Pozor!

Ve Vašem prohlížeči není aktuálně povoleno spouštění Javascriptu. Je možné, že některé funkce nebudou fungovat správně. Pro plnou funkčnost internetového obchodu doporučujeme povolit Javascript. Zde jsou instrukce jak povolit JavaScript ve Vašem webovém prohlížeči.

Zobrazovaná měna: Kč

Zobrazení ceny: bez DPH

Doplňující informace

ASTM F3269-21

Standard Practice for Methods to Safely Bound Behavior of Aircraft Systems Containing Complex Functions Using Run-Time Assurance

Přeložit název

NORMA vydána dne 15.7.2021

Jazyk
Provedení	Online zabezpečené PDF - 2 191.90 Kč Norma a Redline - Online zabezpečené PDF - 2 630.30 Kč Tištěné - 2 191.90 Kč Tisk + redline - 2 630.30 Kč
Dostupnost	SKLADEM
Cena	2191.90 Kč bez DPH
2 191.90 Kč

Informace o normě:

Označení normy: ASTM F3269-21
Datum vydání normy: 15.7.2021
Kód zboží: NS-1043851
Počet stran: 21
Přibližná hmotnost: 63 g (0.14 liber)
Země: Americká technická norma
Kategorie: Technické normy ASTM

Tisk

Odeslat známému

Dotaz

Kategorie - podobné normy:

Letadla a kosmické dopravní prostředky všeobecně

Anotace textu normy ASTM F3269-21 :

Keywords:

adaptive, airworthiness, artificial intelligence, assurance, automated, autonomous software, autonomy, certification, complex, control systems, deep neural networks, fuzzy logic, machine learning, online verification, reinforcement learning, run-time assurance, safety, safety monitor, security, software, unmanned aircraft system, validation, verification,, ICS Number Code 49.020 (Aircraft and space vehicles in general)

Doplňující informace

Significance and Use

4.1?This practice provides an architectural framework for developing an RTA system, which provides run-time assurance as an alternative to design-time assurance to fulfill safety requirements for an unassured or complex function. The standard provides best practices and guidelines to assist in the RTA systems development. Further, it describes the architectural components and requirements for designing the RTA system. Compliance to this practice is achieved by deriving RTA System requirements from the standard and capturing them in the Larger System Specification. The system design requirements can then be validated and verified using acceptable engineering practices. It is anticipated that this practice will provide a means to accept complex automation/autonomy aircraft functions that have been difficult to certify using traditional methods.

4.2?The following three-step process is used to derive verifiable design requirements using this architecture standard:

4.2.1?Create RTA System requirements using the guidance provided by this architecture standard.

4.2.2?Capture RTA System requirements in the Larger System Specification.

4.2.3?Perform verification and validation on the RTA System requirements in the Larger System Specification.

4.3?The RTA architecture can be applied to all sizes, levels, and classes of UAS. Using run-time assurance can provide systems with the following benefits:

4.3.1?The ability to mitigate hazards related to nondeterministic or unexpected behavior from unassured functions that employ advanced software methods or algorithmic complexity that cannot be certified using traditional certification practices.

4.3.2?The ability to use functions for which it may not be possible to obtain artifacts of conventional DO-178 or DO-254 assurance processes.

4.3.3?The ability to use COTS hardware or software, or both, for the unassured function.

4.3.3.1?For example, automotive components, thereby leveraging mature software with extensive service history that was developed for other safety-critical industries, but cannot be shown to comply with aviation development assurance practices.

4.3.3.2?For example, industry components where source code or other associated engineering artifacts are unavailable.

4.3.4?A reduction in cost and schedule burdens by allowing rapid design iterations of the unassured or complex function during and after initial certification. This update of the standard allows unassured or complex function upgrades after initial certification to minimize subsequent modifications to the certification or approval.

1. Scope

1.1?The scope of this practice includes the following:

1.1.1?A set of components that comprise an RTA system.

1.1.2?Requirements and best practices to determine safe boundaries and RTA system coverage.

1.1.3?Requirements and best practices for an RTA system and RTA components, as applicable.

1.1.4?Appendixes with examples that demonstrate key RTA system concepts.

1.2?RTA components are required to meet the design assurance level dictated by a safety assessment process. Guidance for the safety assessment process may be found in references appropriate for the intended operations (ARP4754A, ARP4761, Practice F3178, etc.).

1.3?This practice was developed with UAS in mind. It may be applicable for aspects of manned aircraft certification/approval, as well as aviation ground systems. The scope of this practice is also envisioned to allow a variety of aircraft implementations where a human may perform the role of either the Complex Function or a Recovery Function.

1.4?The scope of this practice does not cover aspects of hardware/software integration. These should be considered separately during the development process.

Note 1:?This practice does not suggest a one-size-fits-all strategy knowing that not all use cases may fit well into this architecture. There may exist additional components required to satisfy specific applications to the practice.

1.5?The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.

1.6?Table of Contents:?

Title

Section

Introduction

Background

Scope

Referenced Documents

ASTM Standards

2.1

FAA Advisory Circular

2.2

RTCA Standards

2.3

SAE Standards

2.4

Terminology

Unique and Common Terminology

3.3

Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard

3.4

Abbreviations

3.5

Significance and Use

RTA Functional Architecture

Overall Architecture

5.4

Components and Interfaces

5.4.1

RTA System Coverage

5.4.2

RTA Scenarios

5.4.3

Event Sequencing and Timing

5.4.3.8

Best Practices

5.4.4

Requirements

5.4.5

RTA Interfaces

5.5

Input Manager

5.6

Description

5.6.1

Requirements

5.6.2

Safety Monitor

5.7

Requirements

5.7.2

RTA Switch

5.8

Description

5.8.1

Requirements

5.8.2

Recovery Function

5.9

Description

5.9.1

Best Practices

5.9.2

Requirements

5.9.3

Keywords

Ground Collision Avoidance System (GCAS) as an Example
RTA

Appendix X1

Introduction

Unassured Function

X1.1

RTA Required Inputs

X1.2

RTA Input Manager

X1.3

Safety Monitor

X1.4

Recovery Function

X1.5

RTA Switch

X1.6

Vehicle Management System

X1.7

Machine Learning AI Autopilot (MLAA)

Appendix X2

Introduction

Assured and Unassured Data

X2.1

Input Manager

X2.2

Complex Function

X2.3

Safety Monitors

X2.4

Recovery Control Function

X2.5

RTA Switch

X2.6

Summary

X2.7

Run-Time Assurance for a Neural Network-Based Adaptive
Flight Control of an Unmanned Aircraft

Appendix X3

Visual Line-of-Sight Operations

X3.1

Beyond Visual Line-of-Sight Operation

X3.2

Run-Time Assurance for Risk-Based Operation

Appendix X4

Example Implementation of Timing and Latency Requirement

Appendix X5

References

1.7?This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

1.8?This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

Doporučujeme:

EviNor - Řízení a aktualizace českých norem