Comparing SLIM, SPAR-H and Bayesian Network Methodologies

Eduardo Calixto, Gilson Brito Alves Lima, Paulo Renato Alves Firmino

Energy Planning Engineer (Coppe), Rio de Janeiro, Brasil.
Production Engineer Department, Fluminense Federal University (Uff), Rio de Janeiro, Brasil.
Rural University of Pernambuco, Recife, Brasil.

DOI: 10.4236/ojsst.2013.32004                

Abstract

Human factors always affect maintenance performance, and in some cases, it’s critical to systems availability and reliability. Despite such importance, in so many cases, there’s no human reliability method applied to analyze maintenance tasks in order to understand better human factors influence in maintenance performance. There are several human analysis methodologies and regarding human factors, SLIM (Successes Likelihood Methods), SPAR-H (Standardized Plant Analysis Risk-Human Reliability Analysis Method) and Bayesian Net take into account such factors and may be a good approach to minimize human error. In order to propose a human reliability methodology to analyze maintenance tasks taking into account human factors, a case study about turbine star up tasks will be carried out. Therefore, different human reliability methods will be performed based on specialist opinion. Finally, the human error probability as well as drawbacks and advantages from different methods will be discussed to get a final conclusion.

Keywords

Human Reliability Analysis; Human Performance Factor; Human Error Probability

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	A. D. Swain and H. E. Guttmann, “Handbook of Human Reliability Analysis with Emphasis on Nuclear Power Plant Applications,” Draft, NUREG/CR-1278, 1980.
[2]	V. A. Silva, “O Planejamento de Emergências em Refinarias de Petróleo Brasileiras: Um Estudo dos Planos de Refinarias Brasileiras e uma Análise de Acidentes em Refinarias no Mundo e a Apresentação de uma Proposta de Relação de Canários Acidentais para Planejamento,” Dissertação (Mestrado em Sistemas de Gestão) Universidade Federal Fluminense, Niterói, 2003.
[3]	L. J. Bellamy, T. A. W. Geyer and J. A. Astley, “Evaluation of the Human Contribution to Pipework and In-Line Equipment Failure Frequencies,” Health and Safety, London, 1989.
[4]	M. Grozdanovic, “Usage of Human Reliability Quantification Methods,” International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE), Vol. 11, No. 2, 2005, pp. 153-159.
[5]	A. D. Swain and H. E. Guttmann, “Handbook of Human Reliability Analysis with Emphasis on Nuclear Power Plant Applications,” US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC, 1983.
[6]	“The SPAR-H Human. Reliability Analysis Method,” NUREG/CR-6883, INL/EXT-05-00509, Idaho National Laboratory, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC, 2005.
[7]	D. E. Embrey, P. Humphreys, E. A. Rosa, B. Kirwan and K. Rea, “SLIM-MAUD: An Approach to Assessing Human Error Probabilities Using Structured Expert Judgment, Volume 2: Detailed Analysis of the Technical Issues,” NUREG/CR-3518, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, 1984.
[8]	R. da C. L. Menezes, “Uma Metodologia para Avaliação da Confiabilidade Humana em Atividades de Substituição de Cadeias de Isoladores em Linhas de Transmissão,” Dissertação de Mestrado, UFPE, Recife, 2005.
[9]	K. B. Korb and A. E. Nicholson, “Bayesian Artificial Intelligence,” Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, 2003.
[10]	D. E. Lopez, “Análise da Confiabilidade Humana via Redes Bayesianas: Uma Aplicação à Manutenção de Linhas de Transmissão,” Produção, Vol. 17, No. 1, 2007, pp. 162-185. doi:10.1590/S0103-65132007000100012