 | This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. The specific problem is: getting rid of unexplained bulleted lists; toning down intensity of inscrutable jargon; proofreading (especially for capitalization). (January 2021) |
| Abbreviation |
|
|---|---|
| Latest version | April 19, 2000 |
| Organization | |
| Domain | Aviation electronics |
RTCA DO-254 / EUROCAE ED-80, Design Assurance Guidance for Airborne Electronic Hardware is a document providing guidance for the development of airborne electronic hardware, published by RTCA, Incorporated and EUROCAE. Initially released in 2000, the DO-254/ED-80 standard was not necessarily considered policy until recognized by the FAA in 2005 through AC 20-152 as a means of compliance for the design assurance of electronic hardware in airborne systems.[1] The guidance in this document is applicable, but not limited, to such electronic hardware items as
- Line Replaceable Units (quickly replaceable components)
- Circuit board assemblies (CBA)
- Custom micro-coded components such as field programmable gate arrays (FPGA), programmable logic devices (PLD), and application-specific integrated circuits (ASIC), including any associated macro functions
- Integrated technology components such as hybrid integrated circuits and multi-chip modules
- Commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) components[2]
The document classifies electronic hardware items into simple or complex categories. An item is simple "if a comprehensive combination of deterministic tests and analyses appropriate to the design assurance level can ensure correct functional performance under all foreseeable operating conditions with no anomalous behavior." Conversely, a complex item is one that cannot have correct functional performance ensured by tests and analyses alone; so, assurance must be accomplished by additional means. The body of DO-254/ED-80 establishes objectives and activities for the systematic design assurance of complex electronic hardware, generally presumed to be complex custom micro-coded components, as listed above. However, simple electronic hardware is within the scope of DO-254/ED-80 and applicants propose and use the guidance in this standard to obtain certification approval of simple custom micro-coded components, especially devices that support higher level (A/B) aircraft functions.[3][4]
The DO-254/ED-80 standard is the counterpart to the well-established software standard RTCA DO-178C/EUROCAE ED-12C. With DO-254/ED-80, the certification authorities have indicated that avionics equipment contains both hardware and software, and each is critical to safe operation of aircraft. There are five levels of compliance, A through E, which depend on the effect a failure of the hardware will have on the operation of the aircraft. Level A is the most stringent, defined as "catastrophic" effect (e.g., loss of the aircraft), while a failure of Level E hardware will not affect the safety of the aircraft. Meeting Level A compliance for complex electronic hardware requires a much higher level of verification and validation than Level E compliance.
- ^ Tammy Reeve (May 14, 2024). "Order 8110.105B (and the Evolution of Guidance Surrounding DO-254)". Airworthiness Certification Services. Retrieved 2024-10-23.
When DO-254 was first released in 2000, it wasn't automatically considered policy. This didn't happen until the issuance of AC 20-152 on 6/30/05. An AC, or Advisory Circular, is a document issued by the FAA that provides guidance to the aviation community. AC 20-152 advised the community that RTCA/DO-254 was an acceptable means of compliance for the development of airborne electronic hardware (AEH) to Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) for parts 21, 23, 25, 27, 29 and 33. And with that, following DO-254 became the most commonly used method for compliance of AEH.
- ^ DO-254. p. 3.
- ^ AC 20-152, FAA, Office AIR-100, 2007.
- ^ DO-254. p. 5.
For a simple hardware item, extensive documentation of the design process is unnecessary. The supporting processes of verification and configuration management need to be performed and documented for a simple hardware item, but extensive documentation is not needed. Thus, there is reduced overhead in designing a simple hardware item to comply with this document. The main impact of this document is intended to be on the design of complex hardware items.