Ranking the Technical Modification Options using AHP and TOPSIS for Land Target Engagement Capability of the K-LOGIR Missile System
- 주제(키워드) AHP , TOPSIS , Ranking
- 발행기관 아주대학교
- 지도교수 Euiwhan Kim
- 발행년도 2019
- 학위수여년월 2019. 2
- 학위명 석사
- 학과 및 전공 일반대학원 시스템공학과
- 실제URI http://www.dcollection.net/handler/ajou/000000028817
- 본문언어 영어
- 저작권 아주대학교 논문은 저작권에 의해 보호받습니다.
초록/요약
The necessity to expand the capabilities of K-LOGIR missile system to be used against land targets is currently under attention. Consequently, some technical challenges are needs to be into consideration for this shift in targets. Many modifications options proposed to meet the operational challenges. Additionally, the availability of several opinions within the development team regarded the applications of these modifications will generate subjective evaluations in the application of the modification option. Thus, to avoid this outcome, an objective method in ranking the modification options essential. This paper will suggest a systematic process in determining the modification options ranking. A combination of AHP and TOPSIS are used to fulfill this goal. AHP will determine the performance parameters weight. Then, TOPSIS will objectively rank modification options. Results of the study through both, AHP and TOPSIS were consistent compared with the intuitive ranking. The TOPSIS ranking results satisfied the operational challenges of the system capability enhancement. The intuitive ranking was also surveyed and compared with the TOPSIS ranking only to find the significant discrepancy even by the experts' group.
more목차
1. Introduction 1
1.1. General background study . 1
1.1.1. Issues 1
1.1.2. Purpose . 1
1.1.3. Scope 1
1.1.4. Approaches . 2
1.2. K-LOGIR missile system 2
1.2.1. Characteristics and Performance 3
1.2.2. K-LOGIR Engagement Sequence 4
1.2.3. K-LOGIR Main Features . 7
2. Development of modifications options and criteria 11
2.1. Major challenges to the modification . 11
2.1.1. Challenge 1: Target Acquisition and Homing 11
2.1.2. Challenge 2: Targets Destruction . 14
2.2. Modification options . 16
2.2.1. Consulted with Subject Matter Expert . 16
2.2.2. 12 Options Selected 18
2.3. Performance Criterion . 19
2.3.1. Literature Survey for Performance Parameter Selection . 19
2.3.2. The 8 Performance Parameters Selected 19
3. Ranking Process . 31
3.1. Methodology and Procedure 31
3.2. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) 33
3.3. TOPSIS 39
iii
3.4. Software Tools used (SDI) 45
3.4.1. SDI Tools (AHP) 46
3.4.2. SDI Tools (TOPSIS) . 47
3.4.3. Intuitive Ranking 48
4. Data Survey 49
4.1. Questionnaires Preparation 49
4.1.1. AHP Questionnaire . 49
4.1.2. TOPSIS Questionnaire 51
4.1.3. Intuitive ranking Questionnaire . 52
4.2. Survey participants . 53
4.3. Examples of Collected Data 53
5. Results and Discussion . 55
5.1. Data Processing 55
5.2. AHP Weight Derived 55
5.3. TOPSIS Ranking calculated 57
5.4. Intuitive Ranking surveyed . 58
5.5. Discussion 59
5.5.1. AHP Weights and Challenges . 59
5.5.2. TOPSIS Ranking Compliance to the Challenges 60
5.5.3. Ranking Comparisons . 61
6. Conclusion . 63
APPENDIX . 64
References . 68
