Failure assertion programming uses executable pre/post-condition checks to stop software from silently violating assumptions. In IEC 61508 contexts, it targets systematic failures: if a contract is broken at runtime, the system logs the violation and triggers a defined SAFE REACTION (e.g., inhibit actuation or hold last safe output). Use it on safety-critical interfaces and control paths; keep checks enabled in release builds. Includes a C/C++ example.

Error detecting codes (e.g., CRC, Hamming, checksums) add redundancy to digital data so errors from noise, hardware faults, or software issues can be caught before they trigger unsafe actions. In functional safety, the goal is not correction but detection and safe reaction—discarding bad data instead of guessing. This prevents systematic failures and ensures controllers act only on valid, verified information.

Fault detection ensures failures are identified before they escalate into hazards. By monitoring signals, states, or behaviors, systems can spot anomalies early and trigger a safe reaction. In functional safety, this prevents systematic failures from propagating and ensures random hardware faults are handled promptly, keeping the safety function reliable and trustworthy.

Backward traceability safety requirements ensures that every detailed requirement, design, or test can be traced back to a higher-level safety requirement or need. It prevents floating requirements, avoids gold-plating, and provides strong evidence of systematic failure control for #SIL and #61508 compliance.

Forward traceability safety requirements ensures that every high-level safety requirement is implemented in lower-level specifications, designs, and tests. It prevents floating requirements, supports change impact analysis, and provides audit-ready evidence for #SIL and #61508 compliance.

At Risknowlogy, we guide product developers through one of the most pivotal early decisions in any safety project:

This article offers a high-level overview of over 100 established methods used to manage uncertainty, enhance system performance, and protect people and assets.
Whether you are a decision-maker setting strategy or an engineer seeking the right tool for a project, this guide provides a roadmap for navigating the world of risk management.

The title "Certified Specialist" is used by Risknowlogy to recognize individuals who successfully complete our theory-based training and pass a certification exam. Unlike terms such as "Engineer" or "Professional," which can imply degrees or job roles, "Certified Specialist" accurately reflects demonstrated knowledge of risk, safety, and reliability topics.

Safety and reliability analysis often relies on predictive modeling to assess risks and improve system performance. The Markov technique provides a state-based modeling approach that improves the accuracy of risk, reliability, and safety assessments. This article explores how Markov models work, their applications, and key advantages in industries where failure prevention is critical.

In safety-critical industries, balancing safety and availability is essential. Whether you’re in oil and gas, chemical processing, or power generation, your systems must be both safe and reliable. While most engineers focus heavily on safety integrity, process availability is equally important.

This is why we at Risknowlogy invented the Spurious Trip Level (STL)—to help companies measure and control the risk of unnecessary system shutdowns. In this article, we'll explain why spurious trips are not just an inconvenience but a significant safety risk, and how STL can help optimize both safety and reliability.