Testing hybrid systems with TTCN-3 embedded

An extension of the TTCN-3 language
  • Juergen GrossmannEmail author


A testing language typically provides a set of test automation statements that allows for a systematic definition and automatic application of stimulation data (i.e. messages or signals) to a system under test. Moreover, it eases the assessment of the system’s reaction by providing customizable evaluation statements and functions. TTCN-3, the Testing and Test Control Notation, already provides universal and powerful concepts to describe tests for discrete, message-based systems. However, software-based control systems that are used to control physical processes often show continuous quantities that can be only poorly stimulated and assessed by means of the currently available language constructs in TTCN-3. In this article, we show how this problem can be solved by extending the TTCN-3 language. We introduce an extension of TTCN-3, namely TTCN-3 embedded, that provides concepts and constructs that directly address the specification of tests for continuous and hybrid real time systems. The extension includes the notion of streams that can be used to represent continuous quantities over time. In addition, TTCN-3 has been extended with the concepts of stream-based ports, sampling, equation systems, and with additional control flow structures. The concepts are integrated with standard TTCN-3 and allow for defining test cases that handle continuous quantities, as well as discrete state changes and the exchange of messages within the same concept space. The feasibility of the approach is shown by providing a small example from the automotive industry.


Hybrid systems Testing Standardization TTCN-3 Automotive 


  1. 1.
    Alur, R., Courcoubetis, C., Henzinger, T.A., Ho, P-H.: Hybrid automata: an algorithmic approach to the specification and verification of hybrid systems. In: Hybrid Systems, 209–229 (1992)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alur, R., Henzinger, T.A.: Modularity for timed and hybrid systems, Springer, Berlin, 74–88 (1997)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    ASAM. ASAM HIL V1.0.0. URL: &start=Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Autosar Consortium. Web Site of the Autosar Consortium (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Börger, E., Schulte, W.: A programmer friendly modular definition of the semantics of Java. In: Formal Syntax and Semantics of Java. Springer, London (1999). ISBN 3-540-66158-1, 353–404Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bringmann, E., Kraemer, A.: Systematic testing of the continuous behavior of automotive systems. In: SEAS ’06: Proc. of the 2006 international workshop on Software engineering for automotive systems. ACM Press, New York (2006). ISBN 1-59593-402-2, 13–20Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Broy, M.: Refinement of time. In: Bertran, M. (Hrsg.); Rus, Th. (Hrsg.): Transformation-based reactive system development, ARTS’97, TCS, 44–63 (1997)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Conrad, M.: Modell-basierter Test eingebetteter Software im Automobil. Diss, TU-Berlin (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    dSpace AG. dSPACE AutomationDesk (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    ETAS Group. ETAS—Hardware in the loop (HiL)—ECU Testing—Applications and Solutions—ETAS Products (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    ETSI. Methods for testing and specification (MTS). The Testing and Test Control Notation Version 3, Part 1: TTCN-3 Core Language (ETSI Std. ES 201 873–1 V4.3.1) (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    ETSI. Methods for testing and specification (MTS). The Testing and Test Control Notation Version 3, Part 4: TTCN-3 Operational Semantics (ETSI Std. ES 201 873–4 V4.3.1) (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    ETSI. Methods for testing and specification (MTS). The Testing and Test Control Notation Version 3, TTCN-3 Language Extensions: Support of interfaces with continuous signals (ETSI Std. ES 202 786 V1.1.1) (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Glässer, U.; Gotzhein, R., Prinz, A.: Towards a new formal SDL semantics based on abstract state machines. In: SDL ’99—The Next Millenium, 9th SDL Forum Proceedings (1999)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Grossmann, J., Conrad, M., Fey, I., Wewetzer, C., Lamberg, K., Krupp. A.: TestML a language for exchange of Tests (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Grossmann, J., Makedonski, P., Wiesbrock, H-W., Svacina, J., Schieferdecker, I., Grabowski, J.: Model-based X-in-the-loop testing. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gurevich, Y.: Evolving algebras 1993: Lipari guide. Oxford University Press Inc., New York (1995) 9–36 ISBN 0-19-853854-5Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    IEEE: The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. IEEE Standard VHDL (IEEE Std. 1076–1993) (1993)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    IEEE: The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. IEEE Standard Test Language for all Systems-Common/Abbreviated Test Language for All Systems (C/ATLAS) (IEEE Std.716-1995) (1995) Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    IEEE: The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. User’s Manual for the Signal and Method Modeling Language. (1998)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    IEEE: The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. IEEE Standard VHDL Analog and Mixed-Signal Extensions (IEEE Std. 1076.1-1999) (1999)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    IEEE: The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. IEEE Standard Test Access Port and Boundary-Scan Architecture (IEEE Std.1149.1 -2001) (2001)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lim, J.S., Oppenheim, A.V.: Advanced topics in signal processing. Prentice-Hall Inc., NJ (1987). ISBN 0-13-013129-6Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lynch, N.A., Segala, R., Vaandrager, F.W., Weinberg, H.B.: Hybrid I/O Automata. In: Alur, R., Henzinger, T.A., Sontag, E.D. (eds.) Hybrid Systems Bd. 1066, Springer, Berlin (1995). ISBN 3-540-61155-X, 496–510Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mauel, M., Nissen, H.W., Hartung, G.: An Application of TTCN-3 Embedded in the Automotive Sector. URL: N3EmbeddedInTheAutomotiveSector.ppt. 2011
  26. 26.
    MBtech Group. PROVEtech: TA—Überblick. (2012)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    National Instruments. NI TestStand—Products and Services—National Instruments (2012)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Parker, K.P., Oresjo, S.: A language for describing boundary scan devices. J. Electron. Test. 2(1), 43–75 (1991). ISSN 0923–8174Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    SCC20 ATML Group. IEEE ATML Specification Drafts and IEEE ATML Status reports (2006)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Stärk, R.F., Schmid, J., Börger, E.: Java and the Java virtual machine: definition, verification, validation. Springer, Berlin (2001)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Stephens, R.: A survey of stream processing. Acta Informatica 34(7), 491–541 (1997)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Suparjo, B., Ley, A., Cron, A., Ehrenberg, H.: Analog Boundary-Scan Description Language (ABSDL) for Mixed-Signal Board Test. In: International Test Conference, 152–160 (2006)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    TEMEA.TEMEA Project (Testing Methods for Embedded Systems of the Automotive Industry), founded by the European Community (EFRE) (2009)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    The MathWorks. Web Pages of Simulink—Simulation and Model-Based Design (2006)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    The MathWorks. Modeling an Automatic Transmission Controller. URL: (2013)
  36. 36.
    Vector Informatik GmbH. Vector[Portfolio-Übersicht ”Steuerger äte-Test”]. (2007)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Wallace, C.: The Semantics of the C++ Programming Language. In: Börger, E. (ed.) Specification and Validation Methods. Oxford University Press, New York (1994)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fraunhofer FOKUSBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations