Nuclear power plant personnel reliability simulation test system and personnel error scene evaluation method

Abstract

A nuclear power plant personnel reliability simulation test system and a personnel error scene evaluation method belong to the nuclear power field. The nuclear power plant personnel reliability simulation test system comprises a nuclear power plant simulator, a control system and a data acquisition system. The nuclear power plant simulator simulates nuclear power plant operation and provides simulation faults, the control system can instruct the nuclear power plant simulator to generate the simulation faults, and the data acquisition system acquires operation data of the nuclear power plant simulator and records personnel operation images. The nuclear power plant personnel reliability simulation test system can provide a stable and repeatable test environment, improve the acquisition quality of personnel reliability data, and improve the safety management level of a nuclear power plant.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention belongs to the field of nuclear power, and particularly relates to a nuclear power plant personnel reliability simulation test system and a personnel error scenario evaluation method. Background Art

[0002] Personnel reliability data is one of the main sources of uncertainty in nuclear power plant personnel reliability analysis (HRA) and probabilistic safety assessment (PSA). The availability and reliability of HRA data directly affect the quality of PSA results and risk insights. However, at present, there is a lack of effective means for collecting basic data on nuclear power plant personnel reliability, resulting in difficult data collection, poor repeatability, and affecting the efficiency and quality of PSA evaluation in nuclear power plants. Therefore, providing a nuclear power plant personnel reliability simulation test system is of positive significance for improving the quality of personnel reliability data collection and optimizing PSA evaluation results. Summary of the Invention

[0003] The purpose of the present invention is to provide a nuclear power plant personnel reliability simulation test system to improve the quality of personnel reliability data collection. The present invention also provides a nuclear power plant personnel error scenario evaluation method.

[0004] According to an embodiment of one aspect of the present invention, there is provided a nuclear power plant personnel reliability simulation test system, which includes:

[0005] A nuclear power plant simulator that provides a personnel operation interface, stores and can execute a simulation test program to simulate the operation of a nuclear power plant and can provide simulated faults;

[0006] A control system that is signal-connected to the nuclear power plant simulator and can instruct the nuclear power plant simulator to generate the simulated faults;

[0007] A data acquisition system including a simulator data recording system and a camera system,

[0008] wherein the simulator data recording system acquires the operation data of the nuclear power plant simulator, and the camera system records the personnel operation images.

[0009] Using this system, it is possible to effectively evaluate and test personnel error scenarios, obtain test results with good repeatability, and thus improve the quality of personnel reliability data collection.

[0010] Furthermore, in some embodiments, the control system includes a second operation interface, and through the second operation interface, the nuclear power plant simulator can be instructed to generate the simulated faults.

[0011] Further, in some embodiments, the nuclear power plant personnel reliability simulation test system further includes a data summarization and analysis system, and the data summarization and analysis system outputs personnel reliability simulation test data according to the simulation test results.

[0012] According to an embodiment of another aspect of the present invention, there is provided a method for evaluating a nuclear power plant personnel error scenario. This method uses the nuclear power plant personnel reliability simulation test system provided in any of the foregoing embodiments, and includes the following steps:

[0013] Step a): Provide a simulation test scenario, where the simulation test scenario includes a simulation scope, an initiating event, a superimposed fault and the time of the superimposed fault, and a criterion for determining the success of accident mitigation.

[0014] Step b): Use the nuclear power plant personnel reliability simulation test system to conduct a simulation test, generate the simulation fault according to the simulation test scenario, insert the superimposed fault at a preset time, have the test subject operate the nuclear power plant simulator to perform accident mitigation operations, and use the data acquisition system to record the operation process of the test subject.

[0015] Step c): Use the nuclear power plant simulator to simulate the event consequences after the test subject performs the accident mitigation operations, and evaluate the accident mitigation effect.

[0016] Step d): According to the operation process of the test subject recorded in step b) and the evaluation result obtained in step c), count the error states of the test subject in the accident scenario to obtain a personnel error scenario evaluation result.

[0017] This method can collect nuclear power plant personnel reliability data through a standardized method, evaluate personnel reliability, and provide data support for nuclear power plant PSA analysis.

[0018] Further, in some embodiments, in step a), there is also a step of dividing the test scenario into multiple key task units, and each key task unit includes one or more operation behaviors that play a role in accident mitigation; in step c), an evaluation is made on whether each key task unit is successfully completed.

[0019] Further, in some embodiments, step a) further includes a verification step, and in the verification step, the nuclear power plant simulator is used to verify the feasibility of the simulation test scenario.

