DOT/FAA/TC-12/21 Qualification of Tools for Airborne Federal Aviation Administration Electronic Hardware William J. Hughes Technical Center Aviation Research Division Atlantic City International Airport New Jersey 08405 June 2014 Final Report This document is available to the U.S. public through the National Technical Information Services (NTIS), Springfield, Virginia 22161. This document is also available from the Federal Aviation Administration William J. Hughes Technical Center at actlibrary.tc.faa.gov. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof. The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of the funding agency. This document does not constitute FAA policy. Consult the FAA sponsoring organization listed on the Technical Documentation page as to its use. This report is available at the Federal Aviation Administration William J. Hughes Technical Center’s Full-Text Technical Reports page: actlibrary.tc.faa.gov in Adobe Acrobat portable document format (PDF). Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. DOT/FAA/TC-12/21 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date QUALIFICATION OF TOOLS FOR AIRBORNE ELECTRONIC HARDWARE June 2014 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Brian Butka1, Andrew J. Kornecki1, and Janusz Zalewski2 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) 1 Embry Riddle Aeronautical University 2 Florida Gulf Coast University 600 S. Clyde Morris Blvd. 10501 FGCU Blvd S 11. Contract or Grant No. Daytona Beach, FL 32114 Fort Myers, FL 33965 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered U.S. Department of Transportation Final Report Federal Aviation Administration Aircraft Certification Service—Design, Manufacturing, and Airworthiness FAA National Headquarters 950 L’Enfant Plaza, S.W. Washington DC 20024 14. Sponsoring Agency Code AIR-134 15. Supplementary Notes The Federal Aviation Administration Aviation Research Division CORs were Charles Kilgore and Emmanuel Papadopoulos. 16. Abstract The objective of this research was to study the use and qualification of tools used in developing airborne electronic hardware (AEH) for aircraft. The AEH are custom, microcoded components, or devices used as part of the airborne system. The primary technologies include Programmable Logic Devices, Field Programmable Gate Arrays, Application-Specific Integrated Circuits, and similar circuits used as components of programmable electronic hardware. The avionics standard RTCA DO-254 provides design assurance guidance on project conception, planning, design, implementation, testing, and supporting processes in the hardware design life cycle. In particular, details are discussed regarding the processes that must be followed in respective tools’ assessment and qualification. This study seeks to identify and address potential safety issues in qualifying both hardware design tools and hardware verification tools. The study was conducted in several steps, which included: literature search; industry survey; identification of primary safety, performance, and certification concerns; developing a plan for validating these concerns; conducting experiments with the tools; evaluating the experiments; and producing the final report. The results of this study were aimed at the determination of the major issues related to using tools that support AEH design and verification and recommendations for addressing these issues in the assessment and qualification process. 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement Programmable logic, Tools, Qualification, Airborne electronic This document is available to the U.S. public through the hardware National Technical Information Service (NTIS), Springfield, Virginia 22161. This document is also available from the Federal Aviation Administration William J. Hughes Technical Center at actlibrary.tc.faa.gov. 19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 185 Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY x 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Objectives 2 1.2 Problem Statement 2 1.3 Research Method 3 1.4 Audience 3 1.5 Results 4 1.6 Document Structure 4 2. BACKGROUND 5 2.1 Software and Hardware Relationship 6 2.2 Programmable Logic History 7 2.3 A Typical Airborne Electronic Hardware Development Flow 8 2.4 The AEH Design 10 2.5 Verification of AEH 13 2.6 Simple vs. Complex Electronic Hardware 14 2.7 The AEH Tool Categories 14 2.8 The AEH Tools in DO-254 Framework 17 2.8.1 The DO-254 Design Assurance Guidance 17 2.8.2 The DO-254 Tool Guidance 18 2.9 What Is a Tool? 20 2.10 When Tool Qualification Is Required 20 2.11 Tools’ Disclaimers 22 3. ALTERNATIVES TO TOOL ASSESSMENT AND QUALIFICATION 23 3.1 Independent Assessment of the Tool’s Outputs 23 3.1.1 The Meaning of Independent Assessment 24 3.1.2 Independent Processes at All Phases of the Design 25 3.1.3 What Happens When the Independent Assessment Results Do Not Agree? 