1、_ SAE Technical Standards Board Rules provide that: “This report is published by SAE to advance the state of technical and engineering sciences. The use of this report is entirely voluntary, and its applicability and suitability for any particular use, including any patent infringement arising there
2、from, is the sole responsibility of the user.” SAE reviews each technical report at least every five years at which time it may be reaffirmed, revised, or cancelled. SAE invites your written comments and suggestions. Copyright 2011 SAE International All rights reserved. No part of this publication m
3、ay be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE. TO PLACE A DOCUMENT ORDER: Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada) Tel: 724-776-4970 (outside USA)
4、 Fax: 724-776-0790 Email: CustomerServicesae.org SAE WEB ADDRESS: http:/www.sae.orgSAE values your input. To provide feedback on this Technical Report, please visit http:/www.sae.org/technical/standards/ARP5890AAEROSPACERECOMMENDEDPRACTICEARP5890A Issued 2002-11 Revised 2011-02 Superseding ARP5890 (
5、R) Guidelines for Preparing Reliability Assessment Plans for Electronic Engine Controls RATIONALEThis document has been reviewed by the E36 committee as part of the recommended a 5-year update plan. The committee felt this document should be updated to reflect current practice, which has moved on co
6、nsiderably since its initial publication.TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. SCOPE 22. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS 32.1 SAE Publications . 32.2 IEEE Publications 32.3 International Electrotechnical Commission Publications 32.4 Reliability Information Analysis Center Publications . 32.5 U.S. Military Publications 42.6 Oth
7、er Publications . 43. PLAN TERMS, DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS . 44. RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT PLAN FOR ELECTRONIC ENGINE CONTROLS . 54.1 Plan Content . 54.1.1 Process . 64.1.2 Data . 104.1.3 Methods 144.1.4 Results 234.1.5 Reliability Assessment Process Improvement 254.2 Plan Applicability . 264.3 Pl
8、an Organization 264.4 Plan Implementation . 274.5 Plan Focal Point 274.6 Plan References 275. NOTES 27APPENDIX A SIMILARITY ANALYSIS EXAMPLES . 28APPENDIX B DURABILITY ANALYSIS 40APPENDIX C OTHER SOURCES OF INFORMATION 52FIGURE 1 RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM . 10FIGURE 2 RELIABILITY REQUIREMENTS R
9、EPORT FORM . 12FIGURE 3 SIMILARITY ANALYSIS CHECKLIST 16FIGURE 4 DURABILITY ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST 18FIGURE 5 SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS CHECKLIST 20FIGURE 6 HANDBOOK CHECKLIST 22Copyright SAE International Provided by IHS under license with SAENot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without l
10、icense from IHS-,-,-SAE ARP5890A Page 2 of 541. SCOPE This document establishes guidelines for a Reliability Assessment Plan (herein also called the Plan), in which Electronic Engine Control manufacturers document their controlled, repeatable processes for assessing reliability of their products. Ea
11、ch Electronic Engine Control manufacturer (the Plan owner) prepares a Plan, which is unique to the Plan owner. This document describes processes that are intended for use in assessing the reliability of Electronic Engine Controls, or subassemblies thereof. The results of such assessments are intende
12、d for use as inputs to safety analyses, certification analyses, equipment design decisions, system architecture selection and business decisions such as warranties or maintenance cost guarantees. This Guide may be used to prepare plans for reliability assessment of electronic engine controls in whic
13、h, typically, the impact of failure is high, the operating environment can be relatively severe and the opportunity to improve the equipment after the start of production is limited. In this and similar industries, accurate estimates of expected equipment reliability are necessary prior to the start
14、 of production. This guide was initially produced in response to the recognized need for alternative reliability assessment and prediction methods in the wake of the decline in the availability of mil-spec parts and the declining use of military specifications and handbooks. Since the original publi
15、cation of this document, a more advanced approach to handbook prediction has been developed, re-introducing this assessment method as a more viable option. This re-issue describes recent handbook advances while also highlighting a number of emerging reliability risks resulting from advances in elect
16、ronic component development.The approach to reliability assessment in this Guide: x Encourages the equipment manufacturer (the Plan owner) to consider all relevant information regarding equipment reliability which may include the effects of design and manufacturing process as well as component selec
