Advertisement

Human Reliability Data from Simulator Experiments: Principles and Context-Sensitive Analysis

  • Stephen Collier
  • Jan Tore Ludvigsen
  • Håkan Svengren
Conference paper

Abstract

Human error is often a dominant source of risk in probabilistic risk assessments. At the same time, we hear complaints of a lack of suitable data for human reliability assessment (HRA). Simulators can provide data suitable for HRA. By careful design and planning, a simulator facility can minimize objections in principle, and can maximize applicability of all of its work to HRA, PRA, and risk-informed decision-making. We describe ways to improve the applicability of simulator studies, covering their full duration from conception and design, to analysis and reporting. We also describe a qualitative method under development for reporting “contextually anchored simulator transcripts” (CAST). These transcripts are used to supplement the analysis and reporting of experimental results. The use of CAST is exemplified for a recent simulator study. The results are showing that human performance can depend strongly on qualitative contextual factors, even while planned experimental main effects are also significant, and a structured qualitative analysis of simulator trials can provide better HRA data.

Keywords

Human Error Probabilistic Risk Assessment Simulator Facility Human Reliability Recent Simulator Study 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    International Atomic Energy Agency and OECD Nuclear Energy Agency. Regulatory Review of Probabilistic Safety Assessment (PSA) Level 1, IAEA, Vienna, Austria, IAEA-TECDOC-1135, 2000Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    OECD Nuclear Energy Agency. Nuclear Safety Research in OECD Countries: Major Facilities and Programmes at Risk. AEN/NEA, Paris, 2001Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    International Atomic Energy Agency. Safety of nuclear power plants: design. IAEA Safety Standards Series no. NS-R-1, Vienna, Austria, 2000Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    O’Hara JM, Hall RE. Advanced control rooms and crew performance issues: implications for human reliability. IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science 1992; 39: 919–923CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    OECD Nuclear Energy Agency Committee on the Safety of Nuclear Installations. Critical Operator Actions: Human Reliability Modelling and Data Issues. OECD Nuclear Energy Agency, Issy-les-Moulineaux, France, NEA/CSNI/R(98)1, 1998Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephen Collier
    • 1
  • Jan Tore Ludvigsen
    • 1
  • Håkan Svengren
    • 1
  1. 1.OECD Halden Reactor ProjectInstitute for Energy TechnologyHaldenNorway

Personalised recommendations