Nuclear Engineering and Technology

  • 제56권11호
  • /
  • Pages.4578-4586
  • /
  • 2024
  • /
  • 1738-5733(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2234-358X(eISSN)
한국원자력학회 (Korean Nuclear Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Development of a human reliability analysis framework for nominal human error probability estimate of the TRIGA research reactor in Thailand

  • Wasin Vechgama (Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute) ;
  • Jinkyun Park (Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute) ;
  • Saensuk Wetchagarun (Thailand Institute of Nuclear Technology (Public Organization)) ;
  • Anantachai Pechrak (Thailand Institute of Nuclear Technology (Public Organization)) ;
  • Kampanart Silva (National Energy Technology Center, National Science and Technology Development Agency)
  • 투고 : 2024.03.18
  • 심사 : 2024.06.15
  • 발행 : 2024.11.25
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Human reliability analysis (HRA) of nuclear research reactors often encounters a lack of human performance data, a challenge that is also faced by the TRIGA reactor of Thailand having no specific full method or human error database for HRA. To overcome this challenge, in 2023, HRA teams from the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI) and the Thailand Institute of Nuclear Technology (TINT) jointly developed an HRA framework for the TRIGA reactor. In the HRA framework development, the HRA practitioners applied KAERI's three main HRA tools, namely 1) the EMpirical data-Based crew Reliability Assessment and Cognitive Error analysis (EMBRACE) method, 2) the Human Reliability data EXtraction (HuREX) database, and 3) the TAsk COMplexity (TACOM) method. The HRA framework covers the overall process including the classification of documents and human error types as well as nominal human error extraction for estimating nominal human error probabilities. According to the results of the first use of the HRA framework on the TRIGA reactor in Thailand, the HRA framework provided an effective way to improve the procedures and systematically identify nominal human errors of actions in the emergency procedures.

키워드

과제정보

This work was supported by a grant from the Nuclear Safety Research Program from the Korea Foundation of Nuclear Safety (KOFONS), funded by the Nuclear Safety and Security Commission of the Republic of Korea (No. RS-2021-KN052610). Also, the authors thank the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI), Korea National University of Science and Technology (UST), and Thailand Institute of Nuclear Technology (TINT) for the opportunity and resources for conducting this project.

