editor's blog
Subscribe Now

Getting Beyond “It Depends” for Certification

More and more electronics are going into places where they could cause real damage if they don’t work right. Things like airplanes and weapons and, in particular, the systems that control them. That goes for hardware and software.

So there are elaborate standards controlling how things have to be done in order to pass muster for such systems. DO-178, DO-278, and DO-254 are only the most visible of these. The problem is that the standards don’t actually tell you what has to be done. They outline a broad process for certification, but exactly what is supposed to happen relies on a key individual: the “designated engineering representative,” or DER.

If you ask, in general, how you get a system certified, the answer is, “It depends.” And one of the things it depends on is the DER. You work with the DER to decide what you need to do for your system to be certified. And just because you did a particular set of things with one DER for one system doesn’t mean you can simply replicate that process with a different DER on another system. If the other DER has different ideas about how things should be done, then you have to go in that direction for the new project.

I (thankfully) don’t live in that particular world, but that’s got to be completely frustrating.

LDRA has offered up a Compliance Management System to help with this. It’s a certification process based on a particular individual, Todd White’s, 30 years of experience as a DER. It incorporates a system of checklists, matrices, and document templates intended to speed the certification process.

It works hand in hand with their certification consulting services, which are probably helpful to ensuring that this works most seamlessly. Using a different DER would, presumably, run the risk of that DER wanting something different. You would think, if these are truly proven elements for certification, that any reasonable DER would be happy to include them into a certification plan – unless they have their own system and insist on doing it their way.

So there’s still the possibility of some “it depends” in the mix, but the goal appears to be to remove some of it.

You can find out more in their recent release.

Leave a Reply

featured blogs
May 24, 2024
Could these creepy crawly robo-critters be the first step on a slippery road to a robot uprising coupled with an insect uprising?...
May 23, 2024
We're investing in semiconductor workforce development programs in Latin America, including government and academic partnerships to foster engineering talent.The post Building the Semiconductor Workforce in Latin America appeared first on Chip Design....

featured video

Introducing Altera® Agilex 5 FPGAs and SoCs

Sponsored by Intel

Learn about the Altera Agilex 5 FPGA Family for tomorrow’s edge intelligent applications.

To learn more about Agilex 5 visit: Agilex™ 5 FPGA and SoC FPGA Product Overview

featured paper

Altera® FPGAs and SoCs with FPGA AI Suite and OpenVINO™ Toolkit Drive Embedded/Edge AI/Machine Learning Applications

Sponsored by Intel

Describes the emerging use cases of FPGA-based AI inference in edge and custom AI applications, and software and hardware solutions for edge FPGA AI.

Click here to read more

featured chalk talk

Reliable Connections for Rugged Handling
Sponsored by Mouser Electronics and Amphenol
Materials handling is a growing market for electronic designs. In this episode of Chalk Talk, Amelia Dalton and Jordan Grupe from Amphenol Industrial explore the variety of connectivity solutions that Amphenol Industrial offers for materials handling designs. They also examine the DIN charging solutions that Amphenol Industrial offers and the specific applications where these connectors can be a great fit.
Dec 5, 2023
22,976 views