Why is safety at the heart of software-defined vehicles? (2023)

Developing technology can be a complicated and time-consuming process. At LHP Engineering Solutions we deliver exactly that: solutions. We are a service and technology integrator with the skills and knowledge to solve functional safety problems. One way we deliver solutions for our clients is to integrate them with our advisory governance model, the Functional Security Ecosystem, a six-part integrated model that can take your organization beyond compliance. Safety is the basisSoftware Defined VehiclesBut true functional safety requires more than a simple mechanistic attempt to meet compliance requirements. The LHP ecosystem takes a more holistic approach.

To understand why functional safety needs to be at the heart of software-defined vehicle development, we first need to find a precise definition of functional safety. Next, we will look at some examples of functional safety measures and discuss what functional safety means for designers and managers in an automotive manufacturing company. We will also look at the LHP Ecosystem's integrated approach to functional safety and how it drives not only compliance but excellence in your company's projects and designs from start to finish.

What is functional safety in automotive engineering?

What are the differences between safety and functional safety?

Why is functional safety important in engineering?

What functional safety means for engineers and managers in the automotive industry

Who is responsible for functional safety?

Details on LHP's functional safety ecosystem

Examples of LHP functional safety ecosystem solutions

LHP ecosystem for functional safety, sum of six parts

What is functional safety in automotive engineering?

Functional safety is an aspect of safety management aimed at reducing the risk of failure of a device, process or system as part of the networked and interdependent electrical and electronic (E/E) safety systems of modern automobiles, especially autonomous vehicles (OUCH). . An internationally recognized way to achieve this is described in ISO 26262.

Voluntary compliance with functional safety principles is also a way for manufacturers to showcase credible AV products to the public.Nextgovernment regulations. In the coming years, public confidence in AV vehicles will play an increasingly important role in the industry as the production of cars with a higher level of automation increases dramatically. LHP's functional safety ecosystem puts public safety and their confidence in the safety of vehicles engineered and built to functional safety standards at the forefront of design.

What are the differences between safety and functional safety?

Functional safety is part of the safety practices of many manufacturers. In general, security is a very broad topic. Functional safety is specific and conforms to ISO 26262:2018 Road vehicles - Functional safety to ensure consistent and uniform performance measurement.

The idea of ​​security is actually the idea of ​​risk management, which ensures that the activity does not pose an appropriate risk. It quickly becomes difficult to measure or think about the exact level of risk. Some examples:

• People demand that the risk of injury is extremely low. No one wants to consider the possibility of harming themselves, loved ones, or anyone else.
• We also may not want to cause damage to public buildings, our vehicle or other people's property and want the risk of such an event to be very low.

Intellectually we know that the possibility, this risk, can never be absolutely zero, but we require our safety systems to aim for absolute zero, as the standard itself states: “No unreasonable risk from faulty E/E systems “. Consumers, operators and occupants of automotive products expect that the risk of personal injury or serious property damage is completely eliminated or at least so small that it does not occur in everyday use. Emotions are not actually a quantifiable measure of functional safety, but social trust, even when measurable, is not always based on statistics.

Humans will always, and probably always will, inherently make risk assessments. For example, we can examine a layer of ice on a frozen river; is it thick enough? Is it safe to walk We feel safe when, based on various assessments, our own experience, or the expertise of others, we determine that the risk is very small - small enough to make us feel safe walking on this ice. To feel safe driving a self-driving vehicle, consumers need to use their own judgment. In doing so, they rely in part on the expertise of suppliers and automakers to make the car as safe as possible, relying on the expertise of experts like LHP das da.

In automotive engineering, the question arises: does this system or device help solve a specific problem or safety issue? How must this system be designed to ensure extremely low risk? Instead, functional safety is about whether the risk of failure of an individual system or component of the vehicle is low enough. Another way to express this is to ask: Do I think the risk of this activity is acceptable or unacceptable?

Coming back to the frozen river analogy, safety itself may involve inspecting the ice you intend to walk on. Functional safety must consider not only the ice water flowing beneath, but also potential hidden hazards on the frozen surface, as well as ways to exit the frozen river safely should the ice break underfoot. Functional safety ensures that the affected systems work together correctly and ensure the safety of people. If they fail or don't work together properly, they should do so in a predictable and predictable manner so that even in the event of a failure, these systems continue to function within the contingencies that the AI ​​is programmed to handle. The possibility of a system or device failure must also be part of functional safety.

Why is functional safety important when developing a software-defined vehicle?

Functional safety as a standard governs the construction and design of electrical and electronic systems, especially when they work together not only throughout the vehicle, but throughout the connected network of software-defined vehicles and their external, operational navigation infrastructure.

Functional safety also brings technical quality assurance (QA) into the design process. Quality control is typically very common on the manufacturing side of a company, but less so in the development of the product being manufactured. A good solution is to train the organization's QA team in functional safety.

What does functional safety mean for automotive engineers and managers?

Understanding functional safety and its initial costs and ultimate benefits can force organizational leaders to make an investment decision with full awareness of the difficulties and benefits of that decision. Efforts to comply with ISO 26262 in the short term can lead to greater organizational credibility and longevity.

LHP ecosystem for functional safety and software-defined vehicle

What is the LHP Functional Safety Ecosystem?

Amid all the chaos of new technologies, the automotive industry and especially SDVs need uniform standards for functional safety. These benchmarks not only ensure that vehicles are fully functional, but also increase public confidence in this safety. Widespread compliance with ISO 26262 is one way to drive industry convergence and reduce confusion, but ISO 26262 is still just the beginning. Accommodating dynamic, diverse global organizations that invent new technologies every day and creating a true industry consensus on benchmarks and terms of use for that technology takes more than just adhering to a single standard, no matter how demanding that standard may be. Understanding functional safety and the role of the LHP functional safety ecosystem in ensuring compliance, certification and more is the path for suppliers and manufacturers to be competitive in this complex and emerging global market.

LHP started with ISO 26262 and from there built our unique ecosystem with six focus areas. When deployed as a full-featured security environment that not only ensures compliance but also the highest quality, it is a powerful tool.

Six areas of interest

LHP's functional safety ecosystem consists of cybersecurity, test systems, AUTOSAR, specific standards and regulations, model-driven development, and application lifecycle management. Below we can analyze and discuss each one of them in detail.

cybersecurity:

Safety and protection must work hand-in-hand in the functional safety ecosystem; Security is an essential element in building trust. A software-defined vehicle with billions of lines of code has the same number of vulnerabilities. No matter how robust a system is in terms of security, it can still be vulnerable to malicious hackers. The ISO 26262 standard confirms that functional safety is not possible without an appropriate presence of cybersecurity in the design and operation of electrical and electronic systems. However, the ISO also does not provide guidance on how to implement cybersecurity in the ISO 26262 standard. LHP's functional safety ecosystem fills this gap by understanding SAEJ3061 (Guide to Cybersecurity for Cyber-Physical Vehicle Systems) and ISO/SAE21434 Road Vehicles –Cyber ​​security technology.

test systems:

Download the case study.Automated test systems are a key part of standardization and highest security as system testing and validation is at the heart of design and development. LHP's automated test systems help you quickly test and validate Electronic Control Units (ECUs). This significantly speeds time to market and saves valuable design time. LHP offers a comprehensive range of test systems, from the design of customizable test systems and consulting to the delivery of a complete engine control system (ECS). They are a central part of the overall functional safety ecosystem.

Automotive Open System Architecture (AUTOSAR):

AUTOSAR is not a standard in itself, but a development partnership consisting of several automobile manufacturers and suppliers. The partnership was formed to create a standardized, open software architecture and standard development platform for software development used in electronic control units (ECUs) in modern vehicles. Vehicles are increasingly defined by their software. For example, over-the-air software updates can quickly and easily fix problems and remove or add vehicle features. This means that adherence to software architecture standards becomes even more important for vendors and developers.

Güntera Reicharta, urautosar.orgsaid a spokesman

“If the company does it themselves, it is a proprietary solution. When shared and used by multiple partners, it becomes a technology, and when widely deployed, it becomes state-of-the-art and facilitates certification.”

This is the case: AUTOSAR is now widespread. Because this standardization enables development to be accelerated, software testing to be automated, and software to be scaled to different platforms, it is important for functional safety.

While LHP offers standalone AUTOSAR training, AUTOSAR is truly at the heart of a company's functional safety efforts. Steve Neemeh, LHP's Chief Technology Officer, said, "AUTOSAR is actually a software platform and functional safety has specific standards for software platforms, so there is no AUTOSAR team - have a team developing a functional safety compliant AUTOSAR."(full video)"Obviously, the best way to achieve this is to train the LHP as part of the 6-point LHP ecosystem!"

Model Driven Development (MBD):

MBD must be seen as a necessity when developing functional safety processes for electric and autonomous vehicles. It is an invaluable tool for validating SDV designs. Model-based programming allows designers to simulate the conditions their system will later encounter. This gives them time to identify, manage, and fix issues before the design is made, allowing for faster code generation. Once prototypes are built, they are safer because the designs have already been validated through simulated testing. ANDa case study describing LHP's work with the customer's MBD structureYou will find here.

Standards and regulations

They not only bind designers and engineers to specific conditions and design considerations, but also provide consistent criteria for their organization's compliance with those requirements (e.g., functional safety). This act of maintaining a high standard of performance is a means of earning the trust of the public. LHP's training efforts and work packages not only help companies understand the core functional safety standard (ISO 26262), but also neighboring standards such as IATF 16949 and ASPICE (currently ISO/IEC 33001 and higher), and even entirely new standards such as ISO/PAS 21448. Developers and managers alike need to understand the importance of having a fluent understanding of these standards and the importance of keeping functional safety at the heart of the technical organization.

Application Lifecycle Management (ALM):

Modern cars and the cars of the years to come are defined by the software they leave the factory with and the software they receive throughout the life of the vehicle. With application lifecycle management, developers can manage and control applications from the first iteration to the end of the application life. The implementation of functional safety requires a defined process to ensure traceability. Well-executed ALM helps ensure that a company's customers receive the software that best meets their needs by helping to align the work of the development team with the end goals of the application. Seecase studyAn example of LHP's ability to ensure the security of your product and your organization's compliance with functional security requirements through LHP's Application Lifecycle Management training.

Examples of LHP functional safety ecosystem solutions

A partner like LHP can lead the way in this fast moving industry for companies looking for advice. We offer knowledge that helps demystify ISO requirements and simplify the methodology to achieve compliance. Some examples of guidance available in the LHP functional safety ecosystem:

• Find and fix previously undetected software bugs by implementing functional safety processes.
• Identifying and assisting in eliminating gaps in software development that may be known but not fixed or not known at all.
• Verification and Validation Testing: Helps organizations address functional security testing and documentation requirements.
• Help develop internal processes and update device design considerations to comply with ISO 26262.

LHP ecosystem for functional safety, sum of six parts

We close with a thought from the LHP e-book:Implementation of functional safety:

“ISO 26262 contains a lot of information that sometimes makes it difficult to see the forest instead of countless trees. This can be a barrier to getting started with functional safety, especially for small businesses. But with a map and an escort, it's a lot easier to get around, speeding the process from years to months.”

LHPES can provide a map and we can guide your organization through the ISO 26262 process, guiding you through the maze of information and requirements from inception to certification so that your organization is prepared and well-equipped to take on its place in the software-defined future to take vehicles.

Interested in learning more about a software-defined vehicle for your business? Contact our team today!