skip to main content
10.1145/2785592.2785601acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

Tailoring process requirements for software product assurance

Published:24 August 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

The DLR Space Administration designs and implements the German space program. While project management rests with the agency, suppliers are contracted for building the space devices and their software. As opposed to many other domains, these are often unique devices with uncommon and custom-built peripherals. Its software is specifically developed for a single mission only and controls critical functionality. A small coding error can mean the loss of a mission. For this reason, customer and supplier closely collaborate on the field of software quality. We report from a customer's perspective on lessons and management tools for influencing suppliers' processes and product quality: standards, single-source tailoring and cross-company product assurance.

References

  1. Ecss-e-st-40c: Space engineering – software.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Ecss-q-st-80c: Software product assurance.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Ecss-s-st-00c: Ecss system – description, implementation and general requirements.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. O. Armbrust, M. Katahira, Y. Miyamoto, J. Münch, H. Nakao, and A. Ocampo. Scoping software process models – initial concepts and experience from defining space standards. LNCS 5007:160–172, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. G. Brat and R. Klemm. Static analysis of the mars exploration rover flight software. In Intl. Space Mission Challenges for Inf. Technology, pages 321–326, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. S. E. Donaldson and S. G. Siegel. Successful Software Development. Prentice-Hall, 2 edition, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. M. Dowson. The ariane 5 software failure. Software Engineering Notes, 22:84, 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. D. L. Dvorak, editor. NASA Study on Flight Software Complexity. Jet Propulsion Laboratory, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Y. E. Gammal and W. Kriedte. Ecss — an initiative to develop a single set of european space standards. In Prod. Ass. Symp. and Softw. Prod. Ass. Works., 1996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. G. J. Holzmann. Mars code. Comm. of the ACM, 57(2):64–73, February 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. W. Jobi, editor. Tailoring Catalogue: Product Assurance & Safety Requirements for DLR Space Projects. DLR, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. C. W. Johnson. The natural history of bugs: Using formal methods to analyse software related failures in space missions. LNCS, 3582:9–25, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. W. Ley. Management von raumfahrtprojekten. In Handbuch der Raumfahrttechnik, pages 715–764. 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. H.-A. Marsiske. Wendepunkt mars. Telepolis, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. J. Oberg. Why the mars probe went off course. IEEE Spectrum, pages 34–39, October 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. C. R. Prause, R. Gerlich, R. Gerlich, and A. Fischer. Characterizing verification tools through coding error candidates reported in space flight software. In Data Systems In Aerospace, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Tailoring process requirements for software product assurance

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Other conferences
            ICSSP 2015: Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Software and System Process
            August 2015
            212 pages
            ISBN:9781450333467
            DOI:10.1145/2785592

            Copyright © 2015 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 24 August 2015

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • short-paper

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader