Current Design Practice and Needs in Selected Industrial Sectors

  • Bruno Bouyssounouse
  • Joseph Sifakis
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3436)

Abstract

The overall automotive industry structure is different in the US versus Europe and Japan that share some similarity. In the US, subsystems manufacturers are the results of spin-offs from GM (Delphi) and Ford (Visteon) and cannot be considered as independent as the European subsystem auto makers. In addition, Ford and Gm have hardly invested in the recent past to improve substantially their design methods. It is common belief, and we concur with this assessment, that the European automotive industry is the most advanced in terms of quality and design approaches.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A.: Automotive Electronics: Trends and Challenges. In: Convergence 2000, Detroit (MI), USA (October 2000)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    Bosch, R.: CAN Specification, Version 2.0, Technical Report ISO 11898, Robert Bosch GmbH (1991)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
    Kopetz, H., Gruensteidl, G.: TTP – A Time-Triggered Protocol for Fault- Tolerant Real-Time Systems. In: Proceedings of the 23rd IEEE International Symposium on Fault-Tolerant Computing (FTCS-23), IEEE Press, Toulouse (1993)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Flex Ray Consortium, http://www.flexray-group.com
  7. 7.
    Demmeler, T., Giusto, P.: A Universal Communication Model for an Automotive System Integration Platform. In: Proc. Of DATE 2001 (March 2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Poledna, S., Novak, M.: TTP scheme fuels safer drive-by-wire (March 2001), http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20010306S0042
  9. 9.
    Freund, U., Burst, A.: Graphical Programming of ECU Software – An Interface Based Approach, white paper, ETAS GMBh (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ferrari, A., Garue, S., Peri, M., Pezzini, S., Valsecchi, L., Andretta, F., Nesci, W.: The design and implementation of a dual-core platform for power-train systems. In: Convergence 2000, Detroit (MI), USA (October 2000)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mathworks/Simulink, http://www.mathworks.com
  12. 12.
    Cadence Design Systems, Inc., Virtual Component Co-design (VCC), http://www.cadence.com
  13. 13.
    ETAS, Ascet-SD Homepage, http://www.etas.de
  14. 14.
    Murray, C.J.: Auto Industry faces media revolution (March 2001), http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20010306S0035
  15. 15.
    Giusto, P., Brunel, J.-Y., Ferrari, A., Fourgeau, E., Lavagno, L., Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A.: Automotive virtual integration platforms: why’s, what’s, and how’s. In: Proc. Of the Int. Conf. on Comp. Des. (July 2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Automotive UML homepage, http://www.automotive-uml.com/
  17. 17.
    Martin, G., Lavagno, L., Louis-Guerin, J.: Embedded UML: a merger of real-time UML and co-design. In: CODES 2001, Denmark (April 2001)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Giusto, P., Demmeler, T., Schiele, P.: Translating Models of Computation for Design Exploration of Real-Time Distributed Automotive Applications. In: DATE 2002 (2002)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bombarda, G., Gaviani, G., Marceca, P.: Power-train System Design: Functional and Architectural Specifications. In: Convergence 2000, Detroit (MI), USA (October 2000)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Albrecht, H.: On Meta-Modelling for Communication in Operational Process Control Engineering. Accepted dissertation. VDI Fortschritt-Bericht, Series 8, No. 975, 20 ISBN 3-18-397508-4. VDI-Verlag, Duesseldorf, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Alznauer, R., Auer, K., Fay, A.: Wiederverwendung von Automatisierungs- Informationen und -Loesungen, Automatisierungstechnische Praxis 45, Oldenbourg-Verlag (2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bauer, N., Engell, S.: A comparison of sequential function charts and statecharts and an approach towards integration. In: Workshop: Integration of Software Specification Techniques. ETAPS, pp. 58–69 (2002)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bauer, N., Huuck, R.: A parametrized semantics sequential function charts. In: Semantic Foundations of Engineering Design Languages, Satellite Event of ETPAS 2002 (2002)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Biermann, C., Vogel-Heuser, B.: Requirements of a process control description language for distributed control systems (DCS) in process industry. In: Proceedings of IECON 2002, 28th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, Sevilla (November 2002)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Buch, G.: Verteilte Architekturen in heterogenen Umgebungen. In: Congress Electric Automation SPS/IPC/Drives, Nuernberg, Germany (November 2002)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dierks, H.: PLC-Automata: a new class of implementable real-time automata. TCS 253, 61–93 (2001)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fischer, K., Vogel-Heuser, B.: UML for real-time applications in automation, in German: UML in der automatisierungstechnischen Anwendung – Staerken und Schwaechen, Automatisierungstechnische Praxis 44, Oldenbourg-Verlag (2002)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    IDA group: see http://www.ida-group.org
  29. 29.
    IEC International Standard 1131-3, Programmable Controllers, Part 3, Programming Languages (1993)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Klein, S., Weng, X., Frey, G., Lesage, J.-J., Litz, L.: Controller design for an FMS using signal interpreted Petri Nets and SFC (I). In: American Control Conference, ACC 2002, Anchorage, Mai (2002)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Koeppen-Seliger, B., Ding, S.X., Frank, P.M.: MAGIC – IFATIS: EC-Research Projects. In: IFAC World Congr., Barcelona, Spain (2002)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lewis, R.W.: Programming industrial control systems using IEC 1131-3. The Institution of Electrical Engineers (1995)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Neugebauer, J., Hoepf, M., Skordas, T., Ziegler, M.: The Role of Automation and Control in the Information Society. Study supported by the EU and conducted by Fraunhofer Institut Produktionstechnik und Automatisierung (IPA), Stuttgart (October 1999)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Neumann, P., Diedrich, C., Simon, R.: Engineering of Field Devices using Descriptions. In: 15th Triennial World Congress of the International Federation of Automatic Control (IFAC 2002), Barcelona (July 2002)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rink, A.: Entwicklung einer Methode fueur die systemtechnische Auslegung verteilter und sicherheitskritischer Fueuhrungsfunktionen fuer Fahrzeugantriebe. Dissertation, Bergischen Universitaet Wuppertal, Fakultaet Elektrotechnik und Informationstechnik, Wuppertal (2002)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Vyatkin, V., Hanisch, H.-M.: Component design and validation of decentralized reconfigurable control systems with IEC 61499. In: Proc. of the International Symposium on Advanced Control of Industrial Processes, Kumamoto, Japan, June 2002, pp. 215–220 (2002)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Vyatkin, V., Hanisch, H.-M., Karras, S.: IEC 61499 as an architectural framework to integrate formal models and methods in practical control engineering, Congress Electric Automation SPS/IPC/Drives, Nuernberg, Germany (November 2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bruno Bouyssounouse
    • Joseph Sifakis

      There are no affiliations available

      Personalised recommendations