Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Fuzzy Modeling Application for Human Reliability Analysis in the Process Industry

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Human Factors and Reliability Engineering for Safety and Security in Critical Infrastructures

Part of the book series: Springer Series in Reliability Engineering ((RELIABILITY))

Abstract

Having presented the general Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) principles and the special branch of Fuzzy/CREAM methodologies for Human error probability estimation, the chapter continues with some more details on CREAM which is the base for the fuzzy model developed. Some basic principles of fuzzy logic will then be covered before proceeding to the detailed description of the model itself. Special applications of the model i.e. the definition of critical transitions, the assessment of operators’ response times during a critical task performed in the chemical process industry along with a shorter tailored made version of the model will be presented in the remainder of this chapter.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Some analysts do not consider ATHEANA a third generation technique but rather a well advanced second generation one.

  2. 2.

    However, the same researchers claim that the fuzzy model of CREAM brings on many redundant, self-contradictory rules, which would consume computational time, and lose the truth degree of the results.

  3. 3.

    It has to be noted at this point that two out of the nine CPCs can have only a neutral or negative effect on human reliability. The effect of each CPC on human performance will be analytically explained in Sect. 4.2 where the development of the fuzzy model is being described.

References

  • Baziuk PA, Rivera SS, Núñez Mc Leod J (2016) Fuzzy human reliability analysis: applications and contributions review. Adv Fuzzy Syst. doi:10.1155/2016/4612086

  • Bedford T, Bayley C, Revie M (2013) Screening, sensitivity and uncertainty for the CREAM method of Human Reliability Analysis. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 115:100–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boecker M (2015) Enhancing the effectiveness and efficiency of control room operators—a roadmap-based approach for selecting interaction technologies for defence and safety-critical organisations and industries. Procedia Manuf 3:769–776

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cacciabue P (2004) Human error risk management for engineering systems: a methodology for design, safety assessment, accident investigation and training. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 83:229–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper S et al (2000) Technical basis and implementation guidelines for A Technique for Human Error Analysis (ATHEANA) NUREG-1624, Rev 1. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

    Google Scholar 

  • Embrey DE (1992) Quantitative and qualitative prediction of human error in safety assessments. Major hazards Onshore and Offshore. IChemE, Rugby

    Google Scholar 

  • Fujita Y, Hollnagel E (2004) Failures without errors: quantification of context in HRA. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 83:145–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geng J, Murè S, Gabriele B, Camuncoli G, Demichela M (2015) Human error probability estimation in ATEX-HMI area classification: from THERP to FUZZY CREAM. Chem Eng Trans 43:1243–1248

    Google Scholar 

  • He X, Wang Y, Shen Z, Huang X (2008) A simplified CREAM prospective quantification process and its application. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 93:298–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollnagel E (1996) Reliability analysis and operator modelling. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 52:327–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollnagel E (1998) Cognitive reliability and error analysis method (CREAM). Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollnagel E, Cacciabue P (1991) Cognitive modelling in system simulation. In: Proceedings of third European conference on cognitive science approaches to process control, Cardiff

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaac A, Shorrock ST, Kirwan B (2002) Human error in European air traffic management: the HERA project. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 75(2):257–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kazaras K, Konstandinidou M, Nivolianitou Z, Kirytopoulos K (2013) Enhancing road tunnel risk assessment with a fuzzy system based on the CREAM methodology. Chem Eng Trans 31:349–354

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim B, Bishu R (1996) On assessing operator response time in human reliability analysis (HRA) using a possibilistic fuzzy regression model. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 52:27–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim M, Seong P, Hollnagel E (2006) A probabilistic approach for determining the control mode in CREAM. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 91:191–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klir J, Yuan B (1995) Fuzzy sets & fuzzy logic: theory and applications. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Konstandinidou M, Nivolianitou Z, Kiranoudis C, Markatos N (2006) A fuzzy modeling application of CREAM methodology for human reliability analysis. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 91:706–716

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konstandinidou M, Nivolianitou Z, Kiranoudis C, Markatos N (2008) Evaluation of significant transitions in the influencing factors of human reliability. Proc Inst Mech Eng O J Risk Reliab 222(1):39–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Konstandinidou M, Nivolianitou Z, Simos G, Kiranoudis C, Markatos N (2009) Operators’ response time estimation for a critical task using the fuzzy logic theory. In: Proceedings of the joint ESREL and SRA-Europe conference on safety, reliability and risk analysis: theory, methods and applications, vol 1, pp 281–290

