Safety-Test Model Linking for Automated Technical System Testing

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current safety assessment processes for safety-critical systems are inefficient due to a disconnect between safety analyses and system design/test environments, requiring manual and labor-intensive approaches that fail to adequately cover safety functionalities as systems become more complex.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented method that links safety models with test models to generate test parameters and new test cases, enabling automated testing and ensuring safety-relevant functionalities are adequately covered, using a system model to integrate safety and test models for tracing and parameter generation.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If manual safety analysis approaches (FMEA, FTA) are used separately from system design and test environments, then safety hazards can be identified, but the disconnect between disciplines leads to loss of information and additional effort to specify tests

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety hazard identificationVSAvoidinformation loss between disciplines
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The patent merges safety analysis models with system design and test models into a unified model-based framework. This integration allows safety hazards to be identified while maintaining continuous information flow between disciplines, eliminating the need for manual re-specification of test cases and preventing information loss.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent creates a universal model that serves multiple functions: it supports safety analysis, system design, and test generation simultaneously. This multi-functional model eliminates the need for separate manual processes in different disciplines, as the same model structure can be used across all engineering phases.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

2Reliability

If manual approaches are used to define required tests by reviewing safety analyses, then safety-relevant tests can be identified, but the process takes a lot of effort and is limited in scope

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety-relevant test coverageVSAvoidtest definition efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent enables the model to automatically generate test cases from safety analysis models without requiring manual review and definition by experts. The system serves itself by deriving test requirements directly from the integrated model, significantly reducing the effort required while maintaining comprehensive safety coverage.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent performs preliminary automated generation of test cases based on the integrated model before actual testing begins. This preliminary action captures all safety-relevant test cases systematically, expanding the scope beyond what manual review could achieve and reducing the effort needed during the testing phase.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Adaptability or versatility

If separate models are created for system architecture, testing, and safety analysis, then each model can be specialized, but the lack of integration makes it difficult to evaluate if defined tests cover relevant safety functionality adequately

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemodel specializationVSAvoidtest coverage evaluation
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDifficulty of detecting and measuring

Solution Approach 1:

The patent combines separate specialized models into a single integrated model structure that maintains the specialized characteristics of safety analysis, system architecture, and testing while enabling automated traceability and coverage evaluation between all aspects.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

4Reliability

If safety analyses are not connected directly to system design and test environments, then safety hazards can be analyzed independently, but additional effort is required to specify tests and check if all measures realized to prevent hazards have been tested

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety analysis independenceVSAvoidtest specification effort
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent performs preliminary automated derivation of test cases from the integrated model, capturing all necessary test specifications before the testing phase. This preliminary action eliminates the need for additional manual effort to specify tests and verify coverage, as the model automatically generates comprehensive test requirements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS20220067239A1Computer-implemented method and computerized device for testing a technical system
Publication Date: 2022.03.03 SIEMENS AG
  • US20220067239A1 patent drawing
  • US20220067239A1 patent drawing
  • US20220067239A1 patent drawing

AI summary

The computer-implemented method for testing a technical system having a plurality of technical components includes: providing a safety model modeling a safety relevant functionality of the technical system, providing a test model including test cases for testing the technical system, linking elements of the safety model with elements of the test model for enabling a tracing between the test cases of the test model and the safety-relevant functionality of the safety model, generating test parameters for at least one certain test case of the test cases and/or a new test case for the test model using the safety model linked to the test model, and testing the technical system using the certain test case and/or the new test case. Further, a computer program product, a computerized device and an arrangement having a technical system and a computerized device are provided.