Advertisement

Interface Ergonomics Evaluation Methods and Applied Research for Fighter Cockpit

  • Haijing SongEmail author
  • Xiaofang Xu
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 527)

Abstract

According to the requirements of interface ergonomics evaluation of fighter cockpit from type development and the characteristics of interface, the evaluation indexes were established based on modified Delphi, the engineering evaluation methods applicable to flight test step were proposed, and also the data process integrating multiple attribute decision making, membership function, and fuzzy mathematics were put forward, realizing the quantitative results of interface qualitative evaluation. Finally, this method was applied in one fighter with clean interface during flight test step, and the results proved the validity of this study and can also provide the reference for interface ergonomics evaluation for other military aircraft.

Keywords

Interface ergonomics Evaluation index Data processing Delphi method Quantitative evaluation 

References

  1. 1.
    Hickey LF, Springer WE (1969) A development in cockpit geometry evaluation. Boeing Company, SeattleGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wang H, Wu G, Liu B (1998) Study on advances in aerodynamics. Chin J Aerosp Med 9(3):180–183Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boeing Commercial Airplane Group (2002) Statistical summary of worldwide operations for commercial jet aircraft accidents 1991–2001. Boeing CorporationGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Li Y, Yuan X, Yang F (2003) Research on multi-level fuzzy evaluation of aircraft cabin. Chin J Safety Sci 13(3):50–53Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    McClumpha AJ, Rudisill M (2000) Certification for civil flight decks and the human–computer interface. In: Wise JA, Hopkin VD (eds) Human factors in certification. LEAGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Keota R, Toivonen R (2004) Expert assessment of physical ergonomics at video-display unit workstations: repeatability, validity and responsiveness to changes. Environ Health 77(2):437–442Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wong WG (1999) Grey evaluation method of concrete pavement comprehensive condition. J Transp Eng 25(6):27–31Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhang J (2000) Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Fuzzy Syst Math 14(2):80–88Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Xiao J, Douglas DA (1997) Delphi evaluation of the factors influencing length of stay in Australian hospitals. Int J Health Plann Manag 12(6):207–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Li Y, Yuan X (2003) Research progress of geometric adaptability evaluation technology for aircraft cockpit. J Erg 9(2):29–32Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chinese Flight Test EstablishmentXi’anChina

Personalised recommendations