17、tion issues. This is in contrast to more traditional methods that focus on component reliability as the most significant contributor to the equipment reliability. x Encourages the equipment manufacturer to define and use the processes that are most effective for the manufacturers own equipment. This
18、 guide does not attempt to prescribe a set of acceptable data, algorithms, methods, or equations to be used in reliability assessment, but rather to provide a toolbox of complementary assessment methodologies based upon a number of current practices. x Describes a continuous process, in which a reli
19、ability assessment can be updated as more information becomes available during the equipment life cycle. This information may be used to improve both the reliability of the equipment and the effectiveness of the assessment process. Reliability assessment results should be viewed as objective evidenc
20、e that it is expected the product reliability requirements and goals will be satisfied, by the proposed design. As such, they may be used, for example, to authorize advancement to the next step in product development, or to authorize progress payments, or to proceed with delivery and acceptance of p
21、roducts. Reliability assessment results should never be used to support a claim that the reliability requirements, goals, or expectations have been satisfied, in the face of clear evidence to the contrary from in-service experience.Traditional approaches to reliability assessment, including Handbook
22、 Predictions and Durability Analysis described herein, primarily address unreliability resulting from hardware defects within the equipment. It is not the intention of the ARP to provide methods and processes to specifically address software and system reliability issues but it is recognized that sy
23、stem and software design errors contribute to product unreliability and that the use of Similarity Analysis, for instance, can encompass these sources of unreliability. This SAE Aerospace Recommended (ARP) Practice is intended as a guide towards standard practice and is subject to change to keep pac
24、e with experience and technical advances. Copyright SAE International Provided by IHS under license with SAENot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-SAE ARP5890A Page 3 of 542. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS The following publications form a part of this document to t
25、he extent specified herein. The latest issue of SAE publications shall apply. In the event of conflict between the text of this document and references cited herein, the text of this document takes precedence. Nothing in this document, however, supersedes applicable laws and regulations unless a spe
26、cific exemption has been obtained. 2.1 SAE Publications Available from SAE International, 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001, Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada) or 724-776-4970 (outside USA), www.sae.org.ARP4754 Certification Considerations for Highly-Integrated or Complex Airc
27、raft Systems ARP4761 Guidelines and Methods for Conducting the Safety Assessment Process on Civil Airborne Systems and Equipment870050 Automotive Electronic Reliability Prediction 2.2 IEEE Publications Available from Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ 08
28、854-4141, Tel 732-981-0060, http:/www.ieee.org/.IEEE 1413 Standard Methodology for Reliability Predictions and Assessment for Electronic Systems and Equipment 2.3 International Electrotechnical Commission Publications Available from International Electrotechnical Commission, 3, rue de Varembe, P.O.
29、Box 131, 1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland, Tel: +44-22-919-02-11, http:/www.iec.ch/.IEC 61508 Functional Safety of Electrical / Electronic / Programmable Electronics Safety related Systems IEC 61709 Electronic Components Reliability Reference Conditions for Failure Rates and Stress Models for ConversionI
30、EC 62396 Process management for avionics Atmospheric radiation effects IEC 62239 Process management for avionics Preparation of an Electronic Components Management Plan2.4 Reliability Information Analysis Center Publications Available from RIAC, 201 Mill Street, Rome, NY 13440-6916. http:/theriac.or
31、g/riacapps/search/ RiAC EPRD- Electronic parts Reliability Data RiAC VZAP Electrostatic discharge Susceptibility Data RiAC 217PlustmIntegrated software tool for assessing system and component reliability Copyright SAE International Provided by IHS under license with SAENot for ResaleNo reproduction
32、or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-SAE ARP5890A Page 4 of 542.5 U.S. Military Publications Available from the Document Automation and Production Service (DAPS), Building 4/D, 700 Robbins Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19111-5094, Tel: 215-697-6257, http:/assist.daps.dla.mil/quicksearch/.
33、MIL-HDBK-217 Reliability Prediction of Electronic Equipment MIL-HDBK-87244 Avionics/Electronics Integrity 2.6 Other Publications ANSI / VITA 51.1-2008 Reliability Prediction MIL-HDBK-217 Subsidiary Specification British Telecom Handbook “Handbook of Reliability Data for Components used in Telecommun
34、ications Systems”, British Telecom, Materials and Components Centre, 1987 British Telecom “Handbook for Reliability Data”, Issue 5 (HRD5) Centre National DEtudes des Telecommunications (CNET) Handbook UTE-C 80811 FIDES - Reliability Methodology for Electronic Systems GEIA-STD-0005-1: Performance Sta
35、ndard for Aerospace and High Performance Electronic Systems Containing Lead-free Solder GEIA-STD-0005-2: Standard for Mitigating the Effects of Tin Whiskers in Aerospace and High performance electronic Systems GEIA-HB-0005-2: Technical Guidelines for Aerospace and High performance electronic Systems
36、 Containing Lead-free Solder and Finishes ISBN 0-471-78617-9: Lead Free Electronics: Edited by Ganesan and Pecht JESD47F - JEDEC Solid State Technology Association - Stress-Test-Driven Qualification of Integrated Circuits Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Handbook Siemens Standard SN29500 Technical Ref
37、erence SR-332 “Reliability Prediction Procedure for Electronic Equipment”, Telcordia Technologies 3. PLAN TERMS, DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS The Plan author should make every effort to prevent ambiguous or inconsistant statements within the plan by the utilisation of consistant terms and definitio
38、ns. Abbreviations and acronyms should be spelled out and compiled if used frequently. The list below provides some examples, from this ARP, which may be of use to the author in the production of the plan. Durability Analysis: An analysis of the equipments responses to the stresses imposed by operati
39、onal use, maintenance, shipping, storage, and other activities throughout its specified lifecycle in order to estimate its expected life. Electronic Components: Electrical or electronic devices that are not subject to disassembly without destruction or impairment of design use. They are sometimes ca
40、lled parts, or piece parts. Examples are resistors, diodes, etc. Electronic Engine Control: Primarily LRU (EEC) but not excluding possible application to other elements of the control system. Copyright SAE International Provided by IHS under license with SAENot for ResaleNo reproduction or networkin
41、g permitted without license from IHS-,-,-SAE ARP5890A Page 5 of 54Electronic Equipment: An item, e.g., end item, sub-assembly, line-replaceable unit, shop replaceable unit, or system, designed by the Plan owner. FEA: Finite Element Analysis FFOP: Failure-Free Operating Period FMEA: Failure Mode and
42、Effect Analysis FMECA: Failure Mode Effect and Criticality Analysis FRACAS: Failure Reporting, Analysis and Corrective Action System FTA: Fault Tree Analysis HCI: Hot Carrier Injection Life-Cycle: A period of time extending from the equipment concept design phase through to the end of in-service sup
43、port and disposal. LOTC: Loss Of Thrust Control LRU: Line Replaceable Unit MFOP: Maintenance-Free Operating Period MTBF: Mean Time Between Failures MTBUR: Mean Time Between Unscheduled Removals NBTI: Negative Bias Temperature Instability OEM: Original Equipment Manufacturer PCB: Printed Circuit Boar
44、d Reliability: The ability of an item to perform a required function under stated conditions for a stated period of time. Similarity Analysis: The structured comparison of the elements of the equipment being assessed with those of predecessor equipment for which in-service reliability data are avail
45、able. SRU: Shop Replaceable Unit TBBD: Time Dependent Dielectric Breakdown TLD: Time Limited Dispatch TTF: Time to Failure 4. RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT PLAN FOR ELECTRONIC ENGINE CONTROLS 4.1 Plan Content A Reliability Assessment Plan for Electronic Engine Controls, prepared in accordance with this Gui
46、de, should record the processes used to satisfy the provisions of 4.1.1 through 4.1.5, shown schematically in the Assessment Diagram ofFigure 1. Copyright SAE International Provided by IHS under license with SAENot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-SAE AR
47、P5890A Page 6 of 54Detailed descriptions of the reliability assessment process should be included in the Plan owners document. The Plan should show how the sub-processes of 4.1 fit together to form the entire reliability assessment process. Use of a diagram similar to that of Figure 1 is recommended
48、 to communicate the major elements of the Plan. To avoid duplicating descriptions of processes that may already be documented elsewhere, the Plan owner may refer to other documents in the Plan owners controlled document system as described in 4.6. 4.1.1 Process Reliability assessments depend upon a correct understanding of the reliability requirements and should be conducted according to a documented, controlled, and repeatable process that combines those dat
