核电厂传统人员可靠性分析方法中引入班组因素的研究

赵军, 童节娟, 刘涛, 玉宇

赵军, 童节娟, 刘涛, 玉宇. 核电厂传统人员可靠性分析方法中引入班组因素的研究[J]. 原子能科学技术, 2011, 45(8): 966-971. DOI: 10.7538/yzk.2011.45.08.0966
引用本文: 赵军, 童节娟, 刘涛, 玉宇. 核电厂传统人员可靠性分析方法中引入班组因素的研究[J]. 原子能科学技术, 2011, 45(8): 966-971. DOI: 10.7538/yzk.2011.45.08.0966
ZHAO Jun, TONG Jie-juan, LIU Tao, YU Yu. Integrating Team Factor Into Current Human Reliability Analysis of Nuclear Power Plant[J]. Atomic Energy Science and Technology, 2011, 45(8): 966-971. DOI: 10.7538/yzk.2011.45.08.0966
Citation: ZHAO Jun, TONG Jie-juan, LIU Tao, YU Yu. Integrating Team Factor Into Current Human Reliability Analysis of Nuclear Power Plant[J]. Atomic Energy Science and Technology, 2011, 45(8): 966-971. DOI: 10.7538/yzk.2011.45.08.0966

核电厂传统人员可靠性分析方法中引入班组因素的研究

Integrating Team Factor Into Current Human Reliability Analysis of Nuclear Power Plant

  • 摘要: 在核电厂等大型复杂系统中,人员干预行为通常以班组的协作来完成,而目前核电厂概率安全评价(PSA)采用的以人的失误率预测技术(THERP)和人的认知可靠性(HCR)方法为代表的人员可靠性分析(HRA)方法主要关注对个人绩效的影响,它们在评估核电厂主控室班组绩效时存在一定局限。本文定义一种新的绩效形成因子“班组绩效形成因子(TPSF)”,并将其合理地引入THERP和HCR方法的定量化体系中,使它们可在一定程度上体现班组环境对人员绩效的影响。文章提出了TPSF等级的评价方法及将其引入THERP和HCR方法的定性实施框架。结果证明,合理地将班组因素引入传统HRA方法能改进它们对班组环境下人员绩效模化的合理性。

     

    Abstract: In large complex systems such as nuclear power plants (NPPs), most people work in teams or groups. However, the current human reliability analysis (HRA) methods used in probability safety assessment (PSA) of NPPs are generally focused on the assessment of individual performance. The technique for human error rate prediction (THERP) and human cognitive reliability (HCR) are the most widely used human reliability analysis methods. Therefore, the limitations will exist consequentially when we use the current HRA methods to quantify the actual human performance situation in the control room of NPPs. In this paper, a new performance shaping factor (PSF) named team performance shaping factor (TPSF) was defined and a qualitative framework used to integrate the TPSF into THERP method and HCR model respectively in accordance with the existing architectures was proposed. The process for evaluating the grade of TPSF was put forward, and the question that should be solved in order to accomplish the quantitative analysis was discussed. The result shows that integrating team factor into current HRA will enhance the ability and validity in modeling the human performance in team context.

     

  • [1] SALAS E, DICKINSON T L, CONVERSE S A, et al. Toward an understanding of team performance and training, in teams: Their training and performance[M]. Norwood, NJ (USA): Ablex Publishing Co., 1992: 3-29.
    [2] SASOUA K, REASON J. Team errors: Definition and taxonomy[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 1999, 65: 1-9.
    [3] CHANG Y H J, MOSLEH A. Cognitive modeling and dynamic probabilistic simulation of operating crew response to complex system accidents Part 1: Overview of the IDAC model[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2007, 92(8): 997-1 013.
    [4] CHANG Y H J, MOSLEH A. Cognitive modeling and dynamic probabilistic simulation of operating crew response to complex system accidents Part 2: IDAC performance influencing factors model[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2007, 92(8): 1 014-1 040.
    [5] CHANG Y H J, MOSLEH A. Cognitive modeling and dynamic probabilistic simulation of operating crew response to complex system accidents Part 3: IDAC operator response model[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2007, 92(8): 1 041-1 060.
    [6] CHANG Y H J, MOSLEH A. Cognitive modeling and dynamic probabilistic simulation of operating crew response to complex system accidents Part 4: IDAC causal model of operator problemsolving response[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2007, 92(8): 1 061-1 075.
    [7] CHANG Y H J, MOSLEH A. Cognitive modeling and dynamic probabilistic simulation of operating crew response to complex system accidents Part 5: Dynamic probabilistic simulation of IDAC model[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2007, 92(8): 1 076-1 101.
    [8] US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. NUREG/CR-6710 extending the dynamic flowgraph methodology (DFM) to model human performance and team effects[S]. Washington D.C.: US NRC, 2001.
    [9] YUFEI S, KAZUO F, SHUNSUKE K. Team performance modeling for HRA in dynamic situations[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2002, 78: 111-121.
    [10] KAZUO F, SHUNSUKE K. Group reliability analysis[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 1992, 35: 159-167.
    [11] HOLLNAGEL E. Cognitive reliability and error analysis method[M]. Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science Ltd., 1998.
    [12] US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. NUREG/CR-1278 handbook of human reliability analysis with emphasis on nuclear power plant applications[S]. Washington D.C.: US NRC, 1983.
    [13] HANNAMAN G W, SPURGIN A J, LUKIC Y D. Human cognitive reliability model for PRA analysis[S]. [S.l.] : [s.n.], 1984.
    [14] RASMUSSEN J. Information processing and human-machine interaction: An approach to cognitive engineering[M]. North-Holland, US: [s.n.], 1986.
计量
  • 文章访问数:  854
  • HTML全文浏览量:  0
  • PDF下载量:  1292
  • 被引次数: 0
出版历程
  • 收稿日期:  1899-12-31
  • 修回日期:  1899-12-31
  • 刊出日期:  2011-08-19

目录

    /

    返回文章
    返回