[0020] Further, in some embodiments, in step c), the human error probability HEP of each task unit is calculated respectively.

[0021] HEP = E / N

[0022] Among them, E is the number of mistakes, and N is the number of opportunities.

[0023] Furthermore, in some embodiments, in step b), there is also a step of recording the macro-cognitive function failure mode.

[0024] Furthermore, in some embodiments, there is also a step of evaluating the possibility of error recovery. Description of the Drawings

[0025] Figure 1 It is a flowchart for evaluating the personnel error scenario in a nuclear power plant in an embodiment.

[0026] Meanings of the reference numerals: 1 - step a); 2 - step b); 3 - step c); 4 - step d).

[0027] The purpose of the above-mentioned drawings is to make a detailed description of the present invention so that those skilled in the art can understand the technical concept of the present invention, rather than aiming to limit the present invention. Detailed Embodiments

[0028] The present invention will be further described in detail below through specific embodiments in conjunction with the drawings.

[0029] The mention of "embodiment" in this article means that the specific features, structures or characteristics described in conjunction with the embodiment may be included in at least one embodiment of this article. The phrase appearing at various positions in the specification does not necessarily refer to the same embodiment, nor is it limited to mutually exclusive independent or alternative embodiments. Those skilled in the art should be able to understand that the embodiments in this article can be combined with other embodiments without structural conflicts.

[0030] In the description of this article, the meaning of "a plurality" is at least two.

[0031] With the continuous improvement of the safety requirements of the public and regulatory agencies for nuclear power plants, the impact of personnel reliability on the safe operation of nuclear power plants has also received more and more attention and emphasis. Personnel reliability data is one of the important inputs for human reliability analysis (HRA), and it is also the main source of the uncertainty of the results of human reliability analysis and probabilistic safety assessment (PSA). Personnel reliability data directly affects the results of PSA and the quality of risk insights. However, at present, there is a lack of an effective system to effectively test personnel reliability, and it is also difficult to evaluate the personnel error state under specific accident scenarios, which is not conducive to the optimization of PSA results and the improvement of the safety management level of nuclear power plants.

[0032] To solve the above problems, an embodiment of one aspect of the present invention provides a nuclear power plant personnel reliability test system, which includes a nuclear power plant simulator, a control system, and a data acquisition system. Among them, the nuclear power plant simulator provides a personnel operation interface, stores and can execute simulation test programs. The nuclear power plant simulator can simulate the operation of the nuclear power plant, provide simulated faults, and simulate the response of nuclear power plant equipment to personnel operations under real working conditions; the control system is signal-connected to the nuclear power plant simulator and can instruct the nuclear power plant simulator to generate simulated faults. The instructions can be automatically generated by program control. In a preferred embodiment, the control system has a second operation interface, and the operator can manually instruct the nuclear power plant simulator to generate simulated faults through the second operation interface; the data acquisition system includes a simulator data recording system and a camera system. The simulator data recording system collects the background operation data (log files) of the nuclear power plant simulator, and the camera system records the personnel operation images.

[0033] In a preferred embodiment, the nuclear power plant personnel reliability test system further includes a summary and analysis system, which outputs personnel reliability simulation test data according to the test results of the personnel operating the nuclear power plant personnel reliability test system.

[0034] According to an embodiment of another aspect of the present invention, a method for evaluating nuclear power plant personnel error scenarios is provided, and this method uses the nuclear power plant personnel reliability test system provided in any of the foregoing embodiments. As Figure 1 shown, this method includes 1-step a), 2-step b), 3-step c), 4-step d), specifically:

[0035] Step a): Provide a simulation test scenario.

[0036] Carry out a scenario test for the scenario to be tested, and set up a simulation test scenario based on the regulations, operation experience, and PSA results of the nuclear power plant, etc. The test scenario can combine the PSA analysis results and select an accident scenario that includes personnel error events with greater impact on risks; it can also combine the operation experience of the nuclear power plant and select an accident scenario that has a greater impact on the normal operation of the power plant. According to the selected accident scenario, determine the purpose of the simulation test, set the corresponding simulation range for the nuclear power plant simulator, set the corresponding initiating event, superimposed faults, and the time of the superimposed faults, and determine the criteria for judging the success of accident mitigation.

[0037] In a preferred embodiment, before the formal test, it also includes a verification step to confirm the feasibility of the simulation scenario. It is reviewed by nuclear power plant instructors or other power plant personnel familiar with power plant operation. Before carrying out the simulator test, arrange a pre-run of the test scenario, and use the nuclear power plant simulator to verify the feasibility of the simulation test scenario. If the accident scenario can be carried out and completed according to the process designed by the scenario, it is considered that the scenario can be realized.

[0038] In a preferred embodiment, it further includes the step of dividing the test scenario into multiple critical task elements (CTEs) according to the HRA task analysis. The CTEs are determined based on the procedures and are the smallest task elements that play a decisive role in accident mitigation (such as procedure jumps and frequently failed steps), and include one or more operation behaviors that can mitigate the accident.

[0039] In one embodiment, the CTE division in the steam generator tube rupture (SGTR) accident scenario is shown in Table 1.

[0040]

[0041]

[0042] Table 1 CTE record form for SGTR accident scenario

[0043] According to the CTE items to be investigated, define the data collection scope and the data information to be collected, and prepare a data collection record form or the corresponding system software.

[0044] Step b): Using the operating team as the test subjects, carry out simulation tests using the nuclear power plant personnel reliability simulation test system. According to the selected test scenario, instruct the nuclear power plant simulator to generate corresponding simulated faults, and insert superimposed faults by the program or the instructor manually at a preset time. Let the test subjects operate the nuclear power plant simulator to perform accident mitigation operations. During the operation of the test subjects, use the data collection system to record the operation process of the test subjects.

[0045] Among them, the simulator data recording system automatically records the background data of the nuclear power plant simulator to form a log file, and the camera system records the operation images of the personnel. In some embodiments, it can also be recorded by specialized personnel such as PSA / HRA personnel for the accident response process and the corresponding time parameters.

[0046] Step c): Use the nuclear power plant simulator to simulate the event consequences after the test subjects perform accident mitigation operations, and evaluate the accident mitigation effect.

[0047] In a preferred embodiment, it is judged separately whether each CTE is successfully executed: according to whether the CTE is successfully executed, makes a mistake or is restored after making a mistake, make corresponding records in the success / failure column in Table 1; the "main responder" in Table 1 is the actual executor of this CTE, such as the reactor operator or the entire team.

[0048] If human errors occur during accident mitigation operations, the corresponding macro - cognitive function error modes should also be recorded for subsequent aggregation and analysis of the collected data. Macro - cognitive functions are generally divided into monitoring / attention, understanding, response planning, execution, supervision, and inter - team coordination. Each macro - cognitive function has several performance - influencing factors, and the performance - influencing factors represent challenges to the macro - cognitive function. Collecting performance - influencing factors is beneficial for providing a basis for evaluating the differences in team performance, assessing the impact of scenarios on team performance, and providing a basis for predicting HEP using scenario - based HRA methods.

[0049] In one embodiment, the error mode record form for macro - cognitive functions is shown in Table 2.

[0050] In the following table, "■" indicates that in this embodiment, the error mode "Alarm: Failure to detect or respond to critical alarms" under the macro - cognitive function "monitoring / attention".

[0051]

[0052] Table 2 Partial error modes of macro - cognitive functions

[0053] For each CTE, an evaluation is made on whether it is effective according to the performance criteria. By recording the total number of successes and failures of each type of CTE, the human error probability of the corresponding macro - cognitive function of each type of CTE can be calculated. That is, for a given CTE, the calculation method of its HEP is: HEP = E / N, where E is the number of errors and N is the total number of executions, that is, the number of opportunities.

[0054] Step d): According to the operation process of the test subject recorded in step b) and the evaluation results obtained in step c), count the error status of the test subject in the accident scenario and evaluate the human error scenario. In different embodiments, the statistics and calculation work can be completed manually, or manually or automatically entered into the aggregation and analysis system, and the results are output by the aggregation and analysis system. By counting the number of executions and errors of the same CTE in a single simulation test, the error probability of the CTE in this simulation test can be calculated according to classical estimation. This data is the data result of the collection task in a single simulation test, which can be used for point - value estimation of the CTE task error probability or as data input to the relevant database.

[0055] The method for evaluating human error scenarios of nuclear power plant personnel provided in the above embodiments can provide repeatable test scenarios for multiple tests, improve the accuracy of human reliability data, and thus improve the evaluation level and safety management level of nuclear power plant PSA.

[0056] After the simulation test, collect and record the performance influencing factors of relevant personnel's behaviors. There are many performance influencing factors for personnel's behaviors, which are usually defined by HRA personnel according to the objectives and requirements of data collection and combined with previous HRA method experiences. At the same time, it can be further optimized after communicating with instructors and operators.

[0057] Each macro - cognitive function has specific performance influencing factors. In one embodiment, the influencing factors for alarm detection include monitoring mode (obvious / checking guided by procedures / monitoring guided by procedures / active non - procedure detection), alarm board status (poor / busy / overloaded), and expected changes in alarms (expected / unexpected), etc.

[0058] In the preferred embodiment, in addition to performance influencing factors, it is also necessary to confirm whether the mistakes have been recovered and who has completed the recovery. The recovery includes immediate recovery and delayed recovery, and the recovery methods include self - recovery by personnel, peer - check recovery, team recovery, shift supervisor identification recovery, etc.

[0059] Furthermore, if a certain CTE is affected by other CTEs, it is also necessary to evaluate the factors affecting task relevance, such as task similarity, same personnel, close time, same location, same equipment, same clue, same environment, unreliable system feedback, cultural similarity, etc.

[0060] Based on the results of the above - mentioned evaluation of the scenarios of personnel mistakes in nuclear power plants, communicate and discuss some issues in the accident response process, conduct a detailed analysis of the personnel mistakes that occurred, and determine the lessons learned and improvement measures.

[0061] The purpose of the above - mentioned embodiments is to make a detailed description of the present invention in combination with the accompanying drawings so that those skilled in the art can understand the technical concept of the present invention. Within the scope of the disclosure of the present invention, optimizing or equivalently replacing the involved method steps, and combining the implementation manners in different embodiments without principle conflicts all fall within the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A nuclear power plant personnel reliability simulation test system, characterized in that: include: A nuclear power plant simulator that provides a personnel operation interface, stores and is capable of executing simulation test programs to simulate nuclear power plant operation and is capable of providing simulated failures; A control system connected to the nuclear power plant simulator signal and capable of instructing the nuclear power plant simulator to generate the simulated fault; The data acquisition system includes a simulator data recording system and a camera system, wherein the simulator data recording system collects the operating data of the nuclear power plant simulator, and the camera system records the operating images of personnel.

2. The nuclear power plant personnel reliability simulation test system according to claim 1, characterized in that: The control system includes a second operation interface, and the second operation interface is used to generate instructions so that the nuclear power plant simulator generates the simulated fault.

3. The nuclear power plant personnel reliability simulation test system according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that: It also includes a data summary and analysis system, which outputs personnel reliability simulation test data according to the simulation test results.

4. A method for evaluating a scenario of personnel error in a nuclear power plant, characterized in that: A nuclear power plant personnel reliability simulation test system as claimed in any one of claims 1 to 3 is used, and comprises the following steps: Step a): providing a simulation test scenario, wherein the simulation test scenario includes a simulation scope, an initiating event, a superimposed fault and the time of the superimposed fault, and a criterion for determining successful accident mitigation; Step b): using the nuclear power plant personnel reliability simulation test system to carry out a simulation test, generating the simulated fault according to the simulation test scenario, inserting the superimposed fault at a preset time, and having the test personnel operate the nuclear power plant simulator to perform accident mitigation operations, and using the data acquisition system to record the operation process of the test personnel; Step c): using the nuclear power plant simulator to simulate the consequences of the accident after the test personnel perform the accident mitigation operation, and evaluating the accident mitigation effect; Step d): according to the operation process of the test personnel recorded in step b) and the evaluation result obtained in step c), the error status of the test personnel in the accident scenario is counted to obtain the evaluation result of the personnel error scenario.

5. The method for evaluating a nuclear power plant personnel error scenario according to claim 4, characterized in that: The step a) also includes dividing the test scenario into a plurality of key task units, each of which includes one or more operational behaviors that contribute to accident mitigation; and in the step c), evaluating whether each of the key task units is successfully completed.

6. The method for evaluating a nuclear power plant personnel error scenario according to claim 4, characterized in that: The step a) also includes a verification step, in which the feasibility of the simulation test scenario is verified using the nuclear power plant simulator.

7. The method for evaluating a nuclear power plant personnel error scenario according to claim 5, characterized in that: In the step c), the human error probability HEP of each task unit is evaluated respectively. HEP=E / N, Among them, E is the number of mistakes and N is the number of opportunities.

8. The method for evaluating a nuclear power plant personnel error scenario according to any one of claims 4 to 7, characterized in that: The step b) also includes the step of recording the macro-cognitive function error pattern.

9. The method for evaluating a scenario of personnel error in a nuclear power plant according to any one of claims 4 to 7, characterized in that: It also includes the step of evaluating the possibility of error recovery.

Images