HighRely Whitepapers      

Certifying software to DO178B and DO254 avionics standards typically increases development costs by 75% to 150%. If proper SEI/CMMI environments exist, the added DO-178B/DO-254 costs will be only 10-40% more. When DO-178B and DO-254 are implemented efficiently, the initial increased avionics development cost is much less and will actually be cost-effective over the long-term. The belief that D0178 and D0254 costs 100%-200% more is incorrect. HighRely’s engineers have successfully completed over 150 DO-178B and DO-254 projects using certified Project Management Institute (PMI) lean avionics project methods and metrics. HighRely’s DO-178B and DO-254 formal training clearly shows how to reduce avionics certification costs by 30%-50%. Properly managed avionics DO-178B and DO-254 projects are actually more cost-effective over the long-term because of improved reusability, higher reliability, lower life-cycle and maintenance costs, fewer bug fixes/down-time, and increased market penetration/acceptance. For details on DO178B and DO254 costs please request the proprietary HighRely whitepaper

D0178 and D0254 avionics certification standards require certain tool qualification for avionics software, hardware, and testing tools. But the question of what avionics tools require DO-178B and DO-254 qualification and is relevant. HighRely’s proprietary DO178B/DO254 Tool Qualification Whitepaper provides detailed answers, but the following summarizes. There are two types of avionics tools which could require formal DO178B or DO254 tool qualification: development tools and verification tools. Avionics development tool qualification is required if a tool has the potential to insert an error into the system for which other applied DO178B or DO254 lifecycle steps would not detect. Avionics test tool qualification is required if a tool cannot insert an error but may fail to detect an error, and the other applied DO-178 or DO-254 lifecycle steps would not detect. There are numerous other considerations for DO-178B, DO-178C, and DO-254 avionics tool qualification which are addressed in HighRely’s whitepaper.

The U.S. and foreign militaries have adopted D0178B and D0254 certifiability and compliance. Some reasons for Military DO178B and DO154 adoption are similar to the commercial avionics certification sector: improved avionics consistency, avionics quality, measurable and verifiable avionics quality, increased avionics re-usability, and lower avionics development costs. HighRely’s engineers have worked on many military avionics projects and trained many U.S. and foreign military personnel in DO-178B and DO-254 and noted that the military’s 2167A and 490 specifications were 60% similar to DO178B and DO254. However, DO-178B and DO-254 are more specific than 2167A and 490 for avionics project planning, avionics quality assurance, avionics design details, avionics robustness testing, avionics structural coverage testing, and avionics tool qualification. The military has adopted DO-178B and DO-254 to obtain improvement in these areas and also produce consistency among its larger number of avionics suppliers and subcontractors. The military does not require formal DO-178B and DO-254 certification, but instead requires DO-178B and DO-254 compliance, meaning the military oversees and approves compiance instead of the FAA overseeing certification. The FAA is not actively involved in approval of military avionics. For details on DO178B and DO254 for Military, please request the proprietary HighRely whitepaper

Safety-critical systems including DO-178B and DO-254 require traceability. But what is DO-178 and DO-254 Traceability? This whitepaper describes all aspects of DO178 and DO254 traceability including top-to-bottom and bottom-to-top closed loop traceability for DO-178B and DO-254. Popular traceability tools for DO-178B & DO-254 are discussed as well as traceability trade-offs for D0-178B and D0-254. Requirements traceability, design traceability, and test traceability within DO-254 and DO-178 are all described along with means to maximize effectiveness for DO178B & DO254 traceability. This whitepaper is a synopsis of the chapter on traceability from Vance Hilderman's and Tony Baghai's newly published avionics certification book titled "Avionics Certification: A Complete Guide To DO-178B & DO-254" now available from major bookstores and Amazon. This information is elaborated upon in HighRely's world-class DO-178B and DO-254 Training with a special training module on DO-178B & DO-254 traceability.

Embedded software development requires great discipline and experience. As technology advances and there is more emphasis placed on traditional PC applications, Engineers with embedded software development skills are becoming more difficult to find. This adversely affects companies because the lack of embedded software development skills lead to cost overruns during testing, delayed time to market, and unplanned rework of products out in the field. All of this ultimately leads to low profit margins and lessens the quality of product. However, these adversities can be overcome if an embedded software developer is cognizant of the dynamics of the embedded environment and designs the embedded application to be small, efficient, and pays careful consideration to testability.

At HighRely, we train many companies and individuals in the “hands-on” application of DO-178B and how to most effectively understand and use this obtuse document. The purpose of this HighRely Reliable Whitepaper is to educate the reader in how a leading avionics services company uses DO-178B on a regular basis.

