SafeTTy Systems Ltd
From our base in the UK Midlands, we provide support for organisations across the world that need to create real-time embedded systems that are safe, reliable and secure.
Many of our customers need to achieve compliance with IEC 61508, ISO 26262, DO-178 and related international safety standards and guidelines. We help them to meet these requirements through the use of state-of-the-art “Time-Triggered” (TT) software architectures.
Members of our team have been involved in the creation of successful TT designs for more than two decades. Over this period, we’ve developed several highly-effective new design solutions: these have allowed our customers to obtain the benefits of a TT approach in products ranging from satellite systems to household goods.
To support our customers, we offer:
- introductory Taster Days that explore the benefits of TT systems (delivered on your company site);
- specialised consultancy services delivered by Dr Michael J. Pont;
- an internationally-recognised staff certification programme for developers of software for safety-related embedded systems;
- flexible ReliabiliTTy® licences that provide cost-effective access to our patented technology;
- advanced DuplicaTTor® evaluation boards and related support packages;
- a series of popular books on TT systems and functional safety, including the recently-published ‘ERES2‘.
New book – ‘The Engineering of Reliable Embedded Systems’ (Ed. 2) by Michael J. Pont
Published in November 2016, the Second Edition of ‘The Engineering of Reliable Embedded Systems’ (ERES2), documents an industry-proven approach to the development of software for reliable, real-time embedded systems, based on the use of ‘Time Triggered’ (TT) architectures.
The case studies in ERES2 describe the development of embedded control and monitoring systems for the following products: [i] an industrial alarm sounder unit (IEC 61508, SIL 2); [ii] a domestic washing machine (IEC 60730, Class B); [iii] a hospital radiotherapy machine (IEC 62304, Class C); [iv] a steering-column lock for a passenger car (ISO 26262, ASIL D); and [v] an aircraft jet engine (DO-178C, Level A).
You’ll find further information about this book on the ERES2 page.
New DuplicaTTor® Evaluation Boards
To support organisations that want to explore the use of modern TT designs we have introduced our first DuplicaTTor® Evaluation Board (DEB).
Using a DEB, organisations can evaluate design options up to ‘SIL 3’ / ‘ASIL D’ level (and equivalent).
Learn more on our DuplicaTTor page.
Join us at the next NMI ISO 26262 Workshop on 26 January 2017 (Nuneaton, UK)
The next NMI ISO 26262 Workshop will take place at HORIBA MIRA (Nuneaton, UK) on 26 January 2017:
The automotive industry is going through a period of unprecedented change as embedded systems enable greener and safer vehicles.
Manufacturers facing the challenge of increasing system complexity are required to meet the stringent safety requirements defined in the international standard ISO 26262.
This workshop will provide the latest update on the Standard from HORIBA MIRA expert Dr David Ward, and a range of industry talks covering key current challenges including security, automated vehicles and lessons from other sectors.
Don’t miss this exclusive opportunity to hear the latest from industry experts and peers working with the ISO 26262 standard.
Please join us at this event, where Dr Michael J. Pont (CEO, SafeTTy Systems Ltd) will give a presentation entitled: “Are there lessons that ISO 26262 developers can (and should) learn from IEC 61508?“
This presentation will be concerned with the development of software for real-time automotive systems that need to be both safe and reliable.
The goal of the presentation is to explore one of the central differences between ISO 26262 and IEC 61508, and to consider whether there are lessons that can (and perhaps should) be learned from the earlier (generic / industrial) safety standard by developers of automotive systems.
During the talk it will be suggested that one key difference between IEC 61508 and ISO 26262 is that the latter standard places less (explicit) reliance on the idea of fault tolerance. In particular, the phrase ‘Hardware Fault Tolerance’ (which is referred to throughout IEC 61508) does not appear in ISO 26262. One important consequence of this difference is that, while IEC 61508 can be seen to favour use of multi-processor architectures, there is much less emphasis on such a solution in ISO 26262.
Does this mean that ISO 26262 designs are likely to be ‘less safe’ than equivalent IEC 61508 designs?
It is hoped that this presentation will encourage a debate at the workshop.
You’ll find further information about this event on the NMI website.