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
Mar 26, 2019
It's CDNLive! Well, not today, Tuesday and Wednesday, April 2nd and 3rd at the Santa Clara Convention Center. So I have eight things you can do to get the most out of CDNLive and go home with a... [[ Click on the title to access the full blog on the Cadence Community si...
Mar 25, 2019
Do you ever use the same constraint templates in multiple projects? Now, with PADS Professional VX.2.5, you can easily import and export constraints from one project to the next. Constraint templates enable application of complex rules to multiple nets. They help ensure a smo...
Mar 22, 2019
In the video above, it might not appear that much is taking place, but just like with transformers there is “more than meets the eye.” Alright, that was corny, and I am mildly ashamed, but Nanosecond Event Detection for shock and vibration is nothing to be ashamed...
Jan 25, 2019
Let'€™s face it: We'€™re addicted to SRAM. It'€™s big, it'€™s power-hungry, but it'€™s fast. And no matter how much we complain about it, we still use it. Because we don'€™t have anything better in the mainstream yet. We'€™ve looked at attempts to improve conven...