KR101728666B1 - Method for scenery evaluation of debris barriers - Google Patents

Abstract

The method of evaluating the landscape of Sambang dam is revealed. The present invention creates a checklist according to a selected evaluation index by selecting an evaluation index for evaluating the landscape of a new dam to be newly installed or a four-way dam already installed, and thereby, from an objective viewpoint of the evaluator who evaluates the landscape of the dam, So that the evaluation time can be shortened.

Description

METHOD FOR SCENERY EVALUATION OF DEBRIS BARRIERS [0002]

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 1. Field of the Invention The present invention relates to a landscape evaluation method.

Sambang Dam is a four-way workshop that is installed in the mountain stream to effectively prevent landslides and destruction of landslides in the forest watershed and reduce the actual damage. The Sambang Dam has the ability to reduce damages by proper distribution of the driftwood and the soils from the upper stream in the case of heavy rainfall. Especially, cases of protecting people and property from disasters such as landslides and landslides caused by typhoons and heavy rainfall are steadily confirmed have.

As a result of recent trends in large-scale and centralized landslide disasters such as landslides and landslides due to typhoons and torrential rains due to unusual weather patterns, the trend of large-scale disasters such as mountainous disasters and the spread of awareness about effective disaster prevention function of Sambang Dam, As the demand for installation of Sambang dam from local residents increased rapidly, Sambang dam construction site increased steadily every year. In Korea, since construction in 1986, there are 7,725 places as of 2013, .

On the other hand, along with the increase in the number of the Sambang Dam facilities, the social demand for the Sambang Dam is also evolving in various ways. However, in the early 2000s, the introduction of the concept of environmentally-friendly environment that considers the harmony with the surrounding environment and the ecosystem, and the application to the four-way project site were various. And at the same time, the function and role of the dam is diversified.

In addition, the recent increase in the number of cases of mountainous disasters in the densely populated urban areas or mountainous areas has increased the number of cases of landslide vulnerable area designation and management system, As the number of people is increasingly being placed within the visibility of the people, the Sambang Dam is a typical large-scale mosquito-building, which is a structure that requires consideration of scenery first. Therefore, it is urgent to establish a method to conduct an objective investigation and evaluation of reasonable Sampan dam scenery.

Korean Registered Patent No. 10-1289723 (Registered on July 19, 2013)

An object of the present invention is to provide a method for evaluating a landscape of a dam, which can evaluate the landscape of an objective dam by selecting an evaluation index.

According to another aspect of the present invention, there is provided a method for evaluating the aspect ratio of a four-dam dam landscape evaluation system including an evaluation server and at least one evaluation terminal, the evaluation server comprising: A plurality of index candidates are stored in the storage unit, and at least one final index is selected by evaluating the fitness for each of the plurality of index candidates previously stored as the evaluation index for the plurality of index candidates, and the detailed criteria and the final importance are set for each of the final indicators, Generating and storing a check list in which a plurality of check items for evaluating the landscape view are described; Wherein the evaluation server selects one of the at least one four-way dam information previously stored in response to the selection signal transmitted from the at least one evaluation terminal as the to-be-tested dam information and outputs the selected four- Determining whether the information is about the dam; Transmitting the check list classified according to each building step of the Sambam dam to the at least one evaluation terminal if the Sambang dam information is newly planned Sambang dam information, receiving a check result, and performing a new Sambam dam landscape evaluation; And transmitting the check list to the at least one evaluation terminal to the existing shedding dam if the shedding dam information is the existing shedding dam information, receiving the check result and performing the existing shedding dam landscape evaluation; .

The step of generating and storing the checklist may include generating a final indicator extracting unit of the evaluation server in a preset format for evaluating the fitness for each of the plurality of indicator candidates previously stored as the evaluation index for the landscape view evaluation Selecting at least one final indicator among the plurality of indicator candidates by transmitting the questionnaire information to a plurality of experts according to a Delphi survey method using previously stored expert information and analyzing and analyzing a survey response; The final indicator evaluation unit of the evaluation server compares the fitness of the sub-criteria corresponding to each of the at least one final indicators among the sub-criteria stored corresponding to each of the plurality of indicator candidates in the final indicator extraction unit, Generating a questionnaire for assessing the importance of each of the indicators, transmitting the questionnaire to the plurality of experts using the expert information, analyzing and analyzing the reply to determine the final importance of each of the final indicators, ; And generating a check list in which a plurality of check items are written based on the sub-criteria and the final importance for each of the final indicators; And a control unit.

