The recommended best practices and guidance provided in SAE JA6268 are advisory in nature and are suggested for use in concert with other IVHM recommended practices and the relevant organization’s engineering design practices. There will be situations where good design requires that these guidelines be extended or modified to maximize use of the component, subsystem, system or the vehicle’s inherent (health-ready) design functions and to optimize the benefits of the IVHM system solution.
It is important to note that this document provides recommendations for the integration of both the design-time data and the run-time messages. A supplier may choose to achieve a “Health-Ready” designation for its components through a process that relies primarily on providing additional design-time data, additional run-time messages or a combination of both.
JA6268 seeks to provide uniform requirements, practices, and methods to address the sharing of critical component/subsystem design-time information. This will facilitate real-time platform level communication and the implementation of supplemental IVHM functions. In the past, component suppliers were primarily operating in the diagnosis-only paradigm in which the focus was to facilitate the detection and identification of the root cause(s) once a failure had occurred.
In the new IVHM or prognostics paradigm, the supplier must also facilitate health monitoring and tracking of system degradation severity to prevent a given component from experiencing an unreported degradation to the point where it goes outside its operational performance envelope. Health-ready components are accompanied by descriptive data that produce a coherent picture of the overall health status of the asset and an estimate of the cost/benefit associated with the implementation or enhancement of the component/subsystem health-ready functionality.
A very important selling point of prognostics is that they have a significant impact on perceived reliability from the end-user’s point of view. Consider the fact that if the vehicle health system can reliably predict 90% of a component’s actual field failure incidents, this implies that only 10% of the expected faults would occur without warning. These high coverage rates may be somewhat easier to attain in the automotive space but recent aerospace programs have had the stated goal of reaching as high as 95-99% coverage. Note that from the end-user’s point of view, achieving a 90% prediction rate is analogous to a ten-fold improvement in raw reliability because 90% of the expected field failures would be transformed into simple maintenance events and never actually allowed to become a failure. Of course, 90% coverage may be difficult to achieve in all cases since some failures are not associated with wear-out mechanisms and can be difficult or even impossible to predict—the attainable level is application-specific.
It is nevertheless still extremely important for design engineers to do all that is practical to make a component’s true reliability be as high as possible. But, no matter what level of reliability is achieved through the application of good design practices, the added opportunity for a significant improvement from the customer’s point of view should be carefully considered. Care must also be taken that false alarm rates are not allowed to go up alongside detection rates.
This recommended practice allows for maximum flexibility for the supplier to determine the best way to provide the required IVHM functionality. In some cases, the supplier will implement nearly all the functionality, but only be required to provide structured data to inform the larger IVHM system how to interact with these functions and use their results. In other cases, the supplier may decide that it is better to provide additional design data to allow the integrator or a third party to implement the required functionality.
In either case, or with a combination of them, the recommended practice calls for the supplier to provide their data in a machine-readable format that this document will reference as a “model.” It is important to note that the “model” includes a series of interface definitions, information to interpret results or data provided by the supplier, and possibly, information required to allow a third party to implement the required IVHM functionality.
The SAE’s IVHM Standards Committee has defined a progression of IVHM Capability Levels as shown in Figure 1. These levels offer a harmonized classification system which:
A major transition occurs between levels 2 and 3, where prognostics and predictive analytics are brought to bear. These can significantly enhance the capabilities of the system. These levels as shown in the chart are intended to be generally descriptive and not precise — they hopefully provide a general picture for managers and journalists that captures performance evolution over time along with key distinctions between the levels. They imply no particular order of market introduction. Elements indicate minimum rather than maximum system capabilities for each level. A system may, in fact, have multiple IVHM features which could operate at different capability levels depending upon the feature(s) that are engaged.
Figure – General IVHM capability levels for aerospace and automotive applications
Benefit 1: A Win-Win-Win Strategic Goal
OEMs and suppliers share a common goal of producing the best possible vehicles which ultimately satisfy the needs of the customer. This in turn drives more business to the OEM and to the suppliers in the long term. This common bond creates the basis for a win-win-win situation. First, the OEM achieves a more capable and efficient process to create a higher quality product with built-in IVHM. Second, the supplier has one basic approach whereby it produces the needed information for all its OEM customers. Lastly, the end customer gets a better product that is more reliable, less costly to maintain, and/or better meets their needs.
