Abstract
Processes and techniques used for assessing the safety of a complex system are well-addressed by safety standards. These standards usually recommend to decompose the assessment process into different stages of analysis, so called tiered safety assessment. Each analysis stage should be performed by applying recommended assessment techniques. To provide confidence in the correctness of the whole analysis, some verification techniques, usually traceability checking, are applied between two stages. Even if the traceability provides some confidence in the correctness of the decomposition, the following problems remains How to model the system behaviours at each stage of safety assessment? How to efficiently use these stages during the design process? What is the formal relationship between these modelling stages? To tackle these problems, we propose a way to specify, formalize and implement the relations between assessment stages. The proposal and its pros & cons are illustrated on a Remotely Piloted Aircraft System (RPAS) use-case.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Available at www.onera.fr/sites/default/files/274/IMBSA2019code.zip.
References
Abrial, J.-R.: Modeling in Event-B: System and Software Engineering. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2010)
Arnold, A., Point, G., Griffault, A., Rauzy, A.: The AltaRica formalism for describing concurrent systems. Fundamanta Informaticae 40(2–3), 109–124 (1999)
Bittner, B., et al.: The xSAP safety analysis platform. In: Chechik, M., Raskin, J.-F. (eds.) TACAS 2016. LNCS, vol. 9636, pp. 533–539. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49674-9_31
Bittner, B., Bozzano, M., Cimatti, A., Zampedri, G.: Automated verification and tightening of failure propagation models. In: AAAI, pp. 907–913 (2016)
Dassault. Cecilia OCAS framework (2014)
Domis, D., Höfig, K., Trapp, M.: A consistency check algorithm for component-based refinements of fault trees. In: IEEE 21st International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering, ISSRE 2010, San Jose, CA, USA, 1–4 November 2010, pp. 171–180 (2010)
Farges, J.-L., et al.: Addressing safety assessment of autonomous robot operation and design with model based safety assessment. In: Lambda Mu 21 \(\ll \)Maîtrise des risques et transformation numérique: opportunités et menaces\(\gg \) (2018)
Kaiser, B., Liggesmeyer, P., Mäckel, O.: A new component concept for fault trees. In: Proceedings of the 8th Australian Workshop on Safety Critical Systems and Software, vol. 33, pp. 37–46. Australian Computer Society Inc. (2003)
Laibinis, L., Troubitsyna, E.: Fault tolerance in a layered architecture: a general specification pattern in B. In: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Software Engineering and Formal Methods, SEFM 2004, pp. 346–355. IEEE (2004)
Lisagor, O., Bozzano, M., Bretschneider, M., Kelly, T.: Incremental safety assessment: enabling the comparison of safety analysis results. In: 28th International System Safety Conference (ISSC) (2010, submitted)
Mhenni, F., Choley, J.-Y., Nguyen, N., Frazza, C.: Flight control system modeling with sysml to support validation, qualification and certification. IFAC-PapersOnLine 49(3), 453–458 (2016)
Morel, M.: Model-based safety approach for early validation of integrated and modular avionics architectures. In: Ortmeier, F., Rauzy, A. (eds.) IMBSA 2014. LNCS, vol. 8822, pp. 57–69. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12214-4_5
Papadopoulos, Y., McDermid, J.A.: Hierarchically performed hazard origin and propagation studies. In: Felici, M., Kanoun, K. (eds.) SAFECOMP 1999. LNCS, vol. 1698, pp. 139–152. Springer, Heidelberg (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-48249-0_13
Prosvirnova, T.: AltaRica 3.0: a model-based approach for safety analyses. Ph.D. thesis. Ecole Polytechnique (2014)
Rauzy, A.: Mathematical foundations of minimal cutsets. IEEE Trans. Reliab. 50(4), 389–396 (2001)
SAE: Aerospace Recommended Practices 4761 - guidelines and methods for conducting the safety assessment process on civil airborne systems and equipment (1996)
SAE: Aerospace Recommended Practices 4754a - Development of Civil Aircraft and Systems (2010)
Villemeur, A.: Reliability, Availability, Maintainability and Safety Assessment. Wiley, Hoboken (1992)
Vistbakka, I., Troubitsyna, E., Majd, A.: Multi-layered safety architecture of autonomous systems: formalising coordination perspective. In: 2019 IEEE 19th International Symposium on High Assurance Systems Engineering (HASE), pp. 58–65. IEEE (2019)
Zeller, M., Ratiu, D., Höfig, K.: Towards the adoption of model-based engineering for the development of safety-critical systems in industrial practice. In: Skavhaug, A., Guiochet, J., Schoitsch, E., Bitsch, F. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2016. LNCS, vol. 9923, pp. 322–333. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45480-1_26
Acknowledgment
This work is part of the Phydias french study which is granted by the DGAC to study drone safety.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Delmas, K., Seguin, C., Bieber, P. (2019). Tiered Model-Based Safety Assessment. In: Papadopoulos, Y., Aslansefat, K., Katsaros, P., Bozzano, M. (eds) Model-Based Safety and Assessment. IMBSA 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11842. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32872-6_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32872-6_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-32871-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-32872-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)