SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “Human Reliability”
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.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Dynamic Human Reliability Analysis Using the EMRALD Dynamic Risk Assessment Tool
Not Available
Analysis of Human Reliability Program Data
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Overview of Human Reliability Analysis Research at Idaho National Laboratory
Introducing following HRA topics to visitors from Naval Nuclear Labs. - Dynamic HRA Method and Software (LWRS) - HRA Data Collection (LWRS) - HRA Consultation (KINS) - HRA for Advanced Nuclear Reactors (Hobby) - HRA for Non-Nuclear Industries (BEES)
Human Performance Analysis Depending on Operator Expertise (Student vs. Operator) and Simulator Complexity (Rancor Microworld vs. Compact Nuclear Simulator)
Human reliability analysis (HRA) evaluates human errors and provides human error probabilities (HEPs) for application in probabilistic safety assessment (PSA), which is a comprehensive safety assessment method for nuclear power plants (NPPs). Generally, HRA methods estimate HEPs based on human reliability data collected from actual historical measurement, simulator experiments, or expert judgement. Most recent HRA data collection studies focus on collecting data via full-scope main control room (MCR) simulators with actual licensed reactor operators. Contrary to this, Idaho National Laboratory (INL) has adopted a different approach, which attempts to collect HRA data based on experiment using simplified simulators and student participants by following the Simplified Human Error Experimental Program (SHEEP). This approach has a couple of advantages compared to full-scope data collection. Representatively, it has relatively low entry point for collecting HRA data, and secures large sample sizes with reasonable cost and labor. In the previous studies, we developed the SHEEP framework, then verified whether the data collected through the framework could support a representative full-scope data collection study, i.e., the Human Reliability Data Extraction (HuREX) study. Also, we analyzed human performance measurements depending on participant type (i.e., student vs. operator). In this paper, we analyze human performance data collected from an experiment comparing operator expertise and simulator complexity when using the more simplified simulator developed by INL, i.e., Rancor Microworld and the less simplified simulator, i.e., Compact Nuclear Simulator (CNS) developed by Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests and correlation analysis are used for analyzing the experimental data.
Identifying human failure events (HFEs) for external hazard probabilistic risk assessment
In recent years, several advancements in nuclear power plant (NPP) probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) have been driven by increased understanding of external hazards, plant response, and uncertainties. However, major sources of uncertainty associated with external hazard PRA remain. One important source is how risk-significant human actions that are carried out to enable plant response and recovery from natural hazards cause the close coupling of physical impacts on plants and overall plant risk during these hazard events. This makes human reliability and human-plant interactions important elements to consider in resolving PRA gaps in external hazards. One of the challenges in considering human response in external hazard probabilistic risk assessment (XHPRA) is that most existing human reliability analysis (HRA) models were not developed for assessing actions outside the control room (termed ex-control room actions) and hazard response. To support this new scope, HRA models will need to be developed or modified to support identification of human activities, causal factors, and uncertainties inherent in external hazard response, thereby providing insights regarding event timing and physical event conditions as they relate to human performance. In this study, there are two main objectives: (1) evaluate the applicability of an existing cognitive-based HRA method, Phoenix, to ex-control room actions, and (2) identify sources of uncertainty to be characterized or reduced in order to make this method suitable for XHPRA. The first step of such work is performed by assessing the suitability of existing HRA methods to support identifying human failure events (HFEs) for human response to flooding hazards. These HFEs are human actions or inactions that are involved in human responses to flooding hazards and could contribute to the loss of a critical function for the plant in the scenario being examined. Here, in this work, decomposition analyses using the cognitive-based Phoenix HRA model are used to identify HFEs. The Phoenix method was found to be suitable for analyzing ex-control room actions as well as identifying specific HFEs and underlying crew failure modes (CFMs). However, the method's suitability for use in ex-control room actions would benefit from expanding the available CFMs to accommodate a larger variety of physical and communication tasks.
Identification of Collectible Items in the Rancor Microworld Simulator Compared to Full-scope Studies
Most studies collecting reliability data in human reliability analysis (HRA) have concentrated on research using full-scope simulators and actual operators. However, several researchers have found that there are challenges to collecting the variety of items as well as the amount of data needed to support HRA. As an opposite and complementing approach to the full-scope study, Idaho National Laboratory (INL) has developed a simplified simulator, i.e., Rancor Microworld, for generating HRA data based on student subjects. This paper aims to identify collectible items in Rancor Microworld versus full-scope simulators. In this paper, collectible items and their different analysis levels in Rancor Microworld are identified in comparison with full-scope simulators. Then, how to treat the items is suggested with experiment directions that will be treated in the future.
Back to Basics: First Principles of HRA
Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) continues to suffer from a myriad of technical gaps in its foundations. Core issues have been widely discussed but remain largely unaddressed, although the path taken to this point was paved with good intentions. Now, while this characterization may seem dramatic it is not intended to throw doubt onto HRA as a discipline or to diminish the value it has on increasing safety and resilience in nuclear power. Rather, it is intended to communicate that HRA has some serious challenges and is desperately in need of a critical evaluation. To quote Dougherty [1], “the misrepresentations that will undoubtedly arise may serve to provoke the necessary creativity.” What bears noting is that in the last thirty years since Alan Swain declared that “no adequate HRA had ever been done,” there has been little effort to correct the issues he highlighted. Human factors practice is still poorly implemented, many complex systems are fundamentally incompatible with reliable human performance, and there remains poor foundational support for many of the assumptions within HRA. We propose three categories of issues in HRA, philosophical, theoretical, and empirical and potential solutions to these issues.
