diff --git a/docs/process/process_areas/index.rst b/docs/process/process_areas/index.rst
index da4d8691c4..7d2d2eebb2 100644
--- a/docs/process/process_areas/index.rst
+++ b/docs/process/process_areas/index.rst
@@ -24,5 +24,6 @@ Process Areas
documentation_management/index.rst
implementation/index.rst
requirements_engineering/index.rst
+ safety_analysis/index.rst
safety_management/index.rst
verification/index.rst
diff --git a/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/_assets/safety_analysis_workflow.drawio.svg b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/_assets/safety_analysis_workflow.drawio.svg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..cf32a683a0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/_assets/safety_analysis_workflow.drawio.svg
@@ -0,0 +1,439 @@
+
diff --git a/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/dfa_checklist_template.rst b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/dfa_checklist_template.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..315c1db198
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/dfa_checklist_template.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,257 @@
+..
+ # *******************************************************************************
+ # Copyright (c) 2025 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation
+ #
+ # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional
+ # information regarding copyright ownership.
+ #
+ # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the
+ # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at
+ # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ #
+ # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
+ # *******************************************************************************
+
+.. _dfa checklist:
+
+DFA Checklist
+=============
+
+.. gd_chklst:: DFA Checklist
+ :id: gd_chklst__dfa
+ :status: valid
+ :tags: safety analysis
+
+ **Purpose**
+
+ In order to identify all cascading and common cause failures, which may initiated from your feature or components to the platform, other features, components, etc.,
+ use the following framework of dependent failure initiators to check your completeness of the analysis.
+
+ **Checklist**
+
+ | 2.1 Shared resources
+ | Same software element instance used by the two functions which are therefore affected by the failure or unavailability of that shared resource.
+
+ .. list-table:: Requirement Inspection Checklist
+ :header-rows: 1
+ :widths: 10,30,30,30
+
+ * - ID
+ - Violation cause shared resource used by several components
+ - Avoidance, or detection and mitigation of the fault
+ - Comment
+ * - SR_01_01
+ - Reused standard software modules
+ -
+ -
+ * - SR_01_02
+ - Libraries
+ -
+ -
+ * - SR_01_03
+ - Middleware
+ -
+ -
+ * - SR_01_04
+ - Basic software
+ -
+ -
+ * - SR_01_05
+ - Operating system including scheduler
+ -
+ -
+ * - SR_01_06
+ - Any service stack, e.g. communication stack
+ -
+ -
+ * - SR_01_07
+ - Configuration data
+ -
+ -
+ * - SR_01_08
+ - Calibration data
+ -
+ -
+ * - SR_01_09
+ - Execution time
+ -
+ -
+ * - SR_01_10
+ - Allocated memory
+ -
+ -
+
+ | 2.2 Communication between the two elements:
+ | Receiving function is affected by information that is false, lost, sent multiple times, or in the wrong order etc. from the sender.
+
+ .. list-table:: Requirement Inspection Checklist
+ :header-rows: 1
+ :widths: 10,30,30,30
+
+ * - ID
+ - Violation cause
+ Shared resource used by several components
+ - Avoidance, or detection and mitigation of the fault
+ - Comment
+ * - CO_01_01
+ - Information passed via argument through a function call,
+ or via writing/reading a variable being global to the
+ two software functions (data flow)
+ -
+ -
+ * - CO_01_02
+ - Data or message corruption / repetition (*) / loss (*) /
+ delay (*) / masquerading or incorrect addressing of
+ information (*)
+ -
+ -
+ * - CO_01_03
+ - Insertion (*) / sequence of information (*)
+ -
+ -
+ * - CO_01_04
+ - Corruption of information, inconsistent data (*)
+ -
+ -
+ * - CO_01_05
+ - Asymmetric information sent from a sender to multiple
+ receivers (*)
+ -
+ -
+ * - CO_01_06
+ - Information from a sender received by only a subset of the
+ receivers (*)
+ -
+ -
+ * - CO_01_07
+ - Blocking access to a communication channel (*)
+ -
+ -
+
+ | 2.3 Shared information inputs
+ | Same information consumed by the two functions even in absence of shared resources, i.e. from a functional perspective.
+
+ .. list-table:: Requirement Inspection Checklist
+ :header-rows: 1
+ :widths: 10,30,30,30
+
+ * - ID
+ - Violation cause
+ Shared resource used by several components
+ - Avoidance, or detection and mitigation of the fault
+ - Comment
+ * - SI_01_01
+ - Calibration data
+ -
+ -
+ * - SI_01_02
+ - Configuration data
+ -
+ -
+ * - SI_01_03
+ - Constants, or variables, being global to the two software
+ functions
+ -
+ -
+ * - SI_01_04
+ - Basic software passes data (read from hardware register and
+ converted into logical information) to two applications
+ software functions
+ -
+ -
+ * - SI_01_05
+ - Data / function parameter arguments / messages delivered by
+ software function to more than one other function
+ -
+ -
+
+ | 2.4 Unintended impact
+ | Two functions affecting each other’s elements directly via an implicit, that is unintended, interface.
+
+ .. list-table:: Requirement Inspection Checklist
+ :header-rows: 1
+ :widths: 10,30,30,30
+
+ * - ID
+ - Violation cause
+ Shared resources used by several components
+ - Avoidance, or detection and mitigation of the fault
+ - Comment
+ * - UI_01_01
+ - Memory miss-allocation and leaks
+ -
+ -
+ * - UI_01_02
+ - Read/Write access to memory allocated to another software
+ element (*)
+ -
+ -
+ * - UI_01_03
+ - Stack/Buffer under-/overflow (*)
+ -
+ -
+ * - UI_01_04
+ - Deadlocks (*)
+ -
+ -
+ * - UI_01_05
+ - Livelocks (*)
+ -
+ -
+ * - UI_01_06
+ - Blocking of execution (*)
+ -
+ -
+ * - UI_01_07
+ - Incorrect allocation of execution time (*)
+ -
+ -
+ * - UI_01_08
+ - Incorrect synchronization between software elements (*)
+ -
+ -
+
+ | (*) These issues are taken from the arguments on freedom from interference between software elements.
+ | In that respect, the dependent failure initiators Unintended Impact and Communication represent causes of violation of freedom from interference for software.
+
+ | 2.5 Systematic coupling
+ | Systematic causes from human or tool errors can lead to the simultaneous failure of more than one function.
+
+ .. list-table:: Requirement Inspection Checklist
+ :header-rows: 1
+ :widths: 10,30,30,30
+
+ * - ID
+ - Violation cause
+ Shared resources used by several components
+ - Avoidance, or detection and mitigation of the fault
+ - Comment
+ * - SC_01_01
+ - Manufacturing fault / repair fault (e.g. false flashing,
+ false calibration reference for sensors)
+ -
+ -
+ * - SC_01_02
+ - Non-diverse development approaches including:
+ - same software tools (e.g. IDE, compiler, linker)
+ - same algorithms
+ - same programming and/or modelling language used
+ - same complier/linker used
+ -
+ -
+ * - SC_01_03
+ - Same personal
+ -
+ -
+ * - SC_01_04
+ - Same social-cultural context (even if different personnel)
+ -
+ -
+ * - SC_01_05
+ - Development fault, e.g.
+ - human error
+ - insufficiently qualified personnel
+ - process weaknesses
+ - insufficient methods
+ -
+ -
diff --git a/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/dfa_template.rst b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/dfa_template.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..6f31ea9e16
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/dfa_template.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+..
+ # *******************************************************************************
+ # Copyright (c) 2025 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation
+ #
+ # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional
+ # information regarding copyright ownership.
+ #
+ # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the
+ # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at
+ # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ #
+ # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
+ # *******************************************************************************
+
+
+DFA Template
+============
+
+.. gd_temp:: DFA Templates
+ :id: gd_temp__dfa
+ :status: valid
+ :complies: std_wp__iso26262__analysis_751, std_wp__iso26262__software_753, std_req__iso26262__software_7411, std_req__iso26262__analysis_741, std_req__iso26262__analysis_742, std_req__iso26262__analysis_743, std_req__iso26262__analysis_745, std_req__iso26262__analysis_746, std_req__iso26262__analysis_747, std_req__iso26262__analysis_748, std_req__iso26262__analysis_749
+
+ | .. feat_saf_dfa::
+ | :id: feat_saf_DFA____
+ | :violation_id:
+ | :violation_cause: "Failure mode similar to :need:`gd_chklst__dfa`"
+ | :violates:
+ | :measure: < NONE|ID from Feature Requirement>
+ | :sufficient:
+ | :argument:
+ | :status:
diff --git a/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/fault_models_guideline.rst b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/fault_models_guideline.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..48595f9a84
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/fault_models_guideline.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,205 @@
+..
+ # *******************************************************************************
+ # Copyright (c) 2025 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation
+ #
+ # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional
+ # information regarding copyright ownership.
+ #
+ # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the
+ # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at
+ # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ #
+ # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
+ # *******************************************************************************
+
+Fault Models
+============
+
+.. gd_guidl:: Fault Models
+ :id: gd_guidl__fault_models
+ :status: valid
+ :complies: std_wp__iso26262__software_752, std_req__iso26262__analysis_846
+
+ Fault Models for activity diagrams
+
+ .. list-table:: Fault Models for activity diagrams
+ :header-rows: 1
+ :widths: 15,6,30,30,15
+
+ * - Element
+ - ID
+ - Failure Mode
+ - Simplification
+ - Importance
+ * - data storage
+ - DS_01_01
+ - stored data changed
+ (before read operation)
+ -
+ - High
+ * - data storage
+ - DS_01_02
+ - new data not stored (keeps old data)
+ / stuck-at (specific value)
+ -
+ - High
+ * - data flow
+ - DF_01_01
+ - transferred data changed
+ - DS_01_01 if there is one data flow to the data store
+ - Medium
+ * - data flow
+ - DF_01_02
+ - transferred data lost
+ - DS_01_02 if there is one data flow to the data store
+ - Medium
+ * - data flow
+ - DF_01_03
+ - transferred to wrong data store
+ - DS_01_01 unless point in time of change is important
+ - Low
+ * - data flow
+ - DF_01_04
+ - data stored at wrong location in data store
+ - relevant only for arrays/complex types
+ - High
+ * - processing
+ - PS_01_01
+ - process calculates wrong result(s)
+ - DS_01_01 unless process affects multiple data stores
+ - High
+ * - processing
+ - PS_01_02
+ - processing too slow/fast
+ - relevant only if timing is considered, infinite loop->CF01_01
+ - Low
+ * - control flow
+ - CF_01_01
+ - control flow stops
+ -
+ - High
+ * - control flow
+ - CF_01_02
+ - control flow skips process
+ - PS_01_01 and PS_01_02
+ - Medium
+ * - control flow
+ - CF_01_03
+ - control flow proceeds to wrong process
+ - CF_01_02 or limited to specific process
+ - Low
+ * - fork
+ - FK_01_01
+ - some but not all outgoing concurrent processes are triggered
+ -
+ - Medium
+ * - fork
+ - FK_01_02
+ - concurrent processes are triggered despite incoming process has not yet been completed
+ - similar to CF_01_02
+ - Low
+ * - fork
+ - FK_01_03
+ - none of the outgoing concurrent processes is triggered
+ - similar to CF_01_01
+ - Low
+ * - join
+ - JF_01_01
+ - execution proceeds before all joining processes have been completed
+ - similar to CF_01_02
+ - High
+ * - join
+ - JF_01_02
+ - execution does not proceed despite all joining processes have been completed
+ - similar to CF_01_01
+ - Medium
+
+
+ | Fault Model for sequence diagrams
+
+ .. list-table:: Fault Models for sequence diagrams
+ :header-rows: 1
+ :widths: 15,6,30,30,15
+
+ * - Element
+ - ID
+ - Failure Mode
+ - Simplification
+ - Importance
+ * - message
+ - MF_01_01
+ - message is not received
+ - MF_01_05
+ - Low
+ * - message
+ - MF_01_02
+ - message received too late
+ - relevant only if delay is a realistic fault
+ - Medium
+ * - message
+ - MF_01_03
+ - message received too early
+ - usually not a problem
+ - Low
+ * - message
+ - MF_01_04
+ - message not received correctly by all recipients (different messages or messages partly lost)
+ - only relevant if the same message goes to multiple recipients
+ - Low
+ * - message
+ - MF_01_05
+ - message is corrupted
+ -
+ - High
+ * - duration/time constraint
+ - CO_01_01
+ - minimum constraint boundary is violated
+ -
+ - Medium
+ * - duration/time constraint
+ - CO_01_02
+ - maximum constraint boundary is violated
+ -
+ - High
+ * - execution
+ - EX_01_01
+ - Process calculates wrong result(s)
+ - MF_01_05 or MF_01_04
+ - High
+ * - execution
+ - EX_01_02
+ - processing too slow/fast
+ - relevant only if timing is considered
+ - Low
+ * - execution
+ - EX_01_03
+ - processing changes to arbitrary process
+ -
+ - Low
+ * - execution
+ - EX_01_04
+ - processing is not complete (infinite loop)
+ -
+ - Low
+ * - frame (*)
+ - FE_01_01
+ - frame not entered as specified
+ -
+ - Medium
+ * - frame (*)
+ - FE_01_02
+ - frame not exited as specified
+ -
+ - Medium
+ * - frame (*)
+ - FE_01_03
+ - frame entered differently than specified
+ -
+ - Medium
+ * - frame (*)
+ - FE_01_04
+ - frame exited differently than specified
+ -
+ - Medium
+
+ | (*) frame is a reference to another diagram, which describes more detailed aspects. Entry- and Exit points define the order of transitions.
diff --git a/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/index.rst b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/index.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..8630155667
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/index.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+..
+ # *******************************************************************************
+ # Copyright (c) 2025 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation
+ #
+ # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional
+ # information regarding copyright ownership.
+ #
+ # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the
+ # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at
+ # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ #
+ # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
+ # *******************************************************************************
+
+Guidance
+########
+
+.. toctree::
+ :maxdepth: 1
+
+ dfa_checklist_template
+ dfa_template
+ fault_models_guideline
+ safety_analysis_guideline
+ safety_analysis_process_reqs
+ safety_analysis_templates
diff --git a/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/safety_analysis_guideline.rst b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/safety_analysis_guideline.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..a1bc28061c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/safety_analysis_guideline.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,110 @@
+..
+ # *******************************************************************************
+ # Copyright (c) 2025 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation
+ #
+ # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional
+ # information regarding copyright ownership.
+ #
+ # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the
+ # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at
+ # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ #
+ # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
+ # *******************************************************************************
+
+
+Guidelines
+##########
+
+.. gd_guidl:: Safety Analysis Guideline
+ :id: gd_guidl__safety_analysis
+ :status: valid
+ :complies: std_req__iso26262__analysis_841, std_req__iso26262__analysis_842, std_req__iso26262__analysis_843, std_req__iso26262__analysis_844, std_req__iso26262__analysis_847, std_req__iso26262__analysis_848, std_req__iso26262__analysis_849, std_req__iso26262__analysis_8410, std_wp__iso26262__analysis_851
+
+This document describes the general guidances for Safety Analysis based on the concept which is defined :need:`[[title]]`.
+
+Workflow for Safety Analysis
+============================
+
+Detailed description which steps are need for implementation.
+
+#. To analyse the Feature Architecture a Safety Analysis and a DFA shall be executed.
+#. Perform Safety Analysis on the feature.
+#. Perform DFA on the feature.
+#. To analyse the Architecture a Safety Analysis and a DFA shall be executed.
+#. Perform Safety Analysis on the component.
+#. Perform DFA on the component.
+#. The performance of the Safety Analysis and DFA shall be monitored and verified.
+#. Open issues like from the Safety Analysis and DFA shall be monitored by the Issue Tracking system.
+#. The verification of the Architecture is completed when Safety Analysis and DFA are completed by using the checklist and all open issues are closed.
+
+
+Step-by-Step-approach DFA:
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+
+The analysis is done by using the template <:need:`gd_temp__dfa`> on the feature or component architectural diagrams using a checklist <:need:`gd_chklst__dfa`>.
+
+**Step 1:**
+For each identified violation assign the violation by ID from the DFA checklist and document it as a sphinx-needs directive.
+Document the resulting violation causes and effect and the violated safety requirement.
+Document safety measure/mechanism to avoid or control the violation.
+
+**Step 2:**
+Judge if this is sufficient. If not, request to update the requirements with additional safety measure/mechanism to come to a sufficient outcome.
+The analysis is finished, if for each identified violation a mechanism/measure exists.
+Unless the attribute sufficient is yes, measure and argument attribute can be still empty.
+
+Alternatively the checklist template can be used. It can be filled out and is then the DFA report.
+
+**Example:**
+
+| .. feat_saf_dfa::
+| :id: feat_saf_DFA____
+| :violation_id: "SR_01_05"
+| :violation_cause: "Operating system including scheduler"
+| :violates: FEAT_REQ__persistency_key_val_storage__creation
+| :measure:
+| :sufficient: no
+| :argument:
+| :status: valid
+
+
+Step-by-Step-approach Safety Analysis:
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+
+The analysis is done by using the template <:need:`gd_temp__safety_analysis`> on the feature or component architectural diagrams
+(activity and/or sequence diagrams) using a diagram specific applied fault model <:need:`gd_guidl__fault_models`>.
+The analysis considers single faults that can violate a safety requirement.
+
+**Step 1:**
+For each affected design element in scope of each diagram, assign the faults by ID from the fault model applicable and document it as a sphinx-needs directive.
+Document the resulting failure mode and effect and the violated safety requirement.
+Document safety measure/mechanism to avoid or control the failure.
+
+**Step 2:**
+Judge if this is sufficient. If not, request to update the diagram and the requirements with additional safety measure/mechanism to come to a sufficient outcome.
+The analysis is finished, if for each identified faults a mechanism/measure exists.
+Unless the attribute sufficient is yes, measure and argument attribute can be still empty.
+
+**Examples:**
+
+
+| .. feat_saf_fmea:: OpenKVS
+| :id: FEAT_SAF_FMEA__KVS__OpenKVS
+| :failure_node: "MF_01_05"
+| :failure_effect: "message from calling app is corrupted"
+| :violates: FEAT_REQ_persistency_key_val_storage__interface
+| :measure:
+| :sufficient: no
+| :argument:
+| :status: valid
+
+| .. feat_saf_fmea:: GetKeyValue
+| :id: FEAT_SAF_FMEA__KVS__GetKeyValue
+| :failure_node: "MF_01_05"
+| :failure_effect: "message is corrupted due to corrupted call open to OSAL"
+| :violates: FEAT_REQ_persistency_key_val_storage__interface
+| :measure: FEAT_REQ_persistency_key_val_storage__error
+| :sufficient: yes
+| :argument: "Calling app gets error information"
+| :status: valid
diff --git a/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/safety_analysis_process_reqs.rst b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/safety_analysis_process_reqs.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..0ea8f23f59
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/safety_analysis_process_reqs.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,222 @@
+..
+ # *******************************************************************************
+ # Copyright (c) 2025 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation
+ #
+ # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional
+ # information regarding copyright ownership.
+ #
+ # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the
+ # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at
+ # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ #
+ # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
+ # *******************************************************************************
+
+.. _process_safety_analysis:
+
+Process Safety Analysis
+=======================
+
+.. gd_req:: Safety Analysis Structure
+ :id: gd_req__saf__structure
+ :status: valid
+ :tags: structure
+ :satisfies: wf__analyse_featarch, wf__analyse_comparch
+ :complies:
+
+ Safety Analysis shall be hierarchically grouped into different levels.
+
+ Following levels are defined:
+
+ * Feature architecture
+ * Component architecture
+
+.. _process_safety_analysis_attributes:
+
+Process Safety Analysis Attributes
+----------------------------------
+
+.. gd_req:: Safety Analysis attribute: UID
+ :id: gd_req__saf__attr_uid
+ :status: valid
+ :tags: attribute, mandatory
+ :satisfies: wf__analyse_featarch, wf__analyse_comparch
+ :complies:
+
+ Each Safety Analysis shall have a unique ID. It shall be in a format which is also human readable and consists of
+
+ * type of Safety Analysis
+ * keyword descirbing the level of analysis
+ * keyword describing the content of the Safety Analysis
+
+ The naming convention is defined here: :ref:`naming_convention_needs`
+
+.. gd_req:: Safety Analysis attribute: title
+ :id: gd_req__saf_attr_title
+ :status: valid
+ :tags: attribute, mandatory
+ :satisfies: wf__analyse_featarch, wf__analyse_comparch
+ :complies:
+
+ The title of the Safety Analysis shall provide a short summary of the description
+
+.. gd_req:: Safety Analysis attribute: description
+ :id: gd_req__saf_attr_description
+ :status: valid
+ :tags: attribute, mandatory
+ :satisfies: wf__analyse_featarch, wf__analyse_comparch
+ :complies:
+
+ Each Safety Analysis shall have a description. With this another person should be able to recognize the results of the Safety Analysis
+
+.. gd_req:: DFA attribute: violation ID
+ :id: gd_req__saf__attr_vid
+ :status: valid
+ :tags: attribute, mandatory
+ :satisfies: wf__analyse_featarch, wf__analyse_comparch
+ :complies:
+
+ Each DFA shall have a violation ID. The violation ID is used to identify the related fault <:need:`gd_guidl__fault_models`>.
+
+.. gd_req:: DFA attribute: violation cause
+ :id: gd_req__saf__attr_vcause
+ :status: valid
+ :tags: attribute, mandatory
+ :satisfies: wf__analyse_featarch, wf__analyse_comparch
+ :complies:
+
+ Every DFA shall have a short description of the violation cause.
+
+.. gd_req:: FMEA attribute: failure node
+ :id: gd_req__saf__attr_fnode
+ :status: valid
+ :tags: attribute, mandatory
+ :satisfies: wf__analyse_featarch, wf__analyse_comparch
+ :complies:
+
+ Each FMEA shall have a failure node. The failure nod is used to identify the related fault <:need:`gd_guidl__fault_models`>.
+
+.. gd_req:: FMEA attribute: failure effect
+ :id: gd_req__saf__attr_veffect
+ :status: valid
+ :tags: attribute, mandatory
+ :satisfies: wf__analyse_featarch, wf__analyse_comparch
+ :complies:
+
+ Every FMEA shall have a short description of the failure effect.
+
+.. gd_req:: Safety Analysis attribute: measure
+ :id: gd_req__saf_attr_measure
+ :status: valid
+ :tags: attribute, mandatory
+ :satisfies: wf__analyse_featarch, wf__analyse_comparch
+ :complies: std_req__iso26262__analysis_844, std_req__iso26262__analysis_746, std_req__iso26262__analysis_747
+
+ Each violation shall have a measure for it.
+
+.. gd_req:: Safety Analysis attribute: sufficient
+ :id: gd_req__saf__attr_sufficient
+ :status: valid
+ :tags: attribute, mandatory
+ :satisfies: wf__analyse_featarch, wf__analyse_comparch
+ :complies: std_req__iso26262__analysis_848, std_req__iso26262__analysis_749
+
+ Each measure shall have an statement if it's sufficient.
+
+.. gd_req:: Requirement attribute: argument
+ :id: gd_req__saf__attr_argument
+ :status: valid
+ :tags: attribute, mandatory
+ :satisfies: wf__analyse_featarch, wf__analyse_comparch
+ :complies: std_req__iso26262__analysis_848, std_req__iso26262__analysis_749
+
+ The argument shall describe why the measure is sufficient or not.
+
+.. _process_safety_analysis_linkage:
+
+Safety Analysis Requirement Linkage
+'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
+
+.. gd_req:: Safety Analysis Linkage
+ :id: gd_req__saf__linkage
+ :status: valid
+ :tags: attribute, automated
+ :satisfies: wf__analyse_featarch, wf__analyse_comparch
+ :complies:
+
+ Safety Analysis shall be linked to its adjacent level via the attribute mitigates.
+
+ * Feature Safety Analysis <-> feature architecture
+ * Component Safety Analysis <-> component architecture
+
+.. gd_req:: Safety Analysis attribute: measure coverage
+ :id: gd_req__saf__attr_saf_cov
+ :status: valid
+ :tags: attribute, automated
+ :satisfies: wf__analyse_featarch, wf__analyse_comparch
+ :complies: std_req__iso26262__analysis_848, std_req__iso26262__analysis_749
+
+ It shall be possible to specify the measure coverage.
+
+ * 0 to 100 percent
+
+.. gd_req:: Safety Analysis attribute: link to Aou
+ :id: gd_req__saf__attr_aou
+ :status: valid
+ :tags: attribute, automated
+ :satisfies: wf__analyse_featarch, wf__analyse_comparch
+ :complies: std_req__iso26262__analysis_845
+
+ It shall be possible to link Aou.
+
+.. gd_req:: Safety Analysis attribute: versioning
+ :id: gd_req__saf__attr_hash
+ :status: valid
+ :tags: attribute, automated
+ :satisfies: wf__analyse_featarch, wf__analyse_comparch
+ :complies:
+
+ It shall be possible to provide a versioning for Safety Analysis. It shall be possible to detect if any of the mandatory attributes differ from the versioning: :need:`gd_req__saf__attr_mandatory`
+
+
+.. _process_safety_analysis_checks:
+
+Process Requirements Checks
+'''''''''''''''''''''''''''
+
+.. gd_req:: Safety Analysis mandatory attributes provided
+ :id: gd_req__saf__attr_mandatory
+ :status: valid
+ :tags: attribute, check
+ :satisfies: wf__analyse_featarch, wf__analyse_comparch
+ :complies: std_req__iso26262__analysis_848, std_req__iso26262__analysis_749
+
+ It shall be checked if all mandatory attributes for each Safety Analysis is provided by the user. For all Safety Analysis following attributes shall be mandatory:
+
+ .. needtable:: Overview mandatory Safety Analysis attributes
+ :filter: "mandatory" in tags and "attribute" in tags and "safety analysis" in tags and type == "gd_req"
+ :style: table
+ :columns: title
+ :colwidths: 30
+
+.. gd_req:: Safety Analysis linkage level
+ :id: gd_req__saf__linkage_fulfill
+ :status: valid
+ :tags: attribute, check
+ :satisfies: wf__analyse_featarch, wf__analyse_comparch
+ :complies: std_req__iso26262__analysis_848, std_req__iso26262__analysis_749
+
+ Every feature- and component Safety Analysis shall be linked to at least one parent feature architecture.
+
+
+.. gd_req:: Safety Analysis linkage safety
+ :id: gd_req__saf__linkage_safety
+ :status: valid
+ :tags: attribute, check
+ :satisfies: wf__analyse_featarch, wf__analyse_comparch
+ :complies: std_req__iso26262__analysis_848, std_req__iso26262__analysis_749
+
+ It shall be checked that Safety Analysis (Safety != QM) can only be linked against elements with the same ASIL.
+
+.. needextend:: "process_areas/requirements_engineering" in docname
+ :+tags: safety analysis
diff --git a/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/safety_analysis_templates.rst b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/safety_analysis_templates.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..39c0499d2c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/safety_analysis_templates.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+..
+ # *******************************************************************************
+ # Copyright (c) 2025 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation
+ #
+ # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional
+ # information regarding copyright ownership.
+ #
+ # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the
+ # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at
+ # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ #
+ # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
+ # *******************************************************************************
+
+
+Safety Analysis Template
+========================
+
+.. gd_temp:: Safety Analysis Templates
+ :id: gd_temp__safety_analysis
+ :status: valid
+ :complies: std_wp__iso26262__analysis_851, std_wp__iso26262__software_752, std_req__iso26262__software_7410, std_req__iso26262__software_7412, std_req__iso26262__analysis_841, std_req__iso26262__analysis_842, std_req__iso26262__analysis_843, std_req__iso26262__analysis_844, std_req__iso26262__analysis_845, std_req__iso26262__analysis_846, std_req__iso26262__analysis_847, std_req__iso26262__analysis_848, std_req__iso26262__analysis_849, std_req__iso26262__analysis_8410
+
+ | .. feat_saf_fmea::
+ | :id: feat_saf_FMEA____
+ | :failure_mode:
+ | :failure_effect: "Failure mode similar to :need:`gd_guidl__fault_models`"
+ | :violates:
+ | :measure: < NONE|ID from Feature Requirement>
+ | :sufficient:
+ | :argument:
+ | :status:
diff --git a/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/index.rst b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/index.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..9592f12b3f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/index.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
+..
+ # *******************************************************************************
+ # Copyright (c) 2025 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation
+ #
+ # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional
+ # information regarding copyright ownership.
+ #
+ # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the
+ # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at
+ # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ #
+ # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
+ # *******************************************************************************
+
+.. _safety_analysis:
+
+Safety Analysis
+###############
+
+.. toctree::
+ :maxdepth: 1
+
+ guidance/index
+ safety_analysis_concept
+ safety_analysis_getstrt
+ safety_analysis_roles
+ safety_analysis_workflow
+ safety_analysis_workproducts
diff --git a/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/safety_analysis_concept.rst b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/safety_analysis_concept.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..6412a2dd1a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/safety_analysis_concept.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,92 @@
+..
+ # *******************************************************************************
+ # Copyright (c) 2025 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation
+ #
+ # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional
+ # information regarding copyright ownership.
+ #
+ # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the
+ # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at
+ # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ #
+ # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
+ # *******************************************************************************
+
+Concept Description
+###################
+
+.. doc_concept:: Safety Analysis Concept
+ :id: doc_concept__safety__analysis
+ :status: valid
+ :tags: safety_analysis
+
+In this section a concept for the safety analyses will be discussed. Inputs for this concept are the requirements of ISO26262 Part-9.
+
+Inputs
+******
+
+#. Stakeholders for the safety analysis?
+#. Who needs which information?
+#. How to analyze existing safety measure/mechanism?
+#. How to add new safety measure/mechanisms?
+
+Stakeholders for the Safety Analysis
+====================================
+
+#. :need:`Committer `
+
+ * Analyse the feature architecture by performing the safety analyses and DFA
+ * Analyse the component architecture by performing the safety analyses and DFA
+ * Monitor/veryfiy the Safety Analysis and DFA
+
+#. :need:`Technical Lead `
+
+ * Support the feature safety analyses and DFA
+ * Support the monitoring and veryfing of the feature safety analyses and DFA
+
+#. :need:`Module Lead `
+
+ * Support the component safety analyses and DFA
+ * Support the monitoring and veryfing of the component safety analyses and DFA
+
+#. :need:`Safety Manager `
+
+ * Approve the safety analysis and DFA
+ * Approve the verification of the safety analysis and DFA
+
+#. :need:`Security Manager `
+
+ * Support the safety analyses and DFA
+ * Support the monitoring and veryfing of the safety analyses and DFA
+
+
+Standard Requirements
+=====================
+
+Also requirements of standards need to be taken into consideration:
+
+* ISO26262
+* ASPICE
+* ISO SAE 21434
+
+How to analyze?