    Google Scholar 

  • Kontogiannis T (1997) A framework for the analysis of cognitive reliability in complex systems: a recovery centred approach. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 58:233–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee SM, Ha JS, Seong PH (2011) CREAM-based communication error analysis method (CEAM) for nuclear power plant operators’ communication. J Loss Prev Process Ind 2:90–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li PC, Chen GH, Dai LC, Li Z (2010) Fuzzy logic-based approach for identifying the risk importance of human error. Saf Sci 48(7):902–913

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liao PC, Luo X, Wan T, Su W (2016) The mechanism of how design failures cause unsafe behavior: the cognitive reliability and error analysis method (CREAM). Procedia Eng 145:715–722

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mamdani E (1974) Application of fuzzy Algorithms for simple dynamic plants. Proc IEE 121(12):1585–1588

    Google Scholar 

  • Mamdani E, Assilian S (1975) An experiment in linguistic synthesis with a fuzzy logic controller. Int J Man Mach Stud 7(1):1–13

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Mandal S, Singh K, Behera RK, Sahu SK, Raj N, Maiti J (2015) Human error identification and risk prioritization in overhead crane operations using HTA, SHERPA and fuzzy VIKOR method. Expert Syst Appl 42(20):7195–7206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marseguerra M, Zio E, Librizzi M (2006) Quantitative developments in the cognitive reliability and error analysis method (CREAM) for the assessment of human performance. Ann Nucl Energy 33:894–910

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monferini A, Konstandinidou M, Nivolianitou Z, Weber S, Kontogiannis T, Kafka P, Kay AM, Leva MC, Demichela M (2013) A compound methodology to assess the impact of human and organizational factors impact on the risk level of hazardous industrial plants. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 119:280–289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Onisawa T (1996) Subjective analysis of system reliability and its analyser. Fuzzy Sets Syst 83:249–269

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Park J, Kim Y, Kim JH, Jung W, Seung Jang C (2015) Estimating the response times of human operators working in the main control room of nuclear power plants based on the context of a seismic event—a case study. Ann Nucl Energy 85:36–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedrycz W (1993) Fuzzy control and fuzzy systems. Second extended edition. Research Studies Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Rachid B, Hafaifa A, Hadroug N, Boumehraz M (2016) Reliability evaluation based on a fuzzy expert system: centrifugal pump application. Stud Inf Control 25(2):181–188

    Google Scholar 

  • Reason J (1990) The contribution of latent human failures to the breakdown of complex systems. Human factors in hazardous situations. Oxford Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Saidi E, Anvaripour B, Jaderi F, Nabhani N (2014) Fuzzy risk modeling of process operations in the oil and gas refineries. J Loss Prev Process Ind 30(1):63–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun Z, Li Z, Gong E, Xie H (2012) Estimating human error probability using a modified CREAM. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 100:28–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swain A, Guttmann H (1983) Handbook on human reliability analysis with emphasis on nuclear power plant application. NUREG/CR-1278. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission

    Google Scholar 

  • Ung S-T, Shen W-M (2011) A novel human error probability assessment using Fuzzy modeling. Risk Anal 31(5):745–757

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verma M, Kumar A, Singh Y (2012) Fuzzy fault tree approach for analysing the fuzzy reliability of a gas power plant. Int J Reliab Saf 6(4):254–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vigier HP, Scherger V, Terceño A (2017) An application of OWA operators in fuzzy business diagnosis. Appl Soft Comput 54:440–448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang A, Luo Y, Tu G, Liu P (2011) Quantitative evaluation of human-reliability based on fuzzy-clonal selection. IEEE Trans Reliab 60(3):517–527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu B, Yan X, Wang Y, Soares CG (2017) An evidential reasoning-based CREAM to human reliability analysis in maritime accident process. Risk Anal. doi:10.1111/risa.12757

  • Yang ZL, Bonsall S, Wall A, Wang J, Usman M (2013) A modified CREAM to human reliability quantification in marine engineering. Ocean Eng 58:293–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh L (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8:338–353

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh L (1973) Outline of a new approach to the analysis of complex systems and decision processes. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 3:28–44

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Center for Scientific Research Demokritos, Athens, Greece

    Zoe Nivolianitou & Myrto Konstantinidou

Authors
  1. Zoe Nivolianitou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Myrto Konstantinidou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zoe Nivolianitou .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, University of Cassino and Southern Lazio, Cassino (FR), Italy

    Fabio De Felice

  2. Department of Engineering, University of Napoli “Parthenope”, Napoli (NA), Italy

    Antonella Petrillo

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Nivolianitou, Z., Konstantinidou, M. (2018). A Fuzzy Modeling Application for Human Reliability Analysis in the Process Industry. In: De Felice, F., Petrillo, A. (eds) Human Factors and Reliability Engineering for Safety and Security in Critical Infrastructures. Springer Series in Reliability Engineering. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62319-1_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62319-1_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-62318-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-62319-1

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation