Nuclear Engineering and Technology

Korean Nuclear Society (한국원자력학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The game of safety behaviors among different departments of the nuclear power plants

  • Yuan, Da (School of Resource, Environment and Safety Engineering, University of South China) ;
  • Wang, Hanqing (School of Resource, Environment and Safety Engineering, University of South China) ;
  • Wu, Jian (College of Systems Engineering, National University of Defense Technology)
  • Received : 2021.02.02
  • Accepted : 2021.09.04
  • Published : 2022.03.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

To study the developments and variations of unsafe behaviors in nuclear power plants thus reduce the possibility of human-related accidents, this paper, based on the Game Theory, focused on the changes in benefits of the Department of Management, Operational and Emergency in a nuclear power plant, and established the expected revenue functions of these departments. Additionally, the preventive measures of unsafe behaviors in nuclear power plants were also presented in terms of these 3 departments. Results showed that the violations of the Operation Department (OD) and the Emergency Department (ED) were not only relevant with the factors such as their own risks, costs, and the responsibility-sharing due to accidents, but also affected by the safety investments from the Management Department (MD). Furthermore, results also showed that the accident-induced responsibility-sharing of both the OD and the ED would rise, if the MD increased the investments in safety. As a result, the probability of violation behaviors of these 3 departments would be attenuated consciously, which would reduce the unsafe behaviors in the nuclear power plants significantly.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

The authors appreciate the financial support of the National Natural Science Foundation project (Grant number: U1867221), and of the Hunan Natural Science Foundation Project (Grant number: 2020JJ4078). Special thanks to Dr. Hui Zhu of Qingdao University of Technology, for his guidance and English proof reading of this paper.

References

  1. Z.A. Medvedev, The Legacy of Chernobyl, Norton & Co, New York, NY, 1990.
  2. A. Suzuki, Causes of the JCO criticality accident and lessons learned, Nucl. Energy 39 (2000) 373-380.
  3. IAEA, IAEA International Fact Finding Expert Mission of the Fukushima DalIchi NPP Accident Following the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami, 24, IAEA Mission Report Division of Nuclear Installation Safety Department of Nuclear Safety and Security, 2011.
  4. A. Hameed, F. Khan, S. Ahmed, A risk-based shutdown inspection and maintenance interval estimation considering human error, Process Saf. Environ. Protect. 100 (2016) 9-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2015.11.011
  5. Renzhong Liu, Analysis on food safety regulation based on repeated game, China Soft Science Magazine 9 (2011) 167-171 (in Chinese).
  6. W. Shi, F. Jiang, Q. Zheng, Analysis and control of human error, Procedia Engineering 26 (2011) 2126-2132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.11.2415
  7. M. Seredynski, P. Bouvry, Analysing the development of cooperation in MANETs using evolutionary game theory, J. Supercomput. 63 (2017) 854-870. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-012-0769-7
  8. J. Cleveland, A.S. Ackleh, Evolutionary game theory on measure spaces: well-Posedness, Nonlinear Anal. R. World Appl. 14 (2018) 785-797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nonrwa.2012.08.002
  9. S. Kim, Adaptive online power control scheme based on the evolutionary game theory, IET Commun. 5 (2011) 2648-2655. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-com.2011.0093
  10. Xiaomin Zhao, Xueli Bai, How to motivate the producers' green innovation in WEEE recycling in China? An analysis based on evolutionary game theory, Waste management (New York, N.Y.). 122 (2021) 26-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2020.12.027
  11. Quanlong Liu, Xinchun Li, Xianfei Meng, Effectiveness research on the multiplayer evolutionary game of coalmine safety regulation in China based on system dynamics, Saf. Sci. 111 (2019) 224-233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2018.07.014
  12. Lei Gao, ZhenYu Zhao, The evolutionary game of stakeholders' coordination mechanism of new energy power construction PPP project: a China case, Sustainability 12 (2020) 1-24 (Article number: 1045). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12010001
  13. W. Tang, C. Duffield, D. Young, Partnering mechanism in construction: an empirical study on the Chinese construction industry, J. Construct. Eng. Manag. 132 (2016) 217-229. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2006)132:3(217)
  14. L. Bing, A. Akintoye, P.J. Edwards, C. Hardcastle, The allocation of risk in PPP/PFI construction projects in the UK, Int. J. Proj. Manag. 23 (2005) 25-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2004.04.006
  15. G.J.L. Micheli, E. Cagno, M. Zorzini, Supply risk management vs supplier selection to manage the supply risk in the EPC supply chain, Manag. Res. News 31 (2008) 846-866. https://doi.org/10.1108/01409170810913042
  16. M.P. Abednego, S.O. Ogunlana, Good project governance for proper risk allocation in public-private partnerships in Indonesia, Int. J. Proj. Manag. 24 (2006) 622-634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2006.07.010
  17. C.M. Tam, Build-operate-transfer model for infrastructure developments in Asia: reasons for successes and failures, Int. J. Proj. Manag. 17 (1999) 377-382. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(98)00061-1
  18. J. Korytarova, V. Hromadka, Risk assessment of large-scale infrastructure projects- assumptions and context, Applied Sciences-Basel 11 (2021) 1-12 (Article number: 109).
  19. K.C. Lam, D. Wang, P.T.K. Lee, Y.T. Tsang, Modelling risk allocation decision in construction contracts, Int. J. Proj. Manag. 25 (2007) 485-493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2006.11.005
  20. Yinqiu Tang, Yongqiang Chen, Yuanyuan Hua, Yongcheng Fu, Impacts of risk allocation on conflict negotiation costs in construction projects: does managerial control matter? Int. J. Proj. Manag. 38 (2020) 188-199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2020.03.002
  21. J. Reason, Human Error, Cambridge University Press, UK, 1990, pp. 2-35.
  22. M. Baram, Industry Technology, Chemical Accidents, and Social Control, Reliability and Safety in Hazardous System, 1993, pp. 223-236.
  23. B. Wilpert, P. Klumb, Social dynamics, organization and managerment: factors contributing to system safety, in: B. Wilpert, T.U. Qvale (Eds.), Reliability and Safety in Hazardous Work System, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, UK, Hove, 1993, pp. 87-99.
  24. Kwang Seok Lee, A Research Framework of Organizational Factors on Safety in the republic of KOREA, in : IAEA. Organizational Factors in Hunching Human Performance in Nuclear Power Plants, Report of a Technical Committee meeting held in Ittinger, IAEA-TECDOC-943, Switzerland, 1995.
  25. J. Rasmussen, K. Vicente, Coping with human errors through system design : implications for ecological interface design, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud. 31 (1989) 517-534. https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7373(89)90014-x
  26. W.A. Wagenaar, A.M. Sluverijn, P.T.W. Hudson, Safety management in Intensive care wards, in: B. Wilpert, T.U. Qvale (Eds.), Reliability and Safety in Hazardous Work System, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, UK, Hove, 1993, pp. 157-169.
  27. T.U. Qvale, Design for safety and productivity in largescale industrial projects: the case of the Norwegian offshore oil development, in: B. Wilpert, U. T (Eds.), Reliability and Safety in Hazardous Work System, Hove : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates operation, UK, 1993, pp. 195-221.
  28. W.B. Rouse, J. Cannon-Bowers, E. Salas, The role of mental models in team performance in complex systems, IEEE Transactions on Systems Man & Cybernetics 22 (1992) 1296-1308. https://doi.org/10.1109/21.199457
  29. K. Sasou, K. Takano, S. Yoshimura, et al., Modeling and simulation of operator team behavior in nuclear power plants, Adv. Hum. Factors Ergon. 20 (1995) 415-420.
  30. K. Sasou, J. Reason, Team errors: definition and taxonomy, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 65 (1999) 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(98)00074-X
  31. ShuY, FurutaK, KondoS, Team performance modeling for HRA in dynamic situations, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 78 (2002) 111-121. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(02)00111-4
  32. S.H. Shen, C. Smidts, A. Mosleh, A methodology for collection and analysis of human error data based on a cognitive model: IDA, Nucl. Eng. Des. 172 (1997) 157-186. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0029-5493(97)00002-2
  33. Y.H.J. Chang, A. Mosleh, Cognitive modeling and dynamic probabilistic simulation of operating crew response to complex system accidents. Part 2: IDAC performance influencing factors model, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 92 (2007) 1061-1075. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2006.05.011
  34. Jaewhan Kim, Jinkyun Park, Wonden Jung, Ji Tae Kim, Characteristics of test and maintenance human errors leading to unplanned reactor trips in nuclear power plants, Nucl. Eng. Des. 239 (2009) 2530-2536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2009.06.010
  35. W. Preischl, M. Hellmich, Human errors probabilities from operational experience of German nuclear power plants, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 109 (2013) 150-159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2012.08.004
  36. K. Jussi, Vaurio, Human factors, human reliability and risk assessment in license renewal of a nuclear power plants, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 94 (2009) 1818-1826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2009.05.014
  37. M. Khalaquzzaman, Hyun Gook Kang, Man Cheol Kim, Poong Hyun Seong, A model for estimation of reactor spurious shutdown rate considering maintenance human errors in reactor protection system of nuclear power plants, Nucl. Eng. Des. 240 (2010) 2963-2971. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2010.05.031
  38. H. Liao, J. Forester, V.N. Dang, A. Bye, E. Lois, Assessment of HRA method predictions against operating crew performance: Part I: study background, design and methodology, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 191 (2019) 1-6 (Article number: 106509).
  39. Jianjun Jiang, Yiqun Wang, Li Zhang, Daqing Wu, Min Li, Xie Tian, Pengcheng Li, Licao Dai, Peiyao Li, Xianyun Shi, Shiwei Wang, Anna Zhang, A cognitive reliability model research for complex digital human-computer interface of industrial system, Saf. Sci. 108 (2018) 196-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.07.016
  40. Licao Dai, Li Zhang, Pengcheng Li, HRA in China: model and data, Saf. Sci. 49 (2011) 468-472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2010.11.003
  41. Li Zhang, Xuhong He, Licao Dai, Xiangrui Huang, The simulator experimental study on the operator reliability of Qinshan nuclear power plant, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 92 (2007) 252-259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2005.12.005
  42. Yanhua Zou, Li Zhang, Study on dynamic evolution of operators' behavior in digital nuclear power plant main control room Part I: qualitative analysis, Saf. Sci. 80 (2015) 296-300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.07.033
  43. Yanhua Zou, Li Zhang, Licao Dai, Pengcheng Li, Qing Tao, Human reliability analysis for digitized nuclear power plants: case study on the LingAo II nuclear power plant, Nuclear Engineering and Technology 49 (2017) 335-341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2017.01.011
  44. Jonathan Newton, Evolutionary game theory: a renaissance, Games 9 (2018) 1-67 (Article Number: 31). https://doi.org/10.3390/g9010001
  45. S. Brown Joel, Why Darwin would have loved evolutionary game theory, in: Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 283, 2016, p. 20160847, https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2016.0847.
  46. Dehai Liu, Xingzhi Xiao, Hongyi Li, Weiguo Wang, Historical evolution and benefit-cost explanation of periodical fluctuation in coal mine safety supervision: an evolutionary game analysis framework, Eur. J. Oper. Res. 243 (2015) 974-984. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2014.12.046