期刊文献+

核电厂HRA组织定向研究 被引量:3

Organization-committed human reliability analysis in nuclear power plants
下载PDF
导出
摘要 概率安全评价(PSA)已经成为核电厂定量化安全评价的主要方法,人因可靠性分析(HRA)是其中重要组成部分。传统的HRA方法研究对象主要是"个体失误",而HRA的全面评估必须考虑"组织情景",HRA必须组织定向。分析了HRA各主要方法对于组织因素考虑的不足,提出了HRA组织定向的必要性和基本原则。在提出组织定向的假设条件基础上,建立了HRA(A、B、C类事故)与核电厂相关特定组织之问的映射模型。 The paper is aimed at presenting our analysis of the deficiencies of main HRA (Human Reliability Analysis) method while attaching importance into the organizational factors. As is known, prob- abilistic safety assessment (PSA) has been a dominant method in assessing quantitatively and qualitatively the safety of a nuclear power plant. Since lIRA is an overriding ingredient in assessing the object of HRA methods focused on "the errors caused by individuals," it is necessary to give a comprehensive assessment over the production safety of the nuclear power plant system, which should include the "organizational factor." Therefore, as a rule, HRA should be done on the basis both of full consideration of organizational factors as well as individual human features. While proposing the preliminary conditions of organization-committed HRA and establishing the mapping model, it also takes into consideration the connection among the three categories of human factors (i. e. Category A, Category B and Category C). which are likely to contribute to the production accidents Thus, the suggested method can provide a clearer categorization of organizational factors. Whereas the transmission route is oriented to Category B and Category C in the main control room, Category A is also taken into account as an inseparable factor that may lead to the accident. Hence, the paper proposes a new approach to quantitative estimation in analyzing the organizational factors as a weight imposed on HRA.
出处 《安全与环境学报》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2010年第3期184-188,共5页 Journal of Safety and Environment
基金 国家自然科学基金项目(70873040) 国家自然科学基金项目(70573043) 国防军工基础研究项目(Z012005A001)
关键词 安全管理工程 安全评价 人因可靠性分析 组织定向 映射模型 safety control safety assessment human reliabilityanalysis organization-committed mapping model
  • 相关文献

参考文献29

  • 1ZHANG Li(张力) necessity.Human factor analysis,issue and future development.系统工程理论与实践,2001,21(2):167-172.
  • 2EMBREY D E.Incorporating management and organizational factors into probabilistic safety assessment[J].Reliability Engineering System Safety,1992,38:199-208.
  • 3戴立操,张力,黄曙东.核电厂HRA定性分析[J].核技术,2004,27(10):792-795. 被引量:3
  • 4MARAIIS K,SALEH J H,NANCY G.Archetypes for organizational safety[J].Leveson Safety Science,2006(44):565-582.
  • 5REASON J.Human error[M].New York:Cambridge University Press,1990.
  • 6SWAIN A D,GUTTMANN H E.Handbook of human reliability analysis with emphasis on nuclear power plant,final report[R].Albuquerque:Sandia National Laboratories,1983.
  • 7HANNAMAN G W.Human cognitive reliability model for HRA[R].San Diego:NUS-4531,1984.
  • 8HOLLNAGEL E.Cognitive reliability and error analysis method[M].Oxford(UK):Elseiver Science Ltd,1998.
  • 9HOLLNAGL E.Context and control of human reliability analysis[M].London(UK):Academic Press Ltd,1993.
  • 10SIMON H A.The sciences of the artificial[M].Cambridge,MA:The M.I.T.Press,1972.

二级参考文献16

  • 1王二平.人误研究的组织定向[J].人类工效学,1999,5(1):44-47. 被引量:35
  • 2王清标,冯玉国.用层次分析法(AHP)分析影响钻探工程质量的主要因素[J].地质装备,2006,7(2):27-32. 被引量:5
  • 3IAEA. Periodic safety review of operational nuclear power plants. Safety Standards Series No.50-SG-012(Draft 3), IAEA, Vienna, 2000
  • 4Safety Practices, Safety Series No.50-P-10, IAEA, Vienna,1995:11-12
  • 5IAEA-TECDOC-1101.概率安全评价(PSA)质量保证大纲.[S].,..
  • 6许树柏.层次分析法原理[M].天津:天津大学出版社,1993..
  • 7Hollnagel E.Cognitive Reliability and Error Analysis Method[M].Oxford(UK):Elsevier Science Ltd.,1998.
  • 8张力.概率安全与人因可靠性分析技术[M].北京:原子能出版社,2006.85-88.
  • 9Bernhard Wilpert,Rainer Miller.ORGANISATIONAL FACTORS:Their definition and influence on nuclear safety (ORFA)[R].Report on Needs and Methods,1999.5.
  • 10Nuclear energy agency committee on the safety of nuclear installations.Identification and assessment of organisational factors related to the safety of npps[M].NEA,1999.

共引文献12

同被引文献38

  • 1朱祖祥,周俊.仪表数量与信号间隔时距对监视作业效绩的影响[J].应用心理学,1997,3(2):3-7. 被引量:4
  • 2黄芳芝,郑福裕.压水堆核电厂蒸汽发生器传热管破裂事故处理的研究[J].核动力工程,1993,14(6):498-501. 被引量:4
  • 3高文宇,张力.事故前人因失误研究[J].安全与环境学报,2003,3(2):74-77. 被引量:2
  • 4SWAIN A D, GUTTMANN H E. Handbook of human reliability analysis with emphasis on nuclear power plant application, NUREG/CR-1278 . Washington, DC: USNRC, 1983.
  • 5WILLIAMS J C. A data-based method for assessing and reducing human error to improve operational performance // Proceedings of the IEEE 4th Conference on Human Factor in Power Plants, Monterey, California. New York: Institute of Electronic and Electrical Engineers, 1988.
  • 6HOLLNAGEL E. Cognitive reliability and error analysis method[M]. Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd, 1998.
  • 7CHANG 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 and System Safety, 2007, 92(8): 997-1013.
  • 8CHANG 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 and System Safety, 2007, 92(8): 1014-1040.
  • 9CHANG 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 and System Safety, 2007, 92(8): 1061-1075.
  • 10CHANG 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 the IDAC model[J]. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2007, 92(8): 1076-1101.

引证文献3

二级引证文献5

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部