Benefit 2: Supports Emerging Paradigm Shift from Diagnosis to Prognosis
Throughout the history of the automobile and aerospace industries, OEMs have designed increasingly reliable products built on top of increasingly reliable components and subsystems. The introduction of electronics and computer-based control resulted in the need for more sophisticated diagnostic systems because traditional maintenance approaches were no longer adequate. This happened in part because service technicians could no longer directly observe how various components were performing. For the purpose of JA6268, diagnosis is defined as the process to identify the root cause of a failure once a problem has occurred—specifically, what part or parts require replacement and/or what repair action (e.g., reseating a controller board) is required. The diagnosis paradigm has served these industries well for many decades. However, an argument can be made that the current diagnosis paradigm increasingly suffers from unacceptable rates of No Fault Found (NFF) or No Trouble Found (NTF) incidents. The advent of the prognosis paradigm offers the means to reduce NFF/NTF occurrences since knowing more about the component’s state of health may prevent or reduce unnecessary component replacements.
In today’s world, systems are being designed with ever higher levels of electronics and computer-based control. There is a continuing shift toward electrification of various subsystems, with electronic or electromechanical devices supplanting traditional mechanical solutions. This has created an increased need for health monitoring to mitigate the inherent risks of increased usage of electronics, controls, and software which tend to drive both problem incidents in general and intermittent failures in particular. Similarly, increased usage of certain advanced materials may necessitate new forms of health monitoring. These design innovations in electronics and advanced materials have proven to be a highly effective in meeting the demanding requirements of governmental regulations related to safety, emissions, fuel efficiency, etc. This, in turn, is driving the need for migrating from the diagnosis paradigm to the prognosis paradigm. The goal of prognosis is to track degrading aspects of the overall design to predict deviation. Generally, a prognostic system is defined as capable of computing remaining useful life (RUL), performance life remaining (PLR) or state of health (SOH) with sufficient fidelity and sufficient advance notice to allow a maintenance action well before an operational failure. It is important to note that from the customer or end user point of view, detecting and then correcting problems before they result in loss of function essentially eliminates the impending field failures and replaces them with preventive maintenance actions instead.
Benefit 3: Provides for Better Logical Abstractions of Physical Systems
One critical aspect of more effectively designing and applying health-ready components has to do with the establishment of clear and precise logical abstractions which align well with the represented physical systems. This allows improved design and better communication between the OEM and its suppliers. It becomes the essential underpinning for building good models of these systems and how they behave. In the physical world, there are a multitude of failure modes which lead to performance degradation and ultimately to failure of the given component or subsystem. For example, physical seals can leak and contamination can occur or a fault may be caused by an open circuit or a short circuit. Creating logical abstractions for all these physical systems allows practitioners to understand them, model them and describe their operation. These functional models can incorporate diagnostics as well. In some cases, suppliers provide Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) information or possibly a Fault Tree Analysis (FTA). This information correlates symptoms of a failure to the corresponding failure and its root cause, which then facilitates fault isolation and reduced “Could Not Duplicate” (CND) situations. The FTA can provide a method to evaluate the effects (and the probabilities) of failures of the components on the vehicle system as a whole. The FMEA will always be valuable and some of its content will clearly be required for health-ready components. In fact, the FMEA process itself could be enhanced to better meet the needs of IHVM and prognostics by identifying relevant parameters and relationships that could be used to detect the onset of all known failure modes.
Benefit 4: Facilitates Sharing of Semantic (Underlying Meaning) Data from Suppliers
To implement a health-ready component/subsystem into the IVHM system integration strategy, it is important for the supplier to identify and specify the health state data parameters, messages and their meaning (i.e., semantics) which must be provided for the component/subsystem to provide the critical IVHM interfaces. If the supplier does not wish to implement all of the recommended functionality, the supplier may instead choose to provide additional design data to allow the integrator to do so.
