[SystemSafety] Safety Culture redux (David Green)

[Nick Tudor]

Paul:  we have measured, ...benchmarked, our tools against both ‘no tools’
and against an incumbent checking design against requirements (English).
Trials were independently carried out of our pre prototype tool just over a
year ago. The trial, even then, showed a consistent feasible saving of 80%
against no tool (ie review) and 60% against the incumbent for ASIL D/Level
A code.  Independence was built into the trials and errors were seeded and
all detected. The last year has been spent getting the prototype into a
more widely useful tool. Papers on this have been submitted to Federated
Computer Science conferences in Oxford for July. Talks on the approach have
been given at last years IET safety conference among others.  We have used
our tool (Modelworks) to show that a design for a decision making system
for an autonomous boat satisfied its requirements.

Cheers

Cheers

On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 at 13:58, <paul_e.bennett at topmail.co.uk> wrote:

> On 24/02/2018 at 7:26 AM, "Steve Tockey" <Steve.Tockey at construx.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >My experience is that coding and developer testing should take no
> >more than 10% of a software project’s effort. The industry average
> >is reported to be closer to 60%.
>
> I don't know many who have measured the time taken to get the requirements
> specification tested and fixed before they begin the development. This is
> my
> first task when a spec lands on my desk. It usually involves a lot of Q&A
> communication between the client and provider and I have seen it burn up to
> 30% of the schedule. However, once something that is more coherent emerges,
> the latter development goes quicker than expected with testing and review
> being about 30% of the remainder. Especially with hardware development as
> part of the project. That 30% includes coders own testing and the Fagan
> style
> inspections that are part of the review process.
>
> These figures are provided by a totally manually applied development
> process
> that does not employ software tools for tasks that the mark one eyeball
> can do
> so much better.
>
> Regards
>
> Paul E. Bennett IEng MIET
> Systems Engineer
> Lunar Mission One Ambassador
> --
> ********************************************************************
> Paul E. Bennett IEng MIET.....
> Forth based HIDECS Consultancy.............
> Mob: +44 (0)7811-639972
> Tel: +44 (0)1392-426688
> Going Forth Safely ..... EBA. www.electric-boat-association.org.uk..
> ********************************************************************
>
> _______________________________________________
> The System Safety Mailing List
> systemsafety at TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE
>
-- 
Nick Tudor
Tudor Associates Ltd
Mobile: +44(0)7412 074654
www.tudorassoc.com

*77 Barnards Green Road*
*Malvern*
*Worcestershire*
*WR14 3LR*
*Company No. 07642673*
*VAT No:116495996*

*www.aeronautique-associates.com <http://www.aeronautique-associates.com>*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/private/systemsafety/attachments/20180224/67936ddf/attachment-0001.html>