检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:吕旭飞 姚尚宏[1] 权家乐 LYU Xufei;YAO Shanghong;QUAN Jiale(Center of Flight Test Technology and Engineering,Chinese Flight Test Establishment,Xi'an Shaanxi 710089,China)
机构地区:[1]中国飞行试验研究院飞行试验技术与工程中心,陕西西安710089
出 处:《中国安全科学学报》2022年第2期152-157,共6页China Safety Science Journal
摘 要:为定量评价空中加油软管甩鞭(HWP)现象的安全性,使用系统理论过程分析(STPA)法查找出相关系统级危险、不安全控制行为和致因因素共计46条,确定与之对应的44项安全对接约束条件;依据空中加油飞行试验数据,定义可量化的安全检查点,依据安全检查点将安全约束条件分为17类,确定各检查点的安全区间和权重;根据飞行数据确定HWP的安全量化区间,使用量化区间及其权重,对形成软管重度甩鞭、中度甩鞭、安全对接的实例进行安全性评分。结果表明:使用STPA识别安全风险并量化评分的方法能够表征空中加油对接中的安全水平,其中,软管重度甩鞭下的对接安全性水平最差。In order to quantitatively evaluate safety of HWP in aerial refueling,a total of 46 items which included relevant system-level hazards,unsafe control behaviors and causative factors were found by using STPA method,and 44 corresponding safety constraints were determined.Then,quantifiable safety checkpoints were defined based on air refueling flight data,safety constraints were divided into 17 categories,and safety intervals and weight of each checkpoint were determined.Finally,quantification interval of HWP was decided according to flight data,and together with its weight,was used to score safety of instances of heavy whip,moderate whip,and safe docking.The results show that using STPA method to identify and quantify safety risks could characterize safety level of aerial refueling docking,and it exhibits lowest safety level under heavy whip of the hoses.
关 键 词:系统理论过程分析(STPA) 空中加油 软管甩鞭(HWP) 对接安全性 安全约束条件 安全检查点
分 类 号:X949[环境科学与工程—安全科学]
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.3