Search Results

This recommended practice provides guidance on vehicle Cybersecurity and was created based off of, and expanded on from, existing practices which are being implemented or reported in industry, government and conference papers. ...Other proprietary Cybersecurity development processes and standards may have been established to support a specific manufacturer’s development processes, and may not be comprehensively represented in this document, however, information contained in this document may help refine existing in-house processes, methods, etc. ...This recommended practice establishes a set of high-level guiding principles for Cybersecurity as it relates to cyber-physical vehicle systems. This includes: Defining a complete lifecycle process framework that can be tailored and utilized within each organization’s development processes to incorporate Cybersecurity into cyber-physical vehicle systems from concept phase through production, operation, service, and decommissioning.

This recommended practice provides guidance on vehicle Cybersecurity and was created based off of, and expanded on from, existing practices which are being implemented or reported in industry, government and conference papers. ...Other proprietary Cybersecurity development processes and standards may have been established to support a specific manufacturer’s development processes, and may not be comprehensively represented in this document, however, information contained in this document may help refine existing in-house processes, methods, etc. ...This recommended practice establishes a set of high-level guiding principles for Cybersecurity as it relates to cyber-physical vehicle systems. This includes: Defining a complete lifecycle process framework that can be tailored and utilized within each organization’s development processes to incorporate Cybersecurity into cyber-physical vehicle systems from concept phase through production, operation, service, and decommissioning.

This brief User Guide recaps the content of the AS6518B UCS Architectural Model. The purpose of the UCS Architecture Model is to provide the authoritative source for other models and products within the UCS Architecture as shown in the AS6512B UCS Architecture: Architecture Description.

This specification establishes process controls for the repeatable production of aerospace parts by Electron Beam Powder Bed Fusion (EB-PBF). It is intended to be used for aerospace parts manufactured using additive manufacturing (AM) metal alloys, but usage is not limited to such applications.

Access mechanisms to system data and/or control is a primary use case of the hardware protected security environment (hardware protected security environment) during different uses and stages of the system. The hardware protected security environment acts as a gatekeeper for these use cases and not necessarily as the executor of the function. This section is a generalization of such use cases in an attempt to extract common requirements for the hardware protected security environment that enable it to be a gatekeeper. Examples are: Creating a new key fob Re-flashing ECU firmware Reading/exporting PII out of the ECU Using a subscription-based feature Performing some service on an ECU Transferring ownership of the vehicle Some of these examples are discussed later in this section and some have detailed sections of their own. This list is by no means comprehensive.

This specification establishes process controls for the repeatable production of aerospace parts by Laser Powder Bed Fusion (L-PBF). It is intended to be used for aerospace parts manufactured using Additive Manufacturing (AM) metal alloys, but usage is not limited to such applications.

The basic requirements of AS9100A apply with the following clarifications. This document supplements the requirements of AS9100A for deliverable software. This supplement contains Quality System requirements for suppliers of products that contain deliverable embedded or loadable airborne, spaceborne or ground support software components that are part of an aircraft Type Design, weapon system, missile or spacecraft operational software and/or support software that is used in the development and maintenance of deliverable software. This includes the host operating system software including assemblers, compilers, linkers, loaders, editors, code generators, analyzers, ground simulators and trainers, flight test data reduction, etc., that directly support creation, test and maintenance of the deliverable software.

This document outlines a standard practice for conducting system safety. In some cases, these principles may be captured in other standards that apply to specific commodities such as commercial aircraft and automobiles. For example, those manufacturers that produce commercial aircraft should use SAE ARP4754 or SAE ARP4761 (see Section 2 below) to meet FAA or other regulatory agency system safety-related requirements. The system safety practice as defined herein provides a consistent means of evaluating identified risks. Mishap risk should be identified, evaluated, and mitigated to a level as low as reasonably practicable. The mishap risk should be accepted by the appropriate authority and comply with federal (and state, where applicable) laws and regulations, executive orders, treaties, and agreements. Program trade studies associated with mitigating mishap risk should consider total life cycle cost in any decision.

SMSOLUTIONS0123 represents the work of a team of policy and technical leaders from over a dozen forward-leaning organizations in the ground vehicle industry and government. When asked where Sustainable Mobility Solutions could best apply the capabilities SAE has developed over a century, the SMS group responded without hesitation: address EV charging system failure. The group determined to aggregate charging session data with the view to create a consistent data dictionary and analysis practice. Adopting agile work practices, it studied these data, vetting and iterating its solution with the objective of producing a technical report in approximately half the time required in normal standardization. The resulting document, EV Charging Infrastructure: Charging System Performance Reporting, is informing work by the U.S. Department of Energy and Departments of Energy and Transportation Joint Office, as well as OEMs and suppliers.