This content is not included in
your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
Model-Based Assurance for Justifying Automotive Functional Safety
Technical Paper
2010-01-0209
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
Annotation ability available
Sector:
Language:
English
Abstract
With the growing complexity of, and reliance on, safety-related electrical/electronic (E/E) systems in the automotive sector, the development of an explicit safety case is highly recommended to provide assurance to the different stakeholders interested in automotive functional safety. The production of a safety case is explicitly mandated by the draft automotive functional safety standard ISO26262. A safety case should consider all organisational and technical factors that may contribute to safety. For example, it should provide assurance for the safe behaviours of a particular system as well as assurance for the process by which this system is developed, operated and maintained. In this paper, we address one component of the overall safety case, namely the assurance of the functional safety concept. In particular, we examine how model-driven development and assessment can provide a basis for the systematic generation of functional safety requirements. We demonstrate how an automotive safety case can be structurally and traceably developed, justifying why and how the defined functional safety requirements can adequately mitigate the risk of the identified hazards to an acceptable level. A case study is also presented throughout this paper, discussing examples and lessons learnt from the development of a safety case for an air suspension system.
Recommended Content
Journal Article | Decomposition Scheme in Automotive Hazard Analysis |
Technical Paper | Ford GT Body Engineering - Delivering the Designer's Vision in 24 Months |
Ground Vehicle Standard | Collision Deformation Classification |
Authors
Topic
Citation
Habli, I., Ibarra, I., Rivett, R., and Kelly, T., "Model-Based Assurance for Justifying Automotive Functional Safety," SAE Technical Paper 2010-01-0209, 2010, https://doi.org/10.4271/2010-01-0209.Also In
References
- “ISO26262 DIS: Road Vehicles - Road Safety,” International Organization for Standardization (ISO) June 2009
- Object Management Group (OMG) “Systems Modelling Language (SysML),” v1.1 OMG November 2008
- Kelly T. P. “Arguing Safety - A Systematic Approach to Safety Case Management,” Department of Computer Science, University of York UK 1998
- Bate, I. J. Kelly T. P. “Architectural Considerations in the Certification of Modular Systems,” 21st International Conference on Computer Safety, Reliability and Security (SAFECOMP02) September 2002
- Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) “CAP 670 SW 01: Acceptable Means of Compliance to CAP 670 SW 01: Guidance for Producing SW 01 Safety Arguments for COTS Equipment,” 2 CAA 2009
- UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) “Defence Standard 00-56: Safety Management Requirements for Defence Systems,” 4 UK Ministry of Defence 2007
- Habli I. Kelly T. P. “Process and Product Certification Arguments: Getting the Balance Right” Workshop on Innovative Techniques for Certification of Embedded Systems, in Conjunction the 12th IEEE Real-Time and Embedded Technology and Applications Symposium San Jose, California, USA April 2006