Search Results

Atmospheric Neutron Single Event Effects (SEE) are widely known to cause failures in all electronic hardware, and cause proportionately more failures in avionics equipment due to the use altitude. In digital systems it is easy to show how SEE can contribute several orders of magnitude more faults than random (hard) failures. Unfortunately, current avionics Safety assessment methods do not require consideration of faults from SEE. AVSI SEE Task Group (Aerospace Vehicle Systems Institute Committee #72, on Mitigating Radiation Effects in Avionics) is currently coordinating development of an atmospheric Neutron Single Event Effects (SEE) Analysis method. This analysis method is a work in progress, in close collaboration with SAE S-18 and WG-63 Committees (Airplane Safety Assessment Committee). The intent is to include this method as part of current revisions to ARP4761 (Guidelines and Methods for Conducting the Safety Assessment Process on Civil Airborne Systems and Equipment).

The issues of active vs. passive means of power quality improvement in aerospace applications are addressed. The concept of nonlinear load, i.e., the relationship between the current harmonics and system power factor has been reviewed. Both passive and active means of harmonic minimization are discussed, including resonance issues associated with passive networks and presenting an active rectifier switched in a Space Vector (SV) Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) manner. The analysis of power quality in aerospace applications is presented, together with the industry governing standards. Results of case studies are given, using Saber hierarchical tools for the system analysis. Both simulation and experimental results are provided, demonstrating power quality improvements in several aerospace applications.

It’s a common practice to use different kinds tools to aid in the development and verification of modern safety critical avionics systems. These tools play a key role in avionics engineering and used in all project phases: requirements development, software design, source code development, integration, configuration management, and verification. Tools assist to analyze and improve system safety by automation of some of the activities which if performed manually and are therefore prone to human error. However, incorrect functioning of a tool can have negative impact on the safety and performance of the Safety Critical system. Hence, tools are proposed to be qualified whenever any of the design assurance process(es) described in RTCA/DO-178C or RTCA/DO-254 are eliminated, reduced, or automated using the tool unless the output of the tool is verified manually. Qualification of the tool gives confidence in the tool functionality.

The operating environment of aircraft causes accumulation and build-up of contamination on both the narrowest passages of the ECS (Environmental Control System) i.e: the heat exchangers. Accumulated contamination may lead to reduction of performance over time, and in some case to failures causing AOG (Aircraft on Ground), customer dissatisfaction and elevated repair costs. Airframers/airlines eschew fixed maintenance cleaning intervals because of the high cost of removing and cleaning these devices preferring instead to rely on on-condition maintenance. In addition, on-wing cleaning is t impractical because of installation constrains. Hence, it is desirable to have a contamination monitoring that could alert the maintenance crew in advance to prepare and minimize disruption when contamination levels exceed acceptable thresholds. Two methods are proposed to achieve this task, The effectiveness of these methods are demonstrated using analytical and computational tools.