editor's blog
Subscribe Now

Safe Processing

When we recently looked at software and hardware safety standards, much of the discussion was focused on process-oriented standards like DO-254 and DO-178. But we also mentioned some other standards without going into detail. And some of those operate on the concept of “safety integrity level,” or SIL.

The origin of this concept is IEC 61508, which establishes four SILs, numbered 1-4, with 4 indicating the “safest” level. The determination of SIL appears to be relatively complex and somewhat ambiguous since the specific failure modes must be identified for each individual system, and are not codified in IEC 61508. They involve both process considerations as well as the Probability of Failure on Demand, or PFD,  (or its inverse, the Risk Reduction Factor, or RRF).

It’s actually pretty easy to understand the PFD ranges for each SIL: it’s the maximum number of zeros after the decimal for the PFD (or the minimum number of zeros in the RRF). So SIL 1 applies to a PFD of 0.1 to 0.01 (or an RRF of 10 to 100); SIL 4 applies to a PFD of 0.0001-0.00001 (or an RRF of 10,000-100,000).

ISO 26262 has a similar concept for automobiles, referring to Automotive SILs, or ASILs.

Only systems can achieve a SIL level; components may tout a SIL level, but simply using such components (or a process known to have achieved a certain SIL level on a different product) is not sufficient to demonstrate that SIL level. So, for instance, when TI just announced their Hercules microcontrollers, they didn’t say that “these  microcontrollers conform to SIL x.” They listed a series of features that are specifically designed to help a designer achieve a desired SIL or ASIL.

Because these standards don’t call out specific functional requirements, only probabilities of failure and process requirements, the feature list itself can’t be expressly correlated with specifics of the standard. Again, they’re simply things that are known to allow the implementation of safer systems.

More details and the specific features can be found in TI’s release

Leave a Reply

featured blogs
Mar 28, 2023
In this user case, Marintek uses Fidelity Fine/Marine and Hexpress for resistance curve prediction of a planning hull and its validation against the model test cases. Team Involved End User: Eloïse Croonenborghs, Research Scientist at MARINTEK, Maritime division, Trondhe...
Mar 23, 2023
Explore AI chip architecture and learn how AI's requirements and applications shape AI optimized hardware design across processors, memory chips, and more. The post Why AI Requires a New Chip Architecture appeared first on New Horizons for Chip Design....
Mar 10, 2023
A proven guide to enable project managers to successfully take over ongoing projects and get the work done!...

featured video

First CXL 2.0 IP Interoperability Demo with Compliance Tests

Sponsored by Synopsys

In this video, Sr. R&D Engineer Rehan Iqbal, will guide you through Synopsys CXL IP passing compliance tests and demonstrating our seamless interoperability with Teladyne LeCroy Z516 Exerciser. This first-of-its-kind interoperability demo is a testament to Synopsys' commitment to delivering reliable IP solutions.

Learn more about Synopsys CXL here

featured chalk talk

Johnson RF Connectivity Solutions
The growing need for remote patient monitoring and wireless connectivity has made RF in medicine applications more important than ever before. In this episode of Chalk Talk, Amelia Dalton chats with Ketan Thakkar from Cinch Connectivity Solutions about the growing trends in medicine today that are encouraging the use of RF, why higher frequency, smaller form factor, cable assembly expansion and adapter expansion are vital components in today’s medical applications and why Johnson medical solutions could be a great fit for your next medical design.
Nov 28, 2022
15,608 views