IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reensy/v188y2019icp473-482.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-unit risk aggregation with consideration of uncertainty and bias in risk metrics

Author

Listed:
  • Zhou, Taotao
  • Modarres, Mohammad
  • Droguett, Enrique López

Abstract

The risk significance of multi-unit events has received much interest, especially since the 2011 Fukushima–Daiichi accident. However, there have been limited experiences in performing a multi-unit probabilistic risk assessment (MUPRA), considering the interactions among multiple reactor units and fuel storage facilities on a site. While considerable research and development efforts have been devoted over the past few years to MUPRAs, there is still no consensus on a unified MUPRA methodology. A site-based risk model is of great importance for comprehensive risk-informed applications and safety goals evaluations. Further, a site-based MUPRA model needs to aggregate risks from various reactor units’ internal and external sequences of events and modes of operation. Risk values obtained from various initiating events and modes of operation, however, are usually biased very differently due to the various factors such as conservatism and modeling assumption used during their developments. As such, to appropriately aggregate various sequences of events, they should be least biased. This paper discusses the framework of a probabilistic aggregation approach for the multi-unit risk metrics to make them least biased using expert elicitation. More importantly, the paper, through a sensitivity analysis, shows that a biased risk metric, even when it is not aggregated, could mask important contributors to risk and thereby yield incorrect risk contributors. This is done by comparing the risk insights from importance measures for various modeling scope and assumptions that make a risk metric biased. Through an example, it is shown the masking of important risk contributors and human error events would be an important impediment in the MUPRAs. The example provides an illustration of the aggregation process of multi-unit risk metrics for both external events and internal events. The paper demonstrates the importance of biased correction before approaching to multi-unit risk aggregation, especially for the external events.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhou, Taotao & Modarres, Mohammad & Droguett, Enrique López, 2019. "Multi-unit risk aggregation with consideration of uncertainty and bias in risk metrics," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 473-482.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:188:y:2019:i:c:p:473-482
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2019.04.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832018309815
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ress.2019.04.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert T. Clemen & Robert L. Winkler, 1999. "Combining Probability Distributions From Experts in Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(2), pages 187-203, April.
    2. Schroer, Suzanne & Modarres, Mohammad, 2013. "An event classification schema for evaluating site risk in a multi-unit nuclear power plant probabilistic risk assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 40-51.
    3. Zhou, Taotao & Modarres, Mohammad & Droguett, Enrique López, 2018. "An improved multi-unit nuclear plant seismic probabilistic risk assessment approach," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 34-47.
    4. Stan Kaplan, 2000. "‘Combining Probability Distributions from Experts in Risk Analysis’," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(2), pages 155-156, April.
    5. Modarres, Mohammad & Zhou, Taotao & Massoud, Mahmoud, 2017. "Advances in multi-unit nuclear power plant probabilistic risk assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 87-100.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kim, Yongjin & Jang, Seunghyun & Jae, Moosung, 2022. "Evaluation of inter-unit dependency effect on site core damage frequency: Internal and seismic event," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    2. Arigi, Awwal Mohammed & Park, Gayoung & Kim, Jonghyun, 2020. "Dependency analysis method for human failure events in multi-unit probabilistic safety assessments," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    3. Jin, Kyungho & Hwang, Yujeong & Heo, Gyunyoung, 2021. "Development of Dependence Indexes for Multi-Unit Risk Assessment and its Estimation Using Copula," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    4. Xiaohui Chen & Lin Zhang & Ze Zhang, 2020. "An integrated model for maintenance policies and production scheduling based on immune–culture algorithm," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 234(5), pages 651-663, October.
