Re: [SystemSafety] Functional hazard analysis, does it work?

From: Peter Bernard Ladkin < >
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 09:30:40 +0100


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 2016-01-20 08:11 , DREW Rae wrote:
> You sound exactly like the homeopaths who protest that scientists won't fund clinical trials
> of their latest preparation. Every one of them claims that their preparation is a good one, and
> if people wouldn't only try it they'd realise the benefits. They are willfully blind of the
> fact that the likelihood of them being right is so low, that it isn't worth the opportunity
> cost to even investigate their claims. If you have a better technique for hazard analysis, the
> burden of proof is squarely on you to show it. Not to demonstrate narrow properties, but to
> show that if a company is designing a system, they are more likely to make a better system by
> using your technique.

This sounds to me like a very complicated moral universe you inhabit and I'm not at all sure that I buy into it.

My intended audience is people who regularly perform commercial HazAns and are interested in improving them. I think relative completeness is an important property of an effective HazAn, and in my experience so do most of my intended audience (witness Matthew's request). The question arises: is there an effective way of attaining it, and of showing objectively to third parties (such as assessors) that you have done so?

I think that is a very good question. I answer "yes". If you ever perform a HazAn where the clients are really concerned about relative completeness, do get in touch.

PBL Prof. Peter Bernard Ladkin, Faculty of Technology, University of Bielefeld, 33594 Bielefeld, Germany Je suis Charlie
Tel+msg +49 (0)521 880 7319 www.rvs.uni-bielefeld.de

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWn0WwAAoJEIZIHiXiz9k+j1sH/jZktwzrOneYn/JHFjt5yqVS qH/TUUudsO4ezKSgSWoc4uMoROEA6ZymTdbfgWUAuHXOxOMnjTNquogFA1wiJj+5 Hlx2Grw/pVPzphfRxag4wTQm92Smuxuz/5yZi90mrC2Fb7/SMPvh3glil4LxDLdW nCgZ4wshxSf/4pZcF+MjsasG8Fsi1aCsDuVfMgDH8imfq+hsanzoMrZfA1QomBvY ObpOArVqIW7pnkn05oM4w+OVA7M3KEH9iEOUUzVk9LMO3fktbRBj6E3cY5zkNwjE r7mEoEbwaa2L8HdRjzQkGLnAJwd+imRy4EPOHyd2opHyZ0mQFbSWOuzqMUiiAa0= =PUD2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety_at_xxxxxx Received on Wed Jan 20 2016 - 09:30:48 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Apr 22 2019 - 22:17:07 CEST