Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #26101

Re: Automotive Software and the Law

Show key headers only | View raw

Am 15.03.2017 um 18:32 schrieb Tim Wescott:
> On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 17:12:28 +0000, HT-Lab wrote:
>> I assume with law you mean if this is the standard that all automotive
>> suppliers/manufacturers tried to adhere to (similar to DO-254 for the
>> avionics market), I so then I believe this is indeed the case.
>>
>> However, I have no experience with this standard, I just play with
>> FPGA's day in day out...
> 
> Actually by "law" I mean "law".  Are there regulations in any country or 
> other polity that require companies manufacturing or selling automobiles 
> to adhere to the standard before they can legally sell their wares?  Is
> there anywhere in the world where not following ISO 26262 will have a cop 
> or a government lawyer knocking on your door?

Would it be law that works that way, or would it be a certification agency?

As I understand, technology has to fulfill certain systems requirements
(for a car, things like "can steer", "can brake", "engine warning
light"), and there's recognized state-of-the-art how you do that. The
law doesn't say your steering column has to work mechanically, but
everyone agrees that's a good way to do it. And if you do it
differently, you have to prove to achieve equivalent safety.

> Is there anywhere in the world where, before you can offer a
> newly-designed car for sale, you have to show documentation that
> proves that you've followed the standard, or regulations based on the
> standard?

In Germany, you need a type approval to sell cars to customers
(alternatively, customers would have to get that approval themselves).
You probably don't get a type approval for a steering column programmed
in Visual Basic because you cannot prove its safety.

On the other hand, do you really want to build a car, or are you
building components? In that case, the automakers' rules are not less
important than laws. Laws don't care about quiescent current; the
automaker does. Laws don't care about MISRA or V-model; the automaker does.


  Stefan

Back to comp.arch.embedded | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Automotive Software and the Law Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2017-03-14 18:27 -0500
  Re: Automotive Software and the Law Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2017-03-14 20:18 -0400
  Re: Automotive Software and the Law HT-Lab <hans64@htminuslab.com> - 2017-03-15 11:18 +0000
    Re: Automotive Software and the Law Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-03-15 11:36 -0500
      Re: Automotive Software and the Law HT-Lab <hans64@htminuslab.com> - 2017-03-15 17:12 +0000
        Re: Automotive Software and the Law Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2017-03-15 12:32 -0500
          Re: Automotive Software and the Law John Speth <johnspeth@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-15 11:48 -0700
            Re: Automotive Software and the Law Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2017-03-15 17:31 -0500
              Re: Automotive Software and the Law Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2017-03-15 19:23 -0400
                Re: Automotive Software and the Law Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2017-03-15 18:41 -0500
            Re: Automotive Software and the Law Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-17 05:54 -0500
              Re: Automotive Software and the Law Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-03-17 11:42 +0000
                Re: Automotive Software and the Law Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-17 07:08 -0500
                Re: Automotive Software and the Law Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-03-17 13:50 +0000
              Re: Automotive Software and the Law Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-03-17 10:58 -0500
                Re: Automotive Software and the Law Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2017-03-17 16:18 +0000
                Re: Automotive Software and the Law Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-17 19:00 -0500
          Re: Automotive Software and the Law Jacob Sparre Andersen <jacob@jacob-sparre.dk> - 2017-03-15 22:01 +0100
          Re: Automotive Software and the Law Stefan Reuther <stefan.news@arcor.de> - 2017-03-16 11:09 +0100
            Re: Automotive Software and the Law Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-03-16 10:16 -0500
              Re: Automotive Software and the Law Stefan Reuther <stefan.news@arcor.de> - 2017-03-17 12:10 +0100
                Re: Automotive Software and the Law Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-17 07:12 -0500
                Re: Automotive Software and the Law Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-03-17 11:00 -0500
              Re: Automotive Software and the Law Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2017-03-17 14:49 +0000
  Re: Automotive Software and the Law Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-17 05:52 -0500
    Re: Automotive Software and the Law Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-03-17 11:03 -0500

csiph-web