Temporal decision-making factors in risk analyses of dynamic positioning operations

Abstract Nearly all dynamic positioning (DP) operations are characterized by limited time available for the DP operator to detect and act upon a loss of position. Collision risk is analyzed with a quantitative risk analysis, which usually does not analyze the human contribution to the risk picture, but rather uses estimates. The objective of this paper is to evaluate the way time (e.g. available time, time required, perceived time available and perceived time required) is addressed in risk analyses for oil and gas DP operations and how this affects safety. The study has found that time required can exceed the time available, and that the effects of perceived time available and perceived time required need to be included in human reliability analysis. In general, awareness needs to be raised around the importance of time. This can be done by including the different aspects of time into risk analyses of DP operations so that effective risk reducing measures can be identified. Furthermore, decision support tools should be developed that integrate the dynamics of the vessel movement over time (time available) and the response time of the operator and system (time required) to address not only what, and how of decision-making, but also when.

[1]  Erik Hollnagel,et al.  Cognitive reliability and error analysis method : CREAM , 1998 .

[2]  J.C. Williams,et al.  A data-based method for assessing and reducing human error to improve operational performance , 1988, Conference Record for 1988 IEEE Fourth Conference on Human Factors and Power Plants,.

[3]  Ronald L. Boring,et al.  SPAR-H Step-by-Step Guidance , 2011 .

[4]  Salim Ahmed,et al.  Multivariate probabilistic safety analysis of process facilities using the Copula Bayesian Network model , 2016, Comput. Chem. Eng..

[5]  Faisal Khan,et al.  Dynamic risk assessment using failure assessment and Bayesian theory , 2009 .

[6]  Per Hokstad,et al.  A method for risk modeling of interdependencies in critical infrastructures , 2011, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[7]  Jeremy M Wolfe,et al.  What are the shapes of response time distributions in visual search? , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[8]  Jan Erik Vinnem,et al.  On the need for online decision support in FPSO-shuttle tanker collision risk reduction , 2015 .

[9]  Jan Erik Vinnem,et al.  Data driven approach to risk management and decision support for dynamic positioning systems , 2020, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[10]  Erik Hollnagel.  Decisions about "what", and decisions about "how" , 2003 .

[11]  Wondea Jung,et al.  A taxonomy of performance influencing factors for human reliability analysis of emergency tasks , 2003 .

[12]  Ali Mosleh,et al.  Cognitive modeling and dynamic probabilistic simulation of operating crew response to complex system accidents. Part 2: IDAC performance influencing factors model , 2007, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[13]  Kingsley Hendrick,et al.  Investigating Accidents with Step , 1986 .

[14]  Guy H. Walker,et al.  Human Factors Methods: A Practical Guide for Engineering and Design , 2012 .

[15]  Torgeir Moan,et al.  FPSO-Shuttle Tanker Collision Risk Reduction , 2005 .

[16]  Chen-Tung Chen,et al.  Aggregation of fuzzy opinions under group decision making , 1996, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[17]  Tao Ma,et al.  Distribution of human response times , 2013, Complex..

[18]  Wenzhe Zhang,et al.  Dynamic Modelling, Simulation and Visualization of Marine Crane Operations on DP Vessels , 2015 .

[19]  Jan Erik Vinnem,et al.  Human reliability and the impact of control function allocation in the design of dynamic positioning systems , 2020, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[20]  Torgeir Moan,et al.  Safety of dynamic positioning operations on mobile offshore drilling units , 2008, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[21]  Haibo Chen,et al.  Quantified Risk Analysis of DP Operations - Principles and Challenges , 2016 .

[22]  Eilif Pedersen,et al.  Modeling of Generic Offshore Vessel in Crane Operations With Focus on Strong Rigid Body Connections , 2017, IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering.

[23]  Qi Cai,et al.  Layered Modeling of Event Sequence Diagram for Dynamic Reliability Analysis of Nuclear Power Plant , 2010, 2010 Asia-Pacific Power and Energy Engineering Conference.

[24]  Panagiotis Sotiralis,et al.  Incorporation of human factors into ship collision risk models focusing on human centred design aspects , 2016, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[25]  Marcelo Ramos Martins,et al.  Application of Bayesian Belief networks to the human reliability analysis of an oil tanker operation focusing on collision accidents , 2013, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[26]  Nicola Paltrinieri,et al.  The Petro-HRA Guideline , 2017 .

[27]  The origins of the SPAR-H method’s performance shaping factor multipliers , 2007, 2007 IEEE 8th Human Factors and Power Plants and HPRCT 13th Annual Meeting.

[28]  Ali Mosleh,et al.  Cognitive modeling and dynamic probabilistic simulation of operating crew response to complex system accidents: Part 1: Overview of the IDAC Model , 2007, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[29]  Valerio Cozzani,et al.  Dynamic risk management: a contemporary approach to process safety management , 2016 .

[30]  A. D. Swain,et al.  Handbook of human-reliability analysis with emphasis on nuclear power plant applications. Final report , 1983 .

[31]  John A. Forester,et al.  Expert elicitation approach for performing ATHEANA quantification , 2004, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..