GEIA-GEIA-933-2002.pdf

EIA STANDARD Standard for Preparing a COTS Assembly Management Plan EIA-933 December 2002 ELECTRONIC INDUSTRIES ALLIANCE GOVERNMENT ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION NOTICE EIA Engineering Standards and Publications are designed to serve the public interest through eliminating misunderstandings between manufacturers and purchasers, facilitating interchangeability and improvement of products, and assisting the purchaser in selecting and obtaining with minimum delay the proper product for his particular need. Existence of such Standards and Publications shall not in any respect preclude any member or nonmember of EIA fi-om manufacturing or selling products not conforming to such Standards and Publications, nor shall the existence of such Standards and Publications preclude their voluntary use by those other than EIA members, whether the standard is to be used either domestically or internationally. Standards and Publications are adopted by EIA in accordance with the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) patent policy. By such action, EIA does not assume any liability to any patent owner, nor does it assume any obligation whatever to parties adopting the Standard or Publication. This EIA Standard is considered to have International Standardization implication, but the International Electrotechnical Commission activity has not progressed to the point where a valid comparison between the EIA Standard and the IEC document can be made. This Standard does not purport to address all safety problems associated with its use or all applicable regulatory requirements. It is the responsibility of the user of this Standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and to determine the applicability of regulatory limitations before its use. (From Project No. 5019, formulated under the cognizance of the GEIA, Avionics Process Management Committee (APMC).) Published by OELECTRONIC INDUSTRIES ALLIANCE 2002 Technology Strategy and that the Technical Requirements detailed in clause 3 are accomplished. In general the owners of a complete COTS Assembly Management Plan are electronics equipment and system manufacturers/integrators . This document is intended to help equipment and system integrators, manufacturers, subcontractors, maintenance facilities, and other aerospace electronic assembly, equipment and system users develop their own COTS Assembly Management Plans (CAMPS), hereinafter also called the Plan. The objective is to document or define, as necessary, processes to assure the adequacy of COTS assemblies selected for use in electronic systems. This document states objectives to be accomplished; it does not specify how tasks are to be performed, specific data to be collected or reports to be issued. Those who prepare Plans in compliance with this document are encouraged to document processes that are the most effective and efficient for them in accomplishing the objectives of this document. In order to allow flexibility in implementing and updating the documented processes, Plan authors are encouraged to refer to their own internal process documents instead of including detailed process documentation within their Plans. Organizations that prepare such Plans may prepare a single Plan, and use it for all relevant products supplied by the organization, or may prepare a separate Plan for each relevant product or customer. . 111 -,-,- EM-933 Page Intentionally Blank iv EM-933 1. Scope 1.1 Application This document applies to the development of plans for the integration and management of COTS assemblies in electronic systems used in the commercial, military and space markets. This publication is not intended to preclude or discourage other approaches that similarly represent good engineering practice, or that may be acceptable to, or have been accepted by, appropriate bodies. Parties who wish to bring other approaches to the attention of the formulating committee to be considered for inclusion in fbture drafts of this publication are encouraged to do so. It is the intention of the formulating committee to revise and update this publication fi-om time to time as may be occasioned by changes in technology, industry practice, or government regulations, or for other appropriate reasons. Development by the Government Electronics and Information Technology Association's (GEIA) Avionics Process Management Committee (AF'MC) 1 -,-,- EIA-933 2. References 2.1 Normative References The following normative documents, of the exact issue shown, contain provisions that, through reference in this text, constitute provisions of this Standard to the extent specified herein. Additionally, the most recent issue of applicable documents may be used provided that performance, including integrity, reliability and cost, are not adversely affected. Members of IEC and IS0 maintain registers of currently valid International Standards. Not applicable. 