Skip to main content

Improving Safety Assessment of Complex Systems: An Industrial Case Study

Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS,volume 2805)

Abstract

The complexity of embedded controllers is steadily increasing. This trend, stimulated by the continuous improvement of the computational power of hardware, demands for a corresponding increase in the capability of design and safety engineers to maintain adequate safety levels. The use of formal methods during system design has proved to be effective in several practical applications. However, the development of certain classes of applications, like, for instance, avionics systems, also requires the behaviour of a system to be analysed under certain degraded situations (e.g., when some components are not working as expected). The integration of system design activities with safety assessment and the use of formal methods, although not new, are still at an early stage. These goals are addressed by the ESACS project, a European- Union-sponsored project grouping several industrial companies from the aeronautic field. The ESACS project is developing a methodology and a platform – the ESACS platform – that helps safety engineers automating certain phases of their work. This paper reports on the application of the ESACS methodology and on the use of the ESACS platform to a case study, namely, the Secondary Power System of the Eurofighter Typhoon aircraft.

Keywords

  • Formal Verification and Safety Assessment of Complex Systems
  • Automated Fault Tree Computation
  • ESACS

This work has been and is being developed within ESACS, an European- sponsored project, Framework Programme 5 – Growth Contract no. G4RD-CT-2000-00361

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Audemard, G., Bertoli, P., Cimatti, A., Kornilowicz, A., Sebastiani, R.: A SAT Based Approach for Solving Formulas over Boolean and Linear Mathematical Propositions. In: Voronkov, A. (ed.) CADE 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2392, pp. 195–210. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  2. Audemard, G., Cimatti, A., Kornilowicz, A., Sebastiani, R.: Model Checking for Timed Systems. In: Peled, D.A., Vardi, M.Y. (eds.) FORTE 2002. LNCS, vol. 2529, pp. 243–259. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  3. Arnold, A., Griffault, A., Point, G., Rauzy, A.: The AltaRica formalism for describing concurrent systems. Fundamenta Informaticae 40, 109–124 (2000)

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Aldemir, Y.: Computer-assisted Markov Failure Modeling of Process Control Systems. IEEE Transactions on Reliability R-36, 133–144 (1987)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  5. Biere, A., Cimatti, A., Clarke, E.M., Zhu, Y.: Symbolic Model Checking without BDDs. In: Cleaveland, W.R. (ed.) TACAS 1999. LNCS, vol. 1579, pp. 193–207. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  6. Bieber, P., Castel, C., Seguin, C.: Combination of Fault Tree Analysis and Model Checking for Safety Assessment of Complex System. In: Bondavalli, A., Thévenod-Fosse, P. (eds.) EDCC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2485, pp. 19–31. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  7. Brayton, R.K., Hachtel, G.D., Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A.L., Somenzi, F., Aziz, A., Cheng, S.-T., Edwards, S.A., Khatri, S.P., Kukimoto, Y., Pardo, A., Qadeer, A., Ranjan, R.K., Sarwary, S., Shiple, T.R., Swamy, G., Villa, T.: VIS: A System for Verification and Synthesis. In: Alur, R., Henzinger, T.A. (eds.) CAV 1996. LNCS, vol. 1102, pp. 428–432. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  8. Bryant, R.E.: Symbolic Boolean Manipulation with Ordered Binary Decision Diagrams. ACM Computing Surveys 24(3), 293–318 (1992)

    CrossRef  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Bozzano, M., Villafiorita, A.: Integrating Fault Tree Analysis with Event Ordering Information. In: Proc. European Safety and Reliability Conference (ESREL 2003), Maastricht, The Netherlands (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cimatti, A., Clarke, E.M., Giunchiglia, E., Giunchiglia, F., Pistore, M., Roveri, M., Sebastiani, R., Tacchella, A.: NuSMV2: An OpenSource Tool for Symbolic Model Checking. In: Brinksma, E., Larsen, K.G. (eds.) CAV 2002. LNCS, vol. 2404, p. 359. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  11. Clarke, E., Grumberg, O., Peled, D.: Model Checking. MIT Press, Cambridge (1999)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Cojazzi, G., Izquierdo, J.M., Meléndez, E., Perea, M.S.: The Reliability and Safety Assessment of Protection Systems by the Use of Dynamic Event Trees. The DYLAM-TRETA Package. In: Proc. XVIII Annual Meeting Spanish Nucl. Soc. (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Coudert, O., Madre, J.: Implicit and Incremental Computation of Primes and Essential Primes of Boolean Functions. In: Proc. 29th Design Automation Conference (DAC 1998), pp. 36–39. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Coudert, O., Madre, J.: Fault Tree Analysis: 1020 Prime Implicants and Beyond. In: Proc. Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Devooght, J., Smidts, C.: Probabilistic Dynamics; The Mathematical and Computing Problems Ahead. In: Aldemir, T., Siu, N.O., Mosleh, A., Cacciabue, P.C., Göktepe, B.G. (eds.) Reliability and Safety Assessment of Dynamic Process Systems. NATO ASI Series F, vol. 120, pp. 85–100. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  16. Emerson, E.: Temporal and Modal Logic. In: van Leeuwen, J. (ed.) Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, vol. B, pp. 995–1072. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fenelon, P., McDermid, J.A., Pumfrey, D.J.: Nicholson. M. Towards Integrated Safety Analysis and Design. ACM Applied Computing Review 2(1), 21–32 (1994)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  18. Henzinger, T.A.: The Theory of Hybrid Automata. In: Proc. 11th Annual International Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS 1996), pp. 278–292. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1996)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  19. Henzinger, T.A., Ho, P.-H., Wong-Toi, H.H.: A Model Checker for Hybrid Systems. Software Tools for Technology Transfer 1, 110–122 (1997)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  20. Liggesmeyer, P., Rothfelder, M.: Improving System Reliability with Automatic Fault Tree Generation. In: Proc. 28th International Symposium on Fault Tolerant Computing (FTCS 1998), Munich, Germany, pp. 90–99. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Manian, R., Dugan, J.B., Coppit, D., Sullivan, K.J.: Combining Various Solution Techniques for Dynamic Fault Tree Analysis of Computer Systems. In: Proc. 3rd International High-Assurance Systems Engineering Symposium (HASE 1998), pp. 21–28. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Marseguerra, M., Zio, E., Devooght, J., Labeau, P.E.: A concept paper on dynamic reliability via Monte Carlo simulation. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation 47, 371–382 (1998)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  23. Papazoglou, I.A.: Markovian Reliability Analysis of Dynamic Systems. In: Aldemir, T., Siu, N.O., Mosleh, A., Cacciabue, P.C., Göktepe, B.G. (eds.) Reliability and Safety Assessment of Dynamic Process Systems. NATO ASI Series F, vol. 120, pp. 24–43. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  24. Rae, A.: Automatic Fault Tree Generation – Missile Defence System Case Study. Technical Report 00-36, Software Verification Research Centre, University of Queensland (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Smidts, C., Devooght, J.: Probabilistic Reactor Dynamics II. A Monte-Carlo Study of a Fast Reactor Transient. Nuclear Science and Engineering 111(3), 241–256 (1992)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  26. Sullivan, K.J., Dugan, J.B., Coppit, D.: The Galileo Fault Tree Analysis Tool. In: Proc. 29th Annual International Symposium on Fault-Tolerant Computing (FTCS 1999), pp. 232–235. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Siu, N.O.: Risk Assessment for Dynamic Systems: An Overview. Reliability Engineering ans System Safety 43, 43–74 (1994)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  28. Sheeran, M., Stalmarck, G.: A tutorial on Stalmarck’s proof procedure for propositional logic, Formal Methods in System Design, vol. Formal Methods in System Design 16(1), 23–58 (2000)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  29. Vesely, W., Goldberg, F., Roberts, N., Haasl, D.: Fault Tree Handbook, Technical Report NUREG-0492, Systems and Reliability Research Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1981)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Bozzano, M., Cavallo, A., Cifaldi, M., Valacca, L., Villafiorita, A. (2003). Improving Safety Assessment of Complex Systems: An Industrial Case Study. In: Araki, K., Gnesi, S., Mandrioli, D. (eds) FME 2003: Formal Methods. FME 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2805. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-45236-2_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-45236-2_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-40828-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45236-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive