Actually, DO-160E is now current (issued December 9, 2004) and Revision
F has been approved by RTCA for publication. Quite a lot of changes
appear throughout the documents. 

RTCA SC-135 has been given approval to begin work on the next revision
and this will start in March 2008.

Lots going on based on composite airframes --

Also, it is expected that Mil 461 will pick up and include Section 22 of
DO 160 (Lightning) in a revision expected to be available for comment by
December 2008.

Hope this is helpful...


Michael Hopkins 
Thermo Fisher Scientific
One Lowell Research Center 
Lowell, MA 01852 
Tel: +1 978 275 0800 ext. 334 
Fax: +1 978 275 0850
mobile: +1 603 765 3736
[email protected] 


From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
[email protected]
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 9:30 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: FAA TSO requirements

I have only a basic understanding of EMC for avionics and I hope that
another forum member can provide more information, but I am willing to
contribute what I know.

First, I thought that RTCA/DO-160D superseded revision C about 10 years
ago.  Revision D updated the susceptibility testing, in particular the
RF susceptibility test methods.  Avionics tested to the older standard
might not meet the new standard.

Second, there have almost certainly been changes over the past 10 years
that would significantly affect the EMC performance of any electronic
device.  One problem I have frequently encountered has been die shrinks
>from the semiconductor manufacturers.  As the semiconductor
manufacturers move their highest performance parts to lines with smaller
features, they are left with older fabrication lines with excess
capacity.  They often migrate all of their components to smaller feature
sizes.  It lets them get more dies out of a single wafer and increases
profit.  Often, everything is shrunk without changing the relative
dimensions of the gates.  This can affect susceptibility, and it can
sharpen the edges increasing the broadband noise in emissions.  The
smaller gates and conductors can also be much more susceptible to EMC.

In short, I would think it quite reasonable to requalify a design that
is at least 10 years old.

Ted Eckert
American Power Conversion/MGE
http://www.apc.com/

The items contained in this e-mail reflect the personal opinions of the
writer and are only provided for the assistance of the reader. The
writer is not speaking in an official capacity for APC-MGE or Schneider
Electric.
The speaker does not represent APC-MGE's or Schneider Electric's
official position on any matter.


 

             Ken Javor

             <ken.javor@emccom

             pliance.com>
To 
             Sent by:                  <[email protected]>

             [email protected]
cc 
 

 
Subject 
             12/13/2007 10:18          FAA TSO requirements

             PM

 

 

 

 

 





Forum members,

Lend me your ears.

I am reviewing RTCA/DO-160C qualification data for some aircraft engine
monitor gauges (rpm, temperature at various points). These devices date
back ten years, plus they were qualified by similarity to an earlier
design - how much earlier is not stated.

My question is whether any forum members have a feel for how tight this
TSO process really is.  It is hard for me to imagine that every part in
these gauges is built exactly like it was ten years ago, or more.  I can
see where the individual component part numbers would need to be the
same, but is there any guarantee that the dc/dc converter manufacturer
is building his product the same way, even if he uses the same part
number? What about integrated circuits in general over such a span of
years?

Thanks in advance,

Ken Javor

Phone: (256) 650-5261

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
emc-pstc discussion list.    Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to [email protected]

Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:

     Scott Douglas           [email protected]
     Mike Cantwell           [email protected]

For policy questions, send mail to:

     Jim Bacher:             [email protected]
     David Heald:            [email protected]

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:

    http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
emc-pstc discussion list.    Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to [email protected]

Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:

     Scott Douglas           [email protected]
     Mike Cantwell           [email protected]

For policy questions, send mail to:

     Jim Bacher:             [email protected]
     David Heald:            [email protected]

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:

    http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

-

This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society
emc-pstc discussion list.    Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/

To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to [email protected]

Instructions:  http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html

List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:

     Scott Douglas           [email protected]
     Mike Cantwell           [email protected]

For policy questions, send mail to:

     Jim Bacher:             [email protected]
     David Heald:            [email protected]

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:

    http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc

Reply via email to