The Correlation Between Safety Tool Chains and Nuclear Disarmament

The title may have you wondering how the heck I’m going to tie together two very disparate topics. Well here goes! As most are aware, there has been significant growth in safety critical markets with automotive being the recent front runner. To support the advancement in features and technology, tool companies have been rapidly developing solutions to assist and even automate aspects of the safety lifecycle. This includes tools to aid early cycle activities such as requirements definition as well as tools deployed later in the lifecycle that automate the insertion of safety mechanisms and execution of a fault campaign.

With each passing quarter, new technologies and features are released to help engineers execute activities and visualize issues that arise throughout the lifecycle. Tool companies offering point solutions to assist engineers at each phase, providing integration of these point solutions into a holistic workflow, and enable easier interoperability across the supply chain will be well positioned to drive the development of next generation products.

As new solutions fill gaps and existing solutions are enhanced to meet today’s challenges, I often wonder how automated the safety lifecycle will become? Specifically:

  • Will the industry tolerate full automation of certain safety activities? And if so, which ones?
  • Where can automation be leveraged to assist safety experts?
  • 哪些活动将完全由安全专家推动?

面临安全团队希望将自动化融入其安全生命周期的挑战之一是可信任的工具来提供正确的结果。正如我要考虑的那样,以下短语突破了我的脑海:“信任,但验证”。在冷战期间,这句话推动了验证前苏联与美国之间的核裁军的框架。此短语也在编译器的上下文中利用,并在编译与运行时执行的检查。新解决方案将进入市场,现有解决方案将成熟,但没有工具是完美的,因此,审查数据至关重要,以确保结果准确性。幸运的是,工具也可以在这个空间提供帮助。在正确构造的工具链中,形成一组检查和平衡,其中一个解决方案的结果的准确性被另一种解决方案验证,这是一个被称为多个安全关键行业的独立工具评估的概念。通过利用工具来执行“但验证”活动,可以减少重新灼热和工程师驱动的工具检查,节省了大量时间和资源。图 - 1和图2下面演示了这一概念。

图-1 - 独立工具交叉检查结果


I believe there is the need for the safety engineer, especially in the concept and architecture phases where understanding of intent, use model, and definition of the safety concept are required. However, there are and will continue to be opportunities for greater levels of automation, especially in later stages of the lifecycle. Perhaps with the proper tool chain in place, there is a path forward where infrastructure, tools, and methodology can safely automate larger pieces of the lifecycle.


0 thoughts on “The Correlation Between Safety Tool Chains and Nuclear Disarmament