Prediction of Human Error in Chemical Tanker Ship’s Tank Heating Process to Enhance Operational Safety

Abstract

Depending on the nature of the cargo, specific temperatures must be maintained throughout the safe carrying and loading/unloading of chemical tankers. In this regard, tank heating systems are essential for maintaining the proper temperature range for chemical cargoes, particularly those transported at viscous or near-freezing temperatures. The operational process presents safety challenges because of the nature of the task that the ship crew must perform. Since human error is increasingly a major contributor to marine mishaps, this paper conducts a systematic human error prediction to ensure safe tank heating operations under various conditions. However, improper use of these systems can cause problems such as fire and explosion risk due to overheating, toxic gas formation, cargo deterioration, and equipment damage. This study examines operational practices and risks related to using tank heating systems in chemical tankers; evaluations are made in terms of energy efficiency, cargo safety, and environmental impacts. The paper discusses the fuzzy approach’s Success Likelihood Index Method (SLIM) to achieve this. The fuzzy approach in the suggested method can assist experts’ judgment in decision-making, and the SLIM offers a thorough human error prediction tool. “Perform the temperature increase gradually and prevent sudden temperature increases” is identified as a critical task with the highest human error probability (HEP: 5.28E-02) during chemical tanker tank heating operations.

Keywords

Maritime safety / Human error / Success likelihood index method / Tank heating / Tanker ship

References

[1] Abbasbandy S, Hajjari T. A new approach for ranking of trapezoidal fuzzy numbers. Computers & mathematics with applications, 2009, 57(3): 413-419

[2] Abrishami S, Khakzad N, Hosseini SM, van Gelder P. BN-SLIM: A Bayesian Network methodology for human reliability assessment based on Success Likelihood Index Method (SLIM). Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2020, 193: 106647

[3] ABS (American Bureau of Shipping)Guidelines for the Design and Operation of Chemical Tankers, 2020

[4] Adumene S, Afenyo M, Salehi V, William P. An adaptive model for human factors assessment in maritime operations. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 2022, 89: 103293

[5] Ahn SI, Kurt RE. Application of a CREAM based framework to assess human reliability in emergency response to engine room fires on ships. Ocean Engineering, 2020, 216: 108078

[6] Ahn SI, Kurt RE, Akyuz E. Application of a SPAR-H based framework to assess human reliability during emergency response drill for man overboard on ships. Ocean Engineering, 2022, 251: 111089

[7] Akyuz E, Celik E. The role of human factor in maritime environment risk assessment: A practical application on Ballast Water Treatment (BWT) system in ship. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 2018, 24(3): 653-666

[8] Akyuz E, Celik M. A hybrid human error probability determination approach: The case of cargo loading operation in oil/chemical tanker ship. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2016, 43: 424-431

[9] Akyuz E, Celik M, Akgun I, Cicek K. Prediction of human error probabilities in a critical marine engineering operation onboard chemical tanker ship: The case of ship bunkering. Safety Science, 2018, 110: 102-109

[10] Allianz Global CorporateSpecialtySafety shipping review 2024, 2024MunichAllianz Global Corporate & Specialty

[11] Arici SS, Tekeli MM, Sezer SI, Akyuz E, Arslan O, Aydin M (2024) Prediction of human error probability in helicopter to ship transfer operation under an evidential reasoning extended CREAM approach. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2024.2399427

[12] Aydin M, Camliyurt G, Akyuz E, Arslan O. Analyzing human error contributions to maritime environmental risk in oil/chemical tanker ship. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 2021, 27(7): 1838-1859

[13] Badida P, Balasubramaniam Y, Jayaprakash J. Risk evaluation of oil and natural gas pipelines due to natural hazards using fuzzy fault tree analysis. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2019, 66: 284-292

[14] Barua A, Mudunuri LS, Kosheleva OWhy trapezoidal and triangular membership functions work so well: Towards a theoretical explanation, 2013

[15] Cargo Heating (2022) https://knowledgeofsea.com/cargo-heating/

[16] Castiglia F, Giardina M. Analysis of operator human errors in hydrogen refuelling stations: Comparison between human rate assessment techniques. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2013, 38(2): 1166-1176

[17] Chen SJ, Hwang CL. Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making methods. Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications, 1992BerlinSpringer289-486

[18] DNV GL. Risk Assessment for Tank Heating Operations. DNV GL Guidelines. Focuses on risks and human factors associated with tank heating operations, 2019

[19] Elidolu G, Ahn SI, Sezer SI, Kurt RE, Akyuz E, Gardoni P. Applying evidential reasoning extended SPAR-H modelling to analyse human reliability on crude oil tanker cargo operation. Safety Science, 2023, 164: 106169

[20] Elidolu G, Akyuz E, Arslan O, Arslanoğlu Y. Quantitative failure analysis for static electricity-related explosion and fire accidents on tanker vessels under fuzzy bow-tie CREAM approach. 131, 2022, 131: 105917

[21] Elidolu G, Uflaz E, Aydin M, Celik E, Akyuz E, Arslan O. Numerical risk analysis of gas freeing process in oil/chemical tanker ships. 266, 2022, 266: 113082

[22] Embrey DE, Humphreys PC, Rosa EA, Kirwan B, Rea KSLIM-MAUD: an approach to assessing human error probabilities using structured expert judgement (NUREG/CR-3518), 1984Washington DCUS Nuclear Regulatory Commission

[23] Erdem P, Akyuz E. An interval type-2 fuzzy SLIM approach to predict human error in maritime transportation. Ocean engineering, 2021, 232: 109161

[24] European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA)Annual overview of marine casualties and incidents, 2023LisbonEMSA

[25] Hameed A, Khan F, Ahmed S. A risk-based shutdown inspection and maintenance interval estimation considering human error. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2016, 100: 9-21

[26] He X, Wang Y, Shen Z, Huang X. A simplified CREAM prospective quantification process and its application. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2008, 93(2): 298-306

[27] Hollnagel ECognitive Reliability and Error Analysis Method (CREAM), 1998Oxford, UKElsevier Science Ltd.

[28] Hsu HM, Chen CT. Aggregation of fuzzy opinions under group decision making. Fuzzy sets and systems, 1996, 79(3): 279-285

[29] Islam R, Abbassi R, Garaniya V, Khan FI. Determination of human error probabilities for the maintenance operations of marine engines. Journal of Ship Production and Design, 2016, 32(4): 226-234

[30] Kandemir Ç, Çelik M, Akyuz E, Aydin O. Application of human reliability analysis to repair & maintenance operations onboard ships: the case of HFO purifier overhauling. Applied ocean research, 2019, 88: 317-325

[31] Karmaker CL, Al Aziz R, Palit T, Bari AM. Analyzing supply chain risk factors in the small and medium enterprises under fuzzy environment: Implications towards sustainability for emerging economies. Sustainable Technology and Entrepreneurship, 2023, 2(1): 100032

[32] Khan FI, Sadiq R. Risk-based prioritization of air pollution monitoring using fuzzy synthetic evaluation technique. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2005, 105: 261-283

[33] Lavasani SM, Ramzali N, Sabzalipour F, Akyuz E. Utilisation of fuzzy fault tree analysis (FFTA) for quantified risk analysis of leakage in abandoned oil and natural-gas wells. Ocean Engineering, 2015, 108: 729-737

[34] Liao W, Qiao Y, Dong T, Gou Z, Chen D. A human reliability analysis method based on STPA-IDAC and BN-SLIM for driver take-over in Level 3 automated driving. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2025, 254: 110577

[35] Liu HC, Wang JH, Zhang L, Zhang QZ. New success likelihood index model for large group human reliability analysis considering noncooperative behaviors and social network. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2022, 228: 108817

[36] Liu X, Yan S, Zhang X, Ahmed W (2024) Dynamic human reliability analysis method for nuclear power plant main control room based on SPAR-H and SD. Nuclear Engineering and Technology, 103253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2024.10.015

[37] Magazinović G. Vertical arrangement of coils for efficient cargo tank heating. International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, 2019, 11(2): 662-670

[38] Marine Accident Investigation BranchReport on the investigation of the cargo tank explosion and fire on board the chemical tanker Stolt Groenland, Ulsan, Republic of Korea, 28 September 2019 (Report No. 9/2021), 2021

[39] Martins MR, Maturana MC. Human error contribution in collision and grounding of oil tankers. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 2010, 30(4): 674-698

[40] National Transportation Safety BoardExplosion and sinking of the Bow Mariner (Marine Accident Report NTSB/MAR-05/01), 2005

