With the help of MBSE (Model-Based Systems Engineering), development and validation of ADAS (Advanced Driver Assistance Systems) can be planned and implemented in a structured and consistent manner across collaboration partners and departments. The consistent use of standards supports this approach: Based on a requirement formulated using the ReqIF (Requirements Interchange Format) standard, the ADAS architecture can be specified using the SysML (Systems Modeling Language) standard. Corresponding standards are also available for the planning and implementation of tests at component level in this context, particularly for simulation-based test environments (SiL, Software in the Loop): The SSP standard (System Structure and Parameterization) defines systems of simulation models and their parameterization. The integration and coupling of corresponding models are defined by the FMI (Functional Mock-up Interface) standard. However, the question remains open as to how specifications at the requirements level can be transferred into concrete system architectures for the execution of tests at the component level. This presentation addresses this question and describes a suitable procedure using open-source, royalty-free specifications, and software artifacts: Based on the requirements of UNECE Regulation No. 157 - Automated Lane Keeping Systems (ALKS), a system architecture is defined that results in the implementation of an automated test using freely available simulation frameworks and models.

Simulation-based validation and verification (V&V) of the overall system safety and functionality is crucially important to reduce development times while maintaining the product quality. Dealing with such complex problems usually requires several teams collaborate during the development process. Standardized interfaces and data formats like FMI, SSP are key enablers for such collaborative development environments. The authors developed a Transmission Control Unit (TCU) proof-of-concept to evaluate how SSP and FMI standards can facilitate such collaboration development tasks. For example we analyzed: (1) sharing models with an agreed architecture, while applying IP protection, (2) performing parameter variations for testing and calibration of a component; (3) converting a given simulation architecture and interface definition to an SSP architecture in an automated and incrementally updatetable manner. Very recently, we started to extend this concept with virtual ECU implementations, utilizing the features of FMI 3.0 and FMI layered standards such as FMI-LS-XCP and FMI-LS-BUS.