+===============
+
+DFA
+^^^
+
+A DFA :need:`gd_guidl__safety_analysis` shall be used to proof the absence of dependent failures. For the analysis a checklist
+:need:`gd_chklst__dfa` is available.
+
+Safety Analysis
+^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+
+For the safety analyses the safety analyses :need:`gd_temp__safety_analysis` shall be used. The safety analysis
+is done on architectural diagrams (activity and/or sequence diagrams). Therefore fault models shall be used
+:need:`gd_guidl__fault_models`.
+
+How to add new safety measure/mechanisms?
+=========================================
+
+Identified faults without a mechanism/measure stay open and were monitored in
+the issue tracking sytem :need:`wp__issue_track_system` until there are closed.
diff --git a/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/safety_analysis_getstrt.rst b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/safety_analysis_getstrt.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..cbfe5331af
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/safety_analysis_getstrt.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+..
+ # *******************************************************************************
+ # Copyright (c) 2025 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation
+ #
+ # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional
+ # information regarding copyright ownership.
+ #
+ # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the
+ # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at
+ # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ #
+ # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
+ # *******************************************************************************
+
+Getting Started
+###############
+
+.. doc_getstrt:: Getting Started on Safety Analysis
+ :id: doc_getstrt__safety_analysis
+ :status: valid
+ :tags: safety_analysis
+
+This document describes the steps which are needed to perform safety analysis and also how to monitor/verify the results of the safety analysis.
+
+Therefore a guideline for :need:`gd_guidl__safety_analysis` is available.
+The concept of performing safety analysis is described in :need:`doc_concept__safety__analysis`.
+
+General Workflow
+****************
+
+.. figure:: _assets/safety_analysis_workflow.drawio.svg
+ :align: center
+ :width: 80%
+ :name: safety_analysis_workflow_fig
+
+ Safety Analysis Workflow
+
+The details of what needs to be done in each step are described in the :need:`gd_guidl__safety_analysis`.
diff --git a/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/safety_analysis_roles.rst b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/safety_analysis_roles.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..878523d508
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/safety_analysis_roles.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
+..
+ # *******************************************************************************
+ # Copyright (c) 2025 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation
+ #
+ # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional
+ # information regarding copyright ownership.
+ #
+ # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the
+ # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at
+ # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ #
+ # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
+ # *******************************************************************************
+
+Roles
+#####
+
+For requirements engineering no additional roles need to be defined.
+
+Contributing Roles:
+
+ * :need:`Contributor `
+ * :need:`Committer `
+ * :need:`Technical Lead `
+ * :need:`Module Lead `
+ * :need:`Safety Manager `
+ * :need:`Security Manager `
+
+A detailed overview of the responsibility for the steps of the safety analysis process is listed here:
+
+:ref:`workflow_safety_analysis`
diff --git a/docs/process/workflows/safety_analysis.rst b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/safety_analysis_workflow.rst
similarity index 79%
rename from docs/process/workflows/safety_analysis.rst
rename to docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/safety_analysis_workflow.rst
index cbb7b4b85d..b772e67e99 100644
--- a/docs/process/workflows/safety_analysis.rst
+++ b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/safety_analysis_workflow.rst
@@ -12,16 +12,14 @@
# SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
# *******************************************************************************
-Safety Analysis
-===============
+.. _workflow_safety_analysis:
-Workflows
----------
+Workflow Safety Analysis
+########################
todo: need to add guidance and standard links
-
.. workflow:: Analyse Feature Architecture
:id: wf__analyse_featarch
:status: draft
@@ -57,4 +55,19 @@ todo: need to add guidance and standard links
:output: wp__sw_arch_verification, wp__issue_track_system
| The safety analyses and DFA are monitored and verified.
- | The inspection shall be implemented as integral part of the review tool.
+ | The inspection shall be implemented as an integral part of the review tool.
+
+
+
+
+RAS(IC) for Safety Analysis
+***************************
+
+
+.. needtable:: RASIC Overview for Safety Analysis
+ :tags: safety_analysis
+ :filter: "safety_analysis" in tags and type == "workflow"
+ :style: table
+ :sort: status
+ :columns: id as "Activity";responsible as "Responsible";approved_by as "Approver";supported_by as "Supporter"
+ :colwidths: 30,30,30,30
diff --git a/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/safety_analysis_workproducts.rst b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/safety_analysis_workproducts.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..a002e4aa27
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/process/process_areas/safety_analysis/safety_analysis_workproducts.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
+..
+ # *******************************************************************************
+ # Copyright (c) 2025 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation
+ #
+ # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional
+ # information regarding copyright ownership.
