Home
Categories
EXPLORE
True Crime
Comedy
Society & Culture
Business
History
TV & Film
Technology
About Us
Contact Us
Copyright
© 2024 PodJoint
00:00 / 00:00
Sign in

or

Don't have an account?
Sign up
Forgot password
https://is1-ssl.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Podcasts211/v4/63/cb/2d/63cb2dd3-abc3-8bef-e8ea-12e57f67136a/mza_1236235421606985468.jpg/600x600bb.jpg
Applied FuSa
Wolfgang Freese
12 episodes
4 days ago
Hello and welcome to another episode of “Applied FuSa,” a podcast for FuSa pragmatists.

Functions are often broken down into sub-functions. A typical reason for this is that it can be easier to implement sub-functions rather than the complete function.

This strategy is relevant to functional safety for two reasons:

1. Depending on how the function is broken down into sub-functions, the ASIL of the sub-functions may be reduced; and

2. The usually lower complexity of sub-functions not only reduces the validation effort but also the risk of failure.


In ISO 26262, this type of breakdown is referred to as requirements decomposition, provided the sub-functions meet certain criteria — for instance, complete independence. In this episode, we will present the exact requirements for such a requirements decomposition in detail, explore its benefits, and discuss its limitations.
Show more...
How To
Education
RSS
All content for Applied FuSa is the property of Wolfgang Freese and is served directly from their servers with no modification, redirects, or rehosting. The podcast is not affiliated with or endorsed by Podjoint in any way.
Hello and welcome to another episode of “Applied FuSa,” a podcast for FuSa pragmatists.

Functions are often broken down into sub-functions. A typical reason for this is that it can be easier to implement sub-functions rather than the complete function.

This strategy is relevant to functional safety for two reasons:

1. Depending on how the function is broken down into sub-functions, the ASIL of the sub-functions may be reduced; and

2. The usually lower complexity of sub-functions not only reduces the validation effort but also the risk of failure.


In ISO 26262, this type of breakdown is referred to as requirements decomposition, provided the sub-functions meet certain criteria — for instance, complete independence. In this episode, we will present the exact requirements for such a requirements decomposition in detail, explore its benefits, and discuss its limitations.
Show more...
How To
Education
https://is1-ssl.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Podcasts211/v4/63/cb/2d/63cb2dd3-abc3-8bef-e8ea-12e57f67136a/mza_1236235421606985468.jpg/600x600bb.jpg
FSC vs TSC
Applied FuSa
12 minutes 8 seconds
2 months ago
FSC vs TSC
The strict separation of functional and technical safety concepts is one of the most important principles in functional safety—and for good reason. This not only affects the scope of the two work products but also their respective responsibilities and the impact this separation has on the efficiency of safety concepts.
Applied FuSa
Hello and welcome to another episode of “Applied FuSa,” a podcast for FuSa pragmatists.

Functions are often broken down into sub-functions. A typical reason for this is that it can be easier to implement sub-functions rather than the complete function.

This strategy is relevant to functional safety for two reasons:

1. Depending on how the function is broken down into sub-functions, the ASIL of the sub-functions may be reduced; and

2. The usually lower complexity of sub-functions not only reduces the validation effort but also the risk of failure.


In ISO 26262, this type of breakdown is referred to as requirements decomposition, provided the sub-functions meet certain criteria — for instance, complete independence. In this episode, we will present the exact requirements for such a requirements decomposition in detail, explore its benefits, and discuss its limitations.