Systematic Human Reliability Analysis (SHRA): A New Approach to Evaluate Human Error Probability (HEP) in a Nuclear Plant

Abstract

Emergency management in industrial plants is a fundamental issue to ensure the safety of operators. The emergency management analyses two fundamental aspects: the system reliability and the human reliability. System reliability is the capability of ensuring the functional properties within a variability of work conditions, considering the possible deviations due to unexpected events. However, system reliability is strongly related to the reliability of its weakest component. The complexity of the processes could generate incidental situations and the worker appears (human reliability) to be the weakest part of the whole system. The complexity of systems influences operator’s ability to take decisions during emergencies. The aim of the present research is to develop a new approach to evaluate human error probability (HEP), called Systematic Human Reliability Analysis (SHRA). The proposed approach considers internal and external factors that affect operator’s ability. The new approach is based on Nuclear Action Reliability Assessment (NARA), Simplified Plant Analysis Risk Human Reliability (SPAR-H) and on the Performance Shaping Factors (PSFs) relationship. The present paper analysed some shortcomings related to literature approaches, especially the limitations of the working time. We estimated HEP, after 8 hours (work standard) during emergency conditions. The correlations between the advantages of these three methodologies allows proposing a HEP analysis during accident scenarios emergencies. SHRA can be used to estimate human reliability during emergencies. SHRA has been applied in a nuclear accident scenario, considering 24 hours of working time. The SHRA results highlight the most important internal and external factors that affect operator’s ability.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 23 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.