참고문헌

  1. T. Govindaraj, Characterizing performance in socio-technical systems: a modeling framework in the domain of nuclear power, Omega 36 (1) (2008) 10-21, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2005.07.010. 
  2. D. Hunt, A. Naweed, The risk of risk assessments: investigating dangerous workshop biases through a socio-technical systems model, Saf. Sci. 157 (2023) 105918, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105918. 
  3. M.N. McSweeney, B. Ryan, S. Cobb, Interviews with rail industry leaders about systems thinking in the management of organisational change and risk management, Saf. Sci. 164 (2023) 106168, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2023.106168. 
  4. M.M. Chatzimichailidou, N.A. Stanton, I.M. Dokas, The concept of risk situation awareness provision: towards a new approach for assessing the DSA about the threats and vulnerabilities of complex socio-technical systems, Saf. Sci. 79 (2015) 126-138, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.05.012. 
  5. T. Sgobba, N. Leveson, P. Wilde, S. Barr, Chapter 8 - System Safety and Accident Prevention, Space Safety and Human Performance, Butterworth-Heinemann, 2018, pp. 273-353, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-101869-9.00008-X. 
  6. S. Yasuyuki, B. Rima, K. Tomoaki, Aggregate impacts of natural and man-made disasters: a quantitative comparison, Rivista Int. di Econ. dei Trasporti (2011). https://www.rieti.go.jp/jp/publications/dp/11e023.pdf. 
  7. European Commission (EC), Commission staff working document: overview of natural and man-made disaster risks the European Union may face, Surf. Water Data Can. (2020). https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/swd/2020/0330/COM_SWD(2020)0330(PAR05)_EN.pdf. 
  8. E. Zarei, F. Khan, R. Abbassi, Importance of human reliability in process operation: a critical analysis, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 211 (2021) 107607, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2021.107607. 
  9. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Guidelines for the review of research reactor safety. Revised Edition, Reference Document for IAEA Integrated Safety Assessment of Research Reactors (INSARR), IAEA-SVS-25, Vienna, 2013. https ://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/SVS-25_web.pdf. 
  10. S. Kaplan, B.J. Garrick, On the quantitative definition of risk, Risk Anal. 1 (1) (1981) 11-27, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1981.tb01350.x. 
  11. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Risk Management: A Tool for Improving Nuclear Power Plant Performance, IAEA-TECDOC-1209, Vienna, 2001. https://www-pub.iaea.org/mtcd/publications/pdf/te_1209_prn.pdf. 
  12. J.A. Forester, S.E. Cooper, E. Lois, A.M. Kolaczkowski, D.C. Bley, J. Wreathall, An Overview of the Evolution of Human Reliability Analysis in the Context of Probabilistic Risk Assessment, SAND2008-5085, Sandia National Laboratories, California, 2009. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/950689/. 
  13. E. Lois, V.N. Dang, J. Forester, H. Broberg, S. Massaiu, M. Hildebrandt, P. O. Braarud, G. Parry, J. Julius, R. Boring, I. Mannisto, A. Bye, International HRA Empirical Study - Phase 1 Report Description of Overall Approach and Pilot Phase Results from Comparing HRA Methods to Simulator Performance Data, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, 2009. https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0933/ML093380283.pdf. 
  14. J. Reason, Human error: models and management, West. J. Med. 172 (6) (2000) 393-396, https://doi.org/10.1136/ewjm.172.6.393. 
  15. G. Wu, Y. Mao, Y. He, Y. Lu, M. Jia, S. Fu, Safety archetypes identification and behavior simulation for nuclear power plant operation human reliability improvement, Ann. Nucl. Energy 174 (2022) 109189, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2022.109189. 
  16. T.A. Kletz, Hazop-past and future, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 55 (3) (1997) 263-266, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(96)00100-7. 
  17. H. Kim, D. Lee, C.W. Lee, H.R. Kim, S.J. Lee, Safety assessment framework for nuclear power plant decommissioning workers, IEEE Access 7 (2019) 76305-76316, https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2907407. 
  18. W. Jung, D. Kang, J. Kim, Development of a Standard Method for Human Reliability Analysis of Nuclear Power Plants: Level I PSA Full Power Internal HRA, KAERI/TR-2961/2005, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, 2005. Daejeon, https://www.osti.gov/etdeweb/servlets/purl/20823240. 
  19. Environmental Resources Management (ERM), Human error assessment & reduction technique (HEART), Hong Kong. https://www.epd.gov.hk/eia/register/report/eiareport/eia_2242014/EIA/app/app12.10.pdf, 2014. 
  20. S.M.L. Hendrickson, Y.J. Chang, C.R. Grantom, Application of ASEP/THERP in international HRA empirical study, the 10th international probabilistic safety assessment & management conference. Renaissance Seattle Hotel, Seattle, Washington, 7 - 11 June 2010, 2010. https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1007/ML100760026.pdf. 
  21. H. Liao, A. Bone, K. Coyne, J. Forester, Challenges in human reliability analysis (HRA): a reflection on the accident sequence evaluation Program (ASEP) HRA procedure. SAND2012-1680C, Sandia National Laboratories, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, 2012. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1078676. 
  22. D. Gertman, H. Blackman, J. Marble, J. Byers, C. Smith, The SPAR-H Human Reliability Analysis Method, NUREG/CR-6883, Idaho National Laboratory, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, 2005. https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/contract/cr6883/cr6883.pdf. 
  23. Y. Kim, J. Kim, J. Park, S. Choi, S. Kim, W. Jung, H. Kim, S. Shin, An HRA Method for Digital Main Control Rooms - Part I: Estimating the Failure Probability of Timely Performance, KAERI/TR-7607/2019, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, 2019, https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.26690.53447. Daejeon. 
  24. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Safety of research reactors, Specific safety requirements No, SSR-3, Vienna, https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/P1751_web.pdf, 2016. 
  25. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Periodic safety review for research reactors, Safety Reports Series (2020). No. 99, STI/PUB/1889, Vienna, https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/P1889_web.pdf. 
  26. S. Santoso, R. Himawan, J. Situmorang, T.J. Suryono, E. Edison, Reactor operational experience review and analysis based on un-intended reactor trip data, J. Teknol. Dan. Ind. Pertan. Indones. 21 (2) (2019), https://doi.org/10.17146/tdm.2019.21.2.5300. 
  27. A. Hassan, M. Maskin, P. Prak Tom, F. Brayon, P. Hlavac, F. Mohamed, Operator response modeling and human error probability in TRIGA Mark II research reactor probabilistic safety assessment, Ann. Nucl. Energy 102 (2017) 179-189, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2016.12.024. 
  28. W. Vechgama, K. Silva, A. Pechrak, S. Wetchagarun, Application of hazard and operability technique to level 1 probabilistic safety assessment of Thai Research Reactor-1/Modification 1: internal events and human errors, Prog. Nucl. Energy 138 (2021) 103838, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2021.103838. 
  29. Thailand Institute of Nuclear Technology (TINT), Thailand Safety Analysis Report for Thai Research Reactor-1/Modification 1 (TRR-1/M1), Bangkok, 2017. 
  30. Y. Kim, J. Kim, J. Park, S. Choi, H. Kim, An HRA Method for Digital Main Control Rooms - Part II: Estimating the Failure Probability Due to Cognitive Error, KAERI/TR-8065/2020, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, 2020, https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.34243.63524. Daejeon. 
  31. W. Vechgama, K. Silva, J. Yang, J. Park, Initiating risk assessment research collaboration between South Korea and ASEAN NPSR member states, Asian Test. Symp. (2023). Hong Kong, China, 4-6 December 2023. 
  32. W. Vechgama, J. Park, S. Wetchagarun, A. Pechrak, K. Silva, Systematic preprocessing for development of human reliability analysis framework of TRIGA reactor, Asian Test. Symp. (2023). Hong Kong, China, 4-6 December 2023. 
  33. J. Park, The complexity of proceduralized tasks. Springer Series in Reliability Engineering ISSN 1614-7839, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-791-2. 
  34. J. Park, Y. Kim, Comparisons of human reliability data between analog and digital environments, Saf. Sci. 149 (2022) 105701, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105701. 
  35. W. Jung, J. Park, Y. Kim, S. Choi, S. Kim, HuREX - a framework of HRA data collection from simulators in nuclear power plants, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 194 (2020) 106235, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2018.07.036. 
  36. Y. Kim, J. Park, M. Presley, Selecting significant contextual factors and estimating their effects on operator reliability in computer-based control rooms, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 213 (2021) 107679, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2021.107679. 
  37. M.S. Hamada, A.G. Wilson, C.S. Reese, H.F. Martz, Bayesian Reliability, Springer Series in Statistics (SSS), 2008, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-77950-8. 
  38. M. Pandey, Bayesian Reliability Analysis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Waterloo, 2020. https://unene.ca/wp-content/uploads/s17-Bayesian-Reliability-Analysis.pdf. 
  39. H. Raiffa, R. Schlaifer, Applied Statistical Decision Theory, Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University, Massachusetts, 1961. https://gwern.net/doc/statistics/decision/1961-raiffa-appliedstatisticaldecisiontheory.pdf. 
  40. J. Park, Y. Kim, W. Jung, A framework to estimate task opportunities from the operational experience of domestic nuclear power plants, Saf. Sci. 88 (2016) 146-154, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2016.05.001. 
  41. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Models and Data Requirements for Human Reliability Analysis, IAEA-TECDOC-499, Vienna, 1995. 
  42. J. Park, Y. Kim, W. Jung, Calculating nominal human error probabilities from the operation experience of domestic nuclear power plants, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 170 (2018) 215-225, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2017.10.011. 
  43. Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation (MHESI), Ministerial Regulation on Schedule of Review and Update of Safety Analysis Report of Nuclear Facilities, Bangkok, 2020. 
  44. Thailand Institute of Nuclear Technology (TINT), Management Procedure for Nuclear and Radiation Abnormality of TRR-1/M1, Bangkok, 2021. 
  45. Thailand Institute of Nuclear Technology (TINT), 2018 Annual Emergency Training of Thai Research Reactor-1/Modification 1 (TRR-1/M1), Bangkok, 2018. 
  46. Thailand Institute of Nuclear Technology (TINT), 2019 Annual Emergency Training of Thai Research Reactor-1/Modification 1 (TRR-1/M1), Bangkok, 2019. 
  47. ASEAN Network on Nuclear Power Safety Research (ASEAN NPSR), The meeting report on the 1st joint TINT - NUCLEAR Malaysia ASEAN NPSR technical meeting on probabilistic safety assessment and human reliability analysis on nuclear research reactor, in: ASEAN Region, Bangkok, 2023. July 18-20, 2023. 
  48. J.C. Williams, A data-based method for assessing and reducing human error to improve operational performance, the Conference Record for 1988, Fourth IEEE Int. Symp. Forum Softw. Eng. Stand. (1988), https://doi.org/10.1109/HFPP.1988.27540. Monterey, California, 5 - 9 June 1988.