Development of Metrics for the Fidelity Assessment of the Human-Machine Interface in Flight Simulation Applications

飞行模拟应用中人机界面保真度评估指标的开发

• 批准号: 1946863
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: University of Liverpool
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Studentship
• 财政年份: 2017
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2017 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=studentship-1946863
• 关键词: Development; Metrics; Fidelity; Assessment; Human

High fidelity modelling and simulation is an essential tool in the design and development process for new aircraft. It also enables the development of an environment which can be used for pilot training, reducing costs compared with real-world operations and leads to improvements in safety. Aircraft development programmes are long and expensive and make extensive use of modelling and simulation. The development programmes carry a large amount of associated risk up to the point of flight testing and subsequent development. If problems with the design are discovered at late design stages they are time consuming and expensive to fix: The SAAB Gripen prototype experienced flight control problems during the landing of its first flight, leading to the loss of the aircraft. The F-16 research and development costs rose by $7 billion to $13.8 billion by 1986 in part due to flight control problems, leading to the months of delays, whilst the latest F35 A/B/C development programme is potentially facing more than five years of delays.Whilst there continues to be advances in computer processing power (enabling more complex flight models to run in real-time) and improved simulator components (more agile motion platforms, faster graphics cards) there are still challenges in how these tools can be utilised to support aircraft development programmes. The aim of the proposed study is to reduce the risk and uncertainty of the (presently unknown) influence of simulator components on the results derived from a simulator. This is paramount when those results are 'safety' critical for the aircraft or would be costly to put right later (e.g. design, clearance to fly, prep for first flight or training quality) and will be achieved by putting in place a framework for assessing simulator perceptual fidelity, i.e. the influence that the simulator components have on the pilot's opinion, ratings and skill acquisition.For training simulators, international standards such as CS-FSTD(H) [1] specify the tolerances (predictive fidelity) which should be used to produce a flight mechanics with sufficient "fidelity" to ensure the utility of the training device.CS-FSTD(H) also provides information on the technical requirements for other individual components of the simulator e.g. field of view for the visual system, control loading feel. Once the components have been installed into the simulator a subjective test is required prior to its final qualification. Some guidance on the methodology to be used during the subjective assessment is provided in the standards but no objective metrics or tolerances are provided for use in this process. What is not well captured in the standards is how the subjective assessment should be carried out, what metrics should be used to quantify to differences between flight and simulation and hence what the acceptable tolerances should be to enable effective training. New research is required to develop objective metrics for simulator fidelity assessment together with a more robust methodology for the subjective assessment of simulators. For research and engineering simulators, there are no standards to define the level of fidelity of the simulator, and hence their utility; this will be examined in the proposed activity [the proposed problem will develop a framework for deriving such metrics].In the domain of naval operations, the safety envelope for aircraft operations to ship is determined through First of Class Flight Trials (FOCFTs). FOCFTs are currently conducted using "live" assets and, as such, are expensive, hazardous, time consuming and their scope is often limited by the environmental conditions encountered during the trials. Hence, there is a drive to use modelling and simulation to provide the evidence in order to develop the safety case for aircraft clearance programmes; this means that the maturity and validation of the simulation environment is of paramount importance.BAE Systems Simulation Department

高保真建模和仿真是新飞机设计和研制过程中必不可少的工具。它还使开发可用于飞行员培训的环境成为可能，与实际操作相比降低了成本，并提高了安全性。飞机开发计划时间长、费用高，并广泛使用建模和模拟。研制方案在飞行试验和随后的研制阶段都会带来大量相关风险。如果在设计后期发现设计问题，修复这些问题既耗时又昂贵：萨博鹰狮原型在首次飞行时遇到飞行控制问题，导致飞机损失。到1986年，F-16的研发成本增加了70亿美元，达到138亿美元，部分原因是飞行控制问题，导致了几个月的延误，而最新的F35A/B/C开发计划可能面临五年以上的延迟。尽管在计算机处理能力(使更复杂的飞行模型能够实时运行)和改进的模拟器组件(更灵活的运动平台，更快的图形卡)方面继续取得进步，但如何利用这些工具来支持飞机开发计划仍然存在挑战。拟议研究的目的是减少模拟器部件(目前未知)对模拟器得出的结果的影响的风险和不确定性。当这些结果对飞机至关重要或稍后实施成本高昂(例如设计、飞行许可、首次飞行准备或训练质量)并且将通过建立用于评估模拟器感知保真度的框架，即模拟器组件对飞行员的意见、评级和技能获得的影响时，这是至关重要的。对于训练模拟器，国际标准，如CS-FSTD(H)[1]规定了应用来产生具有足够“保真度”的飞行力学以确保训练设备的实用性的公差(预测保真度)。CS-FSTD(H)还提供了关于模拟器的其他个别组件的技术要求的信息，例如视觉系统的视场、控制负荷感觉。一旦将部件安装到模拟器中，在最终鉴定之前需要进行主观测试。标准中对主观评估过程中使用的方法提供了一些指导，但没有提供在这一过程中使用的客观指标或公差。标准中没有很好地反映的是，主观评估应该如何进行，应该使用什么指标来量化飞行和模拟之间的差异，因此可以接受的容差应该是什么，才能实现有效的培训。需要新的研究来开发用于模拟器逼真度评估的客观指标，以及用于模拟器主观评估的更稳健的方法。对于研究和工程模拟器，没有标准来定义模拟器的逼真度水平，因此没有标准来定义模拟器的实用性；这将在拟议的活动中进行审查[拟议的问题将制定得出此类指标的框架]。在海军作战领域，飞机到舰船的安全范围是通过首次飞行试验(FOCFT)来确定的。目前，FOCFT是使用“活的”资产进行的，因此昂贵、危险、耗时，而且其范围往往受到试验期间遇到的环境条件的限制。因此，有一种动力是使用建模和模拟来提供证据，以开发飞机净空计划的安全案例；这意味着模拟环境的成熟和验证是至关重要的。