy of this form.
________________________________________
Name of Subject
________________________________________
Name of Legal Representative (if applicable)
________________________________________ ______________
Signature of Subject or Legal Representative Date
SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR
In my judgment the subject is voluntarily and knowingly giving
informed consent and possesses the legal capacity to give
informed consent to participate in this research study.
________________________________________ ______________
Signature of Investigator Date
At the subject briefing session, the entire Layman's summary
will be reviewed. The test subject will have the opportunity
to ask any questions, and the investigator will highlight all
important information. The briefing will be redundant information
because in this case the investigators are simultaneously serving as
subjects
The personnel present at the briefing will be the test subject,
the principal investigator, and the student investigator who
will be on board the KC-135 with the test subject. All test
procedures, as outlined in section 9.0, will be thoroughly
reviewed during the meeting.
Copies of the Layman's Summary and the JSC Human Research
Subject Informed Consent forms are attached in section 17.
All research that is not performed at JSC will not involve any JSC personnel as
investigators or test subjects.
Funding for this project is anticipated from the M.I.T. department of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, the Massachusetts Space Grant Consortium, and private
industry.
The following application has been sent to the M.I.T. Council on the Use
of Humans as Experimental Subjects. Once their approval is secured, a
letter will be forwarded to the RGSFOP office.
Please note that the Layman's Summaries follow the same format as the
MIT COUHES form entitled ``CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN NON-BIOMEDICAL
RESEARCH''. This was done because COUHES required a standard format
which was an excellent beginning for the JSC Layman's Summary document.
-
- 1
- Air Force Research Laboratory. Spatial Disorientation
Countermeasures Homepage. [Website]. Ohio: Air Force Research Laboratory,
Joint Cockpit Office, 2003 [cited 18 October 2003]. Available from the World
Wide Web: (http://www.spatiald.wpafb.af.mil).
- 2
- Kirkham, W.R., W.E. Collins, P.M. Grape, J.M. Simpson, and T.F.
Wallace. Spatial Disorientation in General Aviation Accidents.
Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine 49(9): 1043-1154. 1978.
- 3
- McGrath, B.J., Tactile Instrument for Aviation, NAMRL -
Internal Report. Copy available upon request.
- 4
- North, D.M., ``Angle on Awareness.'' Aviation Week & Space
Technology 04 08.2003: 41-43.
- 5
- Oman, Charles. ``Neurovestibular adaptation to
spaceflight: Research progress.'' Journal of Vestibular Research. vol 12
pp201-203. 2002/2003.
- 6
- Rupert, A.H., A. Mateczun, F.E. Guedry, Jr., 1990.
Maintaining Spatial Orientation Awareness. Situational Awareness in Aerospace
Operations = La perception de la situation au cours des operations
aériennes : papers presented at the Aerospace Medical Panel symposium held
in Copenhagen, Denmark, from from 2nd-6th October 1989. Neuilly Sur Seine,
France: AGARD, 1990.
- 7
- Rupert, A.H., T.J. McTrusty, J. Peak, 1999. Haptic Interface
Enhancements for Navy Divers. Proceedings of the International Society for
Optical Engineering, April 1999, 246-252.
- 8
- Priplata, A., J. Niemi, M. Salen, J. Harry, L.A. Lipsitz,
and J.J. Collins, 2002. Noise-Enhanced Human Balance Control. Physical Review
Letters 89, 238101 (2002).
- 9
- Wall, C. 3rd, D.M. Merfeld, S.D. Rauch, F.O. Black, 2002.
Vestibular Prostheses: The Engineering and Biomedical Issues. Journal of
Vestibular Research 2002-2003; 12(2-3):95-113.
- 10
- Wall, C. 3rd, M.S. Weinberg, 2003. Balance Prostheses for
Postural Control. Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine, IEEE, 22(2):
84-90 March-April 2003.
- 11
- Wall, Conrad et al. ``Balance Prostheses for Postural
Control.'' IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine. pp84-90
March/April 2003.
- 12
- Wall, Conrad et al. ``Vestibular prostheses: The
engineering and biomedical issues.'' Journal of Vestibular Research. vol 12
pp95-113. 2002/2003.
- 13
- Editor Pat Willits. Private Pilot Manual. Jeppesen
Sanderson, Inc. Englewood, CO. 1997, 1998.
- 14
- Young, Laurence. Principles and Practice of Aviation Psychology. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, inc. 2003.
This document was generated using the
LaTeX2HTML translator Version 2002-2 (1.70)
Copyright © 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996,
Nikos Drakos,
Computer Based Learning Unit, University of Leeds.
Copyright © 1997, 1998, 1999,
Ross Moore,
Mathematics Department, Macquarie University, Sydney.
The command line arguments were:
latex2html -split 1 outline.tex
The translation was initiated by on 2003-11-01
2003-11-01