This HighRely DO-178B whitepaper describes the most common DO178B problems and how to prevent them. What are the most common D0-178B problems? Simply, doing too much work ($), and neglecting key artifacts/steps which cause DO-178B cost overruns averaging 55%. With expert DO-178B training and set-up, this is unnecessary. Specific risks are: 1) inadequate DO-178B low-level software requirements; 2) vagueness within the five key DO-178B process plans prior to initiating those lifecycles; 3) insufficient independence of DO-178B reviews; 4) insufficient DO-178B checklists for reviews; 5) inadequate DO-178B traceability between components; 6) insufficient advance FAA DO-178B coordination/approvals; 7) incomplete DO-178B structural coverage for decision condition and MCDC coverage; 8) over-doing DO-178B tool qualification; 9) not using a certifiable DO-178B RTOS such as Integrity-178B; 10) avionics outsourcing without a clear RTCA DO-178B Project Plan covering details for the avionic outsource team; and 11) reading the RTCA/DO-178B document word-for-word and not understanding the true intent. This HighRely DO-178B whitepaper further clarifies and provides details on how to mitigate these top avionics development & certification risks.

This HighRely whitepaper “DO-178B Overview and Process Flow” summarizes the key DO178B phases, DO-178B lifecycle models, DO-178B documentation, and DO-178B certification. A DO178B overview is provided, along with a summary of the required DO-178B artifacts and DO178B documents. The DO-178B integral processes are described, along with a project management timeline showing DO-178B software development phases and relationships. This whitepaper is a subset synopsis of HighRely’s proprietary DO-178B training which covers all this material in greatly expanded detail.

Certifying software to DO178B and DO254 avionics standards typically increases development costs by 75% to 150%. When DO-178B and DO-254 are implemented efficiently, the initial increased avionics development cost is much less and will actually be cost-effective over the long-term. The belief that D0178 and D0254 costs 100%-200% more is incorrect. HighRely’s engineers have successfully completed over 150 DO-178B and DO-254 projects using certified Project Management Institute (PMI) lean avionics project methods and metrics. HighRely’s DO-178B and DO-254 formal training clearly shows how to reduce avionics certification costs by 30%-50%. Properly managed avionics DO-178B and DO-254 projects are actually more cost-effective over the long-term because of improved reusability, fewer bug fixes/down-time, and increased market penetration/acceptance. For details on DO178B and DO254 costs please request the proprietary HighRely whitepaper.

The D0-254 airborne electronic hardware development guidance document is the counterpart to the well-established software standard RTCA D0-178B /EUROCAE ED-12B. In fact, both DO-178B and DO-254 share a common heritage, structure, and authorship overlap. With DO254 as summarized in HighRely’s whitepaper, the FAA has recognized that airborne systems are comprised of both hardware and software, with each equal in importance. Like a chain which is only as strong as its weakest link, systems are comprised of both hardware and software and each needs its own certification guideline. The DO-254 guideline is applicable to all hierarchical stratifications of hardware developed for airborne systems including Line Replaceable Units (LRUs), Circuit Card/Board Assemblies (CCAs), custom micro-coded components (e.g. ASIC, PLD, FPGA, CPLD), integrated hybrids and multi-chip components, and Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) devices. This HighRely D0254 whitepaper details the DO-254 certification process, DO254 compliance, commercial and military DO-254, and DO-254 strategies and issues. HighRely also provides DO-254 Training which is all-new and delivered by trainers who have trained more persons in DO-254 and DO-178B than all other trainers combined.

Certifying hardware to the RTCA DO-254 avionics standard typically increases development costs by 10% to 70%. If proper processes and efficiencies exist, the added DO254 costs will be only 10-40% more. When D0-254 is implemented efficiently, the initial increased avionics development cost is much less and will actually be cost-effective over the long-term. The belief that D0254 costs 100%-200% more is incorrect. HighRely’s engineers have successfully completed over 150 DO-178B and DO-254 projects using certified Project Management Institute (PMI) lean avionics project methods and metrics. HighRely’s DO-254 formal training clearly shows how to reduce avionics certification costs by 30%-50%. Properly managed DO-254 hardware projects are actually more cost-effective over the long-term because of improved reusability, higher reliability, lower life-cycle and maintenance costs, fewer error fixes/down-time, and increased market penetration/acceptance. For details on DO254 costs please request the proprietary HighRely whitepaper titled “DO-254 Costs & Benefits” or attend HighRely’s all-new DO-254 Training classes.

This HighRely whitepaper describes the 13 most common DO-254 mistakes and how you can avoid each of them. DO254 can easily double or triple your hardware development costs if any of these D0-254 mistakes are made. This HighRely whitepaper covers D0254 mistakes associated with hardware requirements definition, hardware traceabilty, complex versus simple hardware certification, applying DO-254 to components versus systems, independence, DO-254 test coverage, DO-254 tool qualification, and DO-254 automated testing. HighRely explains why these DO-254 areas are important and how to avoid these common DO254 mistakes.

DO-254 Verification is a key component of DO254 certification. However, there are two main challenges in D0254 testing of HDL components: controllability and visibility. All DO254 test efforts are scoped toward getting the Device Under Test (DUT) to behave via a predefined set of stimulus in a predictably consistent and deterministic fashion. The purpose of this HighRely Reliable Whitepaper on DO-254 Testing and Verification is to educate the reader in how a leading avionics services company considers DO-254 approaches for hardware verification activities on a regular basis. HighRely also provides DO-254 Training which is all-new and delivered by trainers who have trained more persons in DO-254 and DO-178B than all other trainers combined.

This HighRely white paper “Safety Engineering and Systems Safety Assessments using ARP4761” summarizes and provides the key activities of SAE-ARP4761. The key areas will be Safety Assessment Process (high level); Functional Hazard Assessment (FHA),-Functional Failure Paths; Preliminary System Safety Assessment: System Safety Assessment, FHA, FMEA, Common Causal Analysis, Zonal Safety Analysis, Particular Risks Analysis, Common Mode Analysis, Fault Tree Analyses; Requirements Validation; System Verification. When developing real-time embedded software for safety-critical applications there must be a solid experience of the Safety Engineering processes, tools and techniques used to manage, develop, analyze and evaluate high-integrity systems across a wide spectrum of safety critical industries. This whitepaper is a subset synopsis of HighRely’s proprietary System Safety training which covers all this material in greatly expanded detail.

The FAA and FDA have product avionics certification requirements and medical device certification requirements which are aimed at new product development. However, in many cases existing products are re-used or certified as-is. In such cases, DO178B, DO254, and FDA Gap Analysis is applied to achieve certification. Gap Analysis is an evaluation of your current engineering process , artifacts, and product to determine missing elements required for end-item certification. Typical missing items include low-level requirements, design documentation, independent reviews, and certain low-level tests. Gap Analysis is typically performed by trained avionics or medical device consultants including those from HighRely. The resultant Gap Analysis RoadMap assesses all of the software/hardware processes and artifacts; it provides details for filling the gap to meet FAA or FDA compliance. Additional details are provided in HighRely’s Whitepaper

Information technology projects run over budget by about 43%, representing more than $17 billion in IT spending. Is embedded software development such as Avionics or Medical Devices really different than developing any other quality IT product? The answer is No; What is unique are the FHA/FMEA, independent reviews/processes, code coverage, and FAA/FDA Liaison/certification. Embedded project management entails deadlines that are engraved in stone, faster time-to-market, more complexity, more 3rd party tools/products, and more challenge with integrating all the preceding items. Companies that adopt a more measured or standardized approach to establishing contingency plans and to avoid troubles will do a better job of meeting deadlines. To be successful, high reliability embedded projects need new metrics and methodologies; this means considering the Schedule Performance Index (SPI) and Cost Performance Index (CPI) over the traditional “Cost/Schedule” control system. HighRely has proven methods of using “dashboard” methodologies to create better management of embedded software projects. Details on HighRely project management methodologies are discussed in this Whitepaper.

The good news for embedded software and hardware developers is that the variety and number of tools to assist their efforts are rapidly increasing. The bad news is the qualify of these tools is often weak, integration and complexity issues are expanding, and cost-effectiveness is difficult to ascertain. HighRely’s engineer’s experience in developing hundreds of safety-critical projects and using embedded tools is summarized in this Whitepaper. Specific tools covered include Modeling Tools, Code Generation Tools, Software and Hardware Testing Tools, Structural Coverage Tools, Unit Testing Tools, Requirements Generation and Tracking Tools, Static Code Analysis Tools, and qualified FDA and DO-178B/DO-254 Tools. Tool integration, usability, interoperability, cost versus benefit analysis, and actual independent recommendations are provided in this HighRely Whitepaper.