+ #
+ # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the
+ # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at
+ # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ #
+ # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
+ # *******************************************************************************
+
+Workproducts Safety Analysis
+############################
+
+.. workproduct:: Feature Safety Analysis
+ :id: wp__feature_safety_analysis
+ :status: valid
+ :complies: std_wp__iso26262__analysis_851, std_wp__iso26262__software_752
+
+ Bottom-Up Safety Analysis with e.g. FMEA method, verifies the feature architecture (as part of SW Safety Concept)
+ - Detection and prevention mitigations linked to Software Feature Requirements or Assumptions of Use
+
+.. workproduct:: Feature DFA
+ :id: wp__feature_dfa
+ :status: valid
+ :complies: std_wp__iso26262__analysis_751, std_wp__iso26262__software_753
+
+ Dependent Failure Analysis on platform/feature level
+ - Detection and prevention mitigations linked to Software Feature Requirements or Assumptions of Use
+ Perform analysis on interactions between safety related and non-safety related modules or modules with different ASIL of one feature. Including potential influences from the rest of the SW platform.
+
+.. workproduct:: Component Safety Analysis
+ :id: wp__sw_component_safety_analysis
+ :status: valid
+ :complies: std_wp__iso26262__analysis_851, std_wp__iso26262__software_752
+
+ Bottom-Up Safety Analysis with e.g. FMEA method, verifies the component architecture (as part of SW Safety Concept)
+ - Detection and prevention mitigations linked to Software Component Requirements or Assumptions of Use
+
+.. workproduct:: Component DFA
+ :id: wp__sw_component_dfa
+ :status: valid
+ :complies: std_wp__iso26262__analysis_751, std_wp__iso26262__software_753
+
+ Dependent Failure Analysis on component/module level
+ - Detection and prevention mitigations linked to Software Component Requirements or Assumptions of Use
+ Perform analysis of safety related and non-safety related sub-elements or sub-elements with different ASIL.
+ Perform analysis on interactions between safety related and non-safety related sub-components or sub-components with different ASIL of one component. Including potential influences from the other components in the component's module.
+
+.. workproduct:: Architecture Verification
+ :id: wp__sw_arch_verification
+ :status: valid
+ :complies: std_wp__iso26262__software_754
+
+ Depends on architecture, FMEA and DFA tooling.
+ May include several methods like inspection, modelling ... Which are selected in SW Development Plan.
diff --git a/docs/process/workflows/index.rst b/docs/process/workflows/index.rst
index 3a11e5a8e4..0241050ade 100644
--- a/docs/process/workflows/index.rst
+++ b/docs/process/workflows/index.rst
@@ -23,4 +23,3 @@ Workflows
platform_management
change_management
quality_management
- safety_analysis
diff --git a/docs/process/workproducts/index.rst b/docs/process/workproducts/index.rst
index 8877bd0462..d058f3d5d4 100644
--- a/docs/process/workproducts/index.rst
+++ b/docs/process/workproducts/index.rst
@@ -112,25 +112,6 @@ Product development
Platform development
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
-.. workproduct:: Feature Safety Analysis
- :id: wp__feature_safety_analysis
- :status: draft
- :tags: safety
- :complies: std_wp__iso26262__analysis_851, std_wp__iso26262__software_752
-
- Bottom-Up Safety Analysis with e.g. FMEA method, verifies the feature architecture (as part of SW Safety Concept)
- - Detection and prevention mitigations linked to Software Feature Requirements or Assumptions of Use
-
-.. workproduct:: Feature DFA
- :id: wp__feature_dfa
- :status: draft
- :tags: safety
- :complies: std_wp__iso26262__analysis_751, std_wp__iso26262__software_753
-
- Dependent Failure Analysis on platform/feature level
- - Detection and prevention mitigations linked to Software Feature Requirements or Assumptions of Use
- Perform analysis on interactions between safety related and non-safety related modules or modules with different ASIL of one feature. Including potential influences from the rest of the SW platform.
-
.. workproduct:: Platform Build Configuration
:id: wp__platform_sw_build_config
:status: draft
@@ -161,34 +142,6 @@ Platform development
Component development
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
-.. workproduct:: Component Safety Analysis
- :id: wp__sw_component_safety_analysis
- :status: draft
- :tags: safety
- :complies: std_wp__iso26262__analysis_851, std_wp__iso26262__software_752, std_wp__isopas8926__4524
-
- Bottom-Up Safety Analysis with e.g. FMEA method, verifies the component architecture (as part of SW Safety Concept)
- - Detection and prevention mitigations linked to Software Component Requirements or Assumptions of Use
-
-.. workproduct:: Component DFA
- :id: wp__sw_component_dfa
- :status: draft
- :tags: safety
- :complies: std_wp__iso26262__analysis_751, std_wp__iso26262__software_753
-
- Dependent Failure Analysis on component/module level
- - Detection and prevention mitigations linked to Software Component Requirements or Assumptions of Use
- Perform analysis of safety related and non-safety related sub-elements or sub-elements with different ASIL.
- Perform analysis on interactions between safety related and non-safety related sub-components or sub-components with different ASIL of one component. Including potential influences from the other components in the component's module.
-
-.. workproduct:: Architecture Verification
- :id: wp__sw_arch_verification
- :status: draft
- :complies: std_wp__iso26262__software_754
-
- Depends on architecture, FMEA and DFA tooling.
- May include several methods like inspection, modelling ... Which are selected in SW Development Plan.
-
.. workproduct:: Module Build Configuration
:id: wp__module_sw_build_config
:status: draft