Simulation-Based Recovery Action Analysis Using the EMRALD Dynamic Risk Assessment Tool
Recovery human action is defined as the action that prevents deviant conditions from producing unwanted effects. Analyzing recovery actions has been a critical part in human reliability analysis (HRA). However, there are a couple of limitations to treating recovery actions using only the current HRA methods available. Representatively, the existing recovery analysis does not specifically consider recovery actions as they have occurred in actual nuclear power plants (NPPs). To handle the challenges in the existing recovery analyses, this study suggests a way to analyze recovery actions under a dynamic HRA method, the Procedure-based Risk Investigation MEthod-Human Reliability Analysis (PRIME-HRA) method. The PRIME-HRA method suggests a way on how to develop dynamic simulation models using dynamic risk assessment tools such as the Event Modeling Risk Assessment Using Linked Diagram (EMRALD) [1] and the Human Unimodel for Nuclear Technology to Enhance Reliability (HUNTER) [2]. EMRALD and HUNTER are the dynamic probabilistic risk assessment and HRA tools developed at Idaho National Laboratory. In this paper, differences on analyzing recovery actions in the Technique for Human Error-Rate Prediction (THERP), the Cause-Based Decision Tree (CBDT) and the Korean Standard HRA (K-HRA) and challenges of these approaches are introduced. How we have developed the PRIME-HRA is also introduced in this paper. Then, the proposed approach to analyzing recovery human actions in dynamic context is partially discussed with an example.
Modeling FLEX Human Actions Using the EMRALD Dynamic Risk Assessment Tool
Most current efforts have modified and applied existing human reliability analysis (HRA) methods to treat human actions related to beyond-design-basis external events in which diverse and flexible coping strategies (FLEX) equipment would be deployed. However, many questions remain regarding the suitability of legacy HRA methods to address FLEX human actions, sparking the need for a new method of reasonably evaluating them. In this context, Idaho National Laboratory (INL) researched a relatively new approach to treating FLEX human actions via Event Modeling Risk Assessment Using Linked Diagrams (EMRALD) software. EMRALD was developed to support the increasing need for dynamic probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) models that can respond to evolving plant conditions during simulations. A couple benefits were identified when analyzing FLEX human actions through this software. In general, it is especially useful for evaluating a strategy’s feasibility, including FLEX human actions that require a relatively long time to perform. In this paper, we suggest how FLEX human actions can be modeled using the EMRALD software. Two different HRA modeling approaches using EMRALD are introduced: (1) procedure-based modeling and (2) PRA/HRA-based modeling. The former approach was introduced in the authors’ previous paper, whereas this paper mainly discusses how the latter approach works for an extended loss of AC power (ELAP) scenario with relevant procedures and PRA models. A hybrid method combining the two modeling approaches is introduced at the paper’s conclusion.
Comparison of Human Performance between Operators and Students Using Rancor Microworld Simulator: A Preliminary Result
This paper describes an experiment using the Rancor Microworld simulator to probe into differences in human performance between students and actual operators. Six human performance measures – 1) time, 2) error, 3) workload, 4) situational awareness, 5) attention patterns, and 6) number of manipulations – are measured from experiments. The experiment has been conducted for 11 operators and 20 students so far. More experiments and analyses will be continued. Further experimental studies using Rancor Microworld are expected to be able to collect additional data that may be missing from full-scope studies and contribute to items that can support human reliability data.
Characterization of Recovery Human Action Mechanisms in Nuclear Power Plants
Recovery human action is defined as the action that prevents deviant conditions from producing unwanted effects. Analyzing recovery actions has been a critical part in human reliability analysis (HRA). However, there are a couple of limitations to treat recovery actions only depending on the current HRA methods. Representatively, the existing recovery analysis does not specifically consider recovery actions as are occurred in actual nuclear power plants (NPPs). The overall goal of this study aims to develop a novel recovery analysis method to account for human action recoveries in context of scenarios as well as complement the limitations of existing recovery analysis. In this paper, the recovery analysis in current HRA methods and their challenges are introduced. A strategy to achieve the goal is introduced with a modified recovery definition. Then, how we have researched the approach will be introduced in the paper.
