SOFTWARE FAILURE MODE AND EFFECT ANALYSIS (SFMEA) - Software Design for Six-Sigma: A Roadmap for Excellence - page 419

TABLE 16.2 (Continued)

Year Reference Contribution

Stated that for an FMEA of code
modifications, implementation, and
programming language knowledge is very
important.

Pfleeger, S.L., Software
engineering: Theory and
practice. Upper Saddle
River, Prentice Hall, New
Jersey, 1998.

Pfleeger:
Pointed out that FMEA is highly labor
intensive and relies on the experience of the
analysts. Lutz and Woodhouse stated that a
complete list of software failure modes cannot
be developed.

Goddard, P.L., Software
FMEA Techniques,
Proceedings Annual
Reliability and
Maintainability Symposium,
pp. 118-123, 2000.

Goddard:
Stated that there are two types of software
FMEA for embedded control systems: system
software FMEA and detailed software FMEA.
System software FMEA can be used to
evaluate the effectiveness of the software
architecture without all the work required for
detailed software FMEA.
Noted that system software FMEA analysis
should be performed as early as possible in the
software design process. This FMEA analysis
is based on the top-level software design.
Stated that the system software FMEA should
be documented in the tabular format used for
hardware FMEA.
Stated that detailed software FMEA validates
that the software has been constructed to
achieve the specified safety requirements.
Detailed software FMEA is similar to
component-level hardware FMEA.
Noted that the analysis is lengthy and labor
intensive.
Pointed out that the results are not available
until late in the development process.
Argued that detailed software FMEA is often
cost effective only for systems with limited
hardware integrity.

2000

(Continued)