Human error contribution to accidents in the manufacturing sector: A structured approach to evaluate the interdependence among performance shaping factors

被引:20
作者
La Fata, C. M. [1 ]
Adelfio, L. [1 ]
Micale, R. [2 ]
La Scalia, G. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Palermo, Dept Engn, Viale Sci,Bldg 8, I-90128 Palermo, Italy
[2] Univ Messina, Dept Engn, I-98166 Messina, Italy
关键词
Human Reliability Analysis (HRA); Human Error Probability (HEP); Performance Shaping Factors (PSFs); Interdependence; Fuzzy DEMATEL; HUMAN RELIABILITY-ANALYSIS; TAXONOMY; DEMATEL; MODEL; HRA; IDENTIFY; IDENTIFICATION; OPTIMIZATION; METHODOLOGY; MAINTENANCE;
D O I
10.1016/j.ssci.2023.106067
中图分类号
T [工业技术];
学科分类号
08 ;
摘要
Since the 1970s, Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) methods have received a great interest for the quantification of the Human Error Probability (HEP) in Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs). To this purpose, the second-generation HRA methods consider contextual and cognitive factors -named Performance Shaping Factors (PSFs) -that may influence the workers' performance during tasks execution. Despite the recent extension of HRA methods to different fields, only few studies refer to the manufacturing sector. In addition, the majority of contributions assume the independence among PSFs, which may result in an over or under estimation of HEP. Therefore, the present paper focuses on the manufacturing sector to propose a Fuzzy DEMATEL (FDEMATEL) based method to support the risk analyst in the quantification of PSF interrelationships and importance, when computing HEP.As a result, the most influential human factors on which taking priority actions to improve the overall human reliability may be identified accurately. Based on a selected list of PSFs, the methodological approach is implemented in an Italian textile company, where experience and training factors are demonstrated to be the most central ones to increase the human reliability when performing the weaving process tasks. The designed approach is well structured and effortless as well as it allows at considering the uncertainty and vagueness of input data and a group decision context.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 74 条
[1]   Human reliability assessment (HRA) in maintenance of production process: a case study [J].
Aalipour M. ;
Ayele Y.Z. ;
Barabadi A. .
International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, 2016, 7 (02) :229-238
[2]   A human reliability analysis methodology for oil refineries and petrochemical plants operation: Phoenix-PRO qualitative framework [J].
Abilio Ramos, M. ;
Lopez Droguett, E. ;
Mosleh, A. ;
Das Chagas Moura, M. .
RELIABILITY ENGINEERING & SYSTEM SAFETY, 2020, 193
[3]  
Adelfio L., 2022, P 27 SUMMER SCH FRAN
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2005, NUREG/CR- 6883, INL/EXT-05-00509)J
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1998, Cognitive reliability and error analysis method (CREAM)
[6]   Integrating fuzzy DEMATEL and fuzzy hierarchical TOPSIS methods for truck selection [J].
Baykasoglu, Adil ;
Kaplanoglu, Vahit ;
Durmusoglu, Zeynep D. U. ;
Sahin, Cenk .
EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS, 2013, 40 (03) :899-907
[7]   Human and organizational factors in reliability assessment and management of offshore structures [J].
Bea, RG .
RISK ANALYSIS, 2002, 22 (01) :29-45
[8]  
Boring R. L., 2010, How many performance shaping factors are necessary for human reliability analysis?
[9]   An empirically benchmarked human reliability analysis of general aviation [J].
Burns, Kevin ;
Bonaceto, Craig .
RELIABILITY ENGINEERING & SYSTEM SAFETY, 2020, 194
[10]   Human Reliability Analysis in Spaceflight Applications, Part 2: Modified CREAM for Spaceflight [J].
Calhoun, Jessica ;
Savoie, Chris ;
Randolph-Gips, Mary ;
Bozkurt, Ipek .
QUALITY AND RELIABILITY ENGINEERING INTERNATIONAL, 2014, 30 (01) :3-12