[41] Noman MA, Alqahtani FM, Al-Harkan I, Alabdulkarim SA, Alasim F. A new integrated risk-assessment model for minimizing human-machine error consequences in a preventive maintenance system. IEEE Access, 2023, 11: 25253-25265

[42] Oliveira SS, de Albuquerque Soares W, Vasconcelos BM. Fatal fall-from-height accidents: Statistical treatment using the human factors analysis and classification system–HFACS. Journal of Safety Research, 2023, 86: 118-126

[43] Park KS, Lee J. A new method for estimating human error probabilities: AHP -SLIM. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2008, 93(4): 578-587

[44] Pivac I, Magazinović G, et al.Soares G, et al.. Numerical analysis of tank heating coil heat transfer process. Towards Green Marine Technology and Transport, 2015LondonTaylor & Francis Group603-608eBook ISBN9780429225604

[45] Qiao W, Liu Y, Ma X, Liu Y. A methodology to evaluate human factors contributed to maritime accident by mapping fuzzy FT into ANN based on HFACS. Ocean Engineering, 2020, 197: 106892

[46] Ramezani A, Nazari T, Rabiee A, Hadad K, Faridafshin M. Human error probability quantification for NPP post-accident analysis using Cognitive-Based THERP method. Progress in Nuclear Energy, 2020, 123: 103281

[47] Senol YE, Aydogdu YV, Sahin B, Kilic I. Fault tree analysis of chemical cargo contamination by using fuzzy approach. Expert Systems with Applications, 2015, 42(12): 5232-5244

[48] Sezer SI, Akyuz E, Arslan O. An extended HEART Dempster–Shafer evidence theory approach to assess human reliability for the gas freeing process on chemical tankers. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2022, 220: 108275

[49] Sezer SI, Akyuz E, Gardoni P. Prediction of human error probability under Evidential Reasoning extended SLIM approach: The case of tank cleaning in chemical tanker. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2023, 238: 109414

[50] Shepherd AHierarchial task analysis, 2003

[51] Singh K, Kaushik M, Kumar M. Integrating α-cut interval based fuzzy fault tree analysis with Bayesian network for criticality analysis of submarine pipeline leakage: A novel approach. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2022, 166: 189-201

[52] Spurgin AJHuman reliability assessment: Theory and practice, 2009

[53] Sugeno MFuzzy modeling and control: selected works of M. Sugeno, 1999

[54] Tang N, Hu H, Xu F, Yeoh JK, Chua DKH, Hu Z. A personalized human factors analysis and classification system (HFACS) for construction safety managementbased on context-aware technology. Enterprise Information Systems, 2022, 16(1): 141-166

[55] Tekeli MM, Arici SS, Sezer SI, Akyuz E, Gardoni P (2024) Predicting human reliability for shore-based LNG bunkering operation process on tanker ships using SLIM and improved Z-numbers. Journal of Marine Science and Application, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11804-024-00492-5

[56] Uflaz E, Sezer SI, Akyuz E, Arslan O, Kurt RE. A human reliability analysis for ship to ship LNG bunkering process under DS evidence fusion HEART approach. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2022, 80: 104887

[57] United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD)Review of maritime transport, 2023

[58] Wang D, Liu J, Yu H. Extending a human error identification and assessment method considering the uncertainty information for human reliability analysis of robot-assisted rehabilitation. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 2024, 133: 108091

[59] Wu Y, Dai L, Kan A, Yang C, Wang F, Zhang G. Theoretical and experimental analysis of the heating operation for cargo oil shipped on an actual voyage. Ships and Offshore Structures, 2023, 18(8): 1171-1180

[60] Zadeh LAFuzzy sets. Information and Control, 1965

[61] Zhang M, Zhang D, Yao H, Zhang K. A probabilistic model of human error assessment for autonomous cargo ships focusing on human–autonomy collaboration. Safety science, 2020, 130: 104838

[62] Zhou JL, Yu ZT, Xiao RB. A large-scale group Success Likelihood Index Method to estimate human error probabilities in the railway driving process. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2022, 228: 108809

[63] Zhou JL, Zhou YL, Xiao RB (2024) A large-scale group SLIM considering expert credibility under social network to estimate human error probabilities in the railway driving process. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 110648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2024.110648

[64] Zhou Q, Wong YD, Loh HS, Yuen KF. A fuzzy and Bayesian network CREAM model for human reliability analysis–The case of tanker shipping. Safety science, 2018, 105: 149-157

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

Harbin Engineering University and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature