Human Error Analysis

Introduction

Human Error Analysis is a systematic engineering approach for the development of an integrated methodology to locate, evaluate and minimize failures due to humans that may produce accidents, plant losses or major safety events. Across risk critical industries including oil & gas, chemicals, power generation, LNG infrastructure and massive industrial complexes inquiries into incidents have a tendency to reveal that failure is hardly ever an equipment only issue. They are a result of how people use systems in real life.

We provide scientific engineering quality Human Error Analysis, here we take it much further than just observations and checklists. Our contribution is an investigation combining human factors engineering, task based analysis, operational expertise, and risk assessment methods to clarify where human failures begin, how they spread and what quality measures are necessary for avoiding them.

Why Human Error Analysis Is Critical in High-Risk Operations

Modern production facilities are almost highly automated, very interconnected and the products are more complex. Key activities must be carried out by operators, technicians and supervisors under conditions of time pressure, abnormal plant status, taskloading complexity and environmental strain.

In the absence of an established Human Error Analysis:

• Each person is accountable for his or her safety and safety-critical tasks are performed based on the individual’s experience rather than controlled by engineered controls
• Human failures are latent, they go unnoticed until an incident occurs
• Procedures look good on paper but they break during real events
• The impact of human activities is largely underrated by risk estimations

Human Error Analysis offers a technical view of human system interaction, which can be used by an organization to mitigate vulnerabilities from forming an incident.

What Is Human Error Analysis? 

Human Error Analysis is a process oriented, methodological review of how human behavior  actions and decisions or lack of the former can lead to hazardous results. Engineering-wise, it looks at:

• Execution of tasks in non-normal, abnormal, and emergency situations
• Human reliability within safety-critical operations
• Human, procedural, physical and organisational interactions between people, process, equipment and environment
• Efficientness against error and severity, and recoverability

Unlike qualitative behavioural analysis, engineering-led Human Error Analysis employs systematic procedures, traceable relationships and logical framework that are more appropriate for being submitted to regulators, insurance agencies or high consequence risk evaluations.

Our Human Error Analysis Methodology

1). Identification of Task and Definition of System Boundary

From operations, maintenance to start-up, shutdown and emergency response we catalog list error sensitive tasks and safety critical tasks.

Each task is straightforward in:

• Equipment and system interfaces
• Modes of operation (normal, transient, upset, emergency)
• Human roles and responsibilities

This guarantees that the analysis is based on real plant operations grounded, not in theoretic workflows.

2). Hierarchical Task Analysis (HTA)

Complex activities are subdivided into organized task steps including:

• Manual actions
• Decision points
• Information needs
• Interdependencies between steps

HTA identifies situations where cognitive overload, bad sequencing, or procedural complexity will likely make it more likely that someone would screw up.

3). Human Error Identification

We employ techniques of organized identification, to examine plausible human failure modes such as:

• Errors of omission and commission
• Timing and sequencing errors
• Misinterpretation of information
• Incorrect decisions under stress

Each mistake is associated with a realistic operational context, making them relevant and credible.

4). Human Reliability Analysis (HRA)

When necessary, Human Reliability Analysis is used to predict probability of errors that were identified by:

• Task complexity and time constraints
• Interface and alarm design
• Training, experience, and competency
• Environmental and ergonomic conditions

These inputs can be fed into QRA, LOPA, SIL verification, risk models to enhance its realism.

5). Performance Shaping Factors (PSFs) Assessment

The performance of human is affected by the system and organisation. We assess PSFs such as:

• Procedure quality and usability
• Control room and field ergonomics
• Alarm load and prioritisation
• Staffing levels and shift patterns
• Conditions/gear (noise, light, temperature, visibility)

This process differentiates between human errors and failures imposed by the system, leading to a lasting mitigation of risk.

6). Error Consequence and Recovery Evaluation

Not all mistakes result in accidents. We evaluate:

• Error detectability
• Available recovery opportunities
• Barriers preventing escalation
• Contact Datum Safeguards and Protection Systems can be contacted

And this enables the prioritization of errors with real safety or operation implications.

7). Risk Reduction and Engineering Recommendations

The work ends with engineering, hands-on lessons pertaining to how:

• Procedure and task redesign
• Interface and control improvements
• Task simplification and standardisation
• Alarm rationalisation
• Training and competency improvements
• Human-centric safeguard enhancements

All of the recommendations are prioritized, actionable and in line with what we can do operationally.

Where Human Error Analysis Adds Maximum Value

Human Error Analysis delivers the greatest benefit when applied to:

• High-hazard and safety-critical operations
• Brownfield facilities and operational changes
• Incident investigation and learning studies
• SIL, LOPA, and QRA enhancement
• Emergency and evacuation planning
• Pre-Startup Safety Reviews (PSSR)
• Regulatory audits and insurance assessments

The integration of HEA in these actions enhances the realism and quality involved to assess risk as part of the decision making process.

Standards & Compliance – Human Error Analysis

Standard / Guideline	Area of Application	Relevance to Human Error Analysis
IEC 61508 / IEC 61511	Functional Safety, SIL	Evaluating of human actions in safety functions including alarm response and operator intervention
IEC 61882 (HAZOP)	Hazard Identification	Identification of human errors associated with deviations, task failures, escalation scenarios
ISO 6385	Ergonomics	Assessment of the knowledge domain on which once can draw when considering the capabilities of people to carry out tasks and their ability at work
ISO 11064	Control Room Design	Evaluation of the contribution that humans might make towards successful design for humans–system interfaces in up-to-date control rooms as regards success planning as well as alarms systems presentation
API RP 1161	Pipeline Operations	Human factors aspects affecting operational communication and behaviours
API RP 1162	Awareness & Communication	Understanding how individuals interact with pipeline systems from both a reliability management and threats perspective
UK HSE Human Factors Guidance	Human Factors Engineering	Task analysis, performance shaping factors, human failure classification
CCPS Human Factors Guidelines	Process Safety Management	The integration into risk assessment processes or incident prevention purposes

Benefits of Engineering-Led Human Error Analysis

• Reduced likelihood of human-initiated incidents
• Enhanced operating reliability and safety behavior
• Increased consistency between procedures and actual practices
• More defensible in the case of audits and investigations
• Better utilize the ones we have
• Improved workforce confidence and decision-making

Why iFluids Engineering

In the case of iFluids Engineering Human Error Analysis is a technical engineering service, not an audit or a behavioural analysis. Our team combines:

• Human factors engineering expertise
• Experience in process safety and risk assessment
• Hands on experience of high risk industrial operations
• Meeting the international best practice standards

We concentrate on Actual Risk Reduction, Practical Realism and Audit Ready results.

Conclusion

In the analysis of human error, it is not a question of guilt. It’s systems engineering supporting human performance in the real-world operating environments. In complex, dangerous environments, humans are still an essential component of the safety system. Making the systems, and procedures and interfaces work as well as they can when decisions need to be made is often the difference between safe operations and bad accidents.

With the use of structured Human Error Analysis organizations move from reactive learning to proactive risk control (detection of weaknesses, before things happen). When human factors are designed into operations, safety stops being gimmicky, procedures stop being unusable and emergency response become predictable.

Need Expert Human Error Analysis Support? 

Talk to our engineering specialists about identifying human-factor risks, strengthening operational safety, and improving system resilience in high-risk facilities.