Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here


Requirements Analysis of New/Changed Regulations

Requirements Analysis of New/Changed Regulations

Requirements Analysis of New/Changed Regulations

I've been struggling with tools or methodology for extracting the requirements from complex cross-referenced regulations.

Sure, I can make a table, paraphrase the requirement, in one column, point to the regulatory reference in another, and list the defining spec in a third.

The part that really bothers me it ensuring I have captured them all. I guess I want to be sure I have unwound all the cross references to ensure I captured everything on the relevant "pathways" and can document why the non-relevant reference pathways are not applicable. Sometimes those facts change over time too. Anybody have the same issue, know of tools or good guidance?


RE: Requirements Analysis of New/Changed Regulations

Not really.  Most requirements management tools are more in the "management" arena, i.e., bookkeeping the stuff you actually figure out, rather than doind anything in the way of figuring out the requirements to begin with.

Unfortunately, I think that until some really solid expert or artificial intelligence systems get developed, we still have to depend on a good systems engineer to do the collation and allocation.


FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies

RE: Requirements Analysis of New/Changed Regulations

talk (early) to whoever is approving the mod (the certification authority, maybe your local FAA office, maybe someone internal to your org, ...).

as the previous poster says there is no listing (as far as i'm aware) that says "if you're doing this, you need to address these requirements"

a problem we have (in our company) is if the electrical guys are doing (leading, principally involved in) a mod, they'll gloss over the structural side of the mod ... but constant whining is havng a +ve affect !

RE: Requirements Analysis of New/Changed Regulations


as the previous poster says there is no listing (as far as i'm aware) that says "if you're doing this, you need to address these requirements"

I once looked through the hand-written notes of an old-timer who really had done this for himself.  A binder with projects such as engine changes, interior conversions, various instrument types.  Basically example certification plans for what he thought were the standard run-of-the-mill projects he had to review.  Unfortunately he didn't share it with me!

Steven Fahey, CET

RE: Requirements Analysis of New/Changed Regulations

I have had to do a few worse-case analysis for some products going into Boeings 787. Wow, talk about "complex cross-referenced regulations"!
It was definately not a one-week job for a project engineer to perform, but eventually I wound up with many columns on an Excel spreadsheet. DO-160E parapraph X refers to part X of D6-15050, which is satisfied by the tests called out in section Y of the whoknowswhat document. etc etc.

In the task of tying each of our performance parameters to a specific spec, I found several instances of D6-16050 cross referencing back onto itself.

Expect many columns in your spec doc to finally ge a clear path from each performance measure to an actual industry spec.

RE: Requirements Analysis of New/Changed Regulations

I appreciate the responses to the OP.

I work for an operator so my requirements analysis needs to be very broad.

Our airplane fleet is one aspect of an overall business plan.  We don't typically get much help from the business side, they seem to have no clue whatsoever. The company operation may be a bit too silo-ed (new word?).

In one mod we met regulatory requirements for operations in a certain region, but overlooked the CRAF revenue stream.  We had to go back and make some fast updates to fleets that didn't operate in the affected region right now to avoid loosing that revenue.

Other business implications might be Operational, like fuel savings associated with efficient operations.

Then there is what I call unwinding the regulations, and it's not always US regulations too.  

Then if there are STCs involved we need to work with the requirements for technical approval.

If there are contracts and realistic continuous airworthiness support requirements above the nominal FAA ICAW we need to capture those requirements too.  That might be shop support software licensing subscriptions etc.

Then as we work toward a hard target we should be trying to look beyond that regulatory compliance date to how the system architecture will evolve beyond the "clutch" date.  If it's related to a new fleet acquisition, we want to try to see out as far as the useful life of the airplane at least for trends.  

We will usher in the FAA's Next Gen effort in a series of stair steps not all in one leap.  A little research is all it takes to set things up for relatively painless growth to the far term target as well as tomorrows deadline.

Of course I do like to assume the company will exist 10 years down the road.  I'm not sure the business people always believe so.  

After capturing the requirements there is the (verification validation) end IRStuff calls the management stuff.

RE: Requirements Analysis of New/Changed Regulations

It sounds like you've been charged with much more than just airworthiness to consider.  If your job description includes considerations of operational efficiency, and project planning into the next 10 years, then you are looking at a team effort at least to sort through the mountain.  How about a team with members that come from each of the "silos" that comes together regularly to move the plan forward.  Then action has to be delegated to people with the ability and time to do it.

Regulations change (Transport Canada is currently undergoing a paperwork overhaul, for example) and often accidents come out of the blue that throw your near-term plans into the dump.

Long-term planning can be a useful tool for controlling impulsive ideas.  Finding 6 people working on a side-line project because of a comment made by the VP will divert them from the bigger project.  If you have to confront the CEO with this as a "problem" it's better to have a solution in the form of the planning document he's already signed.

I'd be very surprised if you found a template that you could use.  First because of the complexity of what you want, and second because any compnay that comes up with one will jealously guard their hard-earned labour.  Especially if it works well enough to help the bottom line.

Steven Fahey, CET

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close