JP2014052358A - Verification device of vehicle controller - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide a verification device which is capable of correctly verifying many models of vehicle controllers different in a fault diagnosis threshold by correcting a verification pattern (a test pattern).SOLUTION: It is determined whether a prescribed test pattern for diagnosis read from an HILS body satisfies a condition or not. If it does not satisfy the condition, a test pattern of a diagnosis section (a correction section) is corrected on the basis of a fault diagnosis threshold (a ROM value) read from an ECU (a vehicle controller), and the corrected test pattern is used to verify whether a diagnostic function of the ECU is correct or not.

Description

  The present invention relates to a verification device that performs functional verification of a control device mounted on a vehicle.

  As this type of verification apparatus, Patent Document 1 discloses an apparatus that performs verification in a debugging process of a vehicle control apparatus.

JP-A-6-213772

  By the way, in the vehicle control device, there is a case where a verification device imitating the control target is used at a verification stage under development, etc., but when there are multiple specifications different for each model in the control device, It was necessary to use a verification pattern according to the specifications of the machine, and adjustments corresponding to the specifications of each model were performed manually.

  Here, if such a verification pattern is not set correctly with respect to the specifications of the control device, there is a possibility that a normal verification result may not be obtained, and there is a possibility of affecting the control device and the verification device. there were.

  The present invention has been made by paying attention to such a conventional problem, and can correctly cope with specifications different for each type of vehicle control device, and can obtain a regular verification result. It is an object of the present invention to provide a verification device for a vehicle control device that can avoid the influence.

  In order to achieve such an object, the present invention is a device that performs functional verification of a control device mounted on a vehicle, has a basic verification pattern in which verification contents are set, and specifications and control data of the target control device Based on the above, the basic verification pattern is corrected to a verification pattern according to the specification of the control device, and the control device is verified using the corrected verification pattern.

  By correcting the verification pattern according to the specifications and control data of the vehicle control device, verification can be automatically performed correctly for various types of control devices with different specifications, and the effect on the control device and verification device Can also be avoided.

It is a block diagram of the engine for vehicles carrying the electronic controller (ECU) by which verification is performed by the verification apparatus which concerns on this invention. It is a figure which shows the outline | summary of the detection apparatus which concerns on this invention. It is a flowchart of the preliminary preparation implemented before verification by a verification apparatus same as the above. It is a flowchart which verifies a diagnostic function, after correcting a verification pattern suitably by a verification apparatus same as the above. Classification a. It is a flowchart which correct | amends a test pattern about the diagnostic item which has the conditional expression of (ROML <parameter <ROMH). It is a time chart which shows the test pattern correct | amended by the flowchart of FIG. 5, and the test pattern before correction | amendment. Classification b. It is a flowchart which correct | amends a test pattern about the diagnostic item which has the conditional expression of (parameter <ROML). It is a time chart which shows the test pattern correct | amended by the flowchart of FIG. 7, and the test pattern before correction | amendment. Classification c. It is a flowchart which correct | amends a test pattern about the diagnostic item which has the conditional expression of (parameter> ROMH). 10 is a time chart showing a test pattern corrected by the flowchart of FIG. 9 and a test pattern before correction. Classification d. It is a flowchart which correct | amends a test pattern about the diagnostic item which has the conditional expression of (parameter-parameter z> ROMDTU). It is a time chart which shows the test pattern correct | amended by the flowchart of FIG. 11, and the test pattern before correction | amendment. Classification e. It is a flowchart which correct | amends a test pattern about the diagnostic item which has the conditional expression of (parameter-parameter z <ROMDTU). It is a time chart which shows the test pattern correct | amended by the flowchart of FIG. 13, and the test pattern before correction | amendment.

Hereinafter, an embodiment of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the drawings.
FIG. 1 is a configuration diagram of a vehicle engine 101 equipped with an electronic control unit (ECU) that is verified by a verification device according to the present invention. In this example, the engine 101 is an in-line four-cylinder four-cycle engine, but is not limited to this example.

  In FIG. 1, an intake pipe 102 of an engine (internal combustion engine) 101 is provided with an electronic control throttle 103 that opens and closes a throttle valve 103b by a throttle motor 103a.

The engine 101 sucks air into the combustion chamber 106 of each cylinder through the electronic control throttle 103 and the intake valve 105.
A fuel injection valve 131 is provided in the intake port 130 of each cylinder, and the fuel injection valve 131 is opened by an injection pulse signal from an ECU (engine control unit) 114 as a control device to inject fuel. To do.

  The fuel in the combustion chamber 106 is ignited and burned by spark ignition by the spark plug 104. Each ignition plug 104 is equipped with an ignition module 112 that incorporates an ignition coil and a power transistor that controls energization of the ignition coil.

  The combustion gas in the combustion chamber 106 flows out to the exhaust pipe 111 through the exhaust valve 107. A front catalytic converter 108 and a rear catalytic converter 109 provided in the exhaust pipe 111 purify exhaust flowing through the exhaust pipe 111.

The intake cam shaft 134 and the exhaust cam shaft 110 are integrally provided with a cam, and the intake valve 105 and the exhaust valve 107 are operated by the cam.
The valve timing of the intake valve 105 is variably controlled by a variable valve timing mechanism (VTC) 113 that rotates the intake camshaft 134 relative to the crankshaft 120 using an actuator.

  The ECU 114 is an electronic control device that is verified by the verification device according to the present invention as described above. The ECU 114 has a built-in microcomputer, performs calculations according to a program stored in advance in a memory, and controls the electronic control throttle 103, the fuel injection valve 131, the ignition module 112, and the like.

  The ECU 114 receives detection signals from various sensors. As various sensors, an accelerator opening sensor 116 that detects an opening (accelerator opening) ACC of an accelerator pedal 116a, an airflow sensor 115 that detects an intake air amount Q of the engine 101, and a crankshaft 120 that is an output shaft of the engine 101. A crank angle sensor (rotation sensor) 117 that outputs a pulsed rotation signal (unit crank angle signal) POS in accordance with the rotation of the engine, a throttle sensor 118 that detects the opening TVO of the throttle valve 103b, and the temperature of cooling water of the engine 101 A water temperature sensor 119 for detecting TW, a cam sensor 133 for outputting a pulsed cam signal PHASE in accordance with the rotation of the intake camshaft 134, a brake switch 122 that is turned on in a braking state in which the driver of the vehicle depresses the brake pedal 121, Vehicles that use the engine 101 as a power source A vehicle speed sensor 123 for detecting the line speed (vehicle speed) VSP, an intake air temperature sensor 124 for detecting the intake air temperature of the engine 101, a fuel temperature sensor 125 for detecting the fuel temperature, an oil temperature sensor 126 for detecting the lubricating oil temperature, and the like. Provided.

  The ECU 114 configured as described above is verified by a verification device (HILS). The verification device is a system for realizing a desired simulation while exchanging signals with the ECU 114 as in the case of actual machines (vehicles and engines) that are controlled by the ECU 114. In the following embodiment, it is verified whether or not the failure diagnosis function of the ECU 114 is normal. Normally, the ECU in the development process is verified, but the finished ECU can also be verified for maintenance.

As shown in FIG. 2, the verification apparatus includes a verification apparatus main body (HILS main body) 201 and a main body operation PC (PC: personal computer) 202 connected to the ECU 114.
In response to a command from the main body operation PC 202, the HILS main body 201 outputs a verification pattern for diagnosis of sensors and the like to the ECU 114, and the ECU 114 performs failure diagnosis of the corresponding sensors and the like based on the verification pattern, and determines The result is output to the main body operation PC 202. The main body operation PC 202 compares a known diagnosis result corresponding to the verification pattern with a result diagnosed by the ECU 114, and determines whether the failure diagnosis function of the ECU 114 is correct or not.

  Here, the main body operation PC 202 corrects the verification pattern in accordance with the diagnosis items and the specifications and control data of the failure diagnosis that differs depending on the model, and outputs the corrected verification pattern to the ECU 114.

FIG. 3 shows a pre-preparation flow in which information necessary for correcting a predetermined verification pattern is registered in the file, RAM, etc. of the main body operation PC 202 by the main body operation PC 202.
In step 1, permission conditions and NG determination conditions that affect a verification pattern (hereinafter, appropriately described as a test pattern or simply a pattern) are selected. For example, in the case of diagnosis of the intake air temperature sensor, the following conditional expression is selected.

vTAINT− (min (TWINT, TFINT, TOINT) ≧ mTHRESHOLD ... (1)
However, vTAINT: Start-up intake air temperature, TWINT: Start-up water temperature, TFINT: Start-up fuel temperature, TOINT: Start-up oil temperature, mTHRESHOLD: Judgment threshold value This is a condition for determining that the intake air temperature sensor is abnormal (NG) when the deviation from the lowest temperature among the starting water temperature, the starting fuel temperature, and the starting oil temperature is equal to or greater than the determination threshold.

