000			02166nab a2200229 4500
005			20260520004418.0
008			260224s2013 xxu ing
041			_aInglés
100	1		_aUversen, Fionn _953073
100	1		_aGressgard, Leif Jarle _953074
100	1		_aThorogood, John L. _937773
100	1		_aBalov, Mohsen Karimi _953075
245	0	0	_aDrilling Automation: Potential for Human Error
260			_cmar. 2013
270			_a03/05/2013 ; 03/05/2013
300			_a14 p. ; 45-59
520			_aTraducción del resúmen del autor: Mode confusion is an automated system behaving differently than expected and the operator not being aware of (or not properly understanding) what the system is doing. Mode confusion is well recognized in the aviation community and has been indicated in a number of high-profile aviation accidents. As an example, a JAS Gripen fighter jet crashed during a test flight in the 1980s because the pilot tried to manually correct instability while the plane's computer was automatically trying to do the same. The potential for the same type of problems, and associated safety hazards, arises in drilling-rig operations as a result of the increasing trend for automation and advisory systems. A simple example could be formation fracturing with an automated downhole pressure control system when displacing to higher mud weight caused by the driller relying on the automated system to maintain sufficiently low flow rate without having reconfigured the system with the new mud properties. This paper describes how the use of a drilling support system in different modes and levels of automation may influence the system operator's performance and risk of human error. The development of a systematic method for detecting mode-confusion problems by model checking is central in this respect. The test cases have been simulated in a virtual test environment created at IRIS specifically for such purposes. The test environment and test cases are described, and results are reported and discussed.
581			_a1
773	0		_tSPE Drilling & Completion _g28
942			_cARTICULO
999			_c187643 _d187643