Improve safety analysis templates#598
Conversation
PandaeDo
requested review from
aschemmel-tech,
masc2023 and
pahmann
as code owners
|
The created documentation from the pull request is available at: docu-html |
PandaeDo
force-pushed
the
vohae_safana_templates
branch
from
3de5f58 to
ee7e56e
Compare
masc2023
left a comment
masc2023
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The templates look all the same on the different levels, correct? Did we not get the message to check, what is needed for the level and remove the rest?
|
Yes... But for the moment we only had separated platform DFA failure initiators. I updated it accordingly and wait for the feedback and experiences from the safety analysis participants to improve them. |
aschemmel-tech
left a comment
aschemmel-tech
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
see inline comments
| Dependent Failure Initiators | ||
| ---------------------------- | ||
|
|
||
| | 2.2 Communication between the two elements: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why is "2.1 Shared ressources" missing here?
| Dependent Failure Initiators | ||
| ---------------------------- | ||
|
|
||
| | 2.2 Communication between the two elements: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I do not like the formatting, could we have headlines? And also that it starts the enumeration with "2".
| Dependent Failure Initiators | ||
| ---------------------------- | ||
|
|
||
| 2.1 Shared resources |
3 participants
Enlarged templates with tables to show that all fault models / failure initiators were analyzed, so that we have the same style in all safety analysis.