Suppliers should provide understandable, machine readable formulae to permit the translation of raw sensor outputs into specific, appropriate engineering units. The machine readable aspect is very important because simple textual descriptions are highly error prone and frequently complicate the use of the information or, worse yet, lead to incorrect conclusions as the data is used.
Benefit 5: Offer Enhanced Methods for Model-Based Engineering
The cost of obtaining equipment-specific IVHM design characteristics could be greatly reduced if the suppliers of the equipment provided more of their design data in a machine readable format. The increasing use of model-based design engineering tools across the industry will facilitate the exchange.
It is worth noting that the presence of these models goes well beyond just defining the interface between the component and the higher level system which is going to access the data. It must also provide insight into what is happening within the component or subsystem. Specifically, it should allow the data to be properly interpreted at the vehicle level. Ideally, these models will become more comprehensive and useful as time progresses. In the interim, a less demanding alternative is to share just the relationships between provided parameters which are deemed important by the designer in terms of detecting degradation. For example, a supplier could identify the critical parameters (along with their normal ranges and the relationships or ratios involving those parameters) that are best used to warn of the onset of specific failure modes.
Are there SAE standards for Health Ready Components & Systems?
Yes. On April 2, 2018, SAE published “JA6268: Design & Run-Time Information Exchange for Health-Ready Components.” This document is designed to help reduce existing barriers to the successful implementation of Integrated Vehicle Health Management (IVHM) technology into the aerospace and automotive sectors by introducing the concept of “health-ready components.”
What is a health-ready component?
Health-ready components are supplier-provided components or subsystems which have been augmented to monitor and report their own health or, alternatively, those where the supplier provides the integrator sufficient information to accurately assess the component’s health via a higher-level system already on the vehicle.
Why is JA6268 important?
The principal motivation behind JA6268 is to facilitate the integration of the IVHM functionality in supplier-provided components to meet the needs and objectives of vehicle OEMs, end users, and government regulators in a cost-effective manner. Underlying this motivation is the assumption that market forces will drive the need to achieve industry-wide application of IVHM technology across the aerospace and automotive sectors, which will in turn drive new health-ready requirements that suppliers must ultimately meet.
What are the objectives of JA6268?
The recommended practices contained in JA6268 have two primary objectives:
(1) to encourage the introduction of a much greater degree of IVHM functionality in future vehicles at a much lower cost
(2) to address legitimate intellectual property concerns by providing recommended IVHM design-time and run-time data specification and information exchange alternatives
Why is industry awareness important?
IVHM technology has the potential to provide significant business benefits in terms of performance, availability, and safety. To date, the level of deployment in aerospace and automotive domains has been limited with respect to higher end functionality such as predictive analytics or prognostics. One of the key barriers is the lack of uniform information sharing methods between OEMs and their suppliers.
Why is now the right time for HRCS?
There is a window of opportunity to move proactively to accelerate IVHM implementations and avoid unnecessary proliferation of different approaches which would be costly and counterproductive. JA6268 is a recommended practice designed to capture this opportunity now. The SAE HM-1 committee established the consortium of OEMs and suppliers, Health Ready Components & Systems, to steer the JA6268 implementation path and positively impact IVHM industry-wide practices.
Integrated Vehicle Health Management (IVHM) technology has the potential to enable significant benefits for a myriad of assets (aircraft, automotive, trucking, shipping, rail, mining, and other industries) in terms of performance, availability, and safety. However, the level of deployment of IVHM implementations has been limited with respect to high-end functionality such as predictive analytics or prognostics. One of the primary barriers is the lack of uniform information sharing methods between OEMs and their supplier base. This key barrier is addressed by SAE JA6268, Surface Vehicle and Aerospace Recommended Practice: “Design & Run-Time Information Exchange for Health-Ready Components.”
Health-ready components are supplier-provided components or subsystems which have been augmented to monitor and report their own health, or alternatively, those where the supplier provides the integrator sufficient information to accurately assess the component’s health via a higher-level system already on the asset.
