A Multi-Methods Approach to HRA and Human Performance Modeling: A Field Assessment

The Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) is a research reactor at the Idaho National Laboratory is primarily designed and used to test materials to be used in other, larger-scale and prototype reactors. The reactor offers various specialized systems and allows certain experiments to be run at their own temperature and pressure. The ATR Canal temporarily stores completed experiments and used fuel. It also has facilities to conduct underwater operations such as experiment examination or removal. In reviewing the ATR safety basis, a number of concerns were identified involving the ATR canal. A brief study identified ergonomic issues involving the manual handling of fuel elements in the canal that may increase the probability of human error and possible unwanted acute physical outcomes to the operator. In response to this concern, that refined the previous HRA scoping analysis by determining the probability of the inadvertent exposure of a fuel element to the air during fuel movement and inspection was conducted. The HRA analysis employed the SPAR-H method and was supplemented by information gained from a detailed analysis of the fuel inspection and transfer tasks. This latter analysis included ergonomics, work cycles, task duration, and workload imposed by tool and workplace characteristics, personal protective clothing, and operational practices that have the potential to increase physical and mental workload. Part of this analysis consisted of NASA-TLX analyses, combined with operational sequence analysis, computational human performance analysis (CHPA), and 3D graphical modeling to determine task failures and precursors to such failures that have safety implications. Experience in applying multiple analysis techniques in support of HRA methods is discussed

FRamework Assessing Notorious Contributing Influences for Error (FRANCIE): Perspective on Taxonomy Development to Support Error Reporting and Analysis

Beginning in the 1980s a primary focus of human reliability analysis was estimation of human error probabilities. However, detailed qualitative modeling with comprehensive representation of contextual variables often was lacking. This was likely due to the lack of comprehensive error and performance shaping factor taxonomies, and the limited data available on observed error rates and their relationship to specific contextual variables. In the mid 90s Boeing, America West Airlines, NASA Ames Research Center and INEEL partnered in a NASA sponsored Advanced Concepts grant to: assess the state of the art in human error analysis, identify future needs for human error analysis, and develop an approach addressing these needs. Identified needs included the need for a method to identify and prioritize task and contextual characteristics affecting human reliability. Other needs identified included developing comprehensive taxonomies to support detailed qualitative modeling and to structure meaningful data collection efforts across domains. A result was the development of the FRamework Assessing Notorious Contributing Influences for Error (FRANCIE) with a taxonomy for airline maintenance tasks. The assignment of performance shaping factors to generic errors by experts proved to be valuable to qualitative modeling. Performance shaping factors and error types from such detailed approaches can be used to structure error reporting schemes. In a recent NASA Advanced Human Support Technology grant FRANCIE was refined, and two new taxonomies for use on space missions were developed. The development, sharing, and use of error taxonomies, and the refinement of approaches for increased fidelity of qualitative modeling is offered as a means to help direct useful data collection strategies

Advancing Usability Evaluation through Human Reliability Analysis

This paper introduces a novel augmentation to the current heuristic usability evaluation methodology. The SPAR-H human reliability analysis method was developed for categorizing human performance in nuclear power plants. Despite the specialized use of SPAR-H for safety critical scenarios, the method also holds promise for use in commercial off-the-shelf software usability evaluations. The SPAR-H method shares task analysis underpinnings with human-computer interaction, and it can be easily adapted to incorporate usability heuristics as performance shaping factors. By assigning probabilistic modifiers to heuristics, it is possible to arrive at the usability error probability (UEP). This UEP is not a literal probability of error but nonetheless provides a quantitative basis to heuristic evaluation. When combined with a consequence matrix for usability errors, this method affords ready prioritization of usability issues

Human reliability analysis for computerized procedures, part two: Applicability of current methods

Computerized procedures (CPs) are an emerging technology within nuclear power plant control rooms. While CPs have been implemented internationally in advanced control rooms, to date no U.S. nuclear power plant has implemented CPs in its main control room. Yet, CPs are a reality of new plant builds and are an area of considerable interest to existing plants, which see advantages in terms of easier records management by omitting the need for updating hardcopy procedures. The overall intent of this paper is to provide a characterization of human reliability analysis (HRA) issues for computerized procedures. It is beyond the scope of this document to propose a new HRA approach or to recommend specific methods or refinements to those methods. Rather, this paper serves as a review of current HRA as it may be used for the analysis and review of computerized procedures

How training and experience affect the benefits of autonomy in a dirty-bomb experiment

A dirty-bomb experiment conducted at the INL is used to evaluate the effectiveness and suitability of three different modes of robot control. The experiment uses three distinct user groups to understand how participants’ background and training affect the way in which they use and benefit from autonomy. The results show that the target mode, which involves automated mapping and plume tracing together with a point and click tasking tool, provides the best performance for each group. This is true for objective performance such as source detection and localization accuracy as well as subjective measures such as perceived workload, frustration and preference. The best overall performance is achieved by the Explosive Ordinance Disposal group which has experience in both robot teleoperation and dirty bomb response. The user group that benefits least from autonomy is the Nuclear Engineers that have no experience with either robot operation or dirty bomb response. The group that benefits most from autonomy is the Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Response Team that has extensive experience related to the task, but no robot training

Human reliability analysis for computerized procedures

This paper provides a characterization of human reliability analysis (HRA) issues for computerized procedures in nuclear power plant control rooms. It is beyond the scope of this paper to propose a new HRA approach or to recommend specific methods or refinements to those methods. Rather, this paper provides a review of HRA as applied to traditional paper-based procedures, followed by a discussion of what specific factors should additionally be considered in HRAs for computerized procedures. Performance shaping factors and failure modes unique to computerized procedures are highlighted. Since there is no definitive guide to HRA for paper-based procedures, this paper also serves to clarify the existing guidance on paper-based procedures before delving into the unique aspects of computerized procedures

Improving Emergency Response and Human-Robotic Performance

Preparedness for chemical, biological, and radiological/nuclear incidents at nuclear power plants (NPPs) includes the deployment of well trained emergency response teams. While teams are expected to do well, data from other domains suggests that the timeliness and accuracy associated with incident response can be improved through collaborative human-robotic interaction. Many incident response scenarios call for multiple, complex procedure-based activities performed by personnel wearing cumbersome personal protective equipment (PPE) and operating under high levels of stress and workload. While robotic assistance is postulated to reduce workload and exposure, limitations associated with communications and the robot’s ability to act independently have served to limit reliability and reduce our potential to exploit human –robotic interaction and efficacy of response. Recent work at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) on expanding robot capability has the potential to improve human-system response during disaster management and recovery. Specifically, increasing the range of higher level robot behaviors such as autonomous navigation and mapping, evolving new abstractions for sensor and control data, and developing metaphors for operator control have the potential to improve state-of-the-art in incident response. This paper discusses these issues and reports on experiments underway intelligence residing on the robot to enhance emergency response

HUMAN ERROR QUANTIFICATION USING PERFORMANCE SHAPING FACTORS IN THE SPAR-H METHOD

This paper describes a cognitively based human reliability analysis (HRA) quantification technique for estimating the human error probabilities (HEPs) associated with operator and crew actions at nuclear power plants. The method described here, Standardized Plant Analysis Risk-Human Reliability Analysis (SPAR-H) method, was developed to aid in characterizing and quantifying human performance at nuclear power plants. The intent was to develop a defensible method that would consider all factors that may influence performance. In the SPAR-H approach, calculation of HEP rates is especially straightforward, starting with pre-defined nominal error rates for cognitive vs. action-oriented tasks, and incorporating performance shaping factor multipliers upon those nominal error rates