ISO 21448: Quantifying Validation Targets — How Many Test Kilometers Are Enough?

Date
2027-05-10
Location
Online
Host
Zach L
Register

About this event

A live 30-minute expert session on Quantifying Validation Targets — How Many Test Kilometers Are Enough? (ISO 21448 — Safety of the Intended Functionality). What We'll Cover: What a quantitative validation target is and how it flows from the acceptance criterion in the ISO 21448 Clause 6 and Clause 11 chain The derivation step by step: accident statistics baseline, Poisson confidence bounds, distance-per-event math, and the assumptions you must document How targets map to ISO 21448 Annex C.2 guidance and the validation plan and residual-risk argument artifacts Common mistakes: reusing fleet averages as targets, ignoring ODD exposure differences, claiming zero events proves the target is met The evidence auditors look for: target derivation record, test-distance logs, statistical method justification, and closure of the residual-risk claim Related topics: validation targets · acceptance criteria · test kilometers · endurance run · statistical validation · poisson estimation · residual risk · iso 21448 clause 11 · automated driving validation · mileage argument · accident statistics baseline · confidence level · sotif quantification · safety case evidence 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.