Search NASA⌕ Search

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.

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

At least 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2016

Human Reliability Assessments: Using the Past (Shuttle) to Predict the Future (Orion)

NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) Johnson Space Center (JSC) Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) uses two human reliability analysis (HRA) methodologies. The first is a simplified method which is based on how much time is available to complete the action, with consideration included for environmental and personal factors that could influence the human's reliability. This method is expected to provide a conservative value or placeholder as a preliminary estimate. This preliminary estimate or screening value is used to determine which placeholder needs a more detailed assessment. The second methodology is used to develop a more detailed human reliability assessment on the performance of critical human actions. This assessment needs to consider more than the time available, this would include factors such as: the importance of the action, the context, environmental factors, potential human stresses, previous experience, training, physical design interfaces, available procedures/checklists and internal human stresses. The more detailed assessment is expected to be more realistic than that based primarily on time available. When performing an HRA on a system or process that has an operational history, we have information specific to the task based on this history and experience. In the case of a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) that is based on a new design and has no operational history, providing a "reasonable" assessment of potential crew actions becomes more challenging. In order to determine what is expected of future operational parameters, the experience from individuals who had relevant experience and were familiar with the system and process previously implemented by NASA was used to provide the "best" available data. Personnel from Flight Operations, Flight Directors, Launch Test Directors, Control Room Console Operators and Astronauts were all interviewed to provide a comprehensive picture of previous NASA operations. Verification of the assumptions and expectations expressed in the assessments will be needed when the procedures, flight rules and operational requirements are developed and then finalized.

DeMott, Diana↗
NASA NTRS2017

Human Reliability Assessments: Using the Past (Shuttle) to Predict the Future (Orion)

NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) Johnson Space Center (JSC) Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) uses two human reliability analysis (HRA) methodologies. The first is a simplified method which is based on how much time is available to complete the action, with consideration included for environmental and personal factors that could influence the human's reliability. This method is expected to provide a conservative value or placeholder as a preliminary estimate. This preliminary estimate or screening value is used to determine which placeholder needs a more detailed assessment. The second methodology is used to develop a more detailed human reliability assessment on the performance of critical human actions. This assessment needs to consider more than the time available, this would include factors such as: the importance of the action, the context, environmental factors, potential human stresses, previous experience, training, physical design interfaces, available procedures/checklists and internal human stresses. The more detailed assessment is expected to be more realistic than that based primarily on time available. When performing an HRA on a system or process that has an operational history, we have information specific to the task based on this history and experience. In the case of a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) that is based on a new design and has no operational history, providing a "reasonable" assessment of potential crew actions becomes more challenging. To determine what is expected of future operational parameters, the experience from individuals who had relevant experience and were familiar with the system and process previously implemented by NASA was used to provide the "best" available data. Personnel from Flight Operations, Flight Directors, Launch Test Directors, Control Room Console Operators, and Astronauts were all interviewed to provide a comprehensive picture of previous NASA operations. Verification of the assumptions and expectations expressed in the assessments will be needed when the procedures, flight rules, and operational requirements are developed and then finalized.

DeMott, Diana L.↗
DOE OSTI2021

An Experimental Investigation of Human Performance Differences Depending on Simulator Complexity

As a different approach to collect human reliability analysis (HRA) data compared to the full-scope simulator studies, Idaho National Laboratory (INL) has attempted to collect HRA data based on Simplified Human Error Experimental Program (SHEEP), which uses a simplified simulator and student participants. To date, INL has considered the SHEEP approach using simplified simulators such as Rancor Microworld and Compact Nuclear Simulator to complement – not replace – full-scope studies as well as to mainly collect HRA data for estimating nominal/basic human error probabilities (HEPs) needed in the HRA quantification process. This study is a part of the project aiming to suggest how to support full-scope data collection studies based on SHEEP. This paper first introduces major tasks within the SHEEP framework. Then, as one of the major tasks, why and how we have planned to experimentally investigate human performance differences depending on simulator complexity are mainly introduced in this paper.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2022

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.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
NASA NTRS2019

SCREAM: Space-based Cognitive Reliability Error Analysis Method

Given both ground-based performance shaping factors (PSFs) collected by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) and potential space-based PSFs collected by JSC's HH&P, this year's task is to determine how to combine them for future human reliability analysis (HRA) of space missions. All HRA to date for space missions have been based on ground data (i.e. 1-G environment). There is no space-based HRA approach. The target of this project to produce a "first of its kind" HRA approach for space missions. As humans go beyond Earth orbit and missions become longer, human performance and reliability is expected to degrade. The questions become by how much, when, and what, leading to defining the overall effect on crew risk. Knowing this information earlier rather than later will help us mitigate this risk by vehicle design, crew training, and operational workarounds.

Boyer, Roger L.↗
DOE OSTI2024

Qualitative and Quantitative Evaluation for Representative Human Reliability Analysis Methods

The Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety (KINS) is the regulatory expert organization established by the Korean government to strengthen the nation’s technical capabilities relating to nuclear safety regulation. KINS oversees the technical aspects of nuclear safety regulation, including safety reviews, inspections, education, and safety research—all conducted based on technical knowledge and accumulated regulatory experience. In 2023, KINS requested that Idaho National Laboratory (INL) validates representative human reliability analysis (HRA) methods used throughout the world, thus affording KINS with a basis for determining an HRA method adequate for its domestic regulatory purposes. The present paper mainly examines INL’s efforts in this regard. The resulting INL study covered four representative HRA methods widely used by nuclear utilities and regulatory institutes. These methods were qualitatively evaluated by applying specific evaluation criteria and determining how well each method reflected critical HRA issues. For this assessment, INL benchmarked the Halden International HRA Empirical Study. Using the Halden empirical data, along with information on human failure events (HFEs), the present study employed the selected HRA methods to estimate human error probabilities (HEPs) for the HFEs. It also performed statistical analyses to compare the HEPs predicted via the HRA methods against those from the Halden empirical data.

99 - GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Light Water Reactor Sustainability Program: Use of Time Distributions to Predict Operator Procedure Performance in Dynamic Human Reliability Analysis

The Human Unimodel for Nuclear Technology to Enhance Reliability (HUNTER) framework affords software capable of conducting human reliability analysis (HRA) using a dynamic approach built around operating procedures (OPs) from nuclear power plants (NPPs). Previous HUNTER reports document the development of this software tool, the coupling of HUNTER to the simulator code, the collection of operator performance data by using simulators to calibrate HUNTER models, and linking HUNTER to probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) software. The present report largely addresses two topics. The first is a new function in HUNTER called the HUNTER Procedure Performance Predictor (P3). HUNTER P3 uses HUNTER’s built in Monte Carlo tools featuring human performance variability to identify potential error traps in procedures. The second topic is time distribution analysis to generate time inputs for dynamic HRA. The current analysis was performed to investigate time distributions for task primitives, which are the minimum task unit of analysis used in dynamic HRA modeling. Using the time distribution data, the elapsed time for human actions in an extended loss of AC power (ELAP) scenario is then investigated. Time data and prediction are essential for modeling procedure performance.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2022

A framework to collect human reliability analysis data for nuclear power plants using a simplified simulator and student operators

Data scarcity in human reliability analysis (HRA) has been a major challenge in the quantification process. Many institutes have collected HRA data through experiments using full-scope simulators with actual operators. Nevertheless, there are still some limitations to relying solely on full-scope studies. This paper aims to propose how full-scope data collection studies can be supported through the Simplified Human Error Experimental Program (SHEEP). The SHEEP framework was developed by Idaho National Laboratory (INL) to collect HRA data through a simplified simulator and student operators. This paper introduces the major tasks in the SHEEP framework, with a particular focus on differences that arise due to participant type (i.e., student vs. actual operator), based on experiments using a simplified simulator (i.e., the Rancor Microworld). This paper also describes whether the data collected via this approach could support a representative full-scope data collection study (i.e., the HuREX study) based on the experimental data.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2023

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.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Risk-Informed ATF and FLEX Analysis for an Enhanced Resilient BWR Under Design-Basis and Beyond-Design-Basis Accidents

This report documents the activities performed by the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) during fiscal year (FY) 2020 for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) Program, Risk-Informed System Analysis (RISA) Pathway, Enhanced Resilient Plant (ERP) Systems research. The purpose of the RISA Pathway research and development is to support plant owner-operator decisions with the aim to improve the economics, reliability, and maintain the high levels of safety of current nuclear power plants over periods of extended plant operations. The concept of ERP refers to the combinations of accident-tolerant fuel (ATF), optimal use of diverse and flexible coping strategy (FLEX), enhancements to plant components and systems, and the incorporation of augmented or new passive cooling systems, as well as improved fuel cycle efficiency. The objective of the ERP research effort is to use the RISA methods and toolkit in industry applications, including methods development and early demonstration of technologies, in order to enhance existing reactors’ safety features (both active and passive) and to substantially reduce operating costs through risk-informed approaches to plant design modifications to the plant and their characterization. One main focus of the FY 2020 efforts documented in this report was to extend the analyses conducted in FYs 2018 and 2019 for a pressurized water reactor (PWR) to a boiling water reactor (BWR). The same analysis process, risk analysis approaches, and analysis tools as in the previous work for PWR were used for a generic BWR with near-term ATF cladding (i.e., Iron-Chromium-Aluminum [FeCrAl] cladding and Chromium [Cr]-coated cladding) designs under the postulated station blackout (SBO) and medium loss-of-coolant (MLOCA) accident scenarios. In addition, a FLEX model was developed and incorporated into a generic BWR probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) model using the INL-developed software tool, Systems Analysis Programs for Hands-on Integrated Reliability Evaluations (SAPHIRE), to assess the risk impact from FLEX. The other main focus of the FY 2020 efforts was to advance analysis methods, including developing dynamic approach for FLEX human reliability analysis (HRA) using the INL-developed software tool, Event Modeling Risk Assessment using Linked Diagrams (EMRALD), as well as developing a multicriterion benefit evaluation (MCBE) method for evaluating costs and benefits of safety enhancements in nuclear power plants (NPPs). As a case study, the MCBE method was applied to evaluate the costs and benefits brought by FLEX implementation.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Advanced Human-System Interface Risk Analysis Based on Redundancy-guided Systems-theoretic Hazard Analysis and Human Reliability Analysis

Human-system interfaces (HSIs) play an important role in enabling operators to communicate with the nuclear power plant (NPP) side. Getting the information required to understand a NPP’s current status or perform necessary actions for responding to a given operational context are representative operator tasks performed using HSIs. To date, HSIs have been mainly evaluated in the context of human reliability analysis (HRA). However, the current HSI evaluation that occurs during HRA may be challengeable on two fronts: (1) reflecting the unique characteristics of HSI systems and (2) considering situations in which HSIs are poorly operated due to software/hardware malfunctions. Accordingly, this study proposes an approach for specifically evaluating HSIs for digital instrumentation and controls (DI&C) systems, using Redundancy-guided Systems-theoretic Hazard Analysis (RESHA) and HRA. RESHA is a method for analyzing DI&C systems with redundancy features. In this study, we investigate how HSIs are evaluated in existing HRA methods, and what challenges exist in the current approaches. To better evaluate HSIs for DI&C systems, this study modifies the existing HSI evaluation process by additionally modeling the HSI back- and front- ends. In this paper, a HSI fault tree for the APR1400 DI&C system is introduced through a piping and instrumentation diagram. It then touches upon what aspects of the suggested method must be further researched.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2020

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.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2022

A framework to implement human reliability analysis during early design stages of advanced reactors

Nuclear power plants require human actions throughout their lifecycle from design, construction, operation, and decommissioning. However, for advanced reactors (e.g., Generation IV), the reliance on human intervention in safety-related actions is expected to be reduced or completely replaced by automated actions. The Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) Standard for Advanced Non-LWR Nuclear Power Plants requires that the impacts of all operator actions are captured and incorporated in the risk of the modeled plant. Moreover, the Modernization of Technical Requirements for Licensing Advanced Reactors requires human reliability analysis (HRA) to be included throughout all design and PRA development stages. However, due to the lack of details during the early design stages, HRA is often postponed until the design is mature enough. Conducting HRA in later design stages, though it may be adequate in capturing pre-, at-, and post-initiators comes short of informing the design itself in the iterative design lifecycle. Hence, this paper presents a framework to include HRA during the design's early stages, pre-conceptual or conceptual. The proposed framework provides a process for the removal of operator actions that do not contribute to the risk and the identification of all key operator actions that are critical to the safety of the design. The results of this framework are then used to inform the design of those safety-related operator actions to update the design further. Then, using information from the updated design, this framework can be reapplied to investigate the impact of the design update on human reliability. The PRA model of the X-energy's pre-conceptual Xe-100 high-temperature gas-cooled pebble-bed reactor (HTGR-PB) design is used to demonstrate the approach. In the pre-conceptual Xe-100 PRA model, also called Phase 0 PRA model, human actions were considered an integral part of analyzing the plant response to different initiating events. Hence, in this paper, all possible human actions in the Xe-100 PRA model are identified, analyzed, and removed to emulate a design relying only on the available automated control systems. The preliminary results of this assessment show how safe the Xe-100 design is even without crediting any human actions. The results also list necessary sequences in which operator actions are critical to the risk profile of the design.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2020

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.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Simulation-Based Recovery Action Analysis Using the EMRALD Dynamic Risk Assessment Tool

A recovery action is defined as the action that prevents deviant conditions from producing unwanted effects. It generally indicates a kind of countermeasure performed in response to a failure of human action. The recovery actions especially play an important role in complex systems like nuclear power plants (NPPs), which consist of highly sophisticated controllers to ensure that desired performance and safety must be achieved and maintained. This is because a combination of human error and its recovery failure may be able to cause a catastrophic effect on a system. Analyzing recovery actions has been a critical part of HRA, which is a technique to evaluate human errors and provide human error probabilities (HEPs) for application in probabilistic safety assessment (PSA). If recovery actions are not adequately analyzed and applied to PSA models, the PSA results may be under-estimated or be not able to reasonably account for the failure of human actions in the context of PSA. For this reason, some regulatory documents such as ASME/ANS RA-Sb-2013 by the American Society for Mechanical Engineers and the American Nuclear Society and NUREG-1792 by U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission have emphasized the importance of recovery analysis within the HRA. A couple of existing HRA methods, such as the Technique for Human Error-Rate Prediction (THERP), the Cause-Based Decision Tree (CBDT), and the Korean Standard HRA (K-HRA), have respectively suggested their own approaches to the HRA recovery analysis. However, there are a couple of limitations to treating recovery actions using only the current HRA methods available. The biggest limitation is that the existing recovery analysis does not explicitly consider a variety of recovery action types and recovery sequences as they occur in actual NPPs. To handle the limitations of existing recovery analysis, this study proposes a simulation-based recovery analysis method using the Event Modeling Risk Assessment Using Linked Diagram (EMRALD) software. The EMRALD software is a dynamic simulation tool for PSA. It supports realistic and dynamic modeling of human actions as they would be performed at NPPs. It is also favorable to simultaneously model the specific moment at which an action is performed, the time it takes to perform the action, and the failure probability of that action. In this paper, a detailed methodology for modeling recovery actions in the simulation platform is proposed with a couple of examples. Then, outputs from the simulation are discussed as reviewing if this novel approach can complement the challenges of existing recovery analyses.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
NASA NTRS2018

A Prognostic Launch Vehicle Probability of Failure Assessment Methodology for Conceptual Systems Predicated on Human Causal Factors