    5. Zhou, Taotao & Modarres, Mohammad & Droguett, Enrique López, 2021. "Multi-unit nuclear power plant probabilistic risk assessment: A comprehensive survey," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    6. Lewis, Austin D. & Groth, Katrina M., 2022. "Metrics for evaluating the performance of complex engineering system health monitoring models," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Woo Sik Jung, 2021. "A Method to Avoid Underestimated Risks in Seismic SUPSA and MUPSA for Nuclear Power Plants Caused by Partitioning Events," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-13, April.
    2. DeJesus Segarra, Jonathan & Bensi, Michelle & Modarres, Mohammad, 2023. "Multi-unit seismic probabilistic risk assessment: A Bayesian network perspective," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    3. Zhou, Taotao & Modarres, Mohammad & Droguett, Enrique López, 2021. "Multi-unit nuclear power plant probabilistic risk assessment: A comprehensive survey," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    4. Zhang, Sai & Du, Mengyu & Tong, Jiejuan & Li, Yan-Fu, 2019. "Multi-objective optimization of maintenance program in multi-unit nuclear power plant sites," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 532-548.
    5. Yoon, Jae Young & Kim, Dong-San, 2022. "Estimating the adverse effects of inter-unit radioactive release on operator actions at a multi-unit site," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    6. Xiaohui Chen & Lin Zhang & Ze Zhang, 2020. "An integrated model for maintenance policies and production scheduling based on immune–culture algorithm," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 234(5), pages 651-663, October.
    7. Jang, Seunghyun & Kim, Yongjin & Jae, Moosung, 2021. "A site risk assessment for internal events: A case study," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).
    8. Cai, Yinan & Golay, Michael W., 2020. "Formulation of A Risk Assessment Framework Capable of Analyzing Nuclear Power Multiunit Accident Scenarios," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    9. Geon Gyu Choi & Woo Sik Jung & Seong Kyu Park, 2021. "Sensitivity Study on the Correlation Level of Seismic Failures in Seismic Probabilistic Safety Assessments," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-20, May.
    10. Zhou, Taotao & Droguett, Enrique López & Modarres, Mohammad, 2020. "A common cause failure model for components under age-related degradation," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    11. Jang, Seunghyun & Jae, Moosung, 2020. "A development of methodology for assessing the inter-unit common cause failure in multi-unit PSA model," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    12. Arigi, Awwal Mohammed & Park, Gayoung & Kim, Jonghyun, 2020. "Dependency analysis method for human failure events in multi-unit probabilistic safety assessments," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    13. Jin, Kyungho & Hwang, Yujeong & Heo, Gyunyoung, 2021. "Development of Dependence Indexes for Multi-Unit Risk Assessment and its Estimation Using Copula," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    14. Song, Wonjong & Park, Sunghyun & Seo, Yein & Jae, Moosung, 2020. "A source term binning methodology for multi-unit consequence analyses," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    15. Kim, Yongjin & Jang, Seunghyun & Jae, Moosung, 2022. "Evaluation of inter-unit dependency effect on site core damage frequency: Internal and seismic event," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    16. Pence, Justin & Sakurahara, Tatsuya & Zhu, Xuefeng & Mohaghegh, Zahra & Ertem, Mehmet & Ostroff, Cheri & Kee, Ernie, 2019. "Data-theoretic methodology and computational platform to quantify organizational factors in socio-technical risk analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 240-260.
    17. Wanxin Feng & Ming Wang & Zhixin Xu & Yu Yu, 2023. "The Method of Calculating the Frequency of the Initiating Event in a Dual-Unit Site with the Example of LOOP Events," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-8, January.
    18. Kenneth Gillingham & William D. Nordhaus & David Anthoff & Geoffrey Blanford & Valentina Bosetti & Peter Christensen & Haewon McJeon & John Reilly & Paul Sztorc, 2015. "Modeling Uncertainty in Climate Change: A Multi-Model Comparison," NBER Working Papers 21637, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Avner Engel & Shalom Shachar, 2006. "Measuring and optimizing systems' quality costs and project duration," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(3), pages 259-280, September.
    20. Atanasov, Pavel & Witkowski, Jens & Ungar, Lyle & Mellers, Barbara & Tetlock, Philip, 2020. "Small steps to accuracy: Incremental belief updaters are better forecasters," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 19-35.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:188:y:2019:i:c:p:473-482. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/reliability-engineering-and-system-safety .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.