Safe Adaptation for Reliable and Energy-Efficient E/E Architectures

  • Gereon WeissEmail author
  • Philipp Schleiss
  • Christian Drabek
  • Alejandra Ruiz
  • Ansgar Radermacher
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology book series (BRIEFSAPPLSCIENCES)


The upcoming changing mobility paradigms request more and more services and features to be included in future cars. Electric mobility and highly automated driving lead to new requirements and demands on vehicle information and communication (ICT) architectures. For example, in the case of highly-automated driving, future drivers no longer need to monitor and control the vehicle all the time. This calls for new fault-tolerant approaches of automotive E/E architectures. In addition, the electrification of vehicles requires a flexible underlying E/E architecture which facilitates enhanced energy management. Within the EU-funded SafeAdapt project, a new E/E architecture for future vehicles has been developed in which adaptive systems ensure safe, reliable, and cost-effective mobility. The holistic approach provides the necessary foundation for future in-vehicle systems and its evaluation shows the great potential of such reliable and energy-efficient E/E architectures.


Adaptation Safety Reliability Autonomous driving 



The research leading to these results has partially received funding from the European Union Seventh Framework Programme ([FP7/2007–2013] [FP7/2007–2011]) under grant agreement n°608945, project SafeAdapt—Safe Adaptive Software for Fully Electric Vehicles.


  1. 1.
    Gold C, Damböck D, Lorenz L, Bengler K (2013) “Take over!” How long does it take to get the driver back into the loop? Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc Annu Meet 57:1938–1942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aeberhard M et al (2015) Experience, results and lessons learned from automated driving on Germany’s highways. IEEE Intell Transp Syst Mag 7:42–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fürst S (2010) Challenges in the design of automotive software. In: Proceedings of design, automation, and test in Europe (Date)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pretschner A, Broy M, Kruger IH, Stauner T (2007) Software engineering for automotive systems: a roadmap. In: Future of software engineering (FOSE ’07)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bieber P, Noulard E, Pagetti C, Planche T, Vialard F (2009) Design of future reconfigurable IMA platforms. In: Special issue on the 2nd international workshop on adaptive and reconfigurable embedded systems (APRES’09)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    SafeAdapt. Safe adaptive software for fully electric vehicles. (Online). HYPERLINK Last Accessed on 15 July 2016
  7. 7.
    AUTOSAR. Automotive open system architecture. (Online) HYPERLINK Last Accessed on 15 July 2016
  8. 8.
    ISO/IEC 26262 (2011) Road vehicles—functional safety, Part 1–10Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Barthels A, Fröschl J, Michel H-U (2012) An architecture for power management in automotive systems. In: Architecture of Computing Systems—ARCSGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schmutzler C, Simons M, Becker J (2012) On demand dependent deactivation of automotive ECUs. In: Proceedings of the conference on design, automation and test in Europe (Date ’12)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Balbierer N, Waas T, Meyer J, Jakob M, Seitz J (2013) Multinet—a wake-up protocol for multicast network groups. In: Proceedings of the eleventh workshop on intelligent solutions in embedded systems (WISES 2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schmutzler C (2012) Hardwaregestützte Energieoptimierung von Elektrik/Elektronik-Architekturen durch adaptive Abschaltung von verteilten, eingebetteten Systemen. KIT Scientific Publishing, Karlsruhe, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Amorim T, Ruiz A, Dropmann C, Schneider D (2015) Multidirectional modular conditional safety certificates. In: Safecomp workshops, Delft, pp 357–368Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. Time-sensitive networking task group. (Online) HYPERLINK Last Accessed on 15 July 2016
  15. 15.
    Ruiz A, Juez G, Schleiss P, Weiss G (2015) A safe generic adaptation mechanism for smart cars. In: IEEE 26th international symposium on software reliability engineering (ISSRE 2015)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    SafeAdapt (2015) D3.1 concept for enforcing safe adaptation during runtime. Project DeliverableGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Voget S (2010) AUTOSAR and the automotive tool chain. In: Proceedings of the conference on design, automation and test in Europe (Date ’10), pp 259–262Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ruiz A, Melzi A, Kelly T (2015) Systematic application of ISO 26262 on a SEooC: support by applying a systematic reuse approach. In: Design, automation & test in Europe conference & exhibition (Date ’15), pp 393–396Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cuenot P et al (2008) Developing automotive products using the EAST-ADL2: an AUTOSAR compliant architecture description language. In: Ingénieurs de l’Automobile (Automobile Engineers), vol 2, no 793Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pena A, Iglesias I, Valera JJ, Martin A (2012) Development and validation of Dynacar RT software, a new integrated solution for design of electric and hybrid vehicles. In: Technical article on integrated solutions for new vehicles designing, (EVS26)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    SafeAdapt (2016) D5.3 evaluation results of the specified use cases and scenarios. In: Project deliverableGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    SafeAdapt (2015) D3.3 specification of ISO 26262 safety goal for self-adaptation scenarios. In: Project deliverableGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gereon Weiss
    • 1
    Email author
  • Philipp Schleiss
    • 1
  • Christian Drabek
    • 1
  • Alejandra Ruiz
    • 2
  • Ansgar Radermacher
    • 3
  1. 1.Fraunhofer ESKMunichGermany
  2. 2.TecnaliaDerioSpain
  3. 3.CEA LISTPalaiseauFrance

Personalised recommendations