Abstract
The development of automotive systems and components are often in context of a development of a safety critical system with respect to electric/electronic faults. To ensure that these systems are developed adequately safe, standards like the ISO 26262:2018 have evolved which should guide the engineers through the whole development. In this paper a possible testing approach for automotive safety critical systems on system level and on vehicle level is shown. Based on real-world examples, the approach for functional testing, fault-injection testing and robustness testing is investigated in detail. Several important steps which are needed to end up with a fully tested and calibrated safety critical product in context of ISO 26262:2018 are explored. Potential challenges that need to be solved during the testing/calibration activities are highlighted and discussed in detail.
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.
According to the E-Gas concept [5] these functions are often referred to as Level 1 functions.
- 2.
According to the E-Gas concept these functions are often referred to as Level 2 functions.
- 3.
Users in that sense covers all humans that can be affected by the vehicle or its functions (e.g. driver, passengers, maintenance staff or pedestrians).
- 4.
This implies that the fault reaction execution must be always switched on.
- 5.
The overlap caused by calibration can be included in MOCA.
- 6.
In case of a non-successful evaluation of the safety functions, a root-cause analysis followed by rework-steps need to be performed. The same might hold true when calibration changes or functional changes have been applied to the control system.
- 7.
Having a clever testing strategy in mind and having the test cases specified in a generic (ideally machine readable) manner would support to transfer of the test cases between the test environments.
- 8.
To perform an efficient robustness testing, it is proposed to “guide” the test driver through the test maneuvers. This is done by a human-machine-interface that gives the driver an explanation of the intended test before the test shall be performed. After the test has finished, a check routine is automatically triggered. The result of this check routine will immediately inform the driver if the test maneuver was successful or the test must be repeated.
- 9.
Please note, that depending on the test progress the “fault reactions triggering & execution” (see Fig. 5) might be switched off. The tester has no immediate feedback about potential safety triggers and its related fault reaction. As some safety triggers are only healed by an ignition cycle, a visual and audible HMI notification is provided to the tester.
- 10.
In minor cases it is also possible to start from a sufficiently mature Level 1 function. Level 1 function calibration and Level 2 function testing may go in parallel but bear the risk of function mismatch leading to additional development efforts.
- 11.
Between the single test steps shown in Fig. 10 it might be required to change the implemented functionality (e.g. bug fix or calibration update). Whenever this takes place, it might be that parts of the procedure must be repeated.
References
International Electrotechnical Commission: IEC 61508 Edition 2.0: Functional safety of electrical/electronic/programmable electronic safety-related systems (2010)
International Standardization Organization: ISO 26262: Part 1-12: Road vehicles – functional safety (2018)
Wambera, T., Macher, G., Frohner, B.: Prozesssteuerung und domänenspezifische Dokumentation nach ISO26262 und ISO25119 während der Entwicklung und Integration von sicherheitsrelevanten Systemen, Diagnose in mechatronischen Fahrzeugsystemen XIII: Neue Verfahren für Test, Prüfung und Diagnose von E/E-Systemen im Kfz. TUDpress, Dresden (2019)
Pries-Heje, J., Johansen, J.: The SPI Manifesto (2009). https://2020.eurospi.net/images/eurospi/DownloadCenter/spi manifesto.pdf
Arbeitskreis EGAS: Standardisiertes E-Gas Überwachungskonzept für Benzin und Diesel Motorensteuerungen. Arbeitskreis EGAS, Version 6.0
Mavin, A., Wilkinson, P., Harwood, A., Novak, M.: Easy approach to requirements syntax (EARS). In: 2009 17th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE 2009), pp. 317–322. IEEE, Atlanta (2009)
Holtmann, J., Meyer, J., von Detten, M.: Automatic validation and correction of formalized, textual requirements. In: 2011 IEEE Fourth International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops, pp. 486–495. IEEE, Berlin (2011)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Ringdorfer, M., Griessnig, G., Draxler, P., Schnellbach, A. (2020). A Systematical Approach for “System Item Integration and Testing” in Context of ISO 26262. In: Yilmaz, M., Niemann, J., Clarke, P., Messnarz, R. (eds) Systems, Software and Services Process Improvement. EuroSPI 2020. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1251. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56441-4_42
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56441-4_42
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-56440-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-56441-4
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)