Empirical evaluation of THERP, SLIM and ranking to estimate HEPs

Zimolong, Bernhard

doi:10.1016/0951-8320(92)90016-e

Cited by 24 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A comparison between the HRA methods' results and empirical data is necessary to validate the methods. For instance, Zimolong [27], Kirwan [28][29][30], and Maguire [32] each compared team results to real data to validate the HRA methods on their ability to match empirically derived data. Such validation is key to building confidence in the use of the method.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Issues in benchmarking human reliability analysis methods : a literature review.

Lois

Forester²,

Tran

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a diversity of human reliability analysis (HRA) methods available for use in assessing human performance within probabilistic risk assessment (PRA). Due to the significant differences in the methods, including the scope, approach, and underlying models, there is a need for an empirical comparison investigating the validity and reliability of the methods. To accomplish this empirical comparison, a benchmarking study is currently underway that compares HRA methods with each other and against operator performance in simulator studies. In order to account for as many effects as possible in the construction of this benchmarking study, a literature review was conducted, reviewing past benchmarking studies in the areas of psychology and risk assessment. A number of lessons learned through these studies are presented in order to aid in the design of future HRA benchmarking endeavors.4

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Issues in benchmarking human reliability analysis methods : a literature review.

Lois

Forester²,

Tran

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[19]. The corresponding absolute probability values can be calculated when two or more reference tasks are available where absolute probabilities are known.…”

Section: Flimmentioning

confidence: 99%

Method of estimating human error probabilities in construction for structural reliability analysis based on analytic hierarchy process and failure likelihood index method

Zhou

Kou

2010

J. Shanghai Jiaotong Univ. (Sci.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human error (HE) is the most important factor influencing on structural safety because its effect often exceeds the random deviation. Large numbers of facts have shown that structural failures may be caused by the gross error due to HE. So it is essential to analyze HE in construction. The crucial work of human error analysis (HEA) is the estimation of human error probability (HEP) in construction. The method for estimating HEP, analytic hierarchy process and failure likelihood index method (AHP-FLIM), is introduced in this paper. The method also uses the process of expert judgment within the failure likelihood index method (FLIM). A numerical example shows the effectiveness of the methods proposed.

show abstract

“…The measure of human error rate requires the quantification of human error probabilities (HEP). 38 According to Swain and Guttmann, 39 the application of FMEA also had its limitations given the reliance on human, where the RPN for human factors was difficult to quantify. Kirwan 40,41 recommended that the data requirement for human reliability could be obtained through synthetic data or based on expert judgment and converted into quantification techniques.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Failure mode–driven quality analysis of operational risks for composite fiber-reinforced plastic assembly

Suparayan

2017

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B:

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Composite fiber-reinforced plastic products have many failure modes in the manufacturing stage. The cost of rework is high. To ensure a reliable manufacturing process and outcome, this article presents a new method to prioritize assembly process errors according to a risk-based cost of poor quality. The method combines a range of reliability techniques including cause–effect diagram, fault tree, and analytic hierarchy process to achieve multiple failure mode assessment. The outcome of this research provides direct links to develop risk mitigation plans to treat the prioritized risks of production errors in the composite fiber-reinforced plastic assembly process.

show abstract

Empirical evaluation of THERP, SLIM and ranking to estimate HEPs

Cited by 24 publications

References 10 publications

Issues in benchmarking human reliability analysis methods : a literature review.

Issues in benchmarking human reliability analysis methods : a literature review.

Method of estimating human error probabilities in construction for structural reliability analysis based on analytic hierarchy process and failure likelihood index method

Failure mode–driven quality analysis of operational risks for composite fiber-reinforced plastic assembly

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About