Wherein the step of selecting the final indicator generates first questionnaire information in which importance of the plurality of indicator candidates is stored in a relative evaluation form and transmits the first questionnaire information to the plurality of experts according to the expert information, Returning a response; Selecting at least one indicator candidate whose relative evaluation score is equal to or greater than a preset reference value as the primary indicator in the reply; Transmitting second questionnaire information to each of the plurality of experts to evaluate the fitness for each of the at least one primary indicators with scores and returning a response; And analyzing the response to the second questionnaire information by a Riccart scale method to quantify the fitness for each of the primary indicators and to select at least one secondary indicator based on the average value of the quantized fitness, Setting the at least one secondary indicator to the final indicator; And a control unit.

Wherein the selecting as the primary index comprises: selecting at least one index candidate having the relative evaluation score equal to or greater than a preset reference value as a primary index; Selecting an indicator candidate in which the relative evaluation score is within a predetermined range from the reference value among the indicator candidates as the primary indicator; And adding the newly proposed evaluation index to the primary survey information as the primary index; And a control unit.

Wherein the setting of the final importance and subcriteria comprises: generating an importance questionnaire by a pair comparison method between the indicators based on the hierarchical analysis method for the at least one final indicator; Generating a goodness-of-fit questionnaire that evaluates a goodness of fit of the sub-criteria corresponding to each of the at least one final indicators; Transmitting the importance questionnaire and the fitness questionnaire to the plurality of experts and returning a response; Analyzing the response to the importance questionnaire to obtain a significance level included in the importance questionnaire where the inconsistency ratio of the response is less than or equal to a predetermined ratio and using the obtained significance to calculate a final significance level for each of the at least one final indicator ; And analyzing responses to the fitness questionnaire to set the subcriteria corresponding to each of the at least one final indicators; And a control unit.

Wherein the setting of the final importance comprises: analyzing region importance for each of the plurality of regions; Analyzing the indicator importance for each of the at least one final indicator; And acquiring the final importance by combining the region importance with the indicator importance in a predetermined manner; And a control unit.

Wherein the generating the checklist comprises: creating a new checklist for a new construction site to be newly constructed; And generating an existing checklist for an existing existing construction dam; And a control unit.

The step of generating the new check list includes generating a plan check list, a design check list, and a construction check list corresponding to each of the basic plan steps, the execution design steps, and the construction steps, which are each business steps necessary for newly constructing the four- .

The step of performing the evaluation of the new sailing dam scenery includes: acquiring and storing basic planning information of the sailing dam establishment; Transmitting the basic plan information together with the plan check list to the at least one evaluator terminal, receiving and analyzing a check result of the plan check list to obtain a plan evaluation result; Comparing the plan evaluation result with a predetermined first evaluation reference value, and transmitting a plan modification request if the plan evaluation result is less than the first evaluation reference value; Acquiring design information of the four-way dam if the plan evaluation result is not less than the first evaluation reference value; Transmitting the design information of the four-way dam to the at least one evaluator terminal along with the design check list, receiving and analyzing the check result of the design check list to obtain a design evaluation result; Comparing the design evaluation result with a predetermined second evaluation reference value, and if the design evaluation result is less than the second evaluation reference value, transmitting a design modification request; Acquiring construction information of the four-way dam if the design evaluation result is equal to or more than the second evaluation reference value; Transmitting the construction information of the four-way dam to the at least one evaluator terminal together with the construction check list, receiving and analyzing the check result of the construction check list to obtain a construction evaluation result; Comparing the construction evaluation result with a predetermined third evaluation reference value, and transmitting a construction supplementation request if the comparison result is less than the third evaluation reference value; And switching, if the construction evaluation result is equal to or more than the third evaluation reference value, the all-road dam information to the maintenance step; And a control unit.

Wherein the step of performing the evaluation of the existing facade includes determining whether an evaluation period for the existing facade has arrived; If it is determined that the evaluation period for the existing four-way dam has arrived, the existing check list is transmitted to the at least one evaluator terminal together with the previously collected existing three-way dam status information, and the check result of the existing check list is received and analyzed Obtaining an existing evaluation result; Comparing the existing evaluation result with a predetermined fourth evaluation reference value, and if the evaluation result is less than the fourth evaluation reference value, transmitting an alternative request; And a control unit.

Accordingly, the method of evaluating the landscape of the dam of the present invention can evaluate the landscape of the dam by using an evaluation index configured to evaluate the landscape of the dam from an objective point of view, not from the subjective view of the evaluator who evaluates the landscape of the dam, To be able to evaluate the landscape of Sambang dam. In addition, the evaluation time can be shortened by using the checklist based on the evaluation index, and it can be usefully used for preparing alternatives for landscape improvement such as remodeling of Sambang dam. In addition, it can be used as a basis for preparing legal standards for the systematic application of the Sambang dam landscape evaluation.

