Search Results

This SAE Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) provides guidance to develop and assure validation and verification of IVHM systems used in autonomous aircraft, vehicles and driver assistance functions. IVHM covers a vehicle, monitoring and data processing functions inherent within its sub-systems, and the tools and processes used to manage and restore the vehicle’s health. The scope of this document is to address challenges and identify recommendations for the application of integrated vehicle health management (IVHM) specifically to intelligent systems performing tasks autonomously within the mobility sector. This document will focus on the core aspects of IVHM for autonomous vehicles that are common to both aerospace and automotive applications. It is anticipated that additional documents will be developed separately to cover aspects of this functionality that are unique to each application domain.

This Aerospace Informational Report (AIR) provides guidance on using environmental, electrochemical, and electrical resistance measurements to monitor environment spectra and corrosivity of service environments, focusing on parameters of interest, existing measurement platforms, deployment requirements, and data processing techniques. The sensors and monitoring systems provide discrete time-based records of 1) environmental parameters such as temperature, humidity, and contaminants; 2) measures of alloy corrosion in the sensor; and 3) protective coating performance in the sensor. These systems provide measurements of environmental parameters, sensor material corrosion rate, and sensor coating condition for use in assessing the risk of atmospheric corrosion of the structure.

The ARP shall cover the objectives and activities of Verification & Vallidation Processes required to assure high quality and/or criticality level of an IVHM Systems and Software.

The processes outlined in this document cover the entire aircraft for both commercial and military applications. In addition to on-board systems, it covers on-ground elements as well. The practical application of this standardized process is detailed in the form of a checklist. As in all HM-1 documents, the scope of this document covers sensing and acquisition systems, typically on board, data transmission systems and processes, methods and hardware for data analysis, and finally, maintenance actions. The on-board aspects relating to safety of flight, pilot notification, etc., are addressed by the other SAE Committees standards and documents. To help explain the process and the use of the checklist, some high-level use cases related to maintenance credit applications are included.

The statement of concerns within this document may be specific to commercial and/or military applications. They also discuss unique concerns between different regulators. They apply to the entire end-to-end health management function throughout the aircraft’s design and operational life, covering on-board and off-board elements. Regulatory approval has been provided to some engine and aircraft Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs), allowing the use of health management functionality to comply with Airworthiness Directives (AD), extend inspection intervals, comply with MSG guidance, or to more effectively utilize component lives to optimize “time on wing.” However, different variations and applications of IVHM systems could bring up new concerns which are not currently addressed in standards, especially when attempting to obtain approval to use higher criticality IVHM systems for airworthiness credit.

This Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) provides insights on how to perform a cost versus benefit (C/B) analysis (CBA) to determine the return on investment that would result from implementing an integrated health management (HM) system on an air vehicle. The word “integrated” refers to the combination or “roll up” of sub-systems health management tools to create a platform-centric system. This document describes the complexity of features that can be considered in the analysis and the different tools and approaches for conducting a CBA, and it differentiates between military and commercial applications. This document is intended to help those who might not have a deep technical understanding or familiarity with HM systems but want to either quantify or understand the economic benefits (i.e., the value proposition) that an HM system could provide.

This document delineates a recommended practice specifically designed for maintenance processes that involve more than one aviation maintenance stakeholders. These include (but are not limited to) Manufacturers, Operators, Maintenance Repair & Overhaul (MRO) organization and Part Providers. The framework's primary aim is to establish the necessary input for evaluating and accepting (or rejecting) implementing a prognostic model based on their impact from the unique perspective of each stakeholder. As a result, this document is best suited for maintenance processes involving Line-Replaceable Units (LRUs), as these system enter a repair process that involved multiple parties external to the airline operator. This document emphasizes economic efficiency in maintenance operations, targeting tasks that are currently managed on a corrective (or run-to-failure) basis outside of the Airline Maintenance Program.

The scope of this document is to clearly lay out the path for an organization to implement a CBM approach to maintenance. The practices will include both CBM in design and in the support phase for fielded equipment.