FANS is the internationally agreed "next-generation" plan for more efficient communication, navigation, surveillance and air traffic management (CNS/ATM), based heavily on satellite technology. The FANS modification package typically consists of the following systems:
• Flight Management System software upgrade package
• GPS (Global Positioning System)
• SATCOM (satellite communications)
• ACARS/Data Link (Aircraft Communication And Reporting System)
• EFIS (Electronic Flight Instrument System) display

GPS is a worldwide radio-navigation system formed from a constellation of 24 satellites and their ground stations. GPS uses satellites as reference points to calculate positions accurate to a matter of meters. GPS receivers have been miniaturized to just a few integrated circuits.
The basis of GPS is “triangulation”. To “triangulate,” a GPS receiver measures distance using the travel time of radio signals. To measure travel time, GPS needs very accurate timing. Along with distance, you need to know exactly where the satellites are in space. You must also correct for any delays the signal experiences as it travels through the atmosphere.

This paper describes how recent developments in static analysis techniques, so-called Static Verification, can be efficiently used in conjunction with functional testing techniques in order to substantially reduce debugging, code inspection, and robustness testing efforts. Static testing is a key verification technique for critical embedded systems, such as those which HighRely produces. Included in this HighRely static analysis whitepaper are the key features static analyzers must have and analysis techniques for improving quality within embedded software. This static-analysis whitepaper discusses how Static Verification streamlines the functional tests by simply showing errors before they cause disruptions later on while these tests are performed. Proper application of static verification, or static analysis, greatly improves quality and improves cost-effectiveness for embedded software by detecting and correcting defects at the earliest possible stage.

What are the salary and compensation levels for embedded software engineers? This whitepaper by HighRely Inc describes the pay ranges, salaries, and compensation for avionics engineers, medical device engineers, embedded software engineers, and aerospace software engineers, by experience level, skill level, job category, and geographic area. Compiled by HighRely in over one year of aerospace engineer compensation surveys and medical device software engineering consultations, this Whitepaper on embedded engineering pay rates and salaries will assist engineers and managers in determining what they should earn, or pay, embedded software engineers. Also detailed are embedded software consulting company bill rates, compiled by a survey of consulting engineers and embedded consulting companies. Not surprisingly, the highest engineering pay rates are found in areas which maximize coastal access, access to a cosmopolitan area, mild winters, and multiple potential employers. Also not surprisingly is the correlation of living expenses in these same areas: top-ranked engineers simply want the same amenities as everyone. But this HighRely embedded software engineer salary and compensation survey describes the detailed pay data, along with recommendations on compensating, motivating, hiring, and retaining embedded software engineers.

Once upon a time, there was the FDA's "GMP", which detailed the "Good Manufacturing Practices" for medical device software. However, "Good" occasionally meant "Far From Great", and the revolution began. This whitepaper by HighRely Inc describes today's need to develop medical devices from finer-grained subcomponents, with open interfaces that can be composed in flexible ways, to achieve a broad range of functionalities. In addition, these devices need to be network-centric so they can interoperate following a "plug-and-play" paradigm. And all of this advanced software must comply with the FDA's new 510(k) submission process. Given the evolving medical device landscape, what should manufacturers consider with respect to safety and the FDA?

Software development for medical devices under the FDA 510(k) QSR/QSM process is easy if you have unlimited budget and schedule and only want to make one product, one time. However, if you want to achieve efficient certification of medical device software while achieving FDA 510k QSR compliance, you'll need to be smarter. This HighRely medical device software development white paper describes the FDA 510(k) process, QSM process, 510k/QSM documentation, medical device software design and verification/validation, QSM/QSR audits, COTS software in medical devices, and the general FDA 510(k) QSR software development methodology along with common software tools for achieving successful FDA certification.

This HighRely FDA 510(k QSR/QSM white paper describes the most common medical device software development problems and how to prevent them. What are the most common medical device software development/verification problems? Simply, doing too much work ($), and neglecting key artifacts/steps which cause cost overruns averaging 40%. With expert 510(k/QSR training and set-up, this is unnecessary. Specific risks are: 1) inadequate medical device software requirements; 2) vagueness within the key 510(k) and QSR software process plans prior to initiating those lifecycles; 3) insufficient artifacts, reviews, and audits; 4) insufficient FDA QSR checklists for reviews; 5) inadequate 510(k) software traceability between components; 6) inefficient consideration of commercial products and tools during development; 7) incomplete verification/validation; 8) over-doing the FDA software verification process 9) not using a sufficient COTS RTOS such as Green Hills Integrity; 10) medical device software development outsourcing without a clear FDA 510(k) compliant QSR Software Development Project Plan covering details for the medical device outsource team; and 11) reading the FDA QSR/QSM regulations word-for-word and not understanding the true intent. This HighRely medical device whitepaper further clarifies and provides details on how to mitigate these top medical device development & certification risks.