SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Human Reliability Analysis (HRA)”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2022

Human reliability analysis studies from simulator experiments using Bayesian inference

Probabilistic Safety Assessment (PSA) of complex facilities is performed to arrive at the risk posed by them. PSA also accounts for the contribution of the human errors towards the overall risk through Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) in terms of Human Error Probability (HEP). Human operators are part of the system and do not work in isolation. Their performance is influenced by the context in which the actions are performed. As a result, quantification of HEP requires operator performance data under the given context. Some good sources of operator performance data are plant‘s operation data, simulator data and expert judgement. The plant operation data pertaining to HRA is generally sparse. In this situation, a full scope plant simulator provides a good alternative for operator performance data generation. Many of the currently practiced HRA methods have been developed by combining the empirical evidence with expert judgement and contain a lot of uncertainty in their estimates. Bayesian inference is suitable for updating the prior HRA estimates with the simulator evidence to obtain the posterior HEP. Here, posterior HEP has been calculated for postulated accident scenarios in advanced reactor (first of its kind) at design stage, using plant simulator.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2024

Simulator Data Analysis to Inform Digitalized Environment Impacts on Human Reliability

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has developed a human reliability analysis (HRA) method, termed the Integrated Human Event Analysis System for Event and Condition Assessment (IDHEAS-ECA), in order to estimate human error probabilities (HEPs) in risk-informed regulatory applications. To update the quantification part of IDHEAS-ECA, the NRC required human performance and error data from fully digitalized main control rooms (MCRs); therefore, it requested that Idaho National Laboratory (INL) revisit previous data collection studies and investigate how the following three factors impact human reliability: self-checking, peer-checking, and automation. The HRA data collection studies revisited were the Human Reliability Data Extraction (HuREX) project, developed by the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI), and the Simplified Human Error Experimental Program (SHEEP), developed by INL. HuREX is a representative HRA data collection study that collects human reliability data from full-scope simulators staffed by licensed operators. SHEEP, on the other hand, has been proposed to complement such full-scope studies by collecting data via simplified simulators staffed by non-licensed student operators. In the HuREX study, KAERI collected HRA data from fully digitalized MCRs for the Advanced Power Reactor (APR)–1400. The SHEEP data were obtained from simplified simulators that partially mimicked the features of digitalized MCRs. The present report mainly discusses how the impacts of the aforementioned three factors on human errors were derived from these two data collection studies.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2023

An Experimental Investigation of Students’ Learning Effects When Using a Simplified Nuclear Simulator

Securing enough data has been a main challenge in human reliability analysis (HRA). Many researchers and institutes have made a lot of efforts for collecting HRA data to produce reasonable human error probabilities (HEPs) as well as reduce the uncertainty of HRA quantification. Representatively, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (U.S. NRC), Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI) and Idaho National Laboratory (INL) have led lots of empirical research regarding the HRA data collection. The U.S. NRC and KAERI have mainly carried out full-scope simulator research collecting HRA data through experiments using full-scope simulators with actual operators. In contrast, INL has experimentally collected the data using simplified simulators and student operators. INL has proposed the Simplified Human Error Experimental Program (SHEEP) framework to complement full-scope data collection efforts by suggesting a way to infer full-scope data based on experimental data collected from students operating simplified simulators, specifically the Rancor Microworld Simulator (Rancor) and the Compact Nuclear Simulator (CNS). The aim of the SHEEP framework is to lower the entry point for collecting useful HRA data by securing large sample sizes at a reasonable amount of cost and labor while also guaranteeing a high degree of freedom when designing experiments. The authors’ previous research investigated whether data collected from the SHEEP framework could support a representative full-scope study. Besides, human performance differences between professional and student operators when using Rancor and CNS have been analyzed to understand the lack of fidelity of the simplified simulators and student operators within the SHEEP study. As a follow up research, this study experimentally investigates students’ learning effects and the performance trends over a certain period when using Rancor. This study aims to find out 1) how much training or education is required to collect HRA data from non-experts (i.e., students) when using Rancor and 2) how much differences there are in human performance measures between students and professional operators. In this study, a longitudinal experiment is developed. The four experiment trials with two weeks interval are carried out for sixteen undergraduate students majoring nuclear engineering at Chosun University. Totally four scenarios randomly selected from ten Rancor scenarios are used in each experiment trial. Four human performance measurements (i.e., workload, situation awareness, time and error) are considered in the experiment. Lastly, the trend of students’ performance is compared with operator data having been collected from the previous experiment.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2024

An Approach to Dynamic Human Reliability Analysis and Its Data Collection Framework

Human reliability analysis (HRA) is a method for evaluating human errors in a variety of complex systems such as nuclear power plants, military systems, aircraft, and chemical plants. Most HRA methods currently used by regulatory institutes or utilities are called static HRA and are carried out by simple worksheets or simple calculators. To date, there are many unsolved or intrinsic challenges in static HRA. For example, existing static HRA does not realistically model and evaluate human actions as they would be performed at actual systems. There is no method with HRA to objectively estimate the time required for human actions despite being essential to HRA processes. In addition, many HRA methods still rely on a dataset generated prior to the 1980s, from unrelated industry experience or simply from expert judgment. Accordingly, this study attempted to research how to overcome the challenges of existing HRA via dynamic risk assessment (a.k.a., simulation-based or computation-based risk assessment) techniques. First, this study developed a dynamic HRA method, named as PRocedure-based Investigation Method of EMRALD Risk Assessment – HRA (PRIMERA-HRA). The PRIMERA-HRA mainly concentrates on providing HRA analysts with specific guidelines on how to reasonably model human actions, assign human reliability data and evaluate output of simulation within a dynamic probabilistic risk assessment tool, called as Event Modeling Risk Assessment using Linked Diagrams (EMRALD). Second, this study also developed a module for performance shaping factors (i.e., the key concept in HRA quantification) applicable to dynamic HRA, then implemented it based on PRIMERA-HRA within the EMRALD tool. Third, this study developed an HRA data collection framework to support dynamic HRA, called as Simplified Human Error Experimental Program (SHEEP). Originally, the SHEEP study aimed to support static HRA and its data collection, but recently extended the scope to the new technologies such as dynamic HRA or HRA for advanced reactors. SHEEP focuses on the use of data collected from simplified simulators to complement—but not replace—data collection studies using full-scope simulators and actual operators. To date, many experiments were conducted under the SHEEP framework. Multiple analyses, such as human performance analysis, human error analysis, task complexity analysis, learning effect analysis and time distribution analysis, were also carried out using the collected data. Then, based on the major insights, an approach to inferring full-scope data based on simplified simulator data was proposed. The PRIMERA-HRA and SHEEP research are expected to evaluate human actions more realistically than existing static HRA, provide an opportunity to collect more HRA data with reasonable cost and labor, then contribute to enhance the quality of HRA.

99 - GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2022

An Approach to Dynamic Human Reliability Analysis using EMRALD Dynamic Risk Assessment Tool

Research for dynamic human reliability analysis (HRA) (a.k.a., simulation-based or computation-based HRA) has been required, as many researchers have emphasized the importance of dynamic approaches to probabilistic safety assessment (PSA). This study proposes the PRocedure-based Investigation Method of EMRALD Risk Assessment – Human Reliability Analysis (PRIMERA-HRA) method, which is an approach to dynamic HRA using the Event Modeling Risk Assessment using Linked Diagram (EMRALD) software developed by Idaho National Laboratory (INL). In this study, how to model human actions using the software and evaluate the error probabilities is suggested. The applicability of this approach will be also investigated through an extended loss of AC power (ELAP) scenario. Then, major insights from this dynamic HRA approach against the static one will be discussed in the paper.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2023

INVESTIGATION OF HUMAN RELIABILITY ANALYSIS METHODS FOR ANALYZING PRE-INITIATORS

As a type of human actions defined in human reliability analysis (HRA), pre-initiator refers to the human actions that may lead to the unavailability of systems, typically committed during maintenance, test, or calibration. This paper investigates representative HRA methods used for analyzing pre-initiators. The HRA methods are Technique for Human Error Rate Prediction (THERP), Korean Standard HRA (K-HRA) and Standard Plant Risk HRA (SPAR-H). In this paper, characteristics of each HRA method are compared for qualitative and quantification aspects. Two pre-initiators, i.e., a calibration task and a valve restoration task, are analyzed using the HRA methods to compare human error probabilities. Then, insights from the analysis and additional research requirements are discussed in this paper.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2023