Create an improved method to calculate reliability of a conceptual launch vehicle system prior to fabrication by using historic data of actual root causes of failures. While failures have unique "proximate causes", there are typically a finite amount of common "root causes". Heretofore launch vehicle reliability evaluation typically hardware-centric statistical analyses, while most root causes of failures are been shown to be human-centric. A method based on human-centric root causes can be used to quantify reliability assessments and focus proposed actions to mitigate problems. Existing methods have been optimistic in their projections of launch vehicle reliability compared to actuals. Hypothesis: reliability of a conceptual launch vehicle can be more accurately evaluated based on a rational, probabilistic approach using past failure assessment teams' findings predicated on human-centric causes."Human Reliability Analysis Methods Selection Guidance for NASA"Chandler F.T., et al., NASA HQ/OSMA study group, July 2006. Outside HRA experts from academia, other federal labs, and the private sector. 50 system reliability methods considered, fourteen selected for further study, four finally selected as best suited for human spaceflight. Probabilistic Risk Analysis (PRA) + Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) enabled incorporating effects and probabilities of human errors. While four down-selected methods deemed appropriate for failure assessment, it did not appear that these methods could be concisely applied to perform major system-wide assessment of probability of failure of a conceptual design without becoming unwieldy."Engineering a Safer World", Detailed, comprehensive study external to NASA Leveson N. G., MIT, 2011.Systems-Theoretic Accident Model and Processes (STAMP). All-encompassing accident model based on systems theory analyzed accidents after they occurred and created approaches to prevent occurrence in developing systems not focused on failure prevention per se, but rather reducing hazards by influencing human behavior through use of constraints, hierarchical control structures, and process models to improve system safetySystem Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) addresses predictive part of problem (a "hazard analysis"). Includes all causal factors identified in STAMP: "...design errors, software flaws, component interaction accidents, cognitively complex human decision-making errors, and social organizational and management factors contributing to accidents" can guide design process rather than require it to exist before-hand did not appear capable of concise application for system-wide assessment of probability of failure of a conceptual design without becoming unwieldy.

Williams, Craig H.↗
DOE OSTI2023

Solutions for Enhanced Legacy Probabilistic Risk Assessment Tools and Methodologies: Improving Efficiency of Model Development and Processing via Innovative Human Reliability Dependency Analysis

Probabilistic risk assessments (PRAs) are integral to nuclear power plant (NPP) operations, having tremendously benefitted the safety of the U.S. reactor fleet for decades. Insights obtained from the models have provided perspectives on a variety of applications, both at the plant and for the regulator. While these models are very useful, they are now being asked to represent and analyze aspects of the plant that were never envisioned by the initial PRA practitioners. Furthermore, heightened demands on the PRA models have led to increased computing power requirements. Additionally, as the complexity of the PRA models increased, the difficulty experienced by non-PRA experts in trying to understand these models, grasp the insights they provide, and effectively use that information has become problematic. The need for research to address key issues regarding PRA tools and methods has never been greater. Although the nuclear power industry has largely been well-served by these tools and methods, the underlying science is dated, remaining mostly unchanged for over two decades. Three areas were identified as most beneficial to address to maintain and improve the usefulness of the current practice legacy PRA tools: improved quantification speed, increased ability to efficiently model multi-hazard models, and improved modeling human action dependency in PRA. This report is focused on the third critical area, improvements in dependency analysis of human actions conducted as part of a typical human reliability assessment.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
NASA NTRS2010

The Importance of Human Reliability Analysis in Human Space Flight: Understanding the Risks

HRA is a method used to describe, qualitatively and quantitatively, the occurrence of human failures in the operation of complex systems that affect availability and reliability. Modeling human actions with their corresponding failure in a PRA (Probabilistic Risk Assessment) provides a more complete picture of the risk and risk contributions. A high quality HRA can provide valuable information on potential areas for improvement, including training, procedural, equipment design and need for automation.

Hamlin, Teri L.↗