This content is not included in
your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
Methods to Address Specific Issues Related to COTS Electronic Components in Airborne Electronic Hardware
- Aerospace Standard
- ARP7495
- Issued
Downloadable datasets available
Annotation ability available
Sector:
Issuing Committee:
Language:
English
Scope
This ARP is not a certification document; it contains no certification requirements beyond those already contained in existing certification documents. The purpose of this ARP is to provide more detailed descriptions of the 12 hardware-related COTS issues listed in Appendix B, and to provide recommendations on existing practices, processes, and methods to address them. This ARP also describes artifacts that may be used as evidence that the issues have been addressed. The recommended practices and artifacts may be used to facilitate communication between, for example, the provider and the user of the avionics systems into which COTS components are integrated, or between the applicant for certification and the certification body.
This ARP does not claim that the recommended practices and artifacts described in this ARP are the only acceptable ones. They are, however, used widely today, and merit serious consideration where applicable in the avionics system design and certification processes.
COTS components, by definition, typically have not been designed specifically for the aerospace applications or environments in which they will be used. In many cases, the design data for COTS components is limited or not available, compromising the ability of the integrator of the COTS components into aerospace systems to fully assess their functions and failure modes, and consequently their impact on the system performance (intended and unintended) and safety. Nevertheless, the organization that integrates COTS components into avionics systems is responsible to assure that the system is functional and airworthy.
The avionics system design and development process, therefore, needs to take into account the use of COTS components, and the evidence and artifacts that are produced and used to demonstrate that the implementation satisfies the allocated requirements and provides the level of confidence, consistent with airworthiness requirements.
Various methods may be considered to accomplish the above, broad categories of which include (but are not limited to):
-
Design and conduct additional tests and analyses of the COTS component, beyond those conducted by its supplier, to assure that the COTS component will perform its allocated function reliably in its application;
-
Modify the avionics system design to reduce operating and environmental stresses on the COTS component;
-
Modify the avionics system design to provide assurance the system will perform its allocated function reliably, even if the COTS component were to fail;
-
Modify the avionics system operating and maintenance practices to prevent premature failure of the avionics system; and
-
Any additional practices needed by the application.
The 12 issues addressed in this ARP are likely to be relevant for the foreseeable future; however, it also is likely that additional issues will emerge, as COTS component technology continues to progress, and as avionics system reliance on their use continues to increase.
Rationale
Use of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) electronic components is a necessity for airborne electronic hardware (AEH) in aerospace systems; but most COTS components are not designed or intended for long-life, safety-critical, or rugged-environment applications such as AEH. This presents challenges for the design, production, support, and certification of AEH systems. Although COTS hardware can have significant impacts on aerospace electronic system design, reliability assessment, quality, testing, production or support, there is no currently-agreed-upon method to assess those impacts in the certification process. This document describes an aerospace industry consensus process to do so, with respect to 12 specific COTS-related issues, as described in DOT/FAA/TC-16/57. For each of the 12 issues, this document contains (1) a brief description of the issue, (2) aerospace industry consensus processes to assure that the issue has been addressed adequately in the system design, and (3) acceptable artifacts to verify that the issue has been addressed adequately in the system design.
Recommended Content
| Aerospace Standard | Technical Architecture for Aircraft, Launcher, and Weapon Interoperability (ALWI TA) |
| Aerospace Standard | Requirements for a COTS Assembly Management Plan |
| Ground Vehicle Standard | Potential Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) Including Design FMEA, Supplemental FMEA-MSR, and Process FMEA |
Topic
Data Sets - Support Documents
| Title | Description | Download |
|---|---|---|
| Unnamed Dataset 1 | ||
| Unnamed Dataset 2 | ||
| Unnamed Dataset 3 | ||
| Unnamed Dataset 4 | ||
| Unnamed Dataset 5 | ||
| Unnamed Dataset 6 | ||
| Unnamed Dataset 7 |
Issuing Committee
APMC Avionics Process Management
Avionics Process Management Committee (APMC) develops process management standards for systems and equipment used in the field of avionics. Avionics includes electronics used in commercial, civil and military aerospace applications. The committee also provides input to government and other industry organizations and standards. APMC supports the US Technical Advisory Group (US TAG) for International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) Technical Committee 107, Process Management for Avionics.
Reference
| Number | Title |
|---|
* Redlines comparisons are available for those standards
listed in the Revision History that contain a radio button. A
redline comparison of the current version against a revision is
accomplished by selecting the radio button next to the standard and
then selecting 'compare'. At this time, Redline versions only exist
for some AMS standards. SAE will continue to add redline versioning
with ongoing updates to SAE MOBILUS.