Functional Safety vs Technical Safety: What Every Electronics Engineer Needs to Know

In the age of intelligent electronics and increasingly autonomous systems, safety cannot be siloed into a single domain. It must be addressed across a multi-layered design philosophy, encompassing both functional safety and technical safety. 

These two pillars, though often conflated in casual conversations or early-stage planning, are distinct and complementary disciplines underpinning the development of dependable, regulation-compliant, and field-ready electronic systems.

This article demystifies the differences between functional safety and technical safety, illustrating why both are mission-critical for manufacturers, OEMs, and engineering teams working across industries such as automotive, aerospace, industrial automation, and medical technology.

What Is Functional Safety?

Functional Safety (FuSa) is defined as the system’s ability to maintain safe operation despite internal failures or external disturbances. It is primarily concerned with the correct functioning of safety-related systems, such as sensors, controllers, and actuators, in response to defined inputs.

This domain is governed by international standards such as IEC 61508 (the umbrella functional safety standard), ISO 26262 (for road vehicles), IEC 62061 / ISO 13849 (for machinery), and IEC 60601 (for medical devices). Functional safety ensures that, should a fault occur, the system transitions to a defined safe state without causing harm.

Functional safety development involves comprehensive hazard and risk analysis, Safety Integrity Level (SIL) or ASIL determination, and implementation of fault-detection, redundancy, and diagnostic mechanisms. These mechanisms must be verified through structured testing and validation processes such as FMEDA (Failure Modes, Effects, and Diagnostic Analysis), FMEA, and HARA (Hazard and Risk Analysis).

For example, an anti-lock braking system (ABS) in an automobile exemplifies functional safety. It dynamically detects wheel slippage, calculates the optimal braking force in milliseconds, and assists the driver to maintain vehicular control. Any failure in this feedback loop must be handled deterministically.

Another example of the safety function for e-bikes is the prevention of electric motor assistance function without pedalling and activation of the startup assistance mode. This requires performance level “PLr c” according to ISO 13849

What Is Technical Safety?

Technical Safety concerns the physical robustness and intrinsic reliability of electronic and electromechanical components. While functional safety is the brain that decides when and how to act, technical safety is the muscular-skeletal system that ensures those actions occur reliably under expected conditions.

Technical safety involves:

• Electrical insulation performance
• Thermal management and derating principles
• EMI/EMC resilience
• Component lifecycle reliability
• Ingress protection (IP ratings)

Compliance is driven by standards such as IEC 61010 (general electrical equipment), ISO 12100 (machinery risk assessment), and IEC 60601-1 (medical electrical systems).

A real-world example in this domain could be the design of a gyroscopic sensor used in aerospace navigation. The sensor must maintain mechanical integrity under high-G forces, operate within safe thermal limits, and remain shielded from EMI noise that could skew readings. These characteristics fall outside the scope of functional logic but are nonetheless foundational to system safety.

Functional vs. Technical Safety: Key Architectural Distinctions

From a system architecture standpoint, functional safety operates at the control logic and system interaction level, whereas technical safety is embedded in the material, electrical, and environmental reliability of the hardware stack.

System Architecture

Recognizing the division between functional and technical safety empowers engineers to embed targeted redundancy into both domains. For example, incorporating a redundant sensor may fulfill functional safety requirements by providing backup signal paths. However, if that sensor lacks sufficient mechanical reinforcement, environmental protection, or EMI shielding, its output could become erratic or fail altogether, undermining overall system safety despite correct logic handling.

Real-World Integration: Safety in Motion

Let us compare how both domains manifest in two key industries:

Automotive: In an advanced driver assistance system (ADAS), functional safety governs when to trigger autonomous braking based on object proximity. However, technical safety ensures the LIDAR units, brake actuators, and communication buses perform reliably across temperature fluctuations, vibrations, and electromagnetic fields.

Industrial Automation: A robotic arm must stop if a human hand is detected in its working area. Here, functional safety is embedded in the logic that interrupts motion based on sensor input. Yet, technical safety ensures that the proximity sensors are IP-rated, wear-resistant, and free from sensor drift over long operational cycles.

Why Both Are Essential: Interdependence of Layers

Functional safety cannot exist in a vacuum. If the electronics or mechanical components fail prematurely due to poor design, material fatigue, or environmental stress, even the most sophisticated safety logic is rendered useless. Conversely, reliable hardware that lacks proper control logic may operate dangerously when unexpected inputs or faults occur.

Ignoring either domain results in:

• System-wide vulnerability
• Regulatory non-compliance
• Increased liability and market recalls
• Extended development cycles due to failed audits or late-stage failures

A timeline visualization of failure propagation in unsafe systems shows how early neglect of technical robustness leads to stress accumulation and ultimately, a functional safety failure cascade.

Conclusion: Engineering Safety Holistically

True electronic system safety is not a checkbox—it is an engineering doctrine. While functional safety addresses how your system thinks and responds, technical safety ensures that the system can endure and perform those responses reliably over its lifecycle.

For vendors and OEMs, the path to safer, certifiable, and commercially viable products lies in aligning development strategies with both domains. From early design reviews and FMEAs to thermal simulations and system validation, integrating safety as a cross-cutting concern, not a late-stage patch, will define your product’s success in increasingly regulated and mission-critical markets.

📢 Join Our Functional Safety Webinar Series

Want to dive deeper into FuSa? 

Register for the EKTOS Functional Safety Webinar Series, starting June 12 at 16:00 CEST. EKTOS’ Business Director of Development and Oleksandr Liubimov, and Vadym Dovhopolyi will be sharing their expertise on how to embed FuSa from architecture to certification.

Subsequent sessions in the series include:

• Webinar 2: Building Functional Safety into System Architecture
• Webinar 3: Mastering process-oriented development in FuSa projects
• Webinar 4: FuSa tools & Tricks: practical review
• Webinar 5: Calculations and mathematical approach to the FuSa

Secure your seat now and stay ahead of regulatory and technical demands.

About the Author:

Vadym Dovhopolyi is a Technical Leader at EKTOS. An experienced systems engineer specializing in functional and technical safety who leads complex electronics development across hardware and software domains. With a strong track record in safety-critical design and compliance, he helps OEMs and innovators build reliable, certifiable systems that meet today’s most demanding standards.