DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

T&E Process for Safety-Critical CNS/ATM Systems

안전필수항행시스템의 시험평가 프로세스

  • Kang, Ja-Young (Aviation Management, Graduate School, Korea Aerospace University) ;
  • Kim, Mu-Geun (Aviation Management, Graduate School, Korea Aerospace University) ;
  • Kim, Young-Hoon (Aviation Management, Graduate School, Korea Aerospace University) ;
  • Lim, In-Kyu (Aviation Management, Graduate School, Korea Aerospace University)
  • 강자영 (한국항공대학교 대학원 항공운항관리학과) ;
  • 김무근 (한국항공대학교 대학원 항공운항관리학과) ;
  • 김영훈 (한국항공대학교 대학원 항공운항관리학과) ;
  • 임인규 (한국항공대학교 대학원 항공운항관리학과)
  • Received : 2017.01.31
  • Accepted : 2017.02.16
  • Published : 2017.02.28

Abstract

Recently, safety-critical aviation system development programs promoted domestically have been terminated in the middle stage or they have not been put to practical use at the final stage. The program failure may be caused by various factors, but this study focused on imperfect test and evaluation(T&E) procedures. In general, T&E process of a safety-critical system must be distributed throughout the entire life-cycle of the system, have a continuity in phases, and can be implemented in a variety of ways depending on the maturity of the system development and acquisition strategy. This paper aims to present a new strategy by analyzing the domestic and overseas T&E processes to reduce the risk of domestic safety-critical CNS/ATM system development program and increase the success rate of program. First, we discuss the verification and validation techniques for safety-critical systems, analyze the T&E procedures of advanced institutes and the domestic situation, and then compare the domestic and overseas T&E processes to complement the imperfect testing procedure.

최근 국내에서 추진된 항공 관련 안전필수시스템 기술 개발 사업들이 중도에 종료되거나 최종 단계에서 실용화되지 못하는 사례가 종종 발생했다. 사업실패의 원인은 여러 가지 요인이 있겠지만 본 연구에서는 불완전한 시험평가 절차에 주안점을 두고 관련 연구를 수행하였다. 일반적으로 안전필수시스템의 시험평가 프로세스는 시스템의 전 수명주기에 걸쳐 분포되고 단계별 연속성을 가져야 하며 시스템 설계 및 획득 전략의 성숙도에 따라 다양한 방법으로 실행될 수 있다. 본 논문의 목적은 국내 안전필수 항행시스템 개발 사업의 리스크를 줄이고 성공률을 높이기 위한 방안으로 국내외 시험평가 프로세스를 분석하여 새로운 전략을 제시하는 것이다. 먼저 안전필수시스템에 대한 검증 및 확인 기법에 대해 토의하고 선진기관의 시험평가 프로세스 및 절차와 국내 현황을 분석한 뒤 국내외 시험평가 프로세스를 비교함으로써 불완전한 시험평가 절차에 대한 보완책을 제시하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. The NewYork Times. Galaxy Note 7 is not Samsung's only problematic product[Internet]. Available: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/13/business/international/samsung-galaxy-note7-profit-battery-fires.html
  2. S. Hastie and S. Wojewoda (2015, October). Standish Group 2015 Chaos Report [Internet]. Available: https://www.infoq.com/articles/standish-chaos-2015
  3. J. Frederick (2014, April). Evolving T&E in the FAA [Internet].Available:http://www.incose.org/docs/default-source/enchantment/140409frederick-evolvingtandeinthefaaF92D0915726F.pdf?sfvrsn=2
  4. M. Blackburn, R. Busser, and A. Nauman, Removing Requirement Defects and Automating Test, Software Productivity Consortium NFP, Inc., 2001.
  5. M. Blackburn, R. Busser, and A. Nauman, "Interface-Driven, Model-Based Test Automation," The Journal of Defense Software Engineering, pp. 27-30, May 2003.
  6. Vishawjyoti and S. Sharma, "Interface-Driven, Model-Based Test Automation," Journal of Global Research in Computer Science (JGRCS), Vol. 3, No. 12, pp. 36-43, Dec. 2012.
  7. I. Sommerville, Software Engineering, 9th ed., Boston, MA: Addison Wesley, 2010.
  8. N. Manju and J Jayanthi, "An Effective Verification and Validation Strategy for Safety-Critical Embedded Systems," International Journal of Software Engineering & Applications(IJSEA), Vol.4, No.2, pp. 123-142, March 2013. https://doi.org/10.5121/ijsea.2013.4209
  9. P. Kaminsky and L. Lyles, Pre-Milestone A and Early-Phase Systems Engineering, National Research Council, Washington D.C.: National Academy Press, 2008.
  10. L. G. Weiss, R. Roberts and S. E. Cross, "The system engineering and test (TSET) approach for unprecedented systems," ITEA Journal, Vol. 30, pp. 386-394, Sep. 2009.
  11. ICAO, Aeronautical Telecommunications, Annex 10 Vol. I, Jule 2006.
  12. ICAO, Manual on Testing of Radio Navigation Aids, Doc 8071 Vol. I, 4th ed. 2015.
  13. FAA, William J. Hughes Technical Center's Test and Evaluation Policy, Order NG 1810.8A, Oct. 2015.
  14. FAA, William J. Hughes Technical Center Test and Evaluation Handbook, VVSPT-A2-PD D-013, Sep. 2013.
  15. FAA, Airport Surveillance Radar Model Test and Evaluation Master Plan(TEMP), DOT/FAA/CT-TN97/27, Feb. 1998.
  16. DAU, Test and Evaluation Management Guide, Jan. 2005.
  17. Paragraph 2 article 80 of Aviation Act, MOLIT, Jan. 2016.
  18. Paragraph 2-4 article 245 of Regulation of the Aviation Act, MOLIT, Oct.2016.
  19. MLTM, Study of NAVAIDs Certification and Technical Standards Advancement, Nov. 2012.

Cited by

  1. Evaluation methodology for safety maturity in air navigation safety vol.98, pp.None, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2021.102159