Skip to main content

​
Compliance Standards Matrix

TestAuto2 implements four primary automotive standards that work together to achieve functional safety and quality objectives:
StandardVersionScopePrimary UseCoverage
ISO 262622018Functional Safety for E/E SystemsHARA, ASIL allocation, safety mechanismsParts 3-6, 8
AIAG-VDA FMEA2019Failure Mode AnalysisDesign and process risk assessmentDFMEA, PFMEA
IATF 169492016Automotive Quality ManagementControl plans, special characteristicsAPQP, CP, SC/CC
ISO 214482019Safety of the Intended Functionality (SOTIF)Hazards beyond malfunctionSystem-level analysis

​
ISO 26262 Functional Safety — The Primary Standard

ISO 26262 Functional Safety of Electrical/Electronic Systems is the foundation for all TestAuto2 safety workflows. The standard defines a V-model lifecycle across eight parts: diagram

​
ASIL Classification System

Automotive Safety Integrity Level (ASIL) is calculated per ISO 26262-3 Table 4 using three factors: S (Severity) — Potential injury outcome if hazard occurs:
  • S1 — Minor injuries (e.g., whiplash, minor cuts)
  • S2 — Serious injuries (e.g., broken bones, prolonged hospitalization)
  • S3 — Life-threatening or fatal injuries (e.g., head trauma, internal bleeding)
E (Exposure) — Probability of operational situation occurring:
  • E1 — Incredible to rare occurrence
  • E2 — Low occurrence probability
  • E3 — Medium occurrence probability
  • E4 — High or frequent occurrence (>50% of vehicle operation time)
C (Controllability) — Driver’s ability to avoid harm after hazard occurs:
  • C1 — Easily avoided (>99% of drivers can respond)
  • C2 — Normally avoided (90-99% of drivers can respond)
  • C3 — Difficult to avoid (<90% of drivers can respond)

​
ASIL Determination Matrix

The intersection of S × E × C yields one of five ASIL levels:
SeverityE1E2E3E4
S1QMQMQMA
S2QMABC
S3ABCD
Legend:
  • QM — Quality Management (no functional safety requirement)
  • A — Lowest Automotive Safety Integrity Level
  • B — Medium integrity level
  • C — Higher integrity level
  • D — Highest integrity level (most stringent requirements)
Every hazard identified in HARA must have Severity, Exposure, and Controllability ratings assigned. Incomplete ASIL assignments block compliance verification and traceability closure.

​
Safety Goal Derivation

For each ASIL B, C, or D hazard, a corresponding Safety Goal must be defined. Safety goals specify the conditions that must be maintained to prevent the hazard:
HazardASILSafety GoalType
Failure to detect obstacle — no brakingDEnsure obstacle detection reliability ≥99.9%Functional requirement
Excessive braking force applicationBLimit maximum braking force to ≤1.0gPerformance requirement
Delayed braking activationBBraking must activate within 150 msTiming requirement
Power supply failure to AEB systemBPower supply availability ≥99%Availability requirement
Safety goals are allocated to:
  • System requirements (Part 4 design phase)
  • Hardware safety mechanisms (Part 5)
  • Software safety mechanisms (Part 6)
  • Verification and test cases (Part 4, 8)

​
Verification and Validation Coverage

TestAuto2 implements the ISO 26262 V-model with bidirectional traceability:

​
Coverage Metrics

ChainTargetActualStatus
Customer Reqs → System Reqs2514⚠️ 56%
System Reqs → Test Cases (verifies)312683%
Design Reqs → Test Cases (verifies)1515100%
Customer Reqs → Validation2512⚠️ 48%
Failure Modes → Risk Controls260260100%
Use the Requirements Traceability Report to identify coverage gaps. Click gap counts to drill down to specific uncovered work items.

​
FMEA Coverage by Level

Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) is performed at three levels per ISO 26262 and AIAG-VDA methodology:
FMEA LevelAnalyzed ComponentFailure ModesRisk ControlsMethodology
System FMEAAEB System, Subsystems13698ISO 26262-4, AIAG-VDA
Design FMEAComponents, assemblies140145AIAG-VDA
Process FMEAManufacturing steps, assembly2025IATF 16949, APQP
Each failure mode is assessed using:
  • Severity (S) — 1 (no effect) to 10 (catastrophic safety impact)
  • Occurrence (O) — 0 (never) to 10 (very high probability)
  • Detection (D) — 0 (certain detection) to 10 (missed defects)
  • Risk Priority Number (RPN) — S × O × D
Control measures are classified by ISO 26262 hierarchy:
Control TypePriorityPurposeExamples
Inherent Safety Design1stEliminate hazard by designFault-tolerant architecture, redundancy
Protective Measure2ndMitigate hazard consequencesWatchdog timers, plausibility checks
Information for Safety3rdWarn operator or external processWarning lights, procedures, training
Post-mitigation ratings are required for all ASIL B, C, and D failure modes.

​
Special Characteristics (SC/CC) Classification

IATF 16949 requires classification of design and manufacturing characteristics that significantly impact safety or function:
ClassificationMeaningControl Strategy
SCSpecial Characteristic — safety-criticalEnhanced design FMEA, verification rigor, process control
CCCritical Characteristic — quality-criticalDesign review, process capability study, 100% inspection
NoneStandard characteristicNormal design and manufacturing controls
SC/CC characteristics are traceable to:
  • Design requirements (Part 5)
  • Failure modes (Part 5, 6)
  • Control plan items (IATF 16949)
  • Verification test cases

​
Control Plan and Process FMEA

Control plans operationalize risk controls in production and supply chain:
ComponentPlan TypeProcess StepsControl ItemsStatus
AEB Sensor UnitControl Plan1025Active
CAN TransceiverControl Plan812Active
ECU ProcessingControl Plan68Draft
Each control plan item specifies:
  • Control Method — How the characteristic is monitored (visual inspection, gauge, test)
  • Sample Size — How many samples per lot/shift/production run
  • Frequency — When control is performed (per unit, per shift, per batch)
  • Reaction Plan — Action if control measure detects nonconformance
  • Capability Index (Cpk) — Minimum process capability required
Control plans must be approved before production release per APQP Phase 4 requirements. Use the Control Plans Report to verify all characteristics have defined control methods.

​
Documentation and Traceability Requirements

ISO 26262 Part 8 (Functional Safety Management) mandates complete traceability documentation: Required Document Chain:
  1. Concept Phase Specification — Hazards, Safety Goals, ASIL allocation per Part 3
  2. System Design Specification — System requirements, system FMEA per Part 4
  3. Hardware Design Specification — Hardware architecture, diagnostics, FMEA per Part 5
  4. Software Design Specification — Software architecture, requirements per Part 6
  5. V&V Report — Verification evidence (test results, reviews, analysis) per Part 4, 8
  6. Functional Safety Assessment — Compliance audit by independent assessor
  7. Process Safety Plan — Production control procedures per Part 7
All documents must maintain:
  • Requirements traceability — Every requirement has upstream source and downstream implementation
  • Bidirectional links — Verification and validation traces in both directions
  • ASIL consistency — Requirements and tests meet allocated ASIL levels
  • Verification closure — All work items have evidence of successful verification
The Safety Readiness Scorecard calculates compliance percentage per standard. Use it to identify and close gaps before functional safety assessment.

​
Standards Compliance Dashboard Navigation

ReportPurposeAccess
Standards Compliance OverviewThis page — standards matrix and compliance metricsHome → Standards
Safety Readiness ScorecardPer-standard readiness metrics and gap countsHome → Scorecard
ISO 26262 HARA ReportHARA completeness, ASIL distribution, hazard registerRisks → Reports
FMEA Coverage ReportFMEA coverage by system element, gap analysisRisks → Reports
Requirements Traceability ReportV-model traceability matrix, coverage percentagesRequirements → Reports
Control Plans ReportControl plan inventory, process step coverageDesign → Reports

​
Enumeration References

​
Compliance Readiness Checklist

Use this checklist to verify standards compliance before functional safety assessment:
  • HARA Completeness — All 18 hazards have Severity, Exposure, Controllability, and ASIL assigned
  • Safety Goals — All ASIL B/C/D hazards have corresponding safety goals defined
  • System Requirements — 100% of safety goals allocated to system-level requirements
  • FMEA Coverage — 100% of failure modes have pre- and post-mitigation Action Priority assigned
  • Risk Controls — All ASIL B/C/D failure modes have ≥2 independent risk controls (prevention + detection)
  • Verification Closure — ≥95% of system requirements have linked test cases with evidence
  • Traceability Matrix — Requirements traceable to HARA, design, FMEA, tests, and control plans
  • SC/CC Classification — All design and manufacturing characteristics classified
  • Control Plans — 100% of SC/CC characteristics have defined control methods and sample plans
  • Documentation — All concept, design, V&V, and process specifications complete and reviewed
The Safety Readiness Scorecard automatically calculates compliance percentage. Monitor it throughout the project to ensure all standards requirements are met before production release.