Error-Detection Wrapping for ASIL-Compliant Hardware Channels
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current approaches to achieving Automotive Safety Integrity Level (ASIL) compliance in safety-critical industries, such as the automotive industry, are costly and complex, as they require designing each component to meet specific safety standards, preventing the use of non-compliant hardware resources for tasks.
Innovation Solution
An integrated circuit (IC) system that includes ASIL-compliant circuitry for error detection and non-compliant circuitry for tasks, where error detection codes are generated and used to ensure the communication channel meets safety standards, allowing non-compliant hardware to be used in ASIL-compliant systems by wrapping it with error detection checking.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If all components are designed to be ASIL compliant, then safety compliance is achieved, but development cost and complexity increase significantly
Solution Approach 1:
An ASIL-compliant error detection code (EDC) is introduced as an intermediary between the non-compliant hardware resource and the safety-critical communication channel. The EDC wraps the non-compliant resource, detecting errors that may occur during message transmission. This allows the majority of the system to use cost-effective non-compliant hardware while only the error detection mechanism itself needs to be ASIL-compliant, thus resolving the contradiction between safety compliance and development cost.
2Reliability
If ASIL-compliant building blocks are used throughout the system, then safety protection is ensured, but hardware resource utilization is limited
Solution Approach 1:
Instead of making the entire system ASIL-compliant, the patent applies ASIL compliance locally only where necessary for safety-critical functions. Non-compliant hardware resources can be used for non-safety-critical tasks, while the error detection code provides local safety protection for the communication channel. This selective application of compliance criteria enables broader hardware resource utilization while maintaining necessary safety protection.
3Device complexity
If non-ASIL compliant hardware is used, then cost and complexity are reduced, but safety compliance cannot be satisfied
Solution Approach 1:
The patent extracts the safety-critical error detection function from the overall system and implements it as a separate, dedicated ASIL-compliant component. This extracted error detection code operates independently to monitor and protect the communication channel, allowing the rest of the system to use cost-effective non-compliant hardware. The separation enables non-compliant hardware to be used while still satisfying safety compliance requirements through the extracted protection mechanism.
Data Source
AI summary
Embodiments herein describe wrapping non-safety compliant hardware resources with error detection checking to satisfy a safety standard. Doing so permits non-safety compliant hardware to be used to perform one or more tasks in a system that, as a whole, satisfies a particular safety standard (e.g., one of the ASIL QM, A, B, C, and D grades).