For aerospace and automotive suppliers, market forces will drive the need to achieve greater industry-wide application of IVHM technology, which will in turn drive new health-ready requirements that suppliers must ultimately meet. Accordingly, the recommended practice contained in JA6268 has two primary objectives:
(1) to encourage the introduction of a much greater degree of IVHM functionality in the future at a much lower cost
(2) to address legitimate intellectual property concerns by providing recommended IVHM design-time and run-time data specification and information exchange alternatives
For the OEMs and fleet operators, a wider deployment of IVHM opens new market opportunities, better ways to serve their customers, and economic benefits derived from business process improvements in areas of asset operational availability, sustainment, and logistics efficiencies.
Related SAE standards committees (e.g., HM-1, OBD-II, E-32, and ARINC Industry Activities, etc.) are already established under the SAE Group to produce IVHM, OBD, OMS, and aerospace standards. Health Ready Components & Systems (HRCS) will provide an industry-neutral forum for these SAE technical committees and others to develop strategies and implementation processes. These will enable the uniform exchange of design and run-time data between suppliers and integrators, promote the development and deployment of health-ready components and advance IVHM implementations in aerospace, automotive, and other industries.
Health Ready Components & Systems (HRCS) is established as a program under the SAE Industry Technologies Consortia (SAE ITC). HRCS will develop, promote, and deploy a common set of requirements, characterization processes, and standards specific to the exchange of design and run-time data between suppliers and integrators. This is intended to:
(a) Increase trust and collaboration between supplier and integrator (or OEM) communities during IVHM system implementations through a focused set of processes and standards that integrate industry best practices
(b) Encourage the introduction of greater of IVHM functionality and at lower cost
(c) Address legitimate intellectual property concerns by providing recommended IVHM design-time and run-time data specification and information exchange alternatives
(d) Simplify supplier sourcing and IVHM implementation decisions by facilitating the sharing of health-ready component information
(e) Provide best practices and lessons learned for risk mitigation strategies both for end users (e.g., capability for proactive maintenance) and organizations (e.g., supply chain management)
3.0 Purpose of this Document
This document describes the operation of Health Ready Components & Systems (HRCS) including strategy, membership, and funding. The objectives of HRCS shall include, but are not limited to, the following:
4.0 Health Ready Components & Systems (HRCS)
4.1 HRCS Leadership
The Chairman, Vice Chairman and Secretary of Health Ready Components & Systems shall be elected by the voting members. SAE ITC shall appoint an individual to act as Treasurer, Secretariat, and IT Liaison. Applicable standard committee liaisons (e.g., HM-1, OBD-II, E-32, and ARINC Industry Activities) shall be appointed from HRCS general membership by the voting membership.
HRCS voting membership shall oversee activities of the group. The voting membership formulates and implements policies and procedures, develops documented procedures for membership and elections, oversees authorization of the technical work program, and rules on the adoption of proposed program documents.
The SAE ITC secretariat shall be responsible for the ongoing operational, technical and administrative services that support HRCS, keeps the Chairman and Vice Chairman advised of all matters requiring attention, maintains technical liaison with other organizations, and may perform other duties requested by the Chairman. SAE ITC will provide additional staff support to the HRCS as budgeted.
Administrative policies and procedures of the HRCS will be developed by SAE ITC for review and input from the voting membership. SAE ITC will enter into agreements, receive revenues, maintain financial data, and inform the voting membership of the resources available to support HRCS.
A fund will exist to support:
The Treasurer shall propose the amount of the financial contribution for each member company subject to review and input from the HRCS voting membeship. Funding invoices will be issued to member companies in December of each year, and payable in the first two months of the following year, for an amount approved by HRCS.
The Treasurer shall propose the amount for product registration and certification subject to review and input from the HRCS voting membership. Provisions for payment at point of service or invoice with 30-day payment terms will be issued in accordance with procedures developed by SAE ITC subject to review and input from the HRCS voting membership.
4.3 Membership & Dues
Upon approval of membership by the HRCS, an Annual Membership Dues invoice will be issued to each new member company. If a company is approved for membership part way through the year, the membership dues will be prorated based on date joined and approved.
4.4 Membership & Voting
The voting membership of Health Ready Components & Systems is limited to the (individual) members assigned by their respective organization members to participate in the HRCS group. Assignment shall be communicated via organization letterhead. HRCS will review new voting member organization applications and agree to approve or disapprove the application. Upon approval, a membership dues invoice will be issued to new organization members in accordance with 4.3 above. The Secretariat of the HRCS shall propose categories and levels of membership subject to review and input from the voting membership. Meeting guests shall be by invitation only through the HRCS Secretary.
4.5 Voting Rules
The participation of a two-thirds majority (66%) of the members of Health Ready Components & Systems shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business at any meeting of HRCS.
Meetings of Health Ready Components & Systems shall be convened at least once per calendar year. Written notice, including time and place, and agenda of all special and regular meetings of the group, shall be posted in advance of the meeting.
The quorum at regular and special meetings shall consist of two-thirds of its members.
Figure 1 provides an overview of Health Ready Components & Systems organizational structure. As shown in the diagram, and as described in this charter, the initial focus will be on activities that encourage the introduction of a much greater degree of IVHM functionality (i.e., Health Ready Components & Systems) in current and future vehicles at a much lower cost. Timing for addressing the other areas shown in the diagram (Off-board Data Acquisition and Exchange & Data Services and Application) will be determined by HRCS.
Figure 1: HRCS Organizational Structure
5.1 Pilot Projects
Pilot projects will be commissioned by HRCS voting membership to investigate potential new development areas. Pilot projects advance the development, production, and adoption of health-ready components and systems. This will result in the following advantages:
To the user/operator:
To OEMs and integrators:
5.2 Health Ready Components & Systems Registry Development
Member companies and other interested parties may register their health-ready components and systems in an online registry established by SAE ITC. The objective of the registry is to simplify supplier sourcing and IVHM implementation decisions for OEMs, integrators, or operators by facilitating the sharing of health-ready component or system information. Product registration includes the following options:
5.3 JA6268 Pilot Implementation Projects
To develop a history of best practice JA6268 use cases, obtain feedback and suggestions from industry on the common set of requirements, characterization processes and standards specific to the exchange of design and run-time data, Health Ready Components & Systems will support specific pilot projects implementing JA6268. These involve member companies and their business partners. Pilot projects involving non-member companies may be supported, as approved by the voting members, to advance the development or deployment of the standard. The pilot projects will typically involve the following efforts:
Various events may be planned and coordinated for communication purposes, training, problem resolution, etc. Collaboration and/or memorandums of understanding (MOU) with other organizations such as SAE International, ARINC Industry Activities AMC/MMC, etc. may be negotiated on behalf of the program participants.
5.5 Other Procedures
Other procedures will be determined, added and revised on an ongoing basis by Health Ready Components & Systems.
6.0 Change management
Revision of this charter shall require approval from Health Ready Components & Systems voting membership.
A new SAE International standard, “JA6268: Design & Run-Time Information Exchange for Health-Ready Components, helps reduce existing barriers to the successful implementation of Integrated Vehicle Health Management (IVHM) technology into the aerospace and automotive sectors by introducing “health-ready components.”
Health-ready components are supplier provided components or subsystems which have been augmented to monitor and report their own health or, alternatively, those where the supplier provides the integrator sufficient information to accurately assess the component’s health via a higher-level system already on the vehicle.
The SAE’s IVHM Standards Committee has defined a progression of IVHM capability levels for aerospace and automotive applications.
JA6268 facilitates integration of the IVHM functionality in supplier-provided components to meet the needs and objectives of vehicle OEMs, end users, and government regulators in a cost-effective manner. Underlying this motivation is the assumption that market forces will drive the need to achieve industry wide application of IVHM technology across the aerospace and automotive sectors, which will in turn drive new health-ready requirements that suppliers must ultimately meet.
“Vehicle Health Management (VHM), or Prognostics and Health Management (PHM), is just beginning to see wide spread deployment in the aerospace and automotive industries,” said Steve Holland, Chief Technologist, Vehicle Health Management at General Motors. Steve is a member of the SAE IVHM Standards Committee (aka HM1) and Chair of the JA6268 Document Committee.
