Explains the causes of the Ariane 5 launcher failure in 1996. Due to a failure in the software controlling the inertial navigation system
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3YJeoYgozw
The Ultimate Guide to Choosing WordPress Pros and Cons
Ariane 5 launcher failure
1. The Ariane 5 Launcher Failure
Ian Sommerville
Ariane launcher failure, Case study, 2013
Slide 1
2. June 4th 1996
Total failure of the Ariane 5
launcher on its maiden flight
Ariane launcher failure, Case study, 2013
Slide 2
3. Ariane 5
• A European rocket designed to
launch commercial payloads
(e.g.communications satellites, etc.)
into Earth orbit
• Successor to the successful Ariane
4 launchers
Ariane launcher failure, Case study, 2013
Slide 3
5. • Ariane 5 can carry a heavier payload
than Ariane 4
• Now the standard launch vehicle for the
European Space Agency
Ariane launcher failure, Case study, 2013
Slide 5
7. Launcher failure
• First test launch of Ariane 5 in June
1996
• Appoximately 37 seconds after a
successful lift-off, the Ariane 5 launcher
lost control
Ariane launcher failure, Case study, 2013
Slide 7
9. • Incorrect control signals were sent to the
engines and these swivelled so that
unsustainable stresses were imposed on
the rocket
• The vehicle started to break up because
of the stresses imposed and selfdestructed
Ariane launcher failure, Case study, 2013
Slide 9
10. The problem
• The attitude and trajectory of the
rocket are measured by a
computer-based inertial reference
system.
• The IRS transmits commands to the
engines to maintain attitude (the
angle to the vertical) and direction
Ariane launcher failure, Case study, 2013
Slide 10
11. • The system failure was a direct result of
a software failure.
• However, it was symptomatic of a more
general systems validation failure
Ariane launcher failure, Case study, 2013
Slide 11
13. • The IRS had both a primary and a
backup computer
• The backup computer was included to
cope with hardware failure but both the
primary and the backup system ran the
same software.
Ariane launcher failure, Case study, 2013
Slide 13
14. • The IRS software in both the primary and the backup
computer shut itself down 37 seconds after take-off
• Diagnostic data about the shutdown was sent to the
engine control system
• This system did not expect such data and interpreted
these as real data
•
The values were such that the system swivelled the
rocket engines to an extreme position
Ariane launcher failure, Case study, 2013
Slide 14
15. Software failure
• Software failure occurred when an
attempt to convert a 64-bit floating point
number representing the horizontal
velocity to a signed 16-bit integer caused
the number to overflow (become too
big).
Ariane launcher failure, Case study, 2013
Slide 15
17. • There was no exception handler associated with the
conversion so the system exception management
facilities were invoked. These shut down the software
controlling the IRS.
• Redundant but not diverse software
• The backup software was a copy and behaved in
exactly the same way i.e. the number overflowed and
the system was shut down
Ariane launcher failure, Case study, 2013
Slide 17
18. Avoidable failure?
• The software that failed was reused from
the Ariane 4 launch vehicle. The
computation that resulted in overflow
was not used by Ariane 5.
• The calculations had been transferred to
a ground-based system in Ariane 5
Ariane launcher failure, Case study, 2013
Slide 18
19. Implementation decisions
• Decisions were made
– Not to remove the facility as this could introduce
new faults
– Not to test for overflow exceptions because the
processor was heavily loaded.
– For dependability reasons, it was thought desirable
to have some spare processor capacity
Ariane launcher failure, Case study, 2013
Slide 19
20. Why not Ariane 4?
• The physical characteristics of Ariane 4 (A smaller
vehicle) are such that it has a lower initial acceleration
and build up of horizontal velocity than Ariane 5
• The value of the variable on Ariane 4 could never
reach a level that caused overflow during the launch
period.
• This calculation had been carried out during the
development of Ariane 4 and it was therefore decided
that no overflow check was required
Ariane launcher failure, Case study, 2013
Slide 20
21. Validation failure
• As the facility that failed was not required
for Ariane 5, there was no requirement
associated with it.
• As there was no associated requirement,
there were no tests of that part of the
software and hence no possibility of
discovering the problem.
Ariane launcher failure, Case study, 2013
Slide 21
22. Simulator-based testing
• During system testing, simulators of the
inertial reference system computers
were used.
• These did not generate the error as
there was no requirement for the unused
code to be included in the simulator
Ariane launcher failure, Case study, 2013
Slide 22
23. Review failure
• Review failures?
• The inertial reference system software was not
reviewed because it had been used in a previous
version
• The review failed to expose the problem or that the
test coverage would not reveal the problem
• The review failed to appreciate the consequences of
system shutdown during a launch
Ariane launcher failure, Case study, 2013
Slide 23
25. Lessons learned
• Don’t run software in critical systems unless it is
actually needed
• As well as testing for what the system should do, you
may also have to test for what the system should not
do
• Do not have a default exception handling response
which is system shut-down in systems that have no
fail-safe state
Ariane launcher failure, Case study, 2013
Slide 25
26. Lessons learned
• In critical computations, always return best effort
values even if the absolutely correct values cannot be
computed
• Wherever possible, use real equipment and not
simulations
• Improve the review process to include external
participants and review all assumptions made in the
code
Ariane launcher failure, Case study, 2013
Slide 26