In step S2, the parameter (name) described in the conditional expression of step S1 and the example of expression (1) are diagnosis of the intake air temperature sensor, so the intake air temperature vTAINT at the start is selected.
In step S3, the ROM constant (name) of the diagnosis determination threshold value described in the conditional expression of step S1 is selected, and in the case of expression (1), mTHRESHOLD is selected.

In step S4, the condition is classified into one of the following five types of patterns from the conditional expression selected in step S1.
a. ROML <parameter <ROMH (including ROML ≦ parameter ≦ ROMH)
b. Parameter <ROML (including parameter ≤ ROML)
c. Parameter> ROMH (including parameter ≥ ROMH)
d. Parameter-parameter z> ROMDTU (including parameter-parameter z ≧ ROMDTU)
e. Parameter-parameter z <ROMDTU (parameter-parameter z ≦ ROMDTU included)
In the example of equation (1), b. are categorized.

Also, the presence / absence of hysteresis (hysteresis) is registered in the condition. If there is a hysteresis, the ROM constant name or immediate value (value arbitrarily set by the operator) of the hysteresis is registered.
C. d. In this case, the ROM value or immediate value of the unit time ΔT for calculating the parameter change rate is registered. For example, when the parameter z is a parameter value before 100 ms, ΔT = 100 ms is registered.

In step S5, a section for correcting the test pattern, that is, a correction start time and a correction end time are determined.
If the correction time is defined by a ROM constant, the end point is
Start point + ROM value × 1.1. The reason for correcting to 1.1 times the ROM value is to avoid failure of diagnosis near the end point and to ensure that the diagnosis result is NG if the diagnosis function is normal. The value of 1.1 times may be changed.

  The advance preparation may be performed only for the diagnostic item (verification item) of the ECU model to be continuously verified, but may be performed for all the diagnostic items, and further, for all the ECU models that can be verified. You may carry out about a diagnostic item.

Then, after the advance preparation, the correctness of the diagnostic function of the ECU is verified.
FIG. 4 shows a flow for verifying the diagnostic function after appropriately correcting the test pattern.
In step S11, the basic test pattern of the corresponding diagnostic item to be verified is read from the HILS main body 201 (which may be a fixed test pattern or a test pattern used at the time of verification by another ECU last time).

  In step S12, the condition classification, parameter name, ROM constant name, hiss information (the presence / absence of hiss and the ROM constant or immediate value of hiss), and the classifications of the diagnostic items are d and e. In this case, ΔT information (ROM constant or immediate value of ΔT) and correction section information (start time and end time) are read out.

In step S13, the ROM constant value is read from the ECU based on the read information.
In step S14, it is determined whether the test pattern in the correction section satisfies the registered condition.

  For the determination, the numerical value of the test pattern and the ROM value are substituted for the registered conditions, and it is confirmed whether the conditions for all the correction sections are satisfied. If all are satisfied, the test pattern is not corrected. If even a part of the section is not satisfied, the process proceeds to step S15.

In step S15, the test pattern is corrected. Details of the correction method will be described later.
In step S16, the corrected test pattern is input to the plant model set in the RAM in the HILS main body 201 or the main body operation PC.

In step S17, the correctness of the failure diagnosis (OBD) function of the ECU is verified using the corrected test pattern.
Next, details of the test pattern correction in step S15 will be described for each diagnosis item having a different classification.

FIG. 5 shows the classification a. The flow which corrects a test pattern is shown about a diagnostic item which has a conditional expression of (ROML <parameter <ROMH).
This classification a. The condition is set so that the diagnosis result is NG when the parameter is between the ROML value (lower limit value) and the ROMH value (upper limit value) in the diagnosis interval (correction interval).

  Therefore, the condition is satisfied if the test pattern read in step S11 (for example, the test pattern used at the time of previous verification) has a parameter between the ROML value and the ROMH value in a predetermined diagnosis section. That is, if the test pattern is output to the ECU and the diagnosis result is NG, it can be verified that the diagnosis function of the ECU is normal, and otherwise, the diagnosis function of the ECU is abnormal.