“These industries are highly dependent on their suppliers,” The SAE’s IVHM Standards Committee has defined a progression of IVHM capability levels for aerospace Holland continued. “Failure to proactively engage suppliers will slow the process of delivering on the significant potential of VHM and raise costs. This standard can help avoid proliferation of different approaches which could be costly and counterproductive. SAE JA6268 is a Recommended Practice designed to address this opportunity now.”
Accordingly, the Recommended Practice contained in JA6268 has two primary objectives:
SAE Industry Technologies Consortia (ITC), a trade association affiliated with SAE International, is developing a registry of health-ready components that would evolve over time to include a system to validate or verify compliance with the new JA6268 recommended practice. SAE ITC is seeking Charter Members to engage in pilot programs with their component(s) as free inaugural catalogued entries in the registry. If interested, please contact SAE ITC at email@example.com.
For more information about “JA6268: Design & Run-Time Information Exchange for Health-Ready Components,” visit sae.org/standards/content/ja6268_201804/.
SAE International has 700 standards development technical committees and 17,000 technical professional volunteers from countries around the world. They serve every aspect of industry from vehicle design and integration to build, manufacture, operate, and maintain; and they address critical issues on everything from fuel to weather conditions, materials to electronics, engine power to energy mandates.
Steve Holland, a member of the SAE IVHM Standards Committee (aka HM1) and Chair of the JA6268 development effort, has been with General Motors for more than 48 years, starting as a co-op student and now serving as Research Fellow and Chief Technologist for Vehicle Health Management in GM Global R&D. In addition to being a ??-year SAE Member, he is a Fellow of IEEE and serves on the Board of Directors of the Prognostics & Health Management Society, with which SAE collaborates. He has been an active member of SAE HM-1 since 2012 and serves on the SAE IVHM Steering Committee. He chairs the JA6268 Document Committee.
Steve Holland with his 2019 Chevrolet Corvette.
“In recent years while I was working on Vehicle Health Management at GM Global R&D, I came across the SAE IVHM Standards Committee, which is part of the SAE Aerospace Standards unit,” he told Update. “Since there was no automotive equivalent, I began attending those meetings and proposed a new SAE Recommended Practice to the aerospace members. It was designed from the beginning to support both aero and auto. That, of course, led to JA6268. Richard Greaves, Past President of SAE International, encouraged me to collaborate with the SAE Aerospace and deliver JA6268 for everyone’s benefit.” Steve’s first SAE presentation was paper 1979-02-01, a coauthoring effort which won an Arch T. Colwell Merit Award in 1979.
Dozens if not hundreds, of SAE members and volunteers participated in and/or helped organize the April 10-12 SAE International WCX World Congress Experience in Detroit, which attracted about 10,000 members and nonmembers alike.
Attendees from about 50 nations were treated to almost 1,500 technical papers and presentations, and nearly 200 exhibit booths—not to mention unending opportunities to network.
“WCX is designed to bring together the brightest minds while sharing the latest next generation technology,” Jim Forlenza, Group Director, SAE Events, said. “We again accomplished that goal and look forward to
building on this momentum for the future.”
One of the highlights was a WCX-opening keynote speech by Bob Lutz, the famed former Vice Chairman of General Motors. Here was the take on his speech by Bill Visnic, Editorial Director, Automotive Engineering:
|Driving will become a thing of the past within a couple decades, predicted Bob Lutz.|
SAE Member Sue Bai addresses a WCX technical
session that she co-organized.
Speaking to a crowd of hundreds of engineers at SAE International’s WCX 2018 in Detroit, long-serving auto-industry executive and revered “car guy” Bob Lutz cut to the chase: humans who enjoy driving and car companies that rely on the concept of branding have another 20-25 years, then “It’s all over” as utilitarian, soulless automated vehicles handle nearly all conventional transportation needs.
