Early-design improvement of human reliability in an experimental facility: A combined approach and application on SPES (original) (raw)
Related papers
The main goal of this Nordic Nuclear Safety Research Council (NKS) project is to produce guidance for how to use human reliability analysis (HRA) to strengthen overall safety. The project consists of two sub-studies: The Nordic Point of View – A User Needs Analysis, and The American Point of View – Insights of How the US Nuclear Industry Works with HRA. The purpose of the Nordic Point of View study was a user needs analysis that aimed to survey current HRA practices in the Nordic nuclear industry, with the main focus being to connect HRA to system design. In this study, 26 Nordic (Swedish and Finnish) nuclear power plant specialists with research, practitioner, and regulatory expertise in HRA, PRA, HSI, and human performance were interviewed. This study was completed in 2009. This study concludes that HRA is an important tool when dealing with human factors in control room design or modernizations. The Nordic Point of View study showed areas where the use of HRA in the Nordic nuclea...
Human error quantification using performance shaping factors in the SPAR-H method
PsycEXTRA Dataset, 2000
This paper describes a cognitively based human reliability analysis (HRA) quantification technique for estimating the human error probabilities (HEPs) associated with operator and crew actions at nuclear power plants. The method described here, Standardized Plant Analysis Risk-Human Reliability Analysis (SPAR-H) method, was developed to aid in characterizing and quantifying human performance at nuclear power plants. The intent was to develop a defensible method that would consider all factors that may influence performance. In the SPAR-H approach, calculation of HEP rates is especially straightforward, starting with pre-defined nominal error rates for cognitive vs. action-oriented tasks, and incorporating performance shaping factor multipliers upon those nominal error rates.
Human reliability analysis for computerized procedures
PsycEXTRA Dataset
This paper provides a characterization of human reliability analysis (HRA) issues for computerized procedures in nuclear power plant control rooms. It is beyond the scope of this paper to propose a new HRA approach or to recommend specific methods or refinements to those methods. Rather, this paper provides a review of HRA as applied to traditional paper-based procedures, followed by a discussion of what specific factors should additionally be considered in HRAs for computerized procedures. Performance shaping factors and failure modes unique to computerized procedures are highlighted. Since there is no definitive guide to HRA for paper-based procedures, this paper also serves to clarify the existing guidance on paperbased procedures before delving into the unique aspects of computerized procedures.
A case study of a human reliability assessment for an existing nuclear power plant
Applied Ergonomics, 1996
This paper concerns a Human Reliability Assessment (HRA) carried out over a period of two years as part of a Nuclear Power Plant Probabilistic Safety Assessment (PSA). The HRA involved all elements of the HRA process, from problem definition and task analysis, through error representation and quantification, to impact assessment, error reduction, quality assurance and documentation. The aim of this paper is to show the methodology of HRA as applied in a real PSA, highlighting various elements of the HRA, and how the HRA interfaced with the PSA. Comments are also given on practical aspects and impacts of the various approaches, and the usefulness of a hybrid HRA/P!JA team approach.
The SPAR-H human reliability analysis method
This paper presents a simple human reliability analysis (HRA) method for estimating the human error probabilities associated with operator and crew actions and decisions in response to initiating events at commercial US nuclear power plants. The Standardized Plant Analysis Risk-Human Reliability Analysis (SPAR-H) method was developed to support development of plantspecific probabilistic risk analysis (PRA) models for the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Office of Regulatory Research and recently has been used to help support the Reactor Oversight Process. SPAR-H addresses the need for the regulator to account for human errors when: (a) performing safety studies such as probabilistic risk analysis; (b) helping to risk-inform the inspection process; (c) reviewing special issues; and (d) helping to risk-inform regulation. The SPAR-H approach decomposes probability into contributions from diagnosis failures and action failures, accounts for the context associated with human failure events by using performance-shaping factors (PSFs), and dependency assignment to adjust a base-case Human Error Probability (HEP), guidance on how to assign the appropriate value of the PSF and offers an adjustment factor to reduce double counting of influencing factors shared by PSFs. This paper discusses development of the method and reviews the application of SPAR-H to a sample problem. Strengths and limitations of the method will also be discussed.
PsycEXTRA Dataset, 2000
A variety of methods have been developed to generate human error probabilities for use in the US nuclear power industry. When actual operations data are not available, it is necessary for an analyst to estimate these probabilities. Most approaches, including THERP, ASEP, SLIM-MAUD, and SPAR-H, feature an atomistic approach to characterizing and estimating error. The atomistic approach is based on the notion that events and their causes can be decomposed and individually quantified. In contrast, in the holistic approach, such as found in ATHEANA, the analysis centers on the entire event, which is typically quantified as an indivisible whole. The distinction between atomistic and holistic approaches is important in understanding the nature of human reliability analysis quantification and the utility and shortcomings associated with each approach.
The Human Factors Approaches to Reduce Human Errors in Nuclear Power Plants
2011
After the Three Mile Island accident, people have been showing a growing interest in human errors in the nuclear field. Human errors in nuclear power plants have been an important factor in the human factors researches. As a part of human factors practices, nuclear power plants are conducting safety assessments such as Periodic Safety Review (PSR) and Probabilistic Safety Assessment (PSA) in order to reduce any possibility which might cause major accidents or damage. Especially, to reduce the human errors recently not only some efforts to eliminate human related causes have been attempted, but also a means to widely manage the human errors such as Human Factors Management Program (HFMP) has been developed. Therefore, this chapter concerns the properties of complex systems and addresses the various practices of human factors. Traditionally, approaches to reduce human errors were to classify error types and to protect operators from Performance Shaping Factor (PSF). Classification of human errors were conducted in previous studies and applied to find cause factors in various ways. These analyses of human errors were gradually systematized as a safety reporting system. Especially, short-term and long-term countermeasures were attempted to minimize possible human errors in a complex system such as aircraft, nuclear power plant. The purpose of these countermeasures is to reduce human errors and to improve performance of operators and systems at the same time. These countermeasures previously focused on satisfaction assessment of Man-Machine Interface (MMI), but these focused on broad considerations which are operator related such as safety culture, communication, aptitude test, etc. in recent. With regulation, the will of employer and the safety consciousness of operators are necessary to manage them efficiently. This chapter concerns various trials of reducing human errors and discusses requirements to perform an identification of them. 2. Complex systems In general industry, insuring tranquility of individuals and systems is acknowledging a prerequisite because that is the first requirement to avoid accidents. Especially, accidents