인문학
사회과학
자연과학
공학
의약학
농수해양학
예술체육학
복합학
DBpia AI
AI 에이전트
AI 아이디어
AI 리더
AI 뷰어
Citeasy
크롬 서지관리 다운로드
지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
피인용 0
초록·키워드
Objective: This study aims to survey and compare three systemic accident investigation techniques of Accimap, STAMP and FRAM, based on the application studies of the Sewol ferry accident.
Background: Traditional accident investigation methods such as domino models, FTA, etc. work well for losses caused by physical component failures or actions of human in relatively simple systems, but are unable to depict mechanisms generating errors and violations in the current complex socio-technical systems. For better understanding the structure and behavior of the socio-technical systems, systemic techniques have been developed and used.
Method: This study was mainly based on survey of literatures through surfing webpages of ScienceDirect and Google, and ergonomics relevant journals. The key words of Sewol, Sewol ferry, Sewol ferry accident, etc. were used in the survey.
Results: Three systemic accident investigation methods included similar actors in the Sewol ferry accident including government, Ministry of Ocean and Fisheries, Korean Coast Guard, Korean Register of Shipping, Korea Shipping Association, Chonghaejin Marine Company, crew members. The methods graphically represented each level"s failures or performance variabilities of relevant functions and relationships between them. It was shown that the systemic methods consider the entire system, ranging from the environment in which the accident occurred, to the role of government in shaping the system of work. Each method has its own comparative pros and cons, but the Accimap has advantages in terms of time of analysis, data required, model complexity and degree of comprehensiveness.
Conclusion: This study reviewed and compared three systemic accident investigation methods, which showed that there are systemic characteristics and pros and cons in the methods.
Application: The results would be used as a guideline when selecting accident investigation methods.
Background: Traditional accident investigation methods such as domino models, FTA, etc. work well for losses caused by physical component failures or actions of human in relatively simple systems, but are unable to depict mechanisms generating errors and violations in the current complex socio-technical systems. For better understanding the structure and behavior of the socio-technical systems, systemic techniques have been developed and used.
Method: This study was mainly based on survey of literatures through surfing webpages of ScienceDirect and Google, and ergonomics relevant journals. The key words of Sewol, Sewol ferry, Sewol ferry accident, etc. were used in the survey.
Results: Three systemic accident investigation methods included similar actors in the Sewol ferry accident including government, Ministry of Ocean and Fisheries, Korean Coast Guard, Korean Register of Shipping, Korea Shipping Association, Chonghaejin Marine Company, crew members. The methods graphically represented each level"s failures or performance variabilities of relevant functions and relationships between them. It was shown that the systemic methods consider the entire system, ranging from the environment in which the accident occurred, to the role of government in shaping the system of work. Each method has its own comparative pros and cons, but the Accimap has advantages in terms of time of analysis, data required, model complexity and degree of comprehensiveness.
Conclusion: This study reviewed and compared three systemic accident investigation methods, which showed that there are systemic characteristics and pros and cons in the methods.
Application: The results would be used as a guideline when selecting accident investigation methods.
본문·목차
인공지능 문자 인식 모델을 통해 추출된 텍스트로, 일부 오타나 오류가 포함될 수 있으나 지속적으로 개선 중입니다.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
최근 본 자료 전체보기