INVESTIGATION OF HUMAN RELIABILITY ANALYSIS METHODS FOR ANALYZING PRE-INITIATORS

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

NASA NTRS2010

The Importance of HRA in Human Space Flight: Understanding the Risks

Human performance is critical to crew safety during space missions. Humans interact with hardware and software during ground processing, normal flight, and in response to events. Human interactions with hardware and software can cause Loss of Crew and/or Vehicle (LOCV) through improper actions, or may prevent LOCV through recovery and control actions. Humans have the ability to deal with complex situations and system interactions beyond the capability of machines. Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) is a method used to qualitatively and quantitatively assess the occurrence of human failures that affect availability and reliability of complex systems. Modeling human actions with their corresponding failure probabilities in a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) provides a more complete picture of system risks and risk contributions. A high-quality HRA can provide valuable information on potential areas for improvement, including training, procedures, human interfaces design, and the need for automation. Modeling human error has always been a challenge in part because performance data is not always readily available. For spaceflight, the challenge is amplified not only because of the small number of participants and limited amount of performance data available, but also due to the lack of definition of the unique factors influencing human performance in space. These factors, called performance shaping factors in HRA terminology, are used in HRA techniques to modify basic human error probabilities in order to capture the context of an analyzed task. Many of the human error modeling techniques were developed within the context of nuclear power plants and therefore the methodologies do not address spaceflight factors such as the effects of microgravity and longer duration missions. This presentation will describe the types of human error risks which have shown up as risk drivers in the Shuttle PRA which may be applicable to commercial space flight. As with other large PRAs of complex machines, human error in the Shuttle PRA proved to be an important contributor (~12 percent) to LOCV. An existing HRA technique was adapted for use in the Shuttle PRA, but additional guidance and improvements are needed to make the HRA task in space-related PRAs easier and more accurate. Therefore, this presentation will also outline plans for expanding current HRA methodology to more explicitly cover spaceflight performance shaping factors.

Hamlin, Teri↗

NASA NTRS2017

And the Human Saves the Day or Maybe They Ruin It, The Importance of Humans in the Loop

Flying a mission in space requires a massive commitment of resources, and without the talent and commitment of the people involved in this effort we would never leave the atmosphere of Earth as safely as we have. When we use the phrase "humans in the loop", it could apply to almost any endeavor since everything starts with humans developing a concept, completing the design process, building or implementing a product and using the product to achieve a goal or purpose. Narrowing the focus to spaceflight, there are a variety of individuals involved throughout the preparations for flight and the flight itself. All of the humans involved add value and support for program success. The paper discusses the concepts of human involvement in technological programs, how a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) accounts for the human in the loop for potential missions using a technique called Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) and the tradeoffs between having a human in the loop or not. Human actions can increase or decrease the overall risk via initiating events or mitigating them, thus removing the human from the loop doesn't always lowers the risk.

DeMott, Diana L.↗

DOE OSTI2019

Identification of Performance Shaping Factor Lag and Linger Effects for Dynamic Human Reliability Analysis: Application of Experimental Data

Many researchers have emphasized the importance of dynamic probabilistic safety assessment (PSA), which highlights the necessity of studies for dynamic human reliability analysis (HRA). Dynamic HRA concentrates on a dynamic account of human actions or how performance shaping factors (PSFs) can dynamically modify the human error probability (HEP) over time. In contrast, existing static HRA does not consider human actions as changes over time or event progressions. Accordingly, previous research on dynamic HRA conceptually suggested PSF lag and linger effects to treat dependence between operator actions in dynamic HRA versus existing approaches. As follow-up research, this study attempted to identify PSF lag and linger effects for dynamic HRA on the basis of experimental data. Firstly, mathematical models for PSF lag and linger effects were developed based on a literature survey in the field of biology. Secondly, we analyzed experimental scenarios from a control room study to identify operator actions considered in PSA. Lastly, based on the experimental data, the effect of the stress PSF with lag and linger effects was compared to that without PSF lag and linger effects. This paper concludes with an overall discussion of PSF lag and linger effects based on the relation between the stress PSF and error occurrence.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2021

Formative vs. Summative Dependence in Human Reliability Analysis

Dependence in human reliability analysis (HRA) is the concept that once an initial human error has occurred, subsequent human errors are more likely. The approach almost universally adopted in HRA was first introduced in the Technique for Human Error Rate Prediction (THERP). In THERP, calculated human error probabilities (HEPs) are adjusted for dependence in the final step of quantification. This final adjustment for dependence involves anchoring the HEP to a set of values corresponding to low through complete dependence. The effect is to increase the HEP. In this paper, we propose formative dependence, which occurs at the onset of quantification. We demonstrate that dependence should be considered earlier in the calculation process, because it is not actually necessary to calculate the HEP when it is subsequently overridden by the dependence anchors. By applying dependence first in the calculation, processing steps can be eliminated, making for more efficient analysis.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2025

EVALUATION OF HRA METHODOLOGIES FOR APPLICATION IN SDP WORK

This study critically evaluates human reliability analysis (HRA) methodologies applicable to regulatory probabilistic safety assessment (PSA) model, with a particular focus on their role in supporting the significance determination process (SDP) in nuclear safety assessment. Firstly, three widely utilized HRA methods – IDHEAS-ECA, SPAR-H, and ASEP/THERP – were qualitatively and quantitatively assessed. Qualitative assessments were conducted using attributes from the NEA/CSNI/R(2015)1 report, while quantitative evaluations employed regression and correlation analyses to compare predicted human error probabilities (HEPs) against empirical data. Results reveal distinct strengths, for example, IDHEAS-ECA’s robust predictive accuracy and K-HRA’s alignment with operational practices. In addition, dependency analysis and recovery analysis were critically evaluated. For dependency analysis, the methods’ handling of inter-task dependencies and their impact on HEPs were examined, while recovery analysis highlighted strategies for mitigating failure events. Furthermore, strategies were proposed to evaluate performance-shaping factors under conditions of reduced human performance, such as stress, fatigue, or cognitive overload, addressing specific challenges faced in SDP evaluations. Human errors from KINS’s operational performance information system event reports were evaluated as a case study. This study identifies gaps and provides actionable insights to ensure their validity and applicability in SDP HRA applications. This paper is a part of research conducted by KINS, and it should be noted that this result does not represent the regulatory position of KINS.

99 - GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Strategies for Quantifying Human Space Flight Performance in the Crew Health and Performance System

The Crew Health and Performance-Probabilistic Risk Assessment (CHP-PRA) team at NASA Glenn Research Center is planning a customized approach to quantify human spaceflight performance changes with respect to changes to the CHP system functions and capabilities. Using the Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAG) initiated by NASA’s Human Systems Risk Board (HSRB) [1], the team is surveying potential candidate models and novel strategies that generate metrics suitable for supporting decision making related to how the CHP system may influence human system performance risk. One such investigation includes classic Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) models. Traditionally, HRA methods estimate the occurrence of human errors and their impact on the success of an activity when designing and operating a system. While humans perceive, interpret, decide on, and carry out a course of action, the factors affecting performance and error likelihood are commonly referred to as performance shaping factors (PSFs). Originally developed to alleviate safety concerns related to nuclear power plant operations, HRA methods such as THERP [2] and CREAM [3] dismantle an activity into tasks, requiring elemental steps to be executed, and assess their failure due to predefined PSFs. In this study, we compare generic HRA methods and those that incorporate some human spaceflight aspects, such as sleep conditions (SCREAM [4]), with respect to how they may be adopted to capture performance with an intention to mitigate detrimental outcomes elucidated by the HSRB DAGs. We suggest strategies to quantify astronaut performance specific to spaceflight activities and illustrate how such concepts may help in optimizing the CHP system capabilities with respect to Artemis missions.

dag↗

DOE OSTI2021

EXTRACTING HUMAN RELIABILITY FINDINGS FROM HUMAN FACTORS STUDIES IN THE HUMAN SYSTEMS SIMULATION LABORATORY

Modernization of U.S. nuclear power plants (NPPs) is widespread, with most plants currently replacing and transitioning equipment, control systems, and human system interfaces (HSI)s from analog to digital displays. This conversion remedies the obsolescence of analog parts along with needs for increased intuitiveness of design, safety, and capabilities. The Human Factors and Reliability team at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) carried out twelve control room modernization studies in the newly designed Human Systems Simulation Laboratory (HSSL) over nine years. The HSSL was constructed as a testbed for evaluating human factors techniques and performance measures, HSI frameworks, and cutting-edge operational concepts in NPPs. Installing a full-scope training simulator enabled direct design and evaluation work on the same instrumentation and control (I&C) and HSIs located at U.S. plants. The subsequent addition of glass top bays afforded crews opportunities to implement operations via the simulator using full-scale representations of their home NPP. Additionally, functional HSI prototypes were created, providing an environment for operator-in-the-loop benchmark studies. The HSSL has assisted in upgrades of six commercial NPP control rooms and served as an invaluable proving ground for new NPP operations technology. Human reliability analysis (HRA) was not originally the focus of the studies; however, data relating to HRA such as type and frequency of human errors can be extracted from the studies. INL is currently extracting data from the HSSL study reports to apprise how information gathered from simulation, HSI, and other related studies can create a broad look across different data sources to help inform HRA methods.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2025

