Overall

Language: korean

Conflict of Interest: In relation to this article, we declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Publication history: Received October 30, 2022
Revised November 29, 2022
Accepted December 1, 2022

This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/bync/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Most Cited

Delphi/AHP 기반 발사장 주변 및 비행경로의 해상안전 강화를 위한 위협요인 분석

An Analysis of Threat Factors for Strengthen Maritime Safety around Delphi/AHP-Based Launch Site and Flight Paths

신안태¹ 박병문¹ 변헌수^2†

Ahn-Tae Shin¹ yung-Mun Park¹ Hun-Soo Byun^2†

¹한국항공우주연구원 나로우주센터 59571 전라남도 고흥군 봉래면 하반로 508 ²전남대학교 화공생명공학과 59626 전라남도 여수시 대학로 50

¹Department of NARO Space Center, Korea Aerospace Research Institute, 508 Haban-ro, Bongrae-myeon, Go-Heung, Jeonnam, 59571, Korea ²Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Chonnam National University, 50 Daehak-ro, Yeosu Jeonnam, 59626, Korea

hsbyun@jnu.ac.kr

Korean Chemical Engineering Research, May 2023, 61(2), 208-216(9), 10.9713/kcer.2023.61.2.20 Epub 31 May 2023

Download PDF

Abstract

본 연구는 Delphi/AHP 기법을 사용하여 발사장 주변 및 비행경로의 해상안전 강화를 위한 위협요인 및 중요도를 분석하였다. 우선 Delphi 기법으로, 발사체/공공안전 전문가 집단을 대상으로 4개 질문(발사안전통제 필요성, 발사 공 공안전 확보 최우선 고려사항, 해상안전 확보를 위하여 개선할 사항, 해상안전 위협요인)에 대하여 20개 항목으로 답 변을 도출하였다. 이를 기반으로 AHP 기법으로 각 항목의 중요도를 평가하였다. AHP 분석결과 4개 질문에 대한 평 균 일관성 비율은 4.8%이고, 각 측정지표의 일관성 비율은 3.9~5.7%로써 CR ≤ 0.1(10%) 보다 낮으므로 모두 일관성 이 있음을 확인하였다. 중요도와 우선순위를 고려한 결과, 발사안전통제가 필요한 이유로 발사 사고 시 인적, 물적으 로 큰 피해가 발생 가능성 때문(0.36)으로, 발사안전통제에서 최우선으로 고려할 사항은 위험구역 내 인원, 장비, 시설 의 안전 확보(0.31)로 나타났다. 또한, 발사 해상안전 위협요인으로 가장 우려되는 항목은 통제해역 내 선박의 무단 진 입, 통제 불가 상황(0.30)이며, 현재 개선하여야 할 대책으로는 이러한 상황을 법적으로 통제할 수 있는 근거마련(0.32) 이 가장 시급하다고 나타났다. 본 논문은 위협요인을 전문가 의견 수렴을 통하여 도출하고, 중요도 및 우선순위를 객 관적으로 평가한 부분에 의미가 있다. 향후 위험성 평가 및 안전통제 계획수립 단계에서 중요한 기초자료로 활용될 수 있을 것으로 기대한다.

In this study, using the Delphi method, 20 responses to 4 questions (need for launch safety control, toppriority considerations for ensuring public safety during launch, necessary improvements for securing maritime safety, and maritime safety threat factors) regarding launch vehicles and public safety were obtained from experts, and their importance was evaluated to analyze the factors that threaten the reinforcement of maritime safety around launch sites and flight paths when launching. According to the results of an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) analysis, the consistency ratio of the four questions was 4.8%, which is lower than CR ≤ 0.1(10%), and the consistency percentage of the lower measurement indicators was 3.9~5.7%. The derived importance and priority of maritime safety threat factors during launching were in the following order: Substantial human and physical damage in case of launch accidents(0.36), Prepare legal bases (e.g., penalty details) regarding maritime control(0.32), Secure the safety of personnel, equipment, and facilities in danger zone(0.31), Unauthorized entry of vessels in maritime control zones and non-compliance to restrictions(0.30). This article can serve as a reference for strengthening maritime safety in areas around launch sites and flight paths.

Keywords

Delphi AHP(Analytic Hierarchy Process) Launch hazard area Public safety Maritime safety

References

1. Yun, J. Y. and Park, D. J., “A Study on the Development of Assessment Index for Catastrophic Incident Warning Sign at Refinery and rtrochemical Plants,” Korean Chem. Eng. Res.,57(5), 637-651(2019).
2. Seol, J. W., Chae. C. k., Lee, K. J., Moon, M. H. and Ko, J. W.,“A Study on Development of Functional Recommendation for Planning mergency,” Korean Chem. Eng. Res., 55(2), 195-200 (2017).
3. Kim, M. C., Lee, M. J., Lee, D. G. and Baek, J. B., “Priority Analysis of Cause Factors of Safety Valve Failure Mode Using Analytical Hierarchy Process,” Korean Chem. Eng. Res., 60(3),347-355(2022).
4. Baek, S. H., Lee, A. Y., Park, H. J., Lee, W. S. and Choi, K. S.,“Study on the Method to Improve a Maritime Safety by Analysing the Distribution Characteristics of the Ships on Marine Firing Range,” Journal of the Korean Society of Safety., 35(3), 79-85 (2020).
5. Shin, A. T. and Byun, H. S., “Consequence Analysis and Risk Reduction Methods for Propulsion Test Facility,” Korean Chem.Eng. Res., 54(3), 360-366(2016).
6. Sim, H. S., Choi, K. S. and Ko, J. H., “Review of Acceptable Risk to the Public from the Launch of aSpace Launch Vehicle,”Korean Society for Aeronautical and Space Sciences., 1,258-1,265(2014).
7. Shin, A. T., Park, B. M. and Byun, H. S., “A Study on the Calculation of Minimum Safety Distance during Storage and Combustion Test of Solid Propellants for Launch Vehicles,” Korean Chem. Eng. Res., 59(2), 180-185(2021).
8. Seol, J. W., Chae, C. K., Lee, K. J., Moon, M. H. and Ko, J. W.,“A Study on Development of Functional Recommendation for Planning Emergency Response Using Model-Based Approach,”Korean Chem. Eng. Res., 55(2), 195-200(2017).
9. Ham, Y. H. and Baek, Y. K., “An Objective Method of Risk Evaluation based on RAM (Reliability, MTBF) and AHP Data Analysis for Warship,” Journal of the Kimst, 21(5), 714-721(2018).
10. NASA, “Range Flight Safety Requirements,” NASA-STD-8719.25,17-18(2021).
11. Range Commanders Council, “Common Risk Criteria for National Test Ranges,” STANDARD 321-20(2020).
12. Feinstein, D., Heugel, W. F., Kardatzke, M. L. and Weinstock,A., “Personnel Casualty Study,” IITRI J6067(2020).
13. Anderson, D., “Strand of System, The Philosophy of C, Peirce,West Lafayette,” Purdue University Press(1997).
14. Satty, T. L., “Multi-criteria Decision Making,” The Analytic Hierarchy Process, AHP series, Vol. 1, RWS Publications(2011).