ISO 21448: ISO 26262 and ISO 21448 Side by Side — Running One Program, Two Standards

Date
2026-11-23
Location
Online
Host
Zach L
Register

About this event

A live 30-minute expert session on ISO 26262 and ISO 21448 Side by Side — Running One Program, Two Standards (ISO 21448 — Safety of the Intended Functionality). What We'll Cover: How ISO 21448 scope (insufficiencies without faults) complements ISO 26262 scope (E/E malfunctions) and where the boundary genuinely blurs The integration method step by step: combined HARA/SOTIF hazard workshop, shared scenario assets, split requirement streams, and one V&V calendar How joint work maps to both standards and produces a combined safety plan and a cross-reference matrix of shared and standard-specific artifacts Common mistakes: filing perception limitations as ISO 26262 faults, duplicate hazard analyses that diverge, ASIL logic misapplied to SOTIF risks The evidence assessors want: a documented interface between the two lifecycles and clear ownership of every hazard under one standard or both Related topics: iso 26262 vs iso 21448 · combined safety program · hara integration · functional safety and sotif · asil · e/e malfunction · safety plan integration · cross reference matrix · hazard ownership · dual compliance · safety lifecycle alignment · adas safety standards · work product mapping · combined workshop Critical Systems Analysis provides embedded functional safety consulting for ISO 21448 — Safety of the Intended Functionality. Learn more: https://criticalsystemsanalysis.com Partner with us: https://meetings.hubspot.com/benjamin-twombly/strategic-partnerships

Topics

About Functional Safety Foundations

This online session delivers expert-led instruction on the regulatory landscape and implementation approach for Functional Safety Foundations.

The cross-sector fundamentals underlying every functional safety standard: risk as severity × likelihood, the safety function concept, integrity levels, the safety lifecycle, and the split between random and systematic failures.

What it regulates

Shared vocabulary and reasoning: hazard → risk → risk reduction allocation → safety requirement → verified implementation → maintained integrity in operation.

Who must comply

Everyone entering the field — the conceptual base of the entire catalog.

Key requirements of Functional Safety Foundations

  • Hazard and risk fundamentals
  • Safety function anatomy: sensor-logic-actuator with defined safe state
  • Integrity ladders (SIL/PL/ASIL/DAL) as risk-reduction currencies
  • Random vs systematic failure treatment
  • Lifecycle and management of functional safety incl. competence

Key concepts: Functional Safety Foundations

Functional safety management
Planning, competence, documentation and assessment wrapped around technical work.
Random vs systematic
Hardware wear-out/chance failures quantified statistically versus design/process errors controlled by rigor.
Risk reduction allocation
Distributing required risk reduction among mechanical design, safeguards, control functions and procedures.
Safe state
The defined condition a function drives the equipment to on demand or fault.

Frequently asked questions: Functional Safety Foundations

Why can't testing alone prove safety?

Rare-event targets (like 1e-7/h) are unverifiable by test duration, and systematic errors evade random testing — hence the standards' dual machinery of quantified hardware analysis plus process rigor and independent assessment.

Standard information based on the published text of Functional Safety Foundations. Event content is provided by the host. For authoritative guidance, consult the official standard body.