CTFL CAST Section 2.4 Comparison

u p
r o
G
e o
Standards and standards for
testing E / E systems
p l
Ex
Comparison - ASPICE and ISO
of
y
26262
r t
p e
r o
1
P
© Expleo Group | CTFL®-AuT V2018 (2.0.2) | Version 1.0
Introduction
u p
r o
G
2 Standards and standards for testing E / E systems
 2.1 Automotive SPICE (ASPICE)
e o
l
 2.2 ISO 26262 - Functional Safety
 2.3 AUTOSAR
x p
E
 2.4 Comparison - ASPICE und ISO 26262

o f
2.4.1 ASPICE and ISO 26262 objectives
2.4.2 Comparison of test levels
y

 2.5
r t
Exercises / comprehension questions / Case Studies
p e
r o
2
P
2.4.1 Comparison - ASPICE and ISO 26262
u p
Learning Objectives:
r o
G
Know
e o
AUTFL-2.4.1 Recall the different objectives of ASPICE and ISO 26262 (K1).
p l
Ex
of
ty
er
o p
3
P r
2.4.1 Objectives of AUTOSAR
u p Know
r o
G
o
Automotive SPICE ISO 26262
le
Process evaluation
x p
System security
“... is available for use when

performing conformant
f E “... is the adaptation of IEC 61508 to
o
comply with needs specific to the
assessments of software process
application sector of electrical
y
capability of automotive suppliers in
t
and/or electronic (E/E) systems
r
accordance with the requirements
within road vehicles.” (2)
e
of ISO/IEC 15504-2.” (1)
Source:
o p
r
(1) Automotive SPICE Process Assessment Model – “1.1 Introduction“ (2) ISO 26262-2 – “Introduction“ ASPICE: AUTOMOTIVE SPICE
P
2.4.1 Objectives of AUTOSAR
u p Know
r o
Automotive SPICE ISO 26262 G
e o
ISO 26262 is a combination of a
p l
process model (Volumes 2, 8, and 9)
and a life cycle model.
x
Evaluation of the performance of
E
the development processes of
If the product to be developed is
f
suppliers of E / E systems in the
one with safety relevance then the
o
automotive industry. The model
safety lifecycle as described in ISO
specifies what needs to be done.
y
26262 must be used.
r t The model dictates how something
p e is fulfilled.
r o
5
P
2.4.1 History / Origin
u p Know
r o
Automotive SPICE ISO 26262 G
e o
l
~ 2001 (1. version) 2011 (1st version)
p
2017 (current Version: V.3.1) 2018 (current version)
Based on
Ex
Automotive-specific adaptation of
ISO/IEC 15504 (SPICE)
of IEC 61508
y
Developed from ISO's Technical
Created on the initiative of the
t
Committee 22 "Road Vehicles"
r
Automotive Special Interest Group
(Subcommittee 3 "Electrical &
e
(SIG)
electronic equipment").
o p
6
P r
2.4.1 Content
u p Know
r o
G
Automotive SPICE processes

e o
l
Automotive Safety Lifecycle
(Process groups)
x p
E
Process performance indicators -
Content "rough description" of the

of Rudimentary mention of the
y
working documents document contents
r t
e
Consideration of risks and system Risk and safety-centric development
p
safety not separately highlighted approach
r o
7
P
2.4.1 "Meaning" of software testing
u p Know
r o
G
Defines WHAT to do
tested e
o
Determines HOW to be
during testing
(processes & activities)
p l (depending on ASIL)
E x
the specifications at the test. f
 When using the standards in the company, participants must know
o
y
 The testing strategies in the company must meet these requirements
r t
(in terms of testing process, documents, methods, risk-oriented
testing, ...).
p e
 Corresponding consequences for testing must be documented in the
test concepts.
r o
8
P
2.4.1 Contents with SW test reference
u p Know
r o
G
Process descriptions for:
o
Description of the development
e
l
phases:
p
 Software Component Verification
x
(SWE.4)  Software unit testing
E
 Software integration and Software (26262-6 #9)
f
integration test (SWE.5)  Software integration and testing
o
 Software test (SWE.6) (26262-6 #10)
 System integration and System  Verification of software safety
integration test (SYS.4)
ty requirements (26262-6 #11)
r
 System test (SYS.5)
e
 Quality Assurance (SUP.1)
p
 Verification (SUP.2)
r o
9
P
2.4.1 The differences
u p Know

r o
G
o
Focus on software development Focus on development of safety-
e
including the (hardware) systems relevant systems
General change management
approach for obtaining a special
p l
Highly suitable for the development of
x
safety-relevant systems
process maturity
Assessment criteria and methods are

f EAssessment criteria and methods are
o
context-specific.
harmonized to allow for cross-appraisal
y
Assessments are therefore not easily
of assessments
t
comparable
e
The aim is to obtain a certificate for ther The aim is to reduce the risks of a
p
system and to avoid damage claims
acquired process maturity
o
against the manufacturer.
10
P r
2.4.1 The differences
u p Know

r o
G
o
Reduce product risks from systematic
Efficient and repeatable development
e
development errors and random
l
of a product or service
hardware errors.
Motivation is to gain a certain level of

x p
Motivation is to minimise product
process ability.
f Eliability risks.
The targeted process capability

o The desired target level depends on
y
depends on the business goals. the risk analysis (ASIL).
r t
e
Does not need a specific method Needs a specific method
p
(the "what" is defined) (the "how" is determined)
r o
11
P
u p
r o
G
e o
2.4.2 Comparison of the test
levels
p l
Ex
of
ty
er
o p
12
P r
u p
Learning Objectives:
r o
G
Understand
e o
AUTFL-2.4.2 Explain the differences between ASPICE and ISO 26262 and
l
CTFL® regarding the test levels (K2).
x p
f E
o
ty
er
o p
13
P r
u p Understand
r o
G
From the syllabus:
Both ISO 26262 and ASPICE describe test levels. However, these are not
e o
completely consistent with the test levels from CTFL®. Therefore, for an
l
efficient and effective collaboration, testers should have a common
p
x
understanding of all test levels.
f
The term “system” used in ASPICE and E the terms “system” and “item”
o
used in the ISO 26262 refer to a product consisting of hardware and
using the term “system”. ty

software components. The CTFL®, however, referred to software when
e r
o p
14
P r
2.4.2 Classification of test levels to ISTQB
u p Understand
r o
G
ISTQB ISO 26262
e o ASPICE
l
Acceptance test Safety validation (4-9) No equivalent
System of systems test
x p
Item integration and test (4- 8)
System qualification test (SYS.5)
E
System integration test System integration test (SYS.4)
f
System test Verifying Software Security Software qualification test (SWE.6)
o
Requirements (6-11)
Component integration
Software Integration and Testing (6- Software integration test (SWE.5)
y
test
t
10)
r
Component test Software Unit Test (6-9) Software unit verification (SWE.4)
p e
r o
15
P
2.4.2 Definition of Terms
u p Understand
r o
Security Validation: G
 The safety validation covers only parts of an acceptance test according
e o
to ISTQB.
p l
Multi System Test :
Ex
of
 The testing of several heterogeneously distributed systems, so-called
y
"systems of systems"
r t
p e
r o
16
P
2.4.2 Definition of Terms
u p Understand
r o
Item integration and test: G
 Item integration and testing consists of three phases: the integration
e o
and testing of hardware and software of an item, the integration and
p l
x
testing of all item-related items, and the integration and testing of
E
items in conjunction with other items in the vehicle.
of
ty
er
o p
17
P r
2.4.2 Application of test methods
u p Understand
r o
According to ISTQB CTFL, test procedures are largely independent of G
the test levels.
e o
 The tester decides which method to use.
p l
As a rule, ASPICE does not name any procedures per test level.
Ex
 The tester decides which method to use.
of
ty
r
In ISO 26262, however, there are individual method tables for each
test level.
p e
 These tell the tester which procedures he should apply, depending on
the ASIL recommendations.
r o
18
P
2.4.2 Differences in work products
u p Informative
r o
G
ISO 26262 requires the creation of additional work products:
 Safety Plan
 Functional Safety Concept
e o
 Technical Safety Concept
p l
 Confirmation Measures Report
E x
f
 Documentation of the software tool qualification
o Report
 Software Component Qualification Report
y
 Hardware Component Qualification
t
 Safety Audit Report
e r
 Proof of service experience
 Safety Assessmentp
o
Report
 Safety Case
19
P r
2.4.2 Differences in work products
u p Informative
r o
G between
The Automotive SPICE PAM contains no work products that comply
with these documents. However, there are overlaps
e o
p l
 the functional security concept and, stakeholder requirements.
x
(according to SYS.1),
f
"System Requirements Specification" E
 the technical safety concept and technical requirements in the
(according to SYS.2)
o
 the qualification reports and the verification results (according to
SUP.2).
ty
e r
o p
20
P r
2.4.2 Process assignment
u p Understand
r o
MAN.3, MAN.5, PIM.3, ACQ 15, SUP.1
G
o
SPL.2
SYS.1
le
p
SYS.4-5
SYS.2-3
x
SYS.1
E
SWE.1
f
SWE.2
o
SWE.3
SWE.4
y
SWE.5-6
r t
e
ACQ.1 SUP.7
SYS.1
p
REU.2
SUP.8
SUP.10
o
SUP.2
r
Source: ISO 26262-2 – “Introduction“
(ISO.org)
21
P
2.4.2 Differences in the processes
u p Understand
r o
G
e o
p l
Ex
of
ty
er
o p
22
P r
u p
r o
G
e o
p l
Ex
o f
Thank r
y
t for your attention.
you
p e
r o
P

CTFL CAST Section 2.4 Comparison

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CTFL CAST Section 2.4 Comparison

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

u p

“... is available for use when

r t The model dictates how something

Automotive SPICE processes

Content "rough description" of the

ty requirements (26262-6 #11)

Automotive SPICE ISO 26262

Assessment criteria and methods are

Automotive SPICE ISO 26262

Motivation is to gain a certain level of

The targeted process capability

using the term “system”. ty

You might also like