 |
SAFBUILD |
|
|
|
The aims of the SAFBUILD project are to define and research applicable means for building safety into the design process of ATM systems - including the human aspects.
|
|
|
|
This project aims at defining and researching applicable means for building safety in the design process of ATM systems -including the human aspects. Along a generic system development life-cycle, it will survey existing techniques, methods and tools that allow assuring safety while designing the system, including simulations for safety insights. It also includes several studies such as recovery from failure, adapting HAZOP and other techniques to ATM, and developing guidelines for HMI changes.
Survey safety assurance tools, surveying methods for designing for safety along a system development life cycle.
Simulations for safety insights The goal of the project is to define and potentially develop standard safety scenarios, safety observation tools and safety analyses tools which would strengthen the simulation 's capacity to give insights in some specific safety aspects.
Recovery from system failure examining both technical and human aspects of system failures, and also unexpected events such as environmental events:
- How in practice can system errors and failure modes be identified and designed so as to be notified to the operator in a way he can cope with the error?
- How do operators cope with malfunctioning systems or more generally unexpected situations?
|
|
|
This project follows an initial study on Validation started at the EEC in 2001.
|
|
|
In other industries, safety is assessed in programmatic form at key stages in the design life cycle. Such safety assessments moreover feed information back into the design process. In ATM, this does not tend to happen. Safety cases are derived late in the design process, and there is little linkage between safety and design: design does not gain the insights that certain safety tools can give.
|
|
|
The goal of the approach is to develop a framework for building safety into the design process. This framework would not replace the currently developing safety assessment methodology, but rather would mirror it, making sure that safety insights are utilised to improve designs.
|
|
|
A formalisation of the design process needs to occur first. Then, secondly, techniques such as HAZOP, Failure Modes and Effects Analysis, Human Error Analysis, Human Factors Analysis (with a safety emphasis), Human Reliability Assessment, and safety measurements during laboratory, prototyping and real-time simulations, would be tested and their 'added value' assessed. Third, a means of deciding what types of design parameters needed what types of analysis, would be developed. This would be based on the scope of the new design and its potential impact on safety. This would lead finally to a flexible approach for analysing designs and building safety into them.
|
|
|
Safety becomes something for which confidence is gained through the whole design process, rather than something which is tested late on, in fact when it is realistically too late to alter design concepts.
|
|
|
For further information, contact:
|
Barry
Kirwan
|
|
SAFBUILD Project Manager
|
| Email:
|
|
|
|