  However, as shown in the test pattern before correction in FIG. 6, when the parameter value in the diagnosis section is outside the range of ROML to ROMH with respect to the ROML value and ROMH value read out corresponding to the current ECU model. The condition is not satisfied (YES in step S14), and verification cannot be performed correctly. Therefore, it is necessary to correct the test pattern.

Therefore, in step S21 of FIG. 5, the corrected parameter is calculated as in the following equation.
Parameter after correction = (ROML + ROMH) / 2 (2)
In step S22, the parameter value is set as a corrected parameter for the correction section read in step S12.

  As a result, as shown in the test pattern after correction in FIG. 6, the parameter in the correction section is corrected to the test pattern set to the central value between the ROML value and the ROMH value, so that the diagnosis condition is surely established. And correct verification using the corrected test pattern.

  Here, as for the correction section, if there is a ROM value for the correction time as described above, the ROM value may be used as it is, but a value slightly larger than the ROM value, such as multiplying the ROM value by 1.1. By setting to, verification accuracy can be improved.

FIG. 7 shows the classification b. The flow which correct | amends a test pattern is shown about the diagnostic item which has the conditional expression of (parameter <ROML).
This classification b. The condition is set so that the diagnosis result is NG when the parameter is smaller than the ROML value (lower limit value) in the diagnosis section (correction section). If the test pattern read in step S11 is larger than the ROML value read corresponding to the current ECU model in the test pattern before correction in FIG. 8, the condition is not satisfied and the verification cannot be performed correctly. Correct the test pattern as follows.

  In step 31, it is determined whether or not there is hiss information. If it is determined that there is no hysteresis information (the ROM value has no hysteresis), the process proceeds to step 32, and the post-correction parameters in the diagnosis interval (correction interval) are calculated based on the lower limit ROML of the ROM constant based on the following equation. Is calculated.

Parameter after correction = ROML-ROM x 0.1 (3)
On the other hand, if it is determined in step 31 that there is hiss information (has a hiss in the ROM value), the process proceeds to step 33 to determine whether there is a hiss ROM constant.

If it is determined that the His constant is determined, the process proceeds to step 34, the lower limit ROML is corrected with the His ROM value, and the corrected parameter is calculated by the following equation.
Parameter after correction = ROML−His ROM × 2 (4)
If it is determined in step 33 that there is no hiss information (has no hiss ROM constant), the process proceeds to step 35 and is corrected by the following equation using the hiss immediate value (his i) set in advance. Post parameters are calculated.

Parameter after correction = ROML−His i × 2 (5)
In step 36, the parameter value for the correction section read out in step S12 is the corrected parameter calculated in any of (3), (4), and (5) above.

  As a result, as shown in the test pattern after correction in FIG. 8, the parameter in the correction section is ROML value, and the presence or absence of hiss is taken into consideration. Since the test pattern is corrected to the set test pattern, the diagnosis condition can be established reliably, and the test pattern after the correction can be correctly verified.

  It should be noted that the post-correction parameter needs to be set to a value that is more than a certain value because the diagnosis condition may be repeatedly established or not established if it is too close to the ROML value (if there is a hysteresis, the correction value is a hysteresis value). . For this reason, in Equation (3), the value is set to a value that is 0.1 times smaller than the ROML value, but may be changed to a value other than 0.1 times. In (4) and (5), the value is set to be twice as small as the hysteresis value, but may be changed to a value other than twice.

FIG. 9 shows the classification c. The flow which correct | amends a test pattern is shown about the diagnostic item which has the conditional expression of (parameter> ROMH).
This classification c. The condition is set so that the diagnosis result is NG when the parameter is larger than the ROMH value (upper limit value) in the diagnosis section (correction section). As shown in the test pattern before correction in FIG. 10, when the test pattern read in step S11 is smaller than the newly read ROMH value, the condition is not satisfied and the verification cannot be performed correctly. Correct the test pattern.

  In step 41, it is determined whether or not there is hiss information. If it is determined that there is no hiss information, the process proceeds to step 42, and the corrected parameters in the diagnosis section (correction section) are calculated by the following formula based on the upper limit value ROMH.

Parameter after correction = ROMH + ROM x 0.1 (6)
On the other hand, if it is determined in step 41 that there is hiss information, the process proceeds to step 43 to determine whether there is a hiss ROM constant.

If it is determined that the His constant is determined, the process proceeds to step 44, where the limit ROMH is corrected with the His ROM value, and the corrected parameter is calculated by the following equation.
Parameter after correction = ROMH + His ROM × 2 (7)
If it is determined in step 43 that there is no hiss information, the process proceeds to step 45, and the corrected parameters are calculated by the following equation using the hysteresis immediate value (his i) set in advance.

Parameter after correction = ROMH + His i × 2 (8)
In step 46, the parameter value for the correction section read in step S12 is the corrected parameter calculated in any one of (6), (7), and (8).

  As a result, as shown in the corrected test pattern in FIG. 10, the parameter in the correction section is corrected to a test pattern set to a value larger than the ROMH value or the ROMH value corrected by the hysteresis value. Can be reliably established, and can be correctly verified using the corrected test pattern.

  It should be noted that the post-correction parameter needs to be set to a value that is larger than a certain degree because there is a possibility that the diagnosis condition is repeatedly satisfied or not satisfied if it is too close to the ROMH value (including the correction value with the hysteresis value). For this reason, in equation (6), the value is set to a value that is 0.1 times larger than the ROMH value, but may be changed to a value other than 0.1 times. In (7) and (8), the value is set twice as large as the hysteresis value, but may be changed to a value other than twice.

FIG. 11 shows the classification d. The flow which correct | amends a test pattern is shown about the diagnostic item which has the conditional expression of (parameter-parameter z> ROMDTU).
This classification d. The condition is set so that the diagnosis result is NG when the parameter change rate is greater than a predetermined value, that is, when the change amount per unit time ΔT is greater than the ROMDTU value. As shown in the test pattern before correction in FIG. 12, when the parameter change rate of the test pattern read in step S11 is smaller than the change rate obtained from the newly read ROMDTU value and ΔT, the condition is not satisfied, and Since verification cannot be performed, the test pattern is corrected as follows.

In step 51, the change rate is calculated from the ROMDTU value and ΔT value read in step 12 as follows.
Speed of change = ROMDTU / ΔT (9)
The change speed calculated by the equation (9) corresponds to a threshold for diagnosis determination.

In step 52, for the correction section read out in step 12, the change time (time width) of the correction section is calculated as follows.
Change time = Correction end time-Correction start time (10)
In step 53, a required change width (amount of change in the parameter correction section) is calculated as follows.

Required change width = change speed x change time x 1.1 ... (11)
In step 54, the end point (the parameter value of the correction end time) is corrected as follows.
End point correction value = start point (parameter value of correction start time)-required change width (12)
Since only the correction of the end point (correction from the start point to the end point) may cause a step in the test pattern after the end point, the diagnosis result may be reversed immediately after the correction section. The test pattern after the end point is corrected so that a stable diagnosis result is maintained.

In step 55, the corrected parameters from the end point of the correction section to the end point of the test pattern are calculated as follows:
Parameter after correction = Parameter before correction + Requested change width-End point before correction (13)
In this way, as shown in the corrected test pattern in FIG. 12, the parameter change speed in the correction section is corrected to a test pattern that is larger than the threshold value of the diagnostic determination change speed calculated by equation (9). Therefore, the diagnostic condition can be established reliably and can be correctly verified using the corrected test pattern.

  Note that if the parameter change rate in the correction interval is too close to the threshold value for the diagnostic determination change rate, the diagnosis condition may be repeatedly satisfied or not satisfied. Although 1.1 times is set, it may be changed to a value other than 1.1 times.

FIG. 13 shows the classification e. The flow which correct | amends a test pattern is shown about the diagnostic item which has the conditional expression of (parameter-parameter z <ROMDTU).
This classification d. The condition is set so that the diagnosis result is NG when the parameter change rate is smaller than a predetermined value, that is, when the amount of change per unit time ΔT is smaller than the ROMDTU value. As shown in the test pattern before correction in FIG. 14, when the parameter change amount of the test pattern read in step S <b> 14 is larger than the newly read ROMDTU value, the condition is not satisfied and the verification cannot be performed correctly. The test pattern is corrected as follows.

In step 61, the change speed is calculated from the ROMDTU value and ΔT value read in step 12 as shown in the following equation.
Speed of change = ROMDTU / ΔT (14)
As described above, the rate of change corresponds to a threshold for diagnosis determination.

In step 62, the change time (time width) of the correction section is calculated from the correction section read in step 12 as follows.
Change time = Correction end time-Correction start time (15)
In step 63, a required change width (amount of change in the parameter correction section) is calculated as follows.

Required change width = change speed x change time x 0.9 (16)
In step 64, the end point is corrected as follows.
End point correction value = start point + required change width (17)
Since only the correction of the end point (correction from the start point to the end point) may cause a step in the test pattern after the end point, the diagnosis result may be reversed immediately after the correction section. The test pattern after the end point is corrected so that a stable diagnosis result is maintained.

In step 65, the post-correction parameters from the end point of the correction section to the end point of the test pattern are calculated as follows:
Parameter after correction = Parameter before correction + Requested change width-End point before correction (18)
In this way, as shown in the corrected test pattern in FIG. 14, the parameter change rate in the correction section is corrected to a test pattern smaller than the threshold value for the diagnostic determination change rate calculated by equation (14). Therefore, the diagnostic condition can be established reliably and can be correctly verified using the corrected test pattern.

  Note that if the parameter change rate in the correction interval is too close to the threshold value for the diagnostic determination change rate, the diagnosis condition may be repeatedly satisfied or not satisfied. However, it may be changed to a value other than 0.9 times.

The above classification a. ~ E. As shown in the correction for each condition, the verification pattern is corrected in accordance with the specification and control data such as the ROM value of the vehicle control device, so that the verification is automatically correctly performed for various types of control devices. It is possible to avoid the influence on the control device and the verification device.
Further, technical ideas other than the claims that can be grasped from the above embodiment will be described together with the effects thereof.

(A) In the verification apparatus for a vehicle control device according to any one of claims 1 to 3, the verification pattern to be corrected corrects the verification pattern so as to satisfy a conditional expression of (ROML <parameter <ROMH). And
In this way, the diagnostic item having the conditional expression (ROML <parameter <ROMH) can be correctly verified by the corrected test pattern.

(B) In the verification apparatus for a vehicle control device according to any one of claims 1 to 3, the verification pattern to be corrected corrects the verification pattern so as to satisfy a conditional expression of (parameter <ROML). .
In this way, the diagnostic item having the conditional expression (parameter <ROML) can be correctly verified by the corrected verification pattern.

(C) The verification apparatus for a vehicle control device according to any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein the verification pattern to be corrected corrects the verification pattern so as to satisfy a conditional expression of (parameter> ROMH). .
In this way, the diagnostic item having the conditional expression (parameter <ROMH) can be correctly verified using the corrected verification pattern.

(D) In the verification apparatus for a vehicle control device according to any one of claims 1 to 3, the verification pattern to be corrected is to correct the verification pattern so as to satisfy a conditional expression of (parameter-parameter z> ROMDTU). Features.
In this way, a diagnostic item having a conditional expression of (parameter-parameter z> ROMDTU) can be correctly verified using the corrected verification pattern.

(E) In the verification apparatus for a vehicle control device according to any one of claims 1 to 3, the verification pattern to be corrected is to correct the verification pattern so as to satisfy a conditional expression of (parameter-parameter z <ROMDTU). Features.
In this way, the diagnostic item having the conditional expression (parameter-parameter z <ROMDTU) can be correctly verified by the corrected verification pattern.

  DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 12 ... Electric motor, 101 ... Engine, 105 ... Intake valve, 113 ... Variable valve timing mechanism (VTC), 114 ... ECU, 117 ... Crank angle sensor, 133 ... Cam sensor, 134 ... Intake cam shaft, 201 ... HILS main body, 202 ... PC for operation

Claims (3)

A device for verifying the function of a control device mounted on a vehicle,
Based on the specifications and control data of the target control device, the basic verification pattern is corrected to a verification pattern according to the specification of the control device, and the corrected verification pattern is used. A verification apparatus for a control apparatus for a vehicle, wherein the verification of the control apparatus is performed.   The verification device for a vehicle control device according to claim 1, wherein the specification and control data of the control device are only specific items related to the verification pattern.   3. The vehicle control apparatus verification apparatus according to claim 2, wherein at least a part of the function verification is automatically performed, and the verification pattern is used for the automatic verification.