Black Box Testing: a safety obligation that impacts development cost/time using matlab/simulink?

6 次查看（过去 30 天）
Naveenraj Vijayan
Naveenraj Vijayan 2016-9-16
编辑： Naveenraj Vijayan 2016-9-21
One main cost saver in model based design using Matlab/Simulink is to avoid as much manual documentation as possible. To do that our decision was to keep the Simulink model as a single source of truth (as much as possible). This means that we decided not to create any extra textual specifications in design level. According to IEC61508 we are obliged to perform “black box testing” on all the models (or code) by an “independent tester”.
Running independent black box testing means we cannot supply an open model to the tester (sitting somewhere else in the world). This forces us to specify textual requirements at design level which we think is a pure waste of time. By doing that we are jeopardizing the cost/time advantage in using model based development.
How do we solve this? What do you recommend??
  2 个评论
Naveenraj Vijayan
Naveenraj Vijayan 2016-9-21
编辑：Naveenraj Vijayan 2016-9-21
That is the point. A masked/locked model needs a seperate requirement specification (which doesn't exist) to be supplied along with it. This is needed for the tester to perform black box testing. In our case the model itself is the requirement and there are no textual requirements.

请先登录，再进行评论。

请先登录，再回答此问题。

回答（0 个）

类别

在 Help Center 和 File Exchange 中查找有关 Simulink PLC Coder 的更多信息

标签

Community Treasure Hunt

Find the treasures in MATLAB Central and discover how the community can help you!

Start Hunting!

Translated by