2.2 Informative References ANSIEIA-649, National Consensus Standard for Configuration Management BS EN 10001 5, Basic Specification, Protection of Electrostatic Sensitive Devices EIA GEB 1, Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages (DMSMS) Management Practices EIA SSB- 1, Guidelines for Using Plastic Encapsulated Microcircuits and Semiconductors in Military, Aerospace and Other Rugged Applications EM-724, Product Life Cycle Data Model EIA-4899, Standard for Preparing an Electronic Components Management Plan EIA-4900, Use of Semiconductor Devices Outside Manufacturers' Specified Temperature Ranges IEC 61340-5-1, Electrostatics - Part 5-1: Protection of Electronic Devices fi-om Electrostatic Phenomena - General Requirements IEC 61340-5-2, Electrostatics - Part 5-2: Protection of Electronic Devices fi-om Electrostatic Phenomena - User Guide IEC PAS/62239, Edition 1 .O, Electronic Component Management Plans IEC PAS/62240, Edition 1 .O, Use of Semiconductor Devices Outside Manufacturers' Specified Temperature Ranges IS0 TR 9 122- 1, Toxicity Testing Of Fire Effluents - P a r t 1 : General 2 -,-,- EIA-933 IS0 900 1, Quality Management Systems Requirements MIL-HDBK-263, Electrostatic Discharge Control Handbook for Protection of Electrical and Electronic Parts, Assemblies, and Equipment (Excluding Electrically Initiated Explosive Devices) (Metric) COTS Risk Mitigation Guide: Practical Methods for Effective COTS Acquisition and Life Cycle Support. This document and related information can be accessed at http :!ly6wi6-v.fm. , s v / e s Q . ) , RTCA DO-254, Design Assurance Guidance for Airborne Electronic Hardware SAE AS9 100, Quality Systems - Aerospace - Model for Quality Assurance in Design, Development, Production, Installation and Servicing SAE ARP4761, Guidelines and Methods for Conducting the Safety Assessment Process on Civil Airborne Systems and Equipment SAE ARP5 890, Guidelines for Preparing Reliability Assessment Plans for Electronic Engine Controls 3 EM-933 3. Requirements The plan shall address each of the requirements in this clause. Where specific requirements do not apply, the plan owner may with appropriate justification amend the requirements by adding, deleting or modifiing them. 3.1 General 3.1.1 Design Assurance The processes documented in the Plan shall provide Design Assurance for all applicable assemblies. NOTE: RTCA DO-254 provides guidance on Design Assurance and is a recommended practice for meeting the objectives of this document. The documented processes shall assure that requirements for each assembly are identified and evaluated against the assembly specification based on the assembly manufacturers data sheet and any additional relevant data to ensure suitability in the end application. If additional performance is required (e.g. up-screening, up-rating, additional parameters defined) then the assembly shall be considered as a specific one and shall be uniquely identified (See Clause 3.2.5.2.1). The documented process shall assure that these evaluations are documented. The processes documented in the plan shall assure that availability and level of obsolescence risk are considered as major assembly selection criteria (see Clause 3.5.1). The Plan shall document the processes used by the Plan Owner to minimize the fbture impact of assembly obsolescence. 3.1.2 Open System Architecture The documented processes shall assure that adequate consideration is given to selection of assemblies that adhere to open principles and standards. NOTE: Selection of assemblies with well defined standard non-proprietary interfaces as part of an open architecture that is scaleable and evolvable is an essential element of minimizing total ownership cost (TOC) through mitigation of DMS impacts, technology independence/ease of technology insertion. 3.1.3 Total Ownership Cost and Performance The documented processes shall assure that adequate consideration is given to selection of assemblies that will support the optimization of total ownership cost (TOC) and performance. 4 -,-,- EM-933 NOTE: SAE ARP5890, Clause 4.1.4.1.3 provides guidance on the use of reliability assessment results to substantiate business decisions and is a recommended practice for meeting the objectives of this document. 