On some systems, such as the one just discussed, software can cause more problems than hardware. Some of the tools and techniques from the hardware arena can the used to improve software quality. Specific actions recommended are: 1. Require the software supplier to use a closed loop FRACAS (MIL-STD-785B, Task 104) and to report results to the customer (in a manner to satisfy the intent of DI-R-3735A). (If the system includes hardware, the same FRACAS and reporting mechanism should be used for hardware and software.) 2. Require software developers to obtain the coordination of other appropriate engineering disciplines (R&M, Human Factors, etc.) before software requirements documents are released to programmers. Currently, most aerospace companies require extensive intradisciplinary coordination before documentation on hardware is released to procurement or manufacturing. Software should be treated similary. 3. Require software suppliers to perform a Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) on software functions. Functions with a potential to damage hardware or prevent mission completion should be considered critical items and receive increased attention. 4. For complex systems with a well-defined mission, contractually specify the acceptable software contribution to unreliability at several points in the developemt program and evaluate such software unreliability during the development program.
A software evaluation: results and recommendations
Software-Beurteilung: Ergebnisse und Empfehlungen
1983
4 Seiten, 1 Bild, 1 Tabelle
Conference paper
English
Space Station Software Recommendations
NTRS | 1985
|Final Results and Recommendations
Springer Verlag | 2016
|LEAPTech Experiment, Approach, Results, Recommendations
NTIS | 2016
|Instructor training:methods, results and recommendations
Automotive engineering | 1990
|Commercial Airborne Radar Evaluation & Recommendations
NTIS | 2021
|