4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Phoenix - A model-based Human Reliability Analysis methodology: Qualitative Analysis Procedure

期刊

RELIABILITY ENGINEERING & SYSTEM SAFETY
卷 145, 期 -, 页码 301-315

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2015.07.009

关键词

Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA); Human Reliability Analysis (HRA); Human Failure Event (HFE); Performance Influencing Factor (PIF); Crew Failure Mode (CFM); Crew Response Tree (CRT)

资金

  1. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) [NRC-04-09-143]
  2. Center for Risk and Reliability of the University of Maryland [NRC-04-09-143]
  3. USNRC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Phoenix method is an attempt to address various issues in the field of Human Reliability Analysis (HRA). Built on a cognitive human response model, Phoenix incorporates strong elements of current HRA good practices, leverages lessons learned from empirical studies, and takes advantage of the best features of existing and emerging HRA methods. Its original framework was introduced in previous publications. This paper reports on the completed methodology, summarizing the steps and techniques of its qualitative analysis phase. The methodology introduces the Crew Response Tree which provides a structure for capturing the context associated with Human Failure Events (HFEs), including errors of omission and commission. It also uses a team-centered version of the Information, Decision and Action cognitive model and macro-cognitive abstractions of crew behavior, as well as relevant findings from cognitive psychology literature and operating experience, to identify potential causes of failures and influencing factors during procedure-driven and knowledge-supported crew-plant interactions. The result is the set of identified HFEs and likely scenarios leading to each. The methodology itself is generic in the sense that it is compatible with various quantification methods, and can be adapted for use across different environments including nuclear, oil and gas, aerospace, aviation, and healthcare. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据