Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Model-based safety assessment with SysML and component fault trees: application and lessons learned

  • Special Section Paper
  • Published:
Software and Systems Modeling Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Mastering the complexity of safety assurance for modern, software-intensive systems is challenging in several domains, such as automotive, robotics, and avionics. Model-based safety analysis techniques show promising results to handle this challenge by automating the generation of required artifacts for an assurance case. In this work, we adapt prominent approaches and propose to augment of SysML models with component fault trees (CFTs) to support the fault tree analysis and the failure mode and effects analysis. While most existing approaches based on CFTs are only targeting the system topology, e. g., UML class diagrams, we propose an integration of CFTs with SysML internal block diagrams as well as SysML activity diagrams. We realized our approach in a prototypical tool. We conclude with best practices and lessons learned that emerged from our case studies with an electronic power steering system and a boost recuperation system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. https://www.jetbrains.com/mps/.

  2. https://www.isograph.com/software/reliability-workbench/.

  3. https://open-psa.github.io/.

  4. http://altarica-association.org/contents/xfta.html.

  5. http://www.arbre-analyste.fr/en.html.

  6. https://www.ibm.com/us-en/marketplace/systems-design-rhapsody.

  7. https://www.sparxsystems.de/.

References

  1. Adler, R., Domis, D., Höfig, K., Kemmann, S., Kuhn, T., Schwinn, J.P., Trapp, M.: Integration of component fault trees into the UML. In: Dingel, J., Solberg, A. (eds.) Models in Software Engineering, pp. 312–327. Springer, New York (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Aizpurua, J.I., Muxika, E.: Model-based design of dependable systems: limitations and evolution of analysis and verification approaches. Int. J. Adv. Secur. 6(1 & 2), 12–31 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Aizpurua, J.I., Muxika, E., Papadopoulos, Y., Chiacchio, F., Manno, G.: Application of the D3H2 methodology for the cost-effective design of dependable systems. Safety 2(2), 9 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Alshboul, B., Petriu, D.: Automatic derivation of fault tree models from SysML models for safety analysis. J. Softw. Eng. Appl. 11, 204–222 (2018). https://doi.org/10.4236/jsea.2018.115013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Amarnath, R., Munk, P., Thaden, E., Nordmann, A., Burton, S.: Dependability challenges in the model-driven engineering of automotive systems. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering Workshops (ISSREW) (2016)

  6. Bechikh, S., Datta, R., Gupta, A. (eds.): Recent Advances in Evolutionary Multi-objective Optimization. Wiley, New York (2017)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Biggs, G., Juknevicius, T., Armonas, A., Post, K.: Integrating safety and reliability analysis into MBSE: overview of the new proposed OMG standard. In; INCOSE International Symposium, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 1322–1336 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2334-5837.2018.00551.x

  8. Choley, J.Y., Mhenni, F., Nguyen, N., Baklouti, A.: Topology-based safety analysis for safety critical CPS. Procedia Comput. Sci. 95, 32–39 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2016.09.290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Clegg, K., Li, M., Stamp, D., Grigg, A., McDermid, J.: A SysML profile for fault trees—linking safety models to system design. In: Romanovsky, A., Troubitsyna, E., Bitsch, F. (eds.) Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security, pp. 85–93. Springer, New York (2019)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Deng, Y., Wang, H., Guo, B.: BDD algorithms based on modularization for fault tree analysis. Prog. Nucl. Energy 85, 192–199 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Domis, D., Trapp, M.: Integrating safety analyses and component-based design. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security, pp. 58–71 (2008)

  12. Greiner, S., Munk, P., Nordmann, A.: Compositionality of component fault trees. In: Proceedings of 6th International Symposium on Model Based Safety and Assessment (IMBSA) (2019)

  13. Grunske, L.: Strukturorientierte Optimierung der Qualitätseigenschaften von softwareintensiven technischen Systemen im Architekturentwurf. Ph.D. thesis, Universität Potsdam (2004)

  14. Helle, P.: Automatic SysML-based safety analysis. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Model Based Architecting and Construction of Embedded Systems, pp. 19–24 (2012)

  15. Höfig, K., Joanni, A., Zeller, M., Montrone, F., Rothfelder, M., Amarnath, R., Munk, P., Nordmann, A.: Model-based reliability and safety: reducing the complexity of safety analyses using component fault trees. In: Proceedings of the Annual Reliability & Maintainability Symposium (RAMS) (2018)

  16. Höfig, K., Zeller, M., Heilmann, R.: Alfred: a methodology to enable component fault trees for layered architectures. In: Proceedings of the 41st Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, pp. 167–176 (2015)

  17. International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC): IEC 60812: Analysis techniques for system reliability—procedure for failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) (2006)

  18. International Standard Organization (ISO 26262): Road vehicles—functional safety (2018)

  19. Junges, S., Guck, D., Katoen, J.P., Stoelinga, M.: Uncovering dynamic fault trees. In: Proceedings of 46th Annual International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks, pp. 299–310 (2016)

  20. Kabir, S., Papadopoulos, Y., Walker, M., Parker, D., Aizpurua, J.I., Lampe, J., Rüde, E.: A model-based extension to HiP-HOPS for dynamic fault propagation studies. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Model-Based Safety and Assessment, pp. 163–178 (2017)

  21. Kaiser, B., Gramlich, C., Förster, M.: State/event fault trees—a safety analysis model for software-controlled systems. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 92(11), 1521–1537 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kaiser, B., Liggesmeyer, P., Mäckel, O.: A new component concept for fault trees. In: Proceedings of the 8th Australian Workshop on Safety Critical Systems and Software, pp. 37–46 (2003)

  23. Kaiser, B., Schneider, D., Adler, R., Domis, D., Möhrle, F., Berres, A., Zeller, M., Höfig, K., Rothfelder, M.: Advances in component fault trees. In: Proceedings of ESREL (2018)

  24. Kaleeswaran, A.P., Munk, P., Sarkic, S., Vogel, T., Nordmann, A.: A domain specific language to support HAZOP studies of SysML models. In: Proceedings of 6th International Symposium on Model Based Safety and Assessment (IMBSA) [in press] (2019)

  25. Lisagor, O., Kelly, T., Niu, R.: Model-based safety assessment: review of the discipline and its challenges. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Reliability, Maintainability and Safety, pp. 625–632 (2011)

  26. Mhenni, F., Choley, J.Y., Nguyen, N.: SysML extensions for safety-critical mechatronic systems design. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Systems Engineering, pp. 242–247 (2015)

  27. Mhenni, F., Nguyen, N., Choley, J.Y.: Automatic fault tree generation from SysML system models. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics (2014)

  28. Möhrle, F., Zeller, M., Höfig, K., Rothfelder, M., Liggesmeyer, P.: Towards automated design space exploration for safety-critical systems using type-annotated component fault trees. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Model-Based Safety and Assessment, Demo Sessions (2017)

  29. Mian, Z., Bottaci, L., Papadopoulos, Y., Sharvia, S., Mahmud, N.: Model transformation for multi-objective architecture optimisation of dependable systems. In: Zamojski, W., Sugier, J. (eds.) Dependability Problems of Complex Information Systems, pp. 91–110. Springer, New York (2015)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Munk, P., Abele, A., Thaden, E., Nordmann, A., Amarnath, R., Schweizer, M., Burton, S.: INVITED: semi-automatic safety analysis and optimization. In: Proceedings of the Design Automation Conference (DAC) (2018)

  31. Nordmann, A., Munk, P.: Lessons learned from model-based safety assessment with SysML and component fault trees. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems (MODELS), pp. 134–143. (2018). 10.1145/3239372.3239373

  32. Object Management Group (OMG): Systems Modeling Language Version 1.4 (2015). http://www.omg.org/spec/SysML/1.4/. Accessed 30 Oct 2019

  33. Papadopoulos, Y., McDermid, J.A.: Hierarchically performed hazard origin and propagation studies. In: Felici, M., Kanoun, K. (eds.) Computer Safety, Reliability and Security, pp. 139–152. Springer, New York (1999)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  34. Papadopoulos, Y., Walker, M., Parker, D., Rüde, E., Hamann, R., Uhlig, A., Grätz, U., Lien, R.: Engineering failure analysis and design optimisation with HiP-HOPS. Eng. Fail. Anal. 18(2), 590–608 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Papadopoulos, Y., Walker, M., Reiser, M.O., Weber, M., Chen, D., Törngren, M., Servat, D., Abele, A., Stappert, F., Lonn, H., Berntsson, L., Johansson, R., Tagliabo, F., Torchiaro, S., Sandberg, A.: Automatic allocation of safety integrity levels. In: Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Critical Automotive Applications: Robustness & Safety (CARS), pp. 7–10 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1145/1772643.1772646

  36. Petre, M.: Why looking isn’t always seeing: readership skills and graphical programming. Commun. ACM 38(6), 33–44 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Robert Bosch GmbH: The BRS boost recuperation system: increased power, enhanced comfort and lower fuel consumption. https://www.bosch-presse.de/pressportal/de/media/migrated_download/de/BRS_Broschuere_RZ_en.pdf. Accessed 30 Oct 2019

  38. Ruijters, E., Stoelinga, M.: Fault tree analysis: a survey of the state-of-the-art in modeling, analysis and tools. Comput. Sci. Rev. 15–16, 29–62 (2015)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  39. Sharvia, S., Kabir, S., Walker, M., Papadopoulos, Y.: Model-based dependability analysis: State-of-the-art, challenges, and future outlook. In: Mistrik, I., Soley, R., Ali, N., Grundy, J., Tekinerdogan, B. (eds.) Software Quality Assurance, pp. 251–278. Morgan Kaufmann, Burlington (2016)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  40. Verband der Automobilindustrie e. V.: Quality management in the automobile industry—quality assurance in the process landscape—general, risk analyses, methods, process models: Volume 4—product- and process-FMEA (2012)

  41. Völter, M.: Best practices for DSLs and model-driven development. J. Object Technol. 8(6), 79–102 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Völter, M., Kolb, B., Birken, K., Tomassetti, F., Alff, P., Wiart, L., Wortmann, A., Nordmann, A.: Using language workbenches and domain-specific languages for safety-critical software development. Softw. Syst. Model 18, 2507–2530 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Völter, M., Lisson, S.: Supporting diverse notations in MPS’ projectional editor. In: Proceedings of GEMOC@MoDELS, pp. 7–16 (2014)

  44. Walker, M., Papadopoulos, Y., Parker, D., Lönn, H., Törngren, M., Chen, D., Johannson, R., Sandberg, A.: Semi-automatic FMEA supporting complex systems with combinations and sequences of failures. Int. J. Passeng. Cars Mech. Syst. 2, 791–802 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Walker, M., Reiser, M.O., Tucci-Piergiovanni, S., Papadopoulos, Y., Lönn, H., Mraidha, C., Parker, D., Chen, D., Servat, D.: Automatic optimisation of system architectures using EAST-ADL. J. Syst. Softw. 86(10), 2467–2487 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Yakymets, N., Jaber, H., Lanusse, A.: Model-based system engineering for fault tree generation and analysis. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development (2013)

  47. Zeller, M., Montrone, F.: Combination of component fault trees and markov chains to analyze complex, software-controlled systems. In: International Conference on System Reliability and Safety (ICSRS) (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSRS.2018.8688854

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank our anonymous reviewers for their helpful and detailed feedback. This work was partially funded within the project SecForCARs by the German Federal Ministry for Education and Research with funding ID 16KIS0792. The responsibility for the content remains with the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Corporate Sector Research and Advance Engineering, Robert Bosch GmbH, 71272, Renningen, Germany

    Peter Munk & Arne Nordmann

Authors
  1. Peter Munk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Arne Nordmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter Munk.

Additional information

Communicated by Richard Paige, Andrzej Wasowski, and Oystein Haugen.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Munk, P., Nordmann, A. Model-based safety assessment with SysML and component fault trees: application and lessons learned. Softw Syst Model 19, 889–910 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-020-00782-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-020-00782-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation