Skip to main content

Validating Safety Models with Fault Trees

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Abstract

In verifying a safety-critical system, one usually begins by building a model of the basic system and of its safety mechanisms. If the basic system model does not reflect reality, the verification results are misleading. We show how a model of a system can be compared with the system’s fault trees to help validate the failure behaviour of the model. To do this, the meaning of fault trees are formalised in temporal logic and a consistency relation between models and fault trees is defined. An important practical feature of the technique is that it allows models and fault trees to be compared even if some events in the fault tree are not found in the system model.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. R.E. Bloomfield, J.H. Cheng, and J. Gorski. Towards a common safety description model. In J.F. Lindeberg, editor, SAFECOMP ’91, 1991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. J.C. Bradfield. A proof assistand for symbolic model checking. In Proceedings of CAV ’92, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Rance Cleaveland, Joachim Parrow, and Bernhard Steffen. The concurrency workbench: A semantics based tool for the verification of concurrent systems. Technical Report ECS-LFCS-89-83, Laboratory for Foundations of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  4. D. Kozen. Results on the propositional mu-calculus. Theoretical Computer Science, 27:333–354, 1983.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. N.H. Roberts, W.E. Vesely, D.F. Haasl, and F.F. Goldberg. Fault Tree Handbook. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  6. C. Stirling. Temporal logics for CCS. In J.W. de Bakker, W.-P. de Roever, and G. Rozenberg, editors, Linear Time, Branching Time and Partial Order in Logics and Models. Springer Verlag, 1989. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 354.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1993 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this paper

Cite this paper

Bruns, G., Anderson, S. (1993). Validating Safety Models with Fault Trees. In: Górski, J. (eds) SAFECOMP ’93. SAFECOMP 1993. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-2061-2_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-2061-2_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-19838-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-2061-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics