Formal Translation of IEC 61131-3 Function Block Diagrams to PVS with Nuclear Application

  • Josh Newell
  • Linna Pang
  • David Tremaine
  • Alan Wassyng
  • Mark Lawford
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9690)

Abstract

The trip computers for the two reactor shutdown systems of the Ontario Power Generation (OPG) Darlington Nuclear Power Generating Station (DNGS) are being refurbished due to hardware obsolescence. For one of the systems, the general purpose computer originally used is being replaced by a programmable logic controller (PLC). The trip computer application software has been rewritten using function block diagrams (FBDs), a commonly used PLC programming language defined in the IEC 61131-3 standard. The replacement project’s quality assurance program requires that formal verification be performed to compare the FBDs against a formal software requirements specification (SRS) written using tabular expressions (TEs). The PVS theorem proving tool is used in the formal verification. Custom tools developed for OPG are used to translate TEs and FBDs into PVS code. In this paper, we present a method to rigorously translate the graphical FBD language to a mathematical model in PVS using an abstract syntax to represent the FBD constructs. We use an example from the replacement project to demonstrate the use of the model to translate a FBD module into a PVS specification.

Keywords

Safety critical systems IEC 61131-3 Function block diagrams Formal specification PVS Tabular expressions 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank OPG for their permitting us to describe the work related to the DNGS TC replacement project. The methodology and tools described herein are the property of OPG. Particularly we thank Ivan Dimitrov, Section Manager, Safety Related Computers, Computers and Control Design, and Mike Viola, SDS Replacement Project Manager, for their valued oversight and assistance. We would also like to thank Lucian Patcas for his thorough review.

References

  1. 1.
    IEEE 7–4.3.2: Standard for Digital Computers in Safety Systems of Nuclear Power Generating Stations (Revision of IEEE Std 7–4.3.2-2003). The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    DO-178C: Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification. Special Committee 205 of RTCA (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Blech, J.O., Biha, S.O.: On formal reasoning on the semantics of PLC using Coq. CoRR abs/1301.3047 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    IEC: 61131–3 Ed. 3.0 en: 2013: Programmable Controllers – Part 3: Programming Languages. International Electrotechnical Commission (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jimenez-Fraustro, F., Rutten, E.: A synchronous model of IEC 61131 PLC languages in SIGNAL. In: Euromicro Conference On Real-Time Systems, pp. 135–142 (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jin, Y., Parnas, D.L.: Defining the meaning of tabular mathematical expressions. Sci. Comput. Program. 75(11), 980–1000 (2010)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Joannou, P., Harauz, J., Viola, M., Cirjanic, R., Chan, D., Whittall, R., Tremaine, D., Moum, G.: Standard for Software Engineering of Safety Critical Software. CANDU Computer Systems Engineering Centre of Excellence Standard CE-1001-STD Rev. 3 (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Németh, E., Bartha, T.: Formal verification of safety functions by reinterpretation of functional block based specifications. In: Cofer, D., Fantechi, A. (eds.) FMICS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5596, pp. 199–214. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Owre, S., Rushby, J.M., Shankar, N.: PVS: A prototype verification system. In: Kapur, D. (ed.) CADE 1992. LNCS, vol. 607, pp. 748–752. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pang, L.: An Engineering Methodology for the Formal Verification of Function Block Based Systems. Ph.D. thesis. McMaster University, Department of Computing and Software (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pang, L., Wang, C., Lawford, M., Wassyng, A.: Formal verification of function blocks applied to IEC 61131–3. Sci. Comput. Program. 113, 149–190 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Parnas, D.L., Madey, J.: Functional documents for computer systems. Sci. Comput. Program. 25(1), 41–61 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Parnas, D.L., Madey, J., Iglewski, M.: Precise documentation of well-structured programs. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 20, 948–976 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Roussel, J.M., Faure, J.: An algebraic approach for PLC programs verification. In: 6th International Workshop on Discrete Event Systems, pp. 303–308 (2002)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Soliman, D., Thramboulidis, K., Frey, G.: Transformation of function block diagrams to Uppaal timed automata for the verification of safety applications. Annu. Rev. Control 36, 338–345 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Völker, N., Krämer, B.J.: Automated verification of function block-based industrial control systems. Sci. Comput. Program. 42(1), 101–113 (2002)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wassyng, A., Janicki, R.: Tabular expressions in software engineering. In: International Conference on Software & System Engineering and their Applications, vol. 4, pp. 1–46 (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wassyng, A., Lawford, M.: Lessons learned from a successful implementation of formal methods in an industrial project. In: Araki, K., Gnesi, S., Mandrioli, D. (eds.) FME 2003. LNCS, vol. 2805, pp. 133–153. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Josh Newell
    • 1
  • Linna Pang
    • 1
  • David Tremaine
    • 1
  • Alan Wassyng
    • 2
  • Mark Lawford
    • 2
  1. 1.Systemware Innovation CorporationTorontoCanada
  2. 2.McMaster Centre for Software CertificationMcMaster UniversityHamiltonCanada

Personalised recommendations