Effects of Architecture Design on Safety Level of Airborne Electronic Systems

Abstract:

Safety level is the key input to the development process and assurance process of airborne electronic system, and is influenced by both the safety effect and the architecture used. The paper focuses on the determination of principle how the architectures influence the level assignment. The relationship between system safety objectives and assurance process was discussed; six architectures were studied in aspects of capability of common error limitation, and the concept of independence was introduced to characterize the architectures. The method to assign levels considering architectures influence was proposed using architecture independence concept, and a yaw damper system was studied for assurance level assignment to verify the principal.

• Periodical: Applied Mechanics and Materials (Volumes 236-237)
• Pages: 862-868
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.236-237.862
• Online since: November 2012
• Authors: Fang Yan
• Keywords: Common Error, Electronic System, Independence, Safety Level, System Architecture

References

[1] Policy Statement on Guidance for Determination of System, Hardware, and Software Development Assurance Levels on Transport Category Airplanes, Federal Aviation Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, January 15, (2004).

[2] SAE ARP4754A Guidelines for Development of Civil Aircraft and Systems, society of automation engineer, (2010).

[3] Bone, M.A.; Cloutier, R.; Korfiatis, P.; Carrigy, A., System architecture: Complexities role in architecture entropy, proceedings of 2010 5th International Conference on System of Systems Engineering (SoSE), 2010 , Page(s): 1 - 6.

DOI: 10.1109/sysose.2010.5544089

[4] Rajsuman, R. Open architecture test system: system architecture and design, Test Conference, 2004. Proceedings. ITC 2004. International, 2004 , Page(s): 403 – 412.

DOI: 10.1109/test.2004.1386976

[5] Griessnig, G.; Mader, R.; Steger, C.; Weiss, R. Design and Implementation of Safety Functions on a Novel CPLD-Based Fail-Safe System Architecture, 2010 17th IEEE International Conference and Workshops on Engineering of Computer Based Systems (ECBS), 2010 , Page(s): 206 – 212.

DOI: 10.1109/ecbs.2010.29

[6] Parise, G.; Martirano, L.; Sutherland, P.E.; Saporita, V.; Neeser, D. Natural and prospective parameters modeling architecture of electric power systems, Conference Record of the Industry Applications Conference, 2002. 37th IAS Annual Meeting. 2002 , Page(s): 2209 - 2215 vol. 3.

DOI: 10.1109/ias.2002.1043839

[7] Fang Yan; Jianzhong Yang; Peng Wang, Study of Safety Design of Avionics Software in Civil Aviation, 2010 International Conference on Intelligent System Design and Engineering Application (ISDEA), 2010 , Page(s): 425 - 429.

DOI: 10.1109/isdea.2010.385

[8] Peralta, J.; de Leon, F.; Mahseredjian, J. Assessment of errors introduced by common assumptions made in power system studies, 2011 IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting, 2011 , Page(s): 1 - 8.

DOI: 10.1109/pes.2011.6038966

[9] Bak, S.; Chivukula, D.K.; Adekunle, O.; Mu Sun; Caccamo, M.; Lui Sha, The System-Level Simplex Architecture for Improved Real-Time Embedded System Safety, 2009 15th IEEE Real- Time and Embedded Technology and Applications Symposium, 2009 , Page(s): 99 – 107.

DOI: 10.1109/rtas.2009.20