This content is not included in
your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
The Development of Safety Cases for an Autonomous Vehicle: A Comparative Study on Different Methods
Technical Paper
2017-01-2010
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
This content contains downloadable datasets
Annotation ability available
Sector:
Language:
English
Abstract
The Connected and Autonomous Vehicles (CAVs) promise huge economic, social and environmental benefits. The autonomous vehicles supposed to be safer than human drivers. However, the advanced systems and complex levels of automation could also bring accidents by tiny faults of hardware or errors of software. To achieve complete safety, a safety case providing guidance on the identification and classification of hazardous events, and the minimization of these risks needs to be developed throughout the entire development lifecycle process of CAVs. A comprehensible and valid safety case has to employ appropriate safety approaches complying with the automotive functional safety requirements in ISO 26262. The technical focus of present work is on the comparative study of different safety approaches, in particular, Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) method and Goal Structuring Notation (GSN) method that have been employed to generate lists of hazardous events, safety goals and functional safety requirements at the vehicle level. A case study on the safety case development of INISIGHT autonomous vehicle has been carried out using the aforementioned methods. This case study covers the safety argument of battery and charging system that supply the whole electric power for INSIGHT vehicle. The safety of this systems has been assessed along with their potential for malfunction together with the layers of protection. The results and conclusions from case study analyses suggest the safety case of CAVs can be developed in a highly effective manner by employing a combined method of GSN and FMEA.
Recommended Content
Technical Paper | A Fault Tolerant Time Interval Process for Functional Safety Development |
Ground Vehicle Standard | Reliability Prediction for Automotive Electronics Based on Field Return Data |
Aerospace Standard | Software Reliability Program Standard |
Authors
Citation
Yang, J., Ward, M., and Akhtar, J., "The Development of Safety Cases for an Autonomous Vehicle: A Comparative Study on Different Methods," SAE Technical Paper 2017-01-2010, 2017, https://doi.org/10.4271/2017-01-2010.Data Sets - Support Documents
Title | Description | Download |
---|---|---|
Unnamed Dataset 1 | ||
Unnamed Dataset 2 |
Also In
References
- http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811363.pdf
- http://www.ucsusa.org/our-work/clean-vehicles/car-emissions-and-global-warming
- http://www.google.co.uk/about/careers/lifeatgoogle/self---driving-car-test-steve-mahan.html
- http://www.navigantresearch.com/research/autonomous---vehicles
- http://www.ieee.org/about/news/2012/5september_2_2012.html
- keesler news keesler 1 1 1948 http://www.keesler.af.mil/AboutUs/FactSheets/Display/tabid/1009/Article/360538/history-of-keesler-air-force-base.aspx 13 10 2016
- Ioannou P. A. and Chien C. C. Autonomous intelligent cruise control IEEE transaction on vehicle technology 42 4 657 672 1993
- Thorpe C. , Hebert M. , Kanade T. and Shafer S. Toward autonomous driving: the CMU Navlab IEEE 31 41 1991
- Thorpe C. , Hebert M. , Kanade T. and Shafer S. Vision and navigation for Carnegie-Mellon Navlab IEEE 10 3 362 373 1988
- Centre for Connected and Autonomous Vehicles UK INSIGHT Project Website Jan 2016
- Heathrow Pod. Company website http://www.ultraglobalprt.com/wheres-it-used/heathrow-t5/ July 2015
- SAE International Surface Vehicle Information Report Guidelines for Safe On-Road Testing of SAE Level 3, 4 and 5 Prototype Automated Driving Systems (ADS) SAE Standard J3018™ Mar. 2015
- Alan Peters Safety of the LUTZ Pathfinder Automated Vehicle 22nd ITS World Congress, Paper number ITS-2427 Bordeaux, France 5-9 October 2015
- ISO 26262 -Road Vehicles -Functional Safety
- SAE International Surface Vehicle Information Report Guidelines for Safe On-Road Testing of SAE Level 3, 4 and 5 Prototype Automated Driving Systems (ADS) SAE Standard J3018™ Mar. 2015
- UK Department for Transport, The pathway for driverless car: a code of practice for testing 2015
- UK Government, Road Traffic Act 1991
- IEC 61508 -Functional Safety of Electrical/Electronic/Programmable Electronic Safety-related Systems
- United States Department of Defense 9 November 1949 MIL-P-1629 - Procedures for performing a failure mode effect and critical analysis Department of Defense (US)
- Goal Structuring Notation Working Group GSN Community Standard Version 1 http://www.goalstructuringnotation.info/ 2011
- Toulmin Stephen E. The Uses of Argument Cambridge University Press 1958
- Kelly T. P. Arguing Safety - A Systematic Approach to Safety Case Management DPhil Thesis YCST99-05 Department of Computer Science, University of York UK 1998
- Kelly T. and Weaver R. The Goal Structuring Notation-A Safety Argument Notation Proceedings of the Dependable Systems and Networks 2004 Workshop on Assurance Cases July 2004
- SAE International Surface Vehicle Recommended Practice Cybersecurity Guidebook for Cyber-Physical Vehicle systems SAE Standard J3061 ™ Jan. 2016
- Palin , R. , Habli , I. Assurance of automotive safety: a safety case approach SAFECOMP.2010 Vienna, Austria 2010
- Palin B. , Ward D. , Habli I. and Rivett R. ISO 26262 safety cases: compliance and assurance In: IET Intl. System Safety Conf. 2011
- Habli I. et. al. Safety Cases and Their Role in ISO 26262 Functional Safety Assessment 32nd International Conference on Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security Toulouse, France 2013
- Matsuno Y.
- SAE International Surface Vehicle Recommended Practice Considerations for ISO 26262 ASIL Hazard Classification SAE Standard J2980 May 2015