Advanced

Comparison of the FMEA and STPA safety analysis methods–a case study

Sulaman, Sardar Muhammad LU ; Beer, Armin; Felderer, Michael and Höst, Martin LU (2017) In Software Quality Journal
Abstract
As our society becomes more and more dependent on IT systems, failures of these systems can harm more and more people and organizations. Diligently performing risk and hazard analysis helps to minimize the potential harm of IT system failures on the society and increases the probability of their undisturbed operation. Risk and hazard analysis is an important activity for the development and operation of critical software intensive systems, but the increased complexity and size puts additional requirements on the effectiveness of risk and hazard analysis methods. This paper presents a qualitative comparison of two hazard analysis methods, failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) and system theoretic process analysis (STPA), using case study... (More)
As our society becomes more and more dependent on IT systems, failures of these systems can harm more and more people and organizations. Diligently performing risk and hazard analysis helps to minimize the potential harm of IT system failures on the society and increases the probability of their undisturbed operation. Risk and hazard analysis is an important activity for the development and operation of critical software intensive systems, but the increased complexity and size puts additional requirements on the effectiveness of risk and hazard analysis methods. This paper presents a qualitative comparison of two hazard analysis methods, failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) and system theoretic process analysis (STPA), using case study research methodology. Both methods have been applied on the same forward collision avoidance system to compare the effectiveness of the methods and to investigate what are the main differences between them. Furthermore, this study also evaluates the analysis process of both methods by using a qualitative criteria derived from the technology acceptance model (TAM). The results of the FMEA analysis were compared to the results of the STPA analysis, which were presented in a previous study. Both analyses were conducted on the same forward collision avoidance system. The comparison shows that FMEA and STPA deliver similar analysis results. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
epub
subject
in
Software Quality Journal
pages
39 pages
publisher
Springer
external identifiers
  • scopus:85036573181
ISSN
0963-9314
DOI
10.1007/s11219-017-9396-0
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
3409c5c6-ea88-4883-9483-725db939003d
date added to LUP
2017-12-04 08:43:22
date last changed
2018-01-07 12:27:08
@article{3409c5c6-ea88-4883-9483-725db939003d,
  abstract     = {As our society becomes more and more dependent on IT systems, failures of these systems can harm more and more people and organizations. Diligently performing risk and hazard analysis helps to minimize the potential harm of IT system failures on the society and increases the probability of their undisturbed operation. Risk and hazard analysis is an important activity for the development and operation of critical software intensive systems, but the increased complexity and size puts additional requirements on the effectiveness of risk and hazard analysis methods. This paper presents a qualitative comparison of two hazard analysis methods, failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) and system theoretic process analysis (STPA), using case study research methodology. Both methods have been applied on the same forward collision avoidance system to compare the effectiveness of the methods and to investigate what are the main differences between them. Furthermore, this study also evaluates the analysis process of both methods by using a qualitative criteria derived from the technology acceptance model (TAM). The results of the FMEA analysis were compared to the results of the STPA analysis, which were presented in a previous study. Both analyses were conducted on the same forward collision avoidance system. The comparison shows that FMEA and STPA deliver similar analysis results.},
  author       = {Sulaman, Sardar Muhammad and Beer, Armin and Felderer, Michael and Höst, Martin},
  issn         = {0963-9314},
  language     = {eng},
  month        = {12},
  pages        = {39},
  publisher    = {Springer},
  series       = {Software Quality Journal},
  title        = {Comparison of the FMEA and STPA safety analysis methods–a case study},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11219-017-9396-0},
  year         = {2017},
}