• Journal of the Society of Naval Architects of Korea
• /
• v.49 no.3
• /
• pp.254-263
• /
• 2012

The survivability of warship is assessed by susceptibility, vulnerability and recoverability. Essentially, a vulnerability assessment is a measure of the effectiveness of a warship to resist hostile weapon effects. Considering the shot line and its penetration effect on the warship, present study introduces the procedural aspects of vulnerability assessments of warship. Present study also considers the prediction of penetration damage to a target caused by the impact of projectiles. It reflects the interaction between the weapon and the target from a perspective of vulnerable area method and COVART model. The shotline and tracing calculation have been directly integrated into the vulnerability assessment method based on the penetration equation empirically obtained. A simplified geometric description of the desired target and specification of a threat type is incorporated with the penetration effect. This study describes how to expand the vulnerable area assessment method to the penetration effect. Finally, an example shows that the proposed method can provide the vulnerability parameters of the warship or its component under threat being hit through tracing the shotline path thereby enabling the vulnerability calculation. In addition, the proposed procedure enabling the calculation of the component's multi-hit vulnerability introduces a propulsion system in dealing with redundant Non-overlapping components.

• Proceedings of the Safety Management and Science Conference
• /
• 2011.04a
• /
• pp.731-746
• /
• 2011

The successful and sustainable growth of SMEs depends on their ability of strengthen their competitiveness in quality and cost and service more than anything else as a fundamental of operation. Among these key competitive factors of SMEs, quality is the most critical factor in manufacturing business fields. Because quality strongly influence cost and service performance on this manufacturing business field. There are many different ways to improve the quality performance but it needs proper management decision to choose the best way what can maximize outputs with minimum inputs. And it needs effective measurement methods and some indicators to analysis the quality performance properly. The quality cost is one of the simplest key indicators to measure the quality performance and the effectiveness of quality related management decisions. The major purpose of this study is to diagnose the categorized current level of actual quality cost of local SMEs to maximize their quality management effectiveness through comparing their level with others what's expressed in early studies. In this study, through survey on local SMEs, we found that their average annual quality cost ratio versus turnover - Total amount of annual quality cost divided by annual turnover - is around 3.69% excluded some SME's performances what have different quality control measures with others. And we found some results what corresponded with the early studies on the correlations between those categorized quality costs factors and some discrepancies between some of the literature model and the early case study results as follows. There were negative correlations between the Prevention costs and the External failure costs, and the Appraisal costs and the External failure costs, and there was positive correlation between the Appraisal costs and Internal failure costs same as early studies. But, we couldn't found any strong negative correlations between the Cost of control - Preventive costs & Appraisal costs - and the Cost of Failure of control - Internal & External failure costs -. It reveals not only the lack of effectiveness on their preventive or appraisal activities but also it can reveal there were so many effective ways to prevent the failure costs properly such as some innovative investment on Factory automation includes Error Proofing and more preventive actions to improve the effectiveness of the typical management methods likes CE (Concurrent Engineering), APQP (Advanced Product Quality Planning), FMEA (Failure Mode & Effect Analysis) etc.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Aeronautical & Space Sciences
• /
• v.40 no.4
• /
• pp.364-374
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this study is to perform the reliability-corrected development cost estimation of the launch vehicle at the conceptual design phase. In order to estimate the launch vehicle development cost, the estimation method based on the independent variable such as the rocket performance and dry mass has been mainly implemented up to now. This approach has made the approximate cost estimation possible, however, the cost variation according to the reliability requirement could not be reflected. In this paper, the cost estimation methodology that introduces the reliability factor in addition to the performance and mass in the TRANSCOST model is presented in order to improve the limitation of current cost estimation method. The development cost of KSLV(Korea Space Launch Vehicle)-II is estimated on the basis of this newly implemented concept with reliability as an added parameter.

• Journal of Korean Society of Industrial and Systems Engineering
• /
• v.42 no.4
• /
• pp.31-38
• /
• 2019

The purpose of this study is to provide the priority of the front-loading factors in the design stage of the automotive parts development process in order to efficiently and effectively respond to the demands of the car maker (customer). Front-loading is defined as a strategy in order to improve development performance by shifting the identification and solving of design problems to earlier phases of a product development process. Two approaches of the front-loading are project-to-project knowledge transfer and rapid problem solving. For the study, a survey was conducted on the R&D department in the automobile parts company and analyzed by AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) method. The result of the survey shows the cost savings is the highest weight in terms of front-loading effect and in terms of front-loading factors, it gives priorities as "the problems of past project" first, "Design Review" second, "CAE (Computer Aided Engineering)" third, "FMEA (Failure Mode and Effects Analysis)" fourth, "benchmarking" and SR (Sourcing of Requirements). The results of the study will be helpful to provide practical value for improving product design of component development.