25 3.1.4 Independent Assessment Is a Process, Not an Event 25 iii 3.2 Service History 26 3.2.1 Service History Case Studies 26 3.2.2 Service History Guidance for Hardware 27 3.2.3 Service History for Design Tools 28 3.2.4 Service History vs. the Latest Technology 28 3.2.5 Tool Service History Is Not Sufficient 28 3.2.6 Testing Maturity Model 29 4. DESIGN ASSURANCE 29 4.1 Constrained Random Verification 29 4.2 Observability 30 4.3 Derived Requirements 31 5. SURVEY OF TOOL USERS 32 5.1 Aviation Community Survey 32 5.1.1 Survey Population 32 5.1.2 Multiple Choice Answers 33 5.1.3 Narrative Answers 35 5.2 Semiconductor Industry Viewpoint 35 6. LITERATURE OVERVIEW 37 7. CASE STUDIES 39 8. SAFETY ISSUES 41 8.1 Hardware Design Error Characterization 41 8.2 The FPGA’s Environment 44 8.3 Timing Issues 44 8.3.1 Synchronous Design 45 8.3.2 Synchronous Design—Multiple Clock Domains 45 8.3.3 Asynchronous Designs 46 8.4 Wide Data Buses and Data Pattern-Dependent Errors 46 8.5 Combinational Feedback/Quasi-Digital Circuits 47 8.6 Synthesis Issues—What the Tool Really Built 47 8.6.1 Getting Less Than Expected 48 8.6.2 Getting More Than Expected 48 iv 8.7 Hardware That Is Nonfunctional in Normal Operation 49 8.7.1 Synthesizer Optimizations 49 8.7.2 Gate-Level Verification 49 8.7.3 Adding Test Circuitry 50 8.8 Radiation Effects and FPGA Architectures 50 8.9 Radiation—DO-254 and DO-160 51 8.10 What Circuit Is Being Generated 51 8.11 Unused Inputs and Outputs 52 8.12 Other Considerations 52 8.13 Power Up/Reset Issues 53 8.14 What Can Be Done to Prevent Problems 53 8.15 Design Issues Summary 53 9. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 55 10. REFERENCES 57 11. GLOSSARY OF TERMS 63 APPENDICES A—Survey Questionnaire B—Survey Results C—Test Procedure D—Annotated Bibliography E—Hardware Case Study Experiments F—Evaluation Report for Hardware Design Tools v LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 The AEH Stakeholders 4 2 Hardware and Software Boundary 8 3 A Typical AEH Design and Verification Flow 9 4 Generic Design Flow for the PLD Tool 12 5 The DO-254 Tool Assessment and Qualification Process 21 6 Survey Population—Type of Organization 33 7 Role of Respondents in DO-254 Projects 34 8 Factors Affecting System Safety 40 9 Macroevaluation Model of the Tool Evaluation Process 40 10 Functional Flaws Requiring Design Re-Spins 42 11 Communication Barriers That Can Prevent Clear Design Specifications 43 12 Ring Oscillator 47 13 A TRM With Three Multipliers 48 14 Flip-Flop Replication 49 15 An SEU in an FPGA Using a CMOS Process 50 vi LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Tool Feature Comparison 16 2 The SEU Mean Time to Error for a Large FPGA in Geosynchronous Orbit 51 vii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS, ACRONYMS, AND LABELS AC Advisory Circular AEH Airborne electronic hardware ASIC Application-specific integrated circuit BNC Bayonet Neill-Concelman connector CAST Certification Authorities Software Team CDC Clock domain crossing CMOS Complementry metal-oxide-semiconductors COTS Commercial off-the-shelf CPLD Complex programmable logic device CPU Central processing unit CVS Concurrent Version System DAL Design assurance level DC Direct current DER Designated Engineering Representative DSP Digital signal processing DUT Device under test EDA Electronic design automation FAA Federal Aviation Administration FFPA Functional failure path analysis FPGA Field-programmable gate array FSM Finite state machine FVI Formal verification interface GAL Generic array logic GCLK Global clock GND Ground GUI Graphical user interface HDL Hardware description language IC Integrated circuit ILA Integrated Logic Analyzer I/O Input/Output IP Intellectual property JAA Joint Aviation Authority LED Light-emitting diode LVTTL Low voltage transistor-transistor logic MBD Model-based design/development NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NI National Instruments™ PAL Programmable array logic PBD Platform-based design PCB Printed circuit board PCI Peripheral component interconnect PLA Programmable logic array PLB Programmable logic block viii PLD Programmable logic device QA Quality assurance RF Radio frequency RTL Register transfer language SCADE Safety-Critical Application Development Environment SEFI Single event functional interrupt SEU Single-event upset SLD System-level design SMA Subminiature version A SoC System-on-chip SPLD Simple programmable logic device SRAM Static random access memory SRPT Synchronous Receptive Process Theory SSN Simultaneous switching noise TRM Triple-redundant module TTL Transistor/transistor logic UAV Unmanned aerial vehicle UCF User Constraint File V&V Validation and verification VDD Label for IC power supply pin VHDL Very high-speed integrated circuit HDL VIL Maximum voltage for low input VIH Minimum voltage for high input Vin_dc Voltage input, dc Vterm Termination voltage ix
Description: