On-the-fly Synchronization for Hardware Redundancy Safety
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Traditional hardware redundancy systems require frequent resetting and synchronization of primary and redundant components, leading to potential data loss and system instability due to loss of synchronization, which can be caused by both safety and non-safety related issues.
Innovation Solution
Implementing a controllable secondary hardware unit that can synchronize with the primary unit on-the-fly, allowing for reduced reboot requirements and enabling re-synchronization without resetting, by using a synchronization verifier and timeout manager to maintain data validity and perform comparisons only when necessary.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If traditional hardware redundancy systems continuously reset and synchronize primary and redundant components, then functional safety is maintained, but data loss and system instability occur due to loss of synchronization
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary synchronization verification before executing the comparison operation. The synchronization verifier checks whether the primary and secondary electrical components are synchronized prior to comparison, preventing data loss by avoiding comparison operations when components are out of sync. This preliminary check resolves the contradiction by enabling safe operation without unnecessary resets.
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements a feedback mechanism where the synchronization verifier continuously monitors the synchronization status of electrical components and provides feedback to control whether comparison operations should proceed. This feedback loop allows the system to adaptively enable or disable comparison based on actual synchronization state, maintaining functional safety while preventing data loss from inappropriate reset operations.
2Stability of the object's composition
If traditional hardware redundancy systems perform frequent synchronization checks, then operational consistency is ensured, but system stability deteriorates due to excessive resetting
Solution Approach 1:
The system applies partial synchronization verification by checking only the necessary synchronization status before comparison operations, rather than continuously resetting components. The timeout manager enables the comparison operation after a predetermined time period following a reset event, providing just enough synchronization verification to ensure operational consistency without excessive resetting that would harm system stability.
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements periodic synchronization verification through the timeout manager, which enables comparison operations at predetermined time intervals after reset events. This periodic approach ensures operational consistency by verifying synchronization at appropriate intervals while avoiding continuous resetting, thereby maintaining system stability.
3Reliability
If hardware redundancy components are reset to maintain synchronization, then functional safety is preserved, but time loss occurs due to reboot requirements
Solution Approach 1:
The synchronization verifier performs preliminary verification of synchronization status before comparison operations are needed. By checking synchronization status in advance and enabling comparison operations when synchronized, the system avoids last-minute reset operations and associated reboot time losses while maintaining functional safety.
Solution Approach 2:
The timeout manager implements partial synchronization management by enabling comparison operations after a predetermined time period following reset, rather than requiring immediate full synchronization. This reduces time loss by allowing comparison operations to proceed with minimal synchronization delay while still preserving functional safety through controlled reset timing.
4Reliability
If synchronization verification is performed continuously, then operational safety is ensured, but device complexity increases due to additional control mechanisms
Solution Approach 1:
The system segments the synchronization verification function into distinct modular components: a synchronization verifier that checks synchronization status and a timeout manager that controls comparison operation timing. This segmentation allows each component to perform its specific function independently, ensuring operational safety while managing device complexity through modular, maintainable code structure.
Solution Approach 2:
The synchronization verifier acts as an intermediary between the electrical components and the comparison operation. It mediates by checking synchronization status and providing a go/no-go signal for comparison operations, ensuring operational safety without requiring complex direct control mechanisms between components. The timeout manager serves as another intermediary that mediates timing control, simplifying the overall control architecture.
Data Source
AI summary
Technologies for ensuring functional safety of an electronic device include receiving data by a primary and secondary hardware unit and performing a function on the data. Each of the primary and secondary hardware unit perform the same function on their respective set of data to generate corresponding results. A determination is made whether the hardware units are synchronized and the results can be compared. If so, the results are compared and an alert is generated if the results do not match.