An Empirical Study on the Use of the Rancor Microworld Simulator to Support Full-scope Data Collection
A lack of data has been identified as a major challenge in human reliability analysis (HRA). Accordingly, several institutes and researchers have tried to collect HRA data from different data sources such as actual historical measurements, expert judgements, or simulator studies. While the most recent studies predominantly focus on collecting data using full-scope simulators with actual operators, Idaho National Laboratory (INL) has begun to collect HRA data using a simplified simulator, i.e., the Rancor Microworld simulator, with student participants. Full-scope studies have been known to have several intrinsic challenges to securing enough quantity of the data due to many reasons like the high cost for performing experiments or requiring actual operators’ cooperation. The ultimate goal of INL’s effort aims to infer actual operators’ data collected from a full-scope simulator on the basis of microworld data with student subjects as well as collect additional data that could be missed in the full-scope research. As a first step to achieve this goal, this paper projects an experimental plan for investigating the differences in human performance between individuals in two groups: 1) an actual operator and 2) a student when using the Rancor Microworld simulator. A randomized factorial experiment design has been developed with two independent variables, i.e., type of scenario and type of subject. Six human performance measures, i.e., 1) time, 2) error, 3) workload, 4) situation awareness, 5) patterns of attention and 6) the number of manipulations were selected. A couple of scenarios and their procedures available to the Rancor Microworld simulator have been developed.
Estimating the Contributions to Human Error Probability from the Convolution of the Distribution of Time Available and Time Required
As part of their duties, Human Reliability Analysis must often evaluate if crews in nuclear power plants (NPPs) can complete tasks associated with a human-failure event within time limits. For example, the time required in NPP scenarios is determined by systematic and structured walkthroughs, feasibility studies, recorded times from training exercises, and interviews with experienced operators and experts. Typically, a point estimate is derived for the estimate (mean, maximum, or 95th percentile of time required). Using point-estimate values can mask the risk associated with variability among crews, plant conditions and set-up, environmental conditions, and other impact factors under which these actions are executed. While point estimates for time required and time available have served the industry well, without considering the uncertainty they could lead to biased understanding about the risk. The Integrated Human Event Analysis System - General Methodology (IDHEAS-G) model (developed by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NRC) for human error probability calculates human error probability by summing two probabilities: insufficient time and cognitive error. As such, the model takes a more holistic approach by considering the full distributions for time required and time available to calculate the human error probability because the time available to complete the task is insufficient. In this study, we expand on the work of the NRC and discuss methods for estimating these time considerations. For example, for the time required, the impact of Performance Influencing Factors (PIFs) on the distribution was divided into impacts that are aleatory in nature, such as crew-to-crew variability, and those that are epistemic (i.e., the PIFs). Starting with the factors that introduce aleatory uncertainty, a first-order distribution was developed from a large set of time required (i.e., NPP task completion times) data for the range of operator actions that occur in the NPP control room under simulated accident conditions. The first-order distribution can then be adjusted to account for epistemic uncertainty using research associated with the impact of applicable PIFs on the time required. We also develop guidance for analysts to address the probability distributions for the time available. The guidance we developed on how to estimate time required and time available distributions is based on the identification of pertinent research and data, data analyses, and expert knowledge elicitation.
A Bayesian and HRA-Aided Method for the Novel Reliability Analysis of Software
Technological advancements and nuclear power plant modernization has inspired considerable research in the areas of safety and reliability, yet there remains a lack of consensus for the reliability assessment of digital instrumentation and control (I&C) systems. Motivated by the lack of consensus for reliability analysis methods, this work employs a novel framework that incorporates Bayesian, human reliability, and common-cause failure (CCF) modeling techniques. The novel framework allows the use of state-of-the-art or classical modeling techniques when accounting for human and CCF effects on system reliability. The Bayesian and HRA-Aided Method for the Reliability Analysis of Software (BAHAMAS) is demonstrated by a case study for the quantification of software hazards found in a previous analysis of a digital reactor trip system. The results demonstrate the ability of BAHAMAS to account for human activities during the software development life cycle and their influence on software reliability. BAHAMAS is a flexible tool for extending the coverage of conventional probabilistic risk assessments to include modernized digital I&C systems.
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.
Experimental Analysis of the Effects of Simulator Complexity on Human Performance
Human Reliability Analysis predicts accidents caused by human errors and is an important factor in Probabilistic Safety Assessment that comprehensively evaluates the safety of nuclear power plants. This study compares and analyzes the human performance of nuclear power plant operators according to the simulator complexity as part of the HRA data collection support method development project conducted by Idaho National Laboratory. This experiment was conducted by setting two types of simulators and scenarios as independent variables. The data collected by conducting the experiments in two different simulators were analyzed using an analysis of variance test and a correlation analysis, and four human performance charts were derived.
Assessment of Electric Grid Transmission System Simulator for Human Factors Research
Over the past decades, various technologies have been developed for electric grid operations to support clean energy, meet rising electricity demands, and address infrastructure concerns. However, the human factors aspect is often overlooked during rapid integration. Questions persist about how these technologies impact human performance. Simulators play a critical role in supporting investigation of human factors design concepts and conducting comprehensive usability testing to evaluate human performance and assess human reliability. This paper aims to address human factors research simulator requirements and conduct a comparative study of six different simulators. A detailed evaluation reveals that the evaluated simulators lack the ability to customize user interfaces. Additionally, their user interface designs do not fulfill the basic human factors design principles, potentially leading to increased response variability and reduced statistical power when conducting controlled experimental research. In the future, it is essential to develop scripting tools to integrate customizable user interfaces and simulation models, ensuring meeting research requirements.