Professional Documents
Culture Documents
An Overview of The Integrated Modular Avionics (Ima) Concept
An Overview of The Integrated Modular Avionics (Ima) Concept
An Overview of The Integrated Modular Avionics (Ima) Concept
1
AN OVERVIEW OF THE INTEGRATED MODULAR AVIONICS (IMA) CONCEPT
Gitsuzo B. S. Tagawa, Marcelo Lopes de Oliveira e Souza
3. LITERATURE OVERVIEW
Nowadays, a growing tendency to move from federate
architectures to integrated architectures is being performed.
The IMA concept is being studied and discussed among
engineers from automotive, space and aeronautic worlds.
In the automotive world, federated architectures are
formed by ECUs. According to (Di Natale and Sangiovanni-
Fig. 3 – Partitions Working as Multiple Virtual Computers. Source: Vincentelli)7, this kind of architecture is no longer adequate
(Black and Fletcher)4. to modern automotive systems due to the ever increasing
number of additional features and functions. Moreover, it
2.3. ARINC 653 leads to a proliferation in the number of ECUs, wiring and
ARINC standards are prepared by the Airlines harnessing, thereby rising size, weight and costs. Thus, they
Electronics Engineering Committee (AEEC). The ARINC propose the use of integrated architectures to overcome
653 is a software specification for space and time those hurdles.
partitioning in the IMA architecture. In other words, it The aeronautics world is where integrated architectures
defines how an Operating System must guarantee a robust have reached its highest maturation. Large and visible
spatial and temporal partitioning. This specification also projects such as Boeing’s 787 and Airbus’ A380 took
standardizes the Application Programming Interface (API). advantage of IMA concept. Boeing is using its Common
The API defined by ARINC 653 is called APEX - Core System (CCS) supplied by GE Aviation to run over 70
APplication Executive. separate applications executing at separate safety levels.
This architecture allowed Boeing to eliminate over 100
discrete LRUs and shave approximately 2000 pounds
2.4. APEX - APPLICATION EXECUTIVE (COTS Journal)3. Likewise, Airbus utilizing IMA approach,
The APEX is a general purpose interface between the cut in half the part numbers of processor units (Avionics
Operating System (O/S) and the application software. With Magazine)8.
this standardized interface, the hardware platform and the (Diniz and Rufino)9 proposed the use of ARINC 653
software applications can evolve independently of each standard in space. Their main argument was that most of the
other, thereby enabling cost-effective upgrades over the life requirements from the civil aviation world of ARINC 653
of the system. are also requirements from the space world. They also
emphasized the benefits in terms of modular certification
and usage of Commercial Off-The-Shelf components
(COTS).
The European Space Agency (ESA), through Skysoft,
developed a multi-platform and modular ARINC 653
Simulator for Modular Space Based Applications (Santos, S.
et al)10.
NASA Langley Research Center presented a research
(Di Vito, B.L.)11 aimed at ensuring safe partitioning and
2
logical noninterference among separate applications running 4.1.4. Incremental Certification
on a shared Avionics Computer Resource (ACR).
ARINC 653 robustness allows incremental certification
Another NASA center, Ames Research Center, presented
because hardware and software are truly isolated. Thus,
a paper (Alena, R.L. et al.)2 where the authors defined and
differently of federated architectures, in integrated
analyzed suitable architectures, standards and conceptual
architectures, it is possible to modify a certified system by
designs for IMA computational modules for applicability to
certifying only the changes. It is not necessary to repeat the
spacecrafts.
full certification process again. Furthermore, application of
In (Mangieri and Vice)12, NASA Kedalion engineering
different levels of criticality can be certified in the same
analysis lab, along with its Orion prime contractor, validated
module.
many contemporary IMA based techniques adapting them
According to (Gangkofer, M. et al.)13, it is necessary to
into a human space vehicle.
identify and constrain the effects of the modifications. Thus,
the incremental certification can be achieved.
4. IMA CHARACTERISTICS
4.1.5. Resource Allocation
4.1. ADVANTAGES Integrated architectures based on the IMA concept
utilize configuration tables to allocate the shared computing
4.1.1. Reduced Size, Weight and Power (SWaP) resources to the hosted functions. Manipulating the
The IMA concept is based on sharing computing configuration tables, the system integrator has the flexibility
resources, so that the same processor and the associated to dynamically manage spare resources to each individual
infrastructure such as power, cooling etc. are used by several hosted function. IMA has an additional capability to reserve
applications of different levels of criticality. Reduced a spare resource pool to be allocated to any hosted function.
hardware means that the size, weight, power and, Thus, the system integrator is able to vary, within certain
consequently, cost, are also reduced. limits, the resource allocation for a given hosted function in
the future; or to add new hosted functions without the
necessity of adding new computing resources.