3.1.4 Assembly Criticality and Operational Safety The documented processes shall ensure that assembly criticality is identified and the corresponding design assurance level is implemented. The process for assembly criticality assessment and rating, and corresponding design assurance levels, when not specified in the equipmenthystem specification, shall be identified by the plan owner and the metrics documented. NOTE: Item criticality assessment and rating is a two-step process. First the equipmenthystem functional criticality must be determined. Next individual item criticality is defined based on system redundancy. A FMECA may be used to define equipmenthystem item criticality through an analysis of system architectures and consequence of equipmenthystem item failure. NOTE: RTCA DO-254, Clauses 2.0,2.1 and 2.3.4 provide guidance on determination of development assurance levels and is a recommended practice for meeting the objectives of this document. The process documented in the Plan shall assure that equipmenthystem operational safety requirements are met. NOTE: RTCA DO-254, Clause 2.2 provides guidance on the System Safety Assessment Process and is a recommended practice for meeting the objectives of this document. NOTE: RTCA DO-254, Clause 2.3 provides guidance on the Hardware Safety Assessment and is a recommended practice for meeting the objectives of this document. NOTE: SAE ARP4761 provides guidelines for the use of reliability assessment results for a safety analysis. 3.2 COTS Assembly Characteristics 3.2.1 Functionality The documented processes shall assure that the allocated system functional requirements for each COTS assembly are clearly specified by the plan owner. The documented process shall assure that the selected assemblies satisfj the functional requirements for each application. NOTE: Examples of these processes include analysis, modeling, simulation, and testing. 3.2.2 Heat Dissipation and Cooling The documented processes shall verifj that each COTS assembly heat dissipation and cooling requirements are consistent with the equipmenthystem specification. 5 -,-,- EM-933 3.2.3 Useful Life The documented processes shall verifj that the assembly meets the useful life requirement for the equipmenthystem. NOTE: Assembly useful life may be assessed through means that may include analysis of vendor specifications and/or application notes, testing, validation or other methods. NOTE: Negotiation of a realistic useful life requirement with the customer is an essential element of minimizing TOC. Negotiation of a shorter useful life should lead to a direct reduction in the duration of specified environmental exposure. 3.2.4 Storage Life The documented process shall verifj that the assembly meets the storage life requirement for the equipmenthystem. 3.2.5 IntegrityReliability 3.2.5.1 IntegrityReliability Analysis The documented processes shall verifj that integrityheliability requirements specified in the equipmenthystem specification are met. IntegrityReliability assessments shall be conducted, with sufficient detail to understand their uses, limitations, and uncertainties. NOTE: SAE ARP5890 provides guidelines for preparing reliability assessment plans and is a recommended practice for meeting the objectives of this document. Clause 4.1.4.2 provides guidelines for the quantification reliability assessment limitations and uncertainties and is a recommended practice for meeting the objectives of this document. The documented processes shall determine if the assembly will be used within the environmental limits specified by the assembly manufacturer. These include; Thermal Evaluation, Mechanical Evaluation, Combined Environment Durability Analysis (Fatigue Evaluation), Moisture/Corrosion Resistance Evaluation, Electrical Stress Evaluation, Natural Radiation Environment Evaluation, Induced Radiation Environment Evaluation, Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) and Other Environments Evaluation. If the assembly is not used within the environmental limits specified by the assembly manufacturer, then the process of clause 3.2.5.2.1 shall be followed. NOTE: SAE ARP5890, Clause 4.1.3.2 provides guidance on durability assessment and is a recommended practice to meet the objectives of this document. Appendix B provides information to help the user understand the durability analysis method of reliability assessment. NOTE: EIA SSB- 1 provides guidelines for using plastic encapsulated microcircuits. NOTE: Assembly level moisture/corrosion tests are generally inadequate to verify the moisture/corrosion resistance of components, for long life exposure in severe moisture/corrosion environments, due to the difference in failure mechanisms and acceleration factors. 6 -,-,- EIA-933 NOTE: Temperature cycling exposure typically has an extremely significant effect on how well PEMs perform in moisture/corrosion environments. Testing of PEMs should include a full lifetime of temperature cycling prior to exposure to the moisture/corrosion environment. 3.2.5.2 Derating and Stress Analysis 3.2.5.2.1 Application Analysis The documented processes shall determine if the assembly will be used (operated and stored) within the limits specified by the assembly manufacturer. All instances in which an assembly is not used within the limits defined above shall be documented. In all such instances, either corrective action shall be taken to bring the planned usage within the limits specified by the manufacture, or just