Advertisement

Failure Analysis Cases in Operational Control and Recommendations for Task Criteria in the Man-Process Interface Design

  • Maria Lorena Souza
  • Salvador Ávila Filho
  • Ivone Cerqueira
  • Carine Nogueira Santino
  • Amanda Ramos
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 793)

Abstract

The control center of industry is a place where information of various types and origins circulates following a causality of processes expected from industrial project. The high complexity of indicators indicating the state of the equipment, processes and products requires a process man interface adaptable to the level of risk and the cognitive ability to control the process in situations of normalcy or in critical situations with risk of accidents. The study on the influence of regional culture and customs that use a cross-matrix between regional cultural characteristics can help to find their typical behaviors, the impact on cognitive loss, the identification of weaknesses and probable failures in the design of Control Rooms, and the respective critical interfaces of the man with the process. This article discusses the need to associate the situation or perceived scenario of normality, deviation, failure or loss of a certain productive process with the cognitive characteristics of individual or group functions.

Keywords

Human factors Man process interface Operational control 

References

  1. 1.
    Ávila Filho, S., Pessoa, F.L.P.: Proposition of review in EEMUA 201 & ISO Standard 11064 based on cultural aspects in labor team, LNG case. In: 6th International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics (AHFE 2015) and the Affiliated Conferences (2015)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shreve, R.N., Joseph, A.B.J.: Chemical Process Industries. 4ª Edição. Guanabara (1980)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lees, F.P.: The hazard warnings structure of major hazards. Trans IchemE, UK 60, 211–221 (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bird, F.; Loftus, R.G.: Loss Control Management. Intl. Loss Control Institute (1976)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Perrow, C.: Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technlogies. Basic Books, New York (1984)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ávila Filho, S., Dias, C.: Reliability research to design barriers of sociotechnical failure. In: 27th European Safety and Reliability Conference on Safety and Reliability. Theory and Applications, ESREL 2017, Portorož. CRC Press (2017)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Drigo, E.S., Ávila Filho, S., Sousa, C.A.O.: Operator discourse analysis as a tool for risk management. In: Proceedings of European Safety and Reliability Conference – ESREL, Zurich (2015)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lees, F.P.: Loss Prevention in the Process Industries: Hazard Identification, Assessment and Control, 2nd edn., vol. 1–3. Butterworth-Heinemann, Great Britain (1996). 3680 páginasGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Embrey, S.D.: Preventing Human Error: Developing a Consensus Led Safety Culture Based on Best Practice. Human Reliability Associates Ltd., London (2000)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Boring, R., Blackman, H.: The origins of SPAR-H method’s performance shaping factors multipliers. EUA, Idaho, August 2007Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Reason, J.: Human Error. Cambridge University Press, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lorenzo, D.K.: API770 – A Manager’s Guide to Reducing Human Errors, Improving Human in the Process Industries. API Publishing Services, Washington (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ávila Filho, S., Drigo, E.S.: Ferramenta C4t para avaliação de Fatores Humanos. Congresso Associação Brasileira de Análise de Risco, Segurança de Processos e Confiabilidade – ABRISCO, Rio de janeiro (2017)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ávila Filho, S.: Risks in the Platform: Social and Human Guidelines Avoid Accidents and alter Standards in Oil Production. Revista Proteção (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Abreu, M.N.G., Ávila Filho, S.: Assessment of risk in the exploration and production of oil at pre-salt layer – Brazil, a discussion about social-technical factors. In: Proceedings of Rio Pipeline Conference and Exposition, Rio de Janeiro (2015)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ávila Filho, S., Costa, C.: Analysis of cognitive deficit in routine task, as a strategy to reduce accidents and industrial increase production. In: Safety and Reliability of Complex Engineered Systems, London, pp. 2837–2844 (2015)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ávila Filho, S., Fonseca, M.N.E., Santos, A.L.A., Santino, C.N.: Analysis of cognitive gaps: training program in the sulfuric acid plant. In: ESREL, Glasgow (2016)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Stenberg Junior, R.: Psicologia Cognitiva. Artmed, Porto Alegre (2008). 582 pagesGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Naito, T., Takano, N., Inamura, E., Hadji, A.: Control room design for efficient plant operation. Yokogawa Technical Report English Edition, vol. 54, no. 1 (2011)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yokogawa VigilantPlant Services™ Provide a Sustainable Approach to Continuous Plant Improvement. ARC WHITE PAPER, January 2010. https://www.yokogawa.com/library/resources/white-papers/yokogawa-vigilantplant-services-provide-a-sustainable-approach-to-continuous-plant-improvement/
  21. 21.
    Almeida, I.M., Binder, M.C.P.: Cognitive traps: the case of omission in the genesis of work-related accidents. Cad. Saúde Pública, Rio de Janeiro 20(5), 1373–1378 (2004)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Drigo, E., Ávila Filho, S.: Organizational communication: discussion of pyramid model application in shift records. Training and education. In: Kantola, J.I., et al. (eds.) Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. Advances in Human Factors, Business Management, vol. 498. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2017)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ávila Filho, S.: Analysis of failure in complex processes. COBEQ Brazilian Congress of Chemical Engineering. ABEQ, Búzios (2012)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ávila Filho, S.: Review of risk analysis and accident on the routine operations in the oil industry. In: 5th CCPS Latin America Conference on Process Safety, Cartagena das Indias (2013)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kwekkeboom, E.J.: Consolidation of refinery control rooms. Petroleum Technology Quaterly. Refining Gas Process Petrochemicals (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maria Lorena Souza
    • 1
  • Salvador Ávila Filho
    • 2
  • Ivone Cerqueira
    • 2
  • Carine Nogueira Santino
    • 2
  • Amanda Ramos
    • 2
  1. 1.Chemical Engineer partner of University Federal of BahiaOndina, SalvadorBrazil
  2. 2.University Federal of Bahia, State of BahiaOndina, SalvadorBrazil

Personalised recommendations