4.1.2. Competitiveness The resource allocation is not made while the system is
In Federated Architectures, a supplier of a LRU is utilized in service because of certification issues. However,
responsible for its entire design (hardware and software), it can be dynamically re-allocated through updated system
implementation, testing and certification of the unit under configuration data; and then be certified for use in service
DO-178B and DO-254. Furthermore, a LRU is typically (Watkins and Walter)14.
certified to a single DO-178B and/or DO-254 safety level.
Thus, if a new functionality is demanded, the problem is 4.1.6. Reconfiguration and Robustness
often solved by introducing a new LRU. Moreover, if a
simple change in a line of software code is made, a complete In this architecture, the modules are software-
requalification of the entire LRU must be done (COTS configurable and there is a potential path between any of
Journal)3. them. These features allow them to respond to avionics
In IMA, the applications are separated from the base faults. Thus, they can adapt to changes in network
computing platform by the APEX. Thus, the base computing functioning or operating modes so that, in the event of
platform and the applications can be chosen from different failures, the system can reconfigure its software functions in
suppliers, thereby given to the airframe manufacture a wider pre-determined ways (Alena, R.L. et al.)2.
range of options.
4.2. DISADVANTAGES
4.1.3. Portability and Reuse
4.2.1. Complex Integration Process
With the APEX intermediating applications and
computing platforms, standard modules for common tasks In IMA architectures the base platform and the
that could be reused by different functions running on application are separated so that they can be provided by
different platforms could be created. These modules could different suppliers. Therefore, it generates a more complex
be interchangeable among various systems. Thus, as these process of integration. According to (Watkins and Walter)14,
modules would be produced in large scale, the cost would be before transitioning from federated architectures to IMA
reduced. architectures, the system integrator must be confident in its
ability to perform the integration process, which includes
increased interface definition & management, resource
allocation & management, and system configuration
analysis & generation.
3
AN OVERVIEW OF THE INTEGRATED MODULAR AVIONICS (IMA) CONCEPT
Gitsuzo B. S. Tagawa, Marcelo Lopes de Oliveira e Souza
5. CONCLUSION
This paper presented an overview of the Integrated [12] Mangieri, M.L.; Vice, J., Orion Flight Software V&V
Modular Avionics concept emphasizing its advantages in and Kedalion Engineering Lab Insight, Space 2010,
relation to federated concepts. Furthermore, it was shown 2010.
who is involved in the study of IMA architectures and where [13] Gangkofer, M.; Kader, H.; Klockner, W.; White, C.G.,
they intend to apply IMA concepts. Transitioning to Integrated Modular Avionics with a
For future work, we intend to simulate and present a Mission Management System, RTO SCI Symposium,
control system making use of an IMA Simulation tool as 2000.
part of a Master Degree in progress.
[14] Watkins, C.B.; Walter, R., Transitioning From
Federated Avionics Architectures to Integrated Modular
6. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Avionics, IEEE, 2007.
The authors thank the National Institute for Space Research
(INPE), its Coordination of Space Engineering and
Technology (ETE), its Division of Space Mechanics and
Control (DMC), and the Coordination for Improvement of
the Personnel for Superior Teaching (CAPES) for providing
them the necessary infrastructure to conduct the
bibliographical survey for this paper. The first author thanks
CAPES financial support during his Master Degree Program
at INPE.
7. REFERENCES
[1] Aleksa, B.D.; Carter, J.P., Boeing 777 Airplane
Information Management System Operational
Experience, IEEE, 1997.
[2] Alena, R.L.; Goforth, A.; Figueroa, F., Ossenfort, J.;
Laws, K.I., Communication for Integrated Modular
Avionics, IEEE Aerospace Conference, 2007
[3] COTS Journal,
http://www.cotsjournalonline.com/articles/view/101451
, acessado em 09/05/2011.
[4] Black, R.; Fletcher, M., Simplified Robotics Avionics
System: An Integrated Modular Architecture Applied
Across a Group of Robotic Elements, IEEE, 2006.
[5] Pascoal E.; Rufino, J.; Schoofs, T.; Windsor, J.,
AMOBA – ARINC 653 Simulator for Modular Space
Based Applications, Data Systems in Aerospace
Conference, 2008.
[6] Kopetz, H.; Obermaisser, R., GENESYS: A Candidate
for an ARTEMIS Cross-Domain Reference
Architecture for Embedded Systems, 2009.
[7] Di Natale, M.; Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A.L., Moving
from Federated to Integrated Architectures in
Automotive: The Role of Standards, Methods and
Tools, IEEE, 2008.
[8] Avionics Magazine,
http://www.aviationtoday.com/av/issue/feature/8420.ht
ml, acessado em 25/04/2011.
[9] Diniz, N.; Rufino, J., ARINC 653 in Space, DASIA –
DAta System in Aerospace Conference, 2005.
[10] Santos, S.; Rufino, J.; Schoofs, T.; Tatibana, C.;
Windsor, J., A Portable ARINC 653 Standard Interface,
IEEE, 2008.
[11] Di Vito, B.L., A Model of Cooperative Noninterference
for Integrated Modular Avionics, IEEE, 2002.