Investigation and Reduction of Fault Sensitivity in the FlexRay Communication Controller Registers

  • Yasser Sedaghat
  • Seyed Ghassem Miremadi
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5219)


It is now widely believed that FlexRay communication protocol will become the de-facto standard for distributed safety-critical automotive systems. In this paper, the fault sensitivity of the FlexRay communication controller registers are investigated using transient single bit-flip fault injection. To do this, a FlexRay bus network, composed of four nodes, was modeled. A total of 135,600 transient single bit-flip faults were injected to all 408 accessible single-bit and multiple-bit registers of the communication controller in one node. The results showed that among all 408 accessible registers, 30 registers were immediately affected by the injected faults. The results also showed that 26.2% of injected faults caused at least one error. Based on the fault injection results, the TMR and the Hamming code techniques were applied to the most sensitive parts of the FlexRay protocol. These techniques reduced the fault affection to the registers from 26.2% to 10.3% with only 13% hardware overhead.


Safety-critical applications Distributed embedded systems Flex- Ray protocol Fault injection 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Byteflight Specification,
  2. 2.
    CAN Specification 2.0,
  3. 3.
    LonWorks networks,
  4. 4.
    PROFIBUS DP Specification,
  5. 5.
    Pop, T., Pop, P., Eles, P., Peng, Z.: Bus Access Optimization for FlexRay-based Distributed Embedded Systems. In: Design, Automation & Test in Europe Conference & Exhibition 2007 (DATE 2007), pp. 1–6. EDA Consortium, Nice (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hoyme, K., Driscoll, K.: SAFEbus. In: IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine (ISSN 0885-8985), vol. 8(3), pp. 34–39. IEEE Press, Los Alamitos (1992)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Miner, P.S., Malekpour, M., Torres-Pomales, W.: Conceptual design of a Reliable Optical BUS (ROBUS). In: 21st AIAA/IEEE Digital Avionics Systems Conference, pp.13D3-1–13D3-11. IEEE Press, Irvine (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kopetz, H., Bauer, G.: The Time-Triggered Architecture. J. IEEE. 91(1), 112–126 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Road Vehicles—Controller Area Network (CAN)—Part 4: Time-Triggered Communication, ISO 11 898-4 (2000)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ferreira, J., Pedreiras, P., Almeida, L., Fonseca, J.A.: The FTT-CAN protocol for flexibility in safety-critical systems. J. IEEE Micro. (Special Issue on Critical Embedded Automotive Networks) 22(4), 46–55 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    FlexRay Communications System - Protocol Specification V2.1 Revision A,
  12. 12.
    Sethna, F., Stipidis, E., Ali, F.H.: What Lessons Can Controller Area Networks Learn From FlexRay. In: Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference (VPPC 2006), pp. 1–4. IEEE Press, Windsor (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pop, T., Pop, P., Eles, P., Peng, Z., Andrei, A.: Timing Analysis of the FlexRay Communication Protocol. In: 18th Euromicro Conference Real-Time Systems (ECRTS 2006), pp. 203–216. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dresden (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hagiescu, A., Bordoloi, U.D., Chakraborty, S.: Performance Analysis of FlexRay-based ECU Networks. In: 44th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC 2007), pp. 284–289. ACM, San Diego (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Makowitz, R., Temple, C.: FlexRay- A Communication Network for Automotive Control Systems. In: IEEE International Workshop on Factory Communication Systems (WFCS 2006), pp. 207–212. IEEE Press, Torino (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Navet, N., Song, Y., Simonot-Lion, F., Wilwert, C.: Trends in Automotive Communication Systems. J. IEEE 93(6), 1204–1223 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tindell, K., Clark, J.: Holistic Schedulability Analysis for Distributed Hard Real-Time Systems. J. Microprocessing & Microprogramming 40, 117–134 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cena, G., Valenzano, A.: Performance analysis of byteflight networks. In: IEEE Workshop on Factory Communication Systems (WFCS 2004), pp. 157–166. IEEE Press, Vienna (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Izosimov, V., Pop, P., Eles, P., Peng, Z.: Design Optimization of Time- and Cost-Constrained Fault-Tolerant Distributed Embedded Systems. In: Design, Automation and Test in Europe Conference and Exhibition 2005 (DATE 2005), vol. 2, pp. 864–869. IEEE Computer Society, Munich (2005)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    FlexRay Communications System - Protocol Conformance Test Specification V2.1,
  21. 21.
    Zarandi, H.R., Miremadi, S.G., Ejlali, A.: Dependability Analysis Using a Fault Injection Tool Based on Synthesizability of HDL Models. In: 18th IEEE International Symposium on Defect and Fault Tolerance in VLSI Systems, pp. 485–492. IEEE Press, Boston (2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Armengaud, E., Rothensteiner, F., Steininger, A., Horauer, M.: A Method for Bit Level Test and Diagnosis of Communication Services. In: IEEE Workshop on Design & Diagnostics of Electronic Circuits & Systems 2005 (DDECS 2005), p. 6. IEEE Press, Hungary (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yasser Sedaghat
    • 1
  • Seyed Ghassem Miremadi
    • 1
  1. 1.Dependable Systems LaboratorySharif University of TechnologyTehranIran

Personalised recommendations