Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “HRA Dependency Analysis”

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.

7 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

Dynamic Approach to Dependency Analysis in Human Reliability Analysis: Application in a Stream Generator Tube Rupture Scenario

Dependency analysis in human reliability analysis (HRA) is a method of adjusting the failure probability of a given action by considering the impact of the action preceding it. It plays a role in reasonably accounting for human actions in the context of probabilistic safety assessments (PSAs), preventing PSA results from being estimated too optimistically based on the HRA results. Nevertheless, the existing dependency methods present a couple of challenges in that the quantification approaches rarely explain the adjustment of human error probabilities (HEPs). For this reason, the authors’ previous research has pointed out challenges of the existing dependency approaches and conceptually, theoretically proposed a performance shaping factor (PSF)-based dynamic dependency analysis method for HRA in order to complement the existing dependency methods. The current paper explores the latest version of the method and guidance for applying it to a steam generator tube rupture (SGTR) scenario.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
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↗
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↗
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↗
DOE OSTI2022

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.

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↗
NASA NTRS2016

Tailoring a Human Reliability Analysis to Your Industry Needs

Companies at risk of accidents caused by human error that result in catastrophic consequences include: airline industry mishaps, medical malpractice, medication mistakes, aerospace failures, major oil spills, transportation mishaps, power production failures and manufacturing facility incidents. Human Reliability Assessment (HRA) is used to analyze the inherent risk of human behavior or actions introducing errors into the operation of a system or process. These assessments can be used to identify where errors are most likely to arise and the potential risks involved if they do occur. Using the basic concepts of HRA, an evolving group of methodologies are used to meet various industry needs. Determining which methodology or combination of techniques will provide a quality human reliability assessment is a key element to developing effective strategies for understanding and dealing with risks caused by human errors. There are a number of concerns and difficulties in "tailoring" a Human Reliability Assessment (HRA) for different industries. Although a variety of HRA methodologies are available to analyze human error events, determining the most appropriate tools to provide the most useful results can depend on industry specific cultures and requirements. Methodology selection may be based on a variety of factors that include: 1) how people act and react in different industries, 2) expectations based on industry standards, 3) factors that influence how the human errors could occur such as tasks, tools, environment, workplace, support, training and procedure, 4) type and availability of data, 5) how the industry views risk & reliability, and 6) types of emergencies, contingencies and routine tasks. Other considerations for methodology selection should be based on what information is needed from the assessment. If the principal concern is determination of the primary risk factors contributing to the potential human error, a more detailed analysis method may be employed versus a requirement to provide a numerical value as part of a probabilistic risk assessment. Industries involved with humans operating large equipment or transport systems (ex. railroads or airlines) would have more need to address the man machine interface than medical workers administering medications. Human error occurs in every industry; in most cases the consequences are relatively benign and occasionally beneficial. In cases where the results can have disastrous consequences, the use of Human Reliability techniques to identify and classify the risk of human errors allows a company more opportunities to mitigate or eliminate these types of risks and prevent costly tragedies.

DeMott, D. L.↗