First insights into the human-related risks of tunnel inspection

Bertovic, Marija; Given, Joseph

doi:10.58286/27321

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…al [19] as part of the WIPANO project. In their study [11] on the human related risks of tunnel inspection, a human-oriented Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) was carried out to identify possible human-related risks in tunnel inspection processes using a laser scan method and also to evaluate these humanrelated risks with regard to their possible causes, consequences and probability of occurrence. The FMEA results were also used to develop a quantification method to further understand the HF in tunnel inspection.…”

Section: Methodology and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In spite of the extreme importance in understanding the influence of human factors in reliability assessments or POD studies of NDT techniques, this topic seems to be rarely investigated [10]. Even though, human factors are well researched qualitatively by several researchers, lack of proper information on the quantification of human factors possess huge difficulty for carrying out the reliability assessments by including the human factors [11]. Hence, in this work, an effort has been made to understand the influence of human factors on the reliability assessments based on Monte Carlo based theoretical approach.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Inclusion of human factors in POD assessments: a theoretical approach

Rentala¹,

Kanzler²

2023

8th International Workshop on Reliability of NDT/NDE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Even though, POD assessments of NDT techniques have been well demonstrated in various industrial sectors such as aviation, nuclear, oil and gas, railways, etc., they lack the inclusion of several influences as explained from the modular model. Influences due to intrinsic capabilities or due to application/environmental parameters can somehow be demonstrated under controlled laboratory and field inspection procedures. However, nowadays the biggest challenge lies in the inclusion of human factors and the organization context into the POD assessments and this can be mainly due to not being able to quantify the human factors. Hence, in the current work on accounting human factors influence on POD curves, the main idea is based on identifying majority of the human related tasks while carrying out the inspection procedures in terms of various statistical metrics. This topic on quantification of human factors is a part of the ongoing WIPANO project "normPOD", for the standardization of reliability assessment in Germany. This method of representation in terms of statistical metrics would enable holistic inclusion of human related influences in the form of the scatter parameters required for POD assessments. Efforts towards inclusion of these quantified human factor parameters into the POD assessments were shown by the adoption of Monte-Carlo approaches.

show abstract

Section: Methodology and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inclusion of human factors in POD assessments: a theoretical approach

Rentala¹,

Kanzler²

2023

8th International Workshop on Reliability of NDT/NDE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…• Preparatory tasks for laser scanning of concrete structures (tunnels) [4] • Localisation (determining the position and dimensions) of material defects during ultrasonic testing [16] For the latter example, FMEA data from previous studies [16] was used in order to assess the feasibility of using existing data and to investigate how differences in data collection might affect the results.…”

Section: The Categorisation and Quantification Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The prototype system that is introduced in this paper can provide visual summaries of the human factors (HF) that are implicated in such errors in a scalable form, so that the information it delivers can be used in a variety of contexts, by decision makers in technical management, by research and development (R&D) teams, and by documentation authors, not to mention for helping to specify requirements for tailored training, providing, thus, valuable information for the prevention of future error. The main ongoing concern in the development of this system, which draws heavily on previous theoretical and practical work of Bertovic et al [1][2][3][4], Müller et al [5], D'Agostino et al [6], and Fahlbruch and Wilpert et al [7][8][9], has been to find a way of quickly collecting risk-related data and automatically categorising that data in terms of human factors to create a holistic overview of possible risks in specific NDT processes. Such data can come from prospective risk assessment tools such as the Human-FMEA, but could just as well come from post-incident analyses.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An automatic system for categorizing and quantifying human factors

Given

2023

8th International Workshop on Reliability of NDT/NDE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human factors (HF) are little understood, and particularly in non-destructive testing (NDT) experimental data is rare, samples are often small, and statistical methods are rarely used to evaluate results [1]. HF have been widely implicated in major occurrences of technical failure, for example at North Anna power plant and on United Airlines Flight 232. Understanding HF is vital for reliable detection and prevention of failures. Reliability assessments, though known to be affected by intrinsic capability, application factors, and HF, have thus far only concentrated to a sufficient degree on intrinsic capability. The addition of HF to that assessment has proven difficult due to the lack of a method of quantifying HF. This paper presents the first attempt from a psychological perspective to quantify HF from qualitative data. HF data was derived from qualitative human-oriented Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (Human-FMEA) workshops for visual inspection of tunnels by laser scanning and for ultrasonic testing of welds. Data was collected on human failure modes, causes, consequences and preventive measures, as well as eliciting a risk priority number (RPN). Using this data, a system of quantitative weightings was created to allocate errors to inductively derived HF categories for further allocation to existing HF categorisation models. This weighting model proved useful for creating quantitative summaries of HF, informing and validating qualitative FMEA results, and comparing existing HF categorisation models. Further potential lies within a planned interface to quantitative reliability assessment methods such as POD (Probability of Detection). While providing quantifications, the method retains a qualitative and holistic nature, can, thus, bridge the gap between psychological and engineering concerns of HF and reliability, contributing to future interdisciplinary work.

show abstract

First insights into the human-related risks of tunnel inspection

Cited by 2 publications

References 2 publications

Inclusion of human factors in POD assessments: a theoretical approach

Inclusion of human factors in POD assessments: a theoretical approach

An automatic system for categorizing and quantifying human factors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About