Fig. 1 shows an example of an evaluation index selection server for the method of evaluating the landscape of the dam according to the present invention.
Fig. 2 shows an example of a method for selecting a road surface evaluation index for the method of evaluating the panoramic landscape of the present invention.
3 shows an example of questionnaire information for Delphi survey.
Fig. 4 shows an example of the result of the Ricard scale analysis for the primary indicator and the secondary indicator selected.
5 shows an example of the area importance and the index importance in each area.
6 is a graph showing the final importance.
FIG. 7 shows a method of evaluating a landscape dam according to an embodiment of the present invention.
Fig. 8 shows an example of a landscape evaluation method for an existing rectangular dam.

In order to fully understand the present invention, operational advantages of the present invention, and objects achieved by the practice of the present invention, reference should be made to the accompanying drawings and the accompanying drawings which illustrate preferred embodiments of the present invention.

BEST MODE FOR CARRYING OUT THE INVENTION Hereinafter, the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the preferred embodiments of the present invention with reference to the accompanying drawings. However, the present invention can be implemented in various different forms, and is not limited to the embodiments described. In order to clearly describe the present invention, parts that are not related to the description are omitted, and the same reference numerals in the drawings denote the same members.

Throughout the specification, when an element is referred to as "including" an element, it does not exclude other elements unless specifically stated to the contrary. The terms "part", "unit", "module", "block", and the like described in the specification mean units for processing at least one function or operation, And a combination of software.

FIG. 1 shows an example of an evaluation index selection server for the method of evaluating the landscape of the present invention, and FIG. 2 shows an example of a method for selecting a landscape evaluation index for the landscape evaluation method of the present invention.

As described above, in order to objectively evaluate the landscape of Sambang Dam, it is first necessary to select an evaluation index so that the Sambang Dam landscape can be evaluated.

The server and method for selecting the landscape evaluation index indicators shown in FIGS. 1 and 2 can select an evaluation index for evaluating the landscape of Sambang dam and objectively set detailed criteria for each selected evaluation index.

Referring to FIGS. 1 and 2, a method of selecting a landscape image evaluation index according to the present invention will be described. First, a plurality of index candidates are collected and stored in the index candidate storage unit 110 in advance (S11). The indicator candidate storage unit 110 stores a plurality of indicator candidates that have been previously considered to be used as evaluation indexes from various document data on the on / off line, the expert opinion information, and the field survey data, Is extracted and stored. The indicator candidate storage unit 110 may store an indicator candidate separately inputted by a user in offline, or may store an indicator candidate transmitted by an authenticated expert on-line. In some cases, it is also possible to search for data related to the landscape of Sambang dam, which is disclosed online, and to store a term used repeatedly in a plurality of online documents over a predetermined number of times as an indicator candidate using statistical analysis.

Also, the indicator candidate storage unit 110 may store a plurality of indicator candidates separately according to a predetermined plurality of areas instead of simply storing the indicator candidates.

In the present invention, for example, as shown in Table 1, 21 indicator candidates classified into three areas of functional, ecological and scenic areas are described as being stored in advance, but the index candidates stored in the indicator candidate storage unit 110 The number and the number of indicator candidates can be adjusted.

Here, the plurality of index candidates stored in the index candidate storage unit 110 are objective candidates that are proposed to be used by various documents or individual experts as indicators, and are objectively verified whether or not a plurality of stored indicator candidates are suitable to be used as actual evaluation indexes need.

The Delphi survey execution unit 120 generates first questionnaire information for consulting a plurality of index candidates stored in the index candidate storage unit 110 in the form shown in FIG. 3 and transmits the first questionnaire information to a plurality of experts, A reply to the questionnaire information is received (S12).

The delphi survey execution unit 120 transmits the first survey information to each of the plurality of experts individually using the expert information previously stored in the index candidate storage unit 110 or displays the first survey information on the designated site, Collect the replies and run the Delphi method.

The Delphi survey is one of the qualitative research methods, which involves repeatedly conducting an anonymous questionnaire surveys that are closely related to the subjects of the research, so that the survey participants can gather their own group members It is a kind of group consultation method that can induce agreement. The Delphi survey is not based on statistical procedures or models, but is a proposed technique for slaughtering predictions or solutions based on human judgment. It synthesizes the results of surveys conducted by experts, So that accurate prediction can be obtained.

In order to execute the Delphi survey, the indicator candidate storage unit 110 may store information of a plurality of experts together with a plurality of indicator candidates as expert information. Here, the expert information is information on the experts related to the Zambang dam which is designated and stored in advance in order to seek advice about the candidate of the indicator, and may include an address, an e-mail address, a telephone number, etc. In addition, It can contain a variety of information. In some cases, the indicator candidate storage unit 110 may display the questionnaire information on a designated site on the line to which the questionnaire information is to be transmitted, without storing special expert information. At this time, the designated page may be an expert forum site related to the Sambang dam.

