A Model-Based Certification Framework for the EnergyBus Standard

  • Alexander Graf-Brill
  • Holger Hermanns
  • Hubert Garavel
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8461)


The EnergyBus is an upcoming industrial standard for electric power transmission and management, based on the CANopen field bus. This paper reviews the particularities of the EnergyBus architecture and reports on the application of formal methods and protocol engineering tools to build a model-based conformance testing framework that is considered to become part of the certification process for EnergyBus-compliant products.


Model Check Battery Pack Test Execution Energy Management System Test Graph 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Vetter, M., Rohr, L., Ortiz, B., Schies, A., Schwunk, S., Wachtel, J.: Dezentrale netzgekoppelte PV-Batteriesysteme. In: VDI-Konferenz Elektrische Energiespeicher – Stationäre Anwendungen und Industriebatterien, pp. 101–112 (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    CAN in Automation International Users and Manufacturers Group e.V., EnergyBus e. V.: CiA 454 Work Draft Application profile for energy management systems – Document series 1 to 14, v. 1.0.6 (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Champelovier, D., Clerc, X., Garavel, H., Guerte, Y., Lang, F., McKinty, C., Powazny, V., Serwe, W., Smeding, G.: Reference Manual of the LOTOS NT to LOTOS Translator (Version 5.8). Technical report, INRIA/VASY and INRIA/CONVECS (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    ISO/IEC: LOTOS — A Formal Description Technique Based on the Temporal Ordering of Observational Behaviour. International Standard 8807 (1989)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    ISO/IEC: Enhancements to LOTOS (E-LOTOS). International Standard 15437:2001 (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Garavel, H., Lang, F., Mateescu, R., Serwe, W.: CADP 2011: A Toolbox for the Construction and Analysis of Distributed Processes. Software Tools for Technology Transfer (STTT) 15, 89–107 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jard, C., Jéron, T.: TGV: Theory, Principles, and Algorithms. Software Tools for Technology Transfer (STTT) 7, 297–315 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tretmans, J.: Model-based Testing with Labelled Transition Systems. In: Hierons, R.M., Bowen, J.P., Harman, M. (eds.) FORTEST. LNCS, vol. 4949, pp. 1–38. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    CAN in Automation International Users and Manufacturers Group e.V.: CiA 301 CANopen Application Layer and Communication Profile, v. 4.2.0 (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    CAN in Automation International Users and Manufacturers Group e.V.: CiA 305 Layer setting services (LSS) and protocols, v. 3.0.0 (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    CAN in Automation International Users and Manufacturers Group e.V., EnergyBus e. V.: CiA 454 Work Draft Application profile for energy management systems – Part 3: PDO communication, v. 1.0.2 (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Graf-Brill, A.: Model-based Testing Approaches for the EnergyBus. Reports of SFB/TR 14 AVACS 96, SFB/TR 14 AVACS (2014) ISSN: 1860–9821,
  13. 13.
    Broy, M., Jonsson, B., Katoen, J.-P., Leucker, M., Pretschner, A. (eds.): Model-Based Testing of Reactive Systems. LNCS, vol. 3472. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    van der Bijl, M., Rensink, A., Tretmans, J.: Compositional Testing with ioco. In: Petrenko, A., Ulrich, A. (eds.) FATES 2003. LNCS, vol. 2931, pp. 86–100. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Garavel, H.: OPEN/CÆSAR: An Open Software Architecture for Verification, Simulation, and Testing. In: Steffen, B. (ed.) TACAS 1998. LNCS, vol. 1384, pp. 68–84. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Prenninger, W., Pretschner, A.: Abstractions for Model-Based Testing – Proceedings of the International Workshop on Test and Analysis of Component Based Systems (TACoS 2004). Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 116, 59–71 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    van der Bijl, H.M., Rensink, A., Tretmans, G.J.: Atomic Action Refinement in Model Based Testing. Technical Report TR-CTIT-07-64, Centre for Telematics and Information Technology University of Twente, Enschede (2007)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Garavel, H., Viho, C., Zendri, M.: System Design of a CC-NUMA Multiprocessor Architecture Using Formal Specification, Model Checking, Co-simulation, and Test Generation. Software Tools for Technology Transfer (STTT) 3, 314–331 (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tretmans, J., Brinksma, E.: TorX: Automated Model Based Testing – Côte de Resyste (2003)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hessel, A., Larsen, K., Mikucionis, M., Nielsen, B., Pettersson, P., Skou, A.: Testing Real-Time Systems Using UPPAAL. In: Hierons, R.M., Bowen, J.P., Harman, M. (eds.) FORTEST. LNCS, vol. 4949, pp. 77–117. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bringmann, E., Krämer, A.: Model-Based Testing of Automotive Systems. In: ICST, pp. 485–493. IEEE Computer Society (2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gerke, M., Ehlers, R., Finkbeiner, B., Peter, H.J.: Model Checking the FlexRay Physical Layer Protocol. In: Kowalewski, S., Roveri, M. (eds.) FMICS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6371, pp. 132–147. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rushby, J.: An Overview of Formal Verification for the Time-Triggered Architecture. In: Damm, W., Olderog, E.-R. (eds.) FTRTFT 2002. LNCS, vol. 2469, pp. 83–106. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Milbredt, P., Vermeulen, B., Tabanoglu, G., Lukasiewycz, M.: Switched FlexRay: Increasing the Effective Bandwidth and Safety of FlexRay Networks. In: Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (ETFA), pp. 1–8. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Krause, J., Hintze, E., Magnus, S., Diedrich, C.: Model Based Specification, Verification, and Test Generation for a Safety Fieldbus Profile. In: Ortmeier, F., Daniel, P. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2012. LNCS, vol. 7612, pp. 87–98. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Goswami, D., Lukasiewycz, M., Kauer, M., Steinhorst, S., Masrur, A., Chakraborty, S., Ramesh, S.: Model-based Development and Verification of Control Software for Electric Vehicles. In: Proceedings of the 50th Annual Design Automation Conference (DAC 2013), Austin, Texas, USA, pp. 96:1–96:9. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hartmanns, A., Hermanns, H.: Modelling and Decentralised Runtime Control of Self-stabilising Power Micro Grids. In: Margaria, T., Steffen, B. (eds.) ISoLA 2012, Part I. LNCS, vol. 7609, pp. 420–439. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexander Graf-Brill
    • 1
  • Holger Hermanns
    • 1
  • Hubert Garavel
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Computer ScienceSaarland UniversitySaarbrückenGermany
  2. 2.InriaFrance
  3. 3.Univ. Grenoble Alpes, LIGGrenobleFrance
  4. 4.CNRS, LIGGrenobleFrance

Personalised recommendations