A mathematical approach to using the forgetting curve to evaluate experience and training factors in human reliability analysis

Traditional human reliability analysis (HRA) methods have difficulty dealing with the dynamic nature of factors such as time and rely on static and expert-judgment-based assessments of performance-shaping factors (PSFs) across limited levels. In this study, we introduce a mathematical approach for dynamically evaluating the experience and training PSF. Our proposed method integrates the psychological concept of the “forgetting curve” to evaluate how PSFs are impacted by the number of trainings and the time elapsed since training. To confirm the validity of the model, we provide experimental data fitted by identifying the quantitative relationship between training and human performance. This research enables dynamic and objective assessments, thus reducing reliance on subjective expert judgment and improving the accuracy of HRA.

99 - GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2022

A Framework to Integrate Human Reliability Data Obtained from Different Sources Based on the Complexity Scores of Proceduralized Tasks

For many decades, PSA (Probabilistic Safety Assessment) or PRA (Probabilistic Risk Assessment) techniques have been used to enhance the operational safety of nuclear power plants (NPPs) based on the consideration of potential hazards that could result in an unexpected consequence. As human error is one of the potential hazards, diverse human reliability analysis (HRA) methods have been proposed to provide a systematic way to estimate the likelihood of human errors (i.e., human error probability, HEP) in specific task contexts. Accordingly, it is evident that the quality of HRA results strongly depends on the credibility of HEP estimations. This implies that, in terms of enhancing this credibility, the collection of raw information (HRA data) that is helpful for understating when and why human errors occur is a crucial issue. In order to address this issue, in this study, the feasibility of a framework to integrate HRA data obtained from different sources is investigated based on the complexity of proceduralized tasks.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2024

SNL Human Reliability Analysis (Capstone Final Report)

Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) requested a measure of possible human error for each state verification method for a safety mechanism performed at partnering production agencies. A team of three human factors individuals were tasked with conducting observations during site visits of both production agencies in order to complete a Human Reliability Analysis (HRA). A HRA will be used because it provides both qualitative and quantitative reports of human error. This report is the first phase of that effort, which will describe the methods which occur at one of the production agencies.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2022

The HUNTER Dynamic Human Reliability Analysis Tool: Coupling an External Plant Code

The Human Unimodel for Nuclear Technology to Enhance Reliability (HUNTER) is a framework to support dynamic human reliability analysis (HRA) with the aim to develop standalone software to perform the dynamic HRA calculations. Within the HRA, human actions in nuclear power plants (NPPs) are predicated by plant states, and human actions influence the plant. In other words, plant operations are necessarily recursive, and it becomes challenging to model complex human-plant interactions. Consequently, we have linked two software simulations that complement those shortcomings. RELAP5-3D—the Reactor Excursion and Leak Analysis Program (RELAP; Aumiller, Tomlinson, and Bauer 2001) is the foundational thermal-hydraulic software used to model nuclear systems. Using RELAP5-3D, we have simulated the plant operations proceeding according to procedures developed to address emergent situations in NPPs. Plant operations include various actions such as the operator checking plant parameters, as well as actions that are continuously performed over time until a specific parameter reaches certain criteria. That means that HUNTER and RELAP5-3D exchange information with each other and should be carried out simultaneously over time. To simulate plant operations, which represent the actual operator checks of plant parameters and corresponding manual control actions, changes in plant status are identified through simulation and performed according to the criteria and order of the procedure. Thus, the goal of coupling HUNTER with RELAP5-3D is to facilitate synchronous coupling, where human and plant models provide iterative feedback loops that drive the course of actions. The advantage of coupling with RELAP5-3D to serve as the external environment module in HUNTER is the ability to customize the plant model and streamline for particular model applications. In this paper, we will address the key features of the coupling and the coupling structure built to perform the feedback loops.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