Advertisement

A Fuzzy Modeling Application for Human Reliability Analysis in the Process Industry

  • Zoe NivolianitouEmail author
  • Myrto Konstantinidou
Chapter
  • 881 Downloads
Part of the Springer Series in Reliability Engineering book series (RELIABILITY)

Abstract

Having presented the general Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) principles and the special branch of Fuzzy/CREAM methodologies for Human error probability estimation, the chapter continues with some more details on CREAM which is the base for the fuzzy model developed. Some basic principles of fuzzy logic will then be covered before proceeding to the detailed description of the model itself. Special applications of the model i.e. the definition of critical transitions, the assessment of operators’ response times during a critical task performed in the chemical process industry along with a shorter tailored made version of the model will be presented in the remainder of this chapter.

Keywords

HRA CREAM Fuzzy theory Industry Critical task 

References

  1. Baziuk PA, Rivera SS, Núñez Mc Leod J (2016) Fuzzy human reliability analysis: applications and contributions review. Adv Fuzzy Syst. doi: 10.1155/2016/4612086
  2. Bedford T, Bayley C, Revie M (2013) Screening, sensitivity and uncertainty for the CREAM method of Human Reliability Analysis. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 115:100–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boecker M (2015) Enhancing the effectiveness and efficiency of control room operators—a roadmap-based approach for selecting interaction technologies for defence and safety-critical organisations and industries. Procedia Manuf 3:769–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cacciabue P (2004) Human error risk management for engineering systems: a methodology for design, safety assessment, accident investigation and training. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 83:229–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cooper S et al (2000) Technical basis and implementation guidelines for A Technique for Human Error Analysis (ATHEANA) NUREG-1624, Rev 1. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionGoogle Scholar
  6. Embrey DE (1992) Quantitative and qualitative prediction of human error in safety assessments. Major hazards Onshore and Offshore. IChemE, RugbyGoogle Scholar
  7. Fujita Y, Hollnagel E (2004) Failures without errors: quantification of context in HRA. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 83:145–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Geng J, Murè S, Gabriele B, Camuncoli G, Demichela M (2015) Human error probability estimation in ATEX-HMI area classification: from THERP to FUZZY CREAM. Chem Eng Trans 43:1243–1248Google Scholar
  9. He X, Wang Y, Shen Z, Huang X (2008) A simplified CREAM prospective quantification process and its application. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 93:298–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hollnagel E (1996) Reliability analysis and operator modelling. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 52:327–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hollnagel E (1998) Cognitive reliability and error analysis method (CREAM). Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  12. Hollnagel E, Cacciabue P (1991) Cognitive modelling in system simulation. In: Proceedings of third European conference on cognitive science approaches to process control, CardiffGoogle Scholar
  13. Isaac A, Shorrock ST, Kirwan B (2002) Human error in European air traffic management: the HERA project. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 75(2):257–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kazaras K, Konstandinidou M, Nivolianitou Z, Kirytopoulos K (2013) Enhancing road tunnel risk assessment with a fuzzy system based on the CREAM methodology. Chem Eng Trans 31:349–354Google Scholar
  15. Kim B, Bishu R (1996) On assessing operator response time in human reliability analysis (HRA) using a possibilistic fuzzy regression model. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 52:27–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kim M, Seong P, Hollnagel E (2006) A probabilistic approach for determining the control mode in CREAM. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 91:191–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Klir J, Yuan B (1995) Fuzzy sets & fuzzy logic: theory and applications. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJGoogle Scholar
  18. Konstandinidou M, Nivolianitou Z, Kiranoudis C, Markatos N (2006) A fuzzy modeling application of CREAM methodology for human reliability analysis. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 91:706–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Konstandinidou M, Nivolianitou Z, Kiranoudis C, Markatos N (2008) Evaluation of significant transitions in the influencing factors of human reliability. Proc Inst Mech Eng O J Risk Reliab 222(1):39–45Google Scholar
  20. Konstandinidou M, Nivolianitou Z, Simos G, Kiranoudis C, Markatos N (2009) Operators’ response time estimation for a critical task using the fuzzy logic theory. In: Proceedings of the joint ESREL and SRA-Europe conference on safety, reliability and risk analysis: theory, methods and applications, vol 1, pp 281–290Google Scholar
  21. Kontogiannis T (1997) A framework for the analysis of cognitive reliability in complex systems: a recovery centred approach. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 58:233–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lee SM, Ha JS, Seong PH (2011) CREAM-based communication error analysis method (CEAM) for nuclear power plant operators’ communication. J Loss Prev Process Ind 2:90–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Li PC, Chen GH, Dai LC, Li Z (2010) Fuzzy logic-based approach for identifying the risk importance of human error. Saf Sci 48(7):902–913CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Liao PC, Luo X, Wan T, Su W (2016) The mechanism of how design failures cause unsafe behavior: the cognitive reliability and error analysis method (CREAM). Procedia Eng 145:715–722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mamdani E (1974) Application of fuzzy Algorithms for simple dynamic plants. Proc IEE 121(12):1585–1588Google Scholar
  26. Mamdani E, Assilian S (1975) An experiment in linguistic synthesis with a fuzzy logic controller. Int J Man Mach Stud 7(1):1–13CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. Mandal S, Singh K, Behera RK, Sahu SK, Raj N, Maiti J (2015) Human error identification and risk prioritization in overhead crane operations using HTA, SHERPA and fuzzy VIKOR method. Expert Syst Appl 42(20):7195–7206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Marseguerra M, Zio E, Librizzi M (2006) Quantitative developments in the cognitive reliability and error analysis method (CREAM) for the assessment of human performance. Ann Nucl Energy 33:894–910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Monferini A, Konstandinidou M, Nivolianitou Z, Weber S, Kontogiannis T, Kafka P, Kay AM, Leva MC, Demichela M (2013) A compound methodology to assess the impact of human and organizational factors impact on the risk level of hazardous industrial plants. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 119:280–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Onisawa T (1996) Subjective analysis of system reliability and its analyser. Fuzzy Sets Syst 83:249–269MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Park J, Kim Y, Kim JH, Jung W, Seung Jang C (2015) Estimating the response times of human operators working in the main control room of nuclear power plants based on the context of a seismic event—a case study. Ann Nucl Energy 85:36–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pedrycz W (1993) Fuzzy control and fuzzy systems. Second extended edition. Research Studies Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  33. Rachid B, Hafaifa A, Hadroug N, Boumehraz M (2016) Reliability evaluation based on a fuzzy expert system: centrifugal pump application. Stud Inf Control 25(2):181–188Google Scholar
  34. Reason J (1990) The contribution of latent human failures to the breakdown of complex systems. Human factors in hazardous situations. Oxford Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  35. Saidi E, Anvaripour B, Jaderi F, Nabhani N (2014) Fuzzy risk modeling of process operations in the oil and gas refineries. J Loss Prev Process Ind 30(1):63–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sun Z, Li Z, Gong E, Xie H (2012) Estimating human error probability using a modified CREAM. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 100:28–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Swain A, Guttmann H (1983) Handbook on human reliability analysis with emphasis on nuclear power plant application. NUREG/CR-1278. US Nuclear Regulatory CommissionGoogle Scholar
  38. Ung S-T, Shen W-M (2011) A novel human error probability assessment using Fuzzy modeling. Risk Anal 31(5):745–757CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Verma M, Kumar A, Singh Y (2012) Fuzzy fault tree approach for analysing the fuzzy reliability of a gas power plant. Int J Reliab Saf 6(4):254–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Vigier HP, Scherger V, Terceño A (2017) An application of OWA operators in fuzzy business diagnosis. Appl Soft Comput 54:440–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wang A, Luo Y, Tu G, Liu P (2011) Quantitative evaluation of human-reliability based on fuzzy-clonal selection. IEEE Trans Reliab 60(3):517–527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wu B, Yan X, Wang Y, Soares CG (2017) An evidential reasoning-based CREAM to human reliability analysis in maritime accident process. Risk Anal. doi: 10.1111/risa.12757
  43. Yang ZL, Bonsall S, Wall A, Wang J, Usman M (2013) A modified CREAM to human reliability quantification in marine engineering. Ocean Eng 58:293–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zadeh L (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8:338–353CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  45. Zadeh L (1973) Outline of a new approach to the analysis of complex systems and decision processes. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 3:28–44Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Center for Scientific Research DemokritosAthensGreece

Personalised recommendations