Abstract
This Chapter shows firstly a practical way to support Risk Informed Decision Making processes. The approach, discussed only in abstract and theoretical terms, shows that it is possible to develop practical instruments supporting the safety analysts in presenting overall results of the risk analysis process to the decision makers in a way highlights the effectiveness of safety measures and their efficiency with respect to cost benefit. The second part of this Chapter evaluates four different and well established Human Reliability methods, with the aim to assess their differences and ability to cope with aviation procedures. The comparison of results of applying the methods to two aviation case studies shows advantages and drawbacks in the implementation of each method. It has not been possible to come to a conclusive assessment of the ability of the methods to cope with aviation issues, as a much more extensive process is necessary to carry out an accurate revision of existing data.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Andrews JD, Moss TR (1993) Reliability and risk assessment. Logman Scientific & Technical, Harlow
ARMS (2011) The arms methodology for operational risk assessment in aviation Organisations. http://www.easa.eu.int/essi/documents/Methodology.pdf visited 2011.12.28
Bell J, Holroyd J (2009) Review of human reliability assessment methods. Health and Safety Executive (HSE). Research Report—RR679
Bello GC, Colombari C (1980) The human factors in risk analyses of process plants: the control room operator model, TESEO. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 1:3–14
BowTie (2013) The Bowtie methodology. Online: www.bowtiepro.com. Visited 12/06/2013
Cacciabue PC (2004) Human error risk management for engineering systems: a methodology for design, safety assessment, accident investigation and training. Special issue on HRA data issues and errors of commission. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 83:229–240
Cacciabue PC, Cassani M, Licata V, Oddone I, Ottomaniello A (2015) A practical approach to assess risk in aviation domains for safety management systems. Cog Tech Work 17:249–267
Castiglia F, Giardina M, Tomarchio E (2015) THERP and HEART integrated methodology for human error assessment. Radiat Phys Chem 116:262–266
De Grandis E, Oddone I, Ottomaniello A, Cacciabue PC (2012) Managing risk in real contexts with scarcity of data and high potential hazards: the case of flights in airspace contaminated by volcanic ash. Proceedings of PSAM-11—ESREL 2012, Helsinki, June 25–29.
Dhillon BS (2014) Human reliability, error, and human factors in power generation. Springer, Cham, ISBN 978-3-319-04019-6
EASA—European Aviation Safety Agency (2012) European Aviation Safety Plan 2012–2015. Final Report
EC—European Commission (2012) Commission Regulation (EU) No 965/2012
Ersdal G, Aven T (2008) Risk informed decision-making and its ethical basis. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 93:197–205
FAA (2010) SMS Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for 14 CFR Part 121 Certificate Holders. SMS NRPM for 14 CFR Part 121
Hannaman GW, Spurgin AJ, Lukic YD (1984) Human cognitive reliability model for PRA analysis. NUS-4531, NUS Corporation, San Diego, CA
Hollnagel E (1998) Cognitive reliability and error analysis method. Elsevier, London
Hollnagel E (2004) Barriers and accident prevention. Ashgate, Aldershot
Humphreys P (ed) (1988) Human reliability assessors guide. United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority, RTS88/95Q
IAEA—International Atomic Energy Agency (2005) Risk informed regulation of nuclear facilities: overview of the current status IAEA-TECDOC-1436. Vienna
IAEA—International Atomic Energy Agency (2011) A framework for an integrated risk informed decision making process INSAG-25. Vienna
ICAO—International Civil Aviation Organisation (2012) Safety management manual, 3rd edn. Doc 9859 AN/474. Montreal
Kierzkowski A, Kisiel T (2015) Airport security screeners’ reliability analysis. Proceedings of 2015 I.E. International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM 2015). Singapore, 6–9 December 2015, pp 1158–1163
Kirwan B (1994) A guide to practical human reliability assessment. Taylor & Francis, London
Lyons M, Woloshynowych M, Adams S, Vincent C (2005) Error Reduction in Medicine. Final Report to the Nuffield Trust
NASA (2010) NASA risk informed decision making handbook. NASA/SP-2010-576 (Vol 1)
NEA-CSNI (1998) Critical operator actions: human reliability modelling and data issues. Principal Working Group No. 5—Task 94-1. NEA/CSNI/R(98)1
Nielsen DS (1971) The cause/consequence diagram method as a basis for quantitative accident analysis. Danish Atomic Energy Commission RISO-M-1374
NRC—US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1995) Final policy statement ‘Use of Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) Methods in Nuclear Regulatory Activities’. Washington, DC
NRC—US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1998) An approach for plant-specific, risk-informed decision making: technical specifications. RG 1.177. Washington, DC
NRC—US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2002) An approach for using probabilistic risk assessment in risk-informed decisions on plant-specific changes to the licensing basis. RG 1.174. Washington, DC
NRC—US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2003). Fleming KN. Issues and recommendations for advancement of PRA technology in risk-informed decision making. NUREG 6813
NRC—US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2009). Drouin M, Parry G, Lehner J, Martinez-Guridi G, LaChance J, Wheeler T. Guidance on the treatment of uncertainties associated with PRAs in risk-informed decision making. NUREG 1855. Vol 1
Rasmussen J (1983) Skills, rules and knowledge: signals, signs and symbols; and other distinc-tions in human performance model. IEEE-SMC 13-3:257–267
Roland HE, Moriarty B (1990) System safety engineering and management. Wiley, New York
Salvendy G (2006) Handbook of human factors and ergonomics. Wiley, Hoboken
Spurgin AJ (2010) Human Reliability Assessment. Theory and practice. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, New York
Stolzer AJ, Halford CJ, Goglia JJ (2010) Safety management systems in aviation. Ashgate, London
Sun R, Chen Y, Liu X, Peng T, Liu L (2011) A method of analysis integrating HCR and ETA modeling for determining risks associated with inadequate flight separation events. J Aviat Technol Eng 1(1):19–27
Swain AD, Guttmann HE (1983) Handbook of reliability analysis with emphasis on nuclear plant applications. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NUREG/CR-1278 Washington, DC
Williams JC (1985) HEART—a proposed method for achieving high reliability in process operation by means of human factors engineering technology. In Proceedings of a Symposium on the Achievement of Reliability in Operating Plant, Safety and Reliability Society (SaRS). NEC, Birmingham.
Williams JC (1988) A data-based method for assessing and reducing human error to improve operational performance, 4th IEEE conference on Human factors in Nuclear Power Plants, Monterey, California, pp. 436–450, 6–9 June 1988
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Cacciabue, P.C., Oddone, I. (2018). A Methodology to Support Decision Making and Effective Human Reliability Methods in Aviation Safety. In: De Felice, F., Petrillo, A. (eds) Human Factors and Reliability Engineering for Safety and Security in Critical Infrastructures. Springer Series in Reliability Engineering. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62319-1_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62319-1_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-62318-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-62319-1
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)