As shown in FIG. 3, the primary questionnaire information about the indicator candidates can be configured to quantify the importance between the plurality of indicator candidates by a relative evaluation method. In addition, the first questionnaire information can be configured so that the experts who received the questionnaire information can suggest additional candidate indicators, not just the questionnaire information about the indicator candidates.

The Delphi survey execution unit 120 analyzes the reply of the primary survey information on the indicator candidates and transmits the result of the primary analysis to the primary indicator selection unit 130. [

Accordingly, the primary indicator selection unit 130 determines whether the specialist among the plurality of indicator candidates stored in the indicator candidate storage unit 110 according to the primary analysis result applied by the Delphi survey execution unit 120 is a highly reliable A plurality of index candidates evaluated as the first index are selected (S13). Here, the primary index selection unit 130 arranges the average value of importance in the primary survey information returned from a plurality of experts in the descending order of the average value of the index candidates or importance having the predetermined standard value or more, The number of the indicator candidates can be selected as the first indicator as the indicator candidates evaluated as having high reliability.

In the present invention, for example, Delphi survey was conducted for the 21 indicator candidates shown in Table 1. As a result, the Delphi survey was carried out for the 21 indicator candidates shown in Table 1. As a result, , Surface treatment of dams, and arrangement of dams are assumed to be highly reliable. Two indicator candidates that require re-verification of color balance and design index were selected as primary indicators. Here, since the Delphi survey is a technique for deriving a conclusion through repeated questionnaires as described above, in one questionnaire, although the reliability is less than the predetermined reference value, the index having a value within a predetermined range from the reference value It is an indicator candidate that is likely to be registered as an indicator candidate again through repeated questionnaires. Also, through the first survey response, it is not a candidate for the existing indicator, but the recommended one is included in the first indicator.

That is, the primary indicator selection unit 130 selects 12 primary indicators from 21 indicator candidates, and adds one newly recommended indicator to the primary indicator to select 13 primary indicators. However, as an example, the number of indicator candidates selected by the primary indicator can be variously adjusted.

When the primary indicator is selected in the primary indicator selection unit 130, the Delphi survey execution unit 120 transmits the secondary survey information on the fitness of the selected primary indicator to the plurality of experts again (S14). And receives and analyzes the response of the second questionnaire information to the fitness of the first indicator to transmit the result of the second analysis to the second indicator indicator 140. [

The secondary indicator selection unit 140 selects the secondary indicator in the primary indicator according to the result of the secondary analysis (S15). The secondary indicator selection unit 140 selects a secondary indicator by a 5-point Likert-type scale analysis as a result of the second analysis. The Riccart scale is a type of scale used to measure an individual's attitude toward a particular subject, such as thoughts, perceptions, emotions, etc. In the scale developed by Resis Likert in the early 1930s, the 5-point Likert scale was selected The method of determining the fitness for each of the primary indicators by dividing them into five points (for example, highly fit-5, fit-4, normal-3, nonconformity-2, and nonconformity-1) .

As an example, by examining the Riccart scale for a large number (25) of experts on 13 primary indicators, the fitness and the average value for each of the primary indicators can be obtained as shown in Table 3 and FIG. 4 there was.

FIG. 3 shows an example of the result of the Riccart scale analysis for the primary indicator and the secondary indicator selected.

As shown in Table 3, the average fitness of the construction material index among the 13 primary indicators was 4.32, and the index of vegetation coverage around the dam was 4.00 or higher. In addition, the overall average fitness of 13 primary indicators was 3.63.

Therefore, the secondary indicator selection unit 140 selects a secondary indicator as shown in Table 4, which is higher than the average average fitness of 3.63 in the primary indicator.

In the present invention, it is assumed that 7 out of 13 primary indicators are selected as secondary indicators according to the results of the actual investigation.

The selected secondary indicators are used as the final indicator for the evaluation of the Sambang dam scenery as the evaluation index which is proved as objectivity through two Delphi surveys.

When a plurality of final indicators are selected, the question analyzer 160 generates an importance questionnaire for analyzing the importance of each of the selected plurality of final indicators and transmits the questionnaire to the specialist (S16). Generating a questionnaire on importance here is not because all of the final indicators are of equal importance, even if they are selected as final indicators. In some cases, it is possible to simply reflect the fitness analyzed by the secondary index ruling unit 140 as the importance, but if the importance is compared and analyzed between the final indicators, the relative importance between the final indicators can be more accurately determined In the present invention, a special importance questionnaire, which can analyze the importance of the final indicator, is transmitted to the specialist.

In order to analyze the relative importance of landscape evaluation areas and indicators, the importance manual is prepared in a pairwise comparison method based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) , Relative importance to landscape, and relative importance to individual indicators. AHP is a systematic procedure for differentiating