This paper summarizes an emerging project regarding the utilization of high-fidelity MIDAS simulations for visualizing and modeling control room crew performance at nuclear power plants. The key envisioned uses for MIDAS-based control room simulations are: (i) the estimation of human error associated with advanced control room equipment and configurations, (ii) the investigative determination of contributory cognitive factors for risk significant scenarios involving control room operating crews, and (iii) the certification of reduced staffing levels in advanced control rooms. It is proposed that MIDAS serves as a key component for the effective modeling of cognition, elements of situation awareness, and risk associated with human performance in next generation control rooms.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BoringR. L.DudenhoefferD. D.HallbertB. P.GoreB. F. (2006). Virtual power plant control room and crew modeling using MIDAS. Joint Halden Reactor Project and CSNI Special Experts' Group on Human and Organisational Factors Workshop on Future Control Station Designs and Human Perfromance Issues in Nuclear Power Plants, Paper 5.3 (pp. 1–5).
2.
BoringR. L.GertmanD. I.JoeJ. C.BlackwoodL. G.BlackmanH. S.BradyB. M. (2006). A simplified expert elicitation guideline. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management, Paper PSAM-0089 (pp. 1–9).
3.
BoringR. L.HugoJ.RichardC. M.DudenhoefferD. D. (2005). Human-computer interaction for next-generation control rooms. CHI 2005 Conference Proceedings, 206–207.
4.
BoringR. L.O'HaraJ. M.HugoJ.JamiesonG. A.OxstrandJ.MaR.HildebrandtM. (In press). Human factors and the nuclear renaissance. Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
5.
DudenhoefferD. D.GertmanD. I.BoringR. L.MarbleJ. L. (2004). Transitioning to advanced human-machine interface technologies. Proceedings of the Fourth American Nuclear Society International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Power Plant Instrumentation, Controls, and Human-Machine Interface Technologies, 306–311.
6.
DudenhoefferD. D.PermannM. R.BoringR. L. (2006). Decision consequence in complex environments: Visualizing Decision Impact. Proceedings of the First Joint Emergency Preparedness and Responses and Robotic and Remote Systems Topical Meeting, 211–218.
7.
GertmanD.BlackmanH.MarbleJ.ByersJ.SmithC. (2005). The SPAR-H human reliability analysis method, NUREG/CR-6883. Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
8.
GoreB. F.JarvisP. A. (2005). New integrated modeling capabilities: MIDAs' recent Behavioral Enhancements. Proceedings of the 2005 Aerospace Congress, Paper 2005–01–2701.
9.
GoreB. F.SmithJ. D. (2006). Risk assessment and human performance modeling: The need for an integrated approach. International Journal of Human Factors of Modeling and Simulation, 1, 119–139.
10.
HartS. G.DahnD.AtencioA.DalalK. M. (2001). Evaluation and application of MIDAS v2.0. Proceedings of the 2001 Aerospace Congress, Paper 2001–01–2648.
11.
KolaczkowskiA.ForresterJ.LoisE.CooperS. (2004). Good practices for implementing human reliability analysis (HRA), NUREG-1792. Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
12.
LauxL.PlottC. (2007). Using operator workload data to inform human reliability analyses. Official Proceedings of the Joint 8th IEEE Conference on Human Factors and Power Plants and the 13th Annual Workshop on Human Performance / Root Cause / Trending / Operating Experience/Self Assessment, 309–313.
13.
National Research Council. (1997). Digital instrumentation and control systems in nuclear power plants. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
14.
O'HaraJ. M.BrownW. S.LewisP. M.PersenskyJ. J. (2002). Human-system interface design review guidelines, NUREG-0700, Rev. 2. Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
15.
O'HaraJ. M.HigginsJ. C.PersenskyJ. J.LewisP. M.BongarraJ. P. (2004). Human factors engineering program reviw model, NUREG-0711, Rev. 2. Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
16.
PersenskyJ.SzaboA.PlottC.EnghT.BarnesV. (2005). Guidance for assessing exemption requests from the nuclear power plant licensed operator staffing requirements specified in 10 CFR 50.54(m), NUREG-1791. Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
17.
RansomV. H.WagnerR. J.TrappJ. A.CarlsonK. E.KiserD. M.KuoH.-H.ChowH.NelsonR. A.JamesS. W. (1982). RELAP5/MOD1 code manual volume 1: System models and numerical methods, NUREG/CR-1826. Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