March 18-21, 2019
ATA/TMC Annual Meeting and Transportation Technology Exhibition
Consisting of fleets, equipment suppliers, and service providers, TMC is focused solely on truck technology and maintenance. At this conference, members work together to create best practices in truck technology and maintenance to improve transportation efficiency throughout North America.
April 2-4, 2019
SAE HM-1 Committee on Integrated Vehicle Health Management (IVHM)
This 17th meeting of the SAE HM-1 committee will include discussion of new SAE standards in the IVHM industry and is hosted by UTC Aerospace Systems.
April 9-11, 2019
SAE World Congress Experience (WCX 2019)
The SAE World Congress Experience (WCX) assembles the best talent in the automotive industry – experts, management teams, engineers, and executives – to collaborate and address current challenges, seek new windows for discovery and exploration, and promote the multitude of opportunities fundamental for a successful future.
April 29-May 2, 2019
Airlines Electronic Engineering Committee (AEEC) General Session
Prague, Czech Republic
The AEEC General Session is an ideal opportunity for aviation industry professionals to obtain an overview of the important technical developments in air transport avionics and other aircraft electronics.
May 14-16, 2019
The Society for Machinery Failure Prevention Technology (MFPT)
MFPT promotes failure prevention technologies and performance monitoring systems. The MFPT 2019 will offer attendees expert perspectives in three technical content tracks: Vibration Institute, Expert Keynote presentations, and Exhibitors.
June 17-19, 2019
IEEE International Conference on PHM
The IEEE Reliability Society matches world-class expertise in academic, engineering, and management disciplines to facilitate exchanges of ideas and practices. Networking is fostered and encouraged. This conference will cover a broad range of research and application topics within the full scope of PHM development.
June 25-27, 2019
Electronic Flight Bag Users Forum (EFBUF)
This conference is a coordinating activity among airlines, cargo carriers, and other aircraft operators intended to facilitate EFB development. Aircraft manufacturers, regulators, EFB suppliers, and others are encouraged to participate in the Forum to advance EFB capabilities.
September 21-26, 2019
This 11th Annual Conference of the Prognostics and Health Management (PHM) Society will bring together the global community of PHM experts from industry, academia, and government in diverse application areas including energy, aerospace, transportation, automotive, human health, smart manufacturing, and industrial automation.
Presented by Luis Hernandez of Global Strategic Solutions at the SAE 2018 Aerospace standards Summit in October, 2018. This presentation begins by defining an unmaintainable system, self-adaptive health management systems, and inherent self-protection mechanisms. Current and future autonomous systems are outlined, along with the health-ready components required to enable this technology. The path to self-adaptive health management is illustrated vis-à-vis the six levels of IVHM capability.
Presented by Steve Holland of General Motors in various venues. This presentation outlines the scope and goals of SAE JA6268. It explains the benefits of health-ready components and the importance of industry awareness. Levels of vehicle health capability, design and run-time parameters, and systems integration are reviewed.
Presented by Jean-Francois Saint-Etienne of Airbus at the AEEC General Session in April 2018. This presentation outlines the Airbus FOMAX-Skywise offering extended use of aircraft data, and touches on aircraft connectivity and domain structure. Examples of digital services are provided which reduce fuel consumption and assist with predictive maintenance.
Presented by Brian Tucker of Bell at the AEEC General Session in April 2018. This presentation differentiates between Health Monitoring vs. Health Management. It outlines the SAE JA6268 Surface Vehicle/Aerospace Recommended Practice and summarizes Bell’s MissionLink implementation and architecture. A big data application example is provided, along with lessons learned.
Presented by Dr. Leon Gommans of AirFranceKLM at the AEEC General Session in April 2018. This presentation recognizes data as an economic asset which can be traded. It reviews risk management and differences between monopolism and open market development, contrasting the oil and data economies. The concept of digital twins is introduced to estimate maintenance credits, and a digital data marketplace architecture is proposed.
SAE Industry Technologies Consortia (SAE ITC®) is an 501(c)(6) affiliate of SAE International®, and its membership is comprised of public and private organizations collaborating in a neutral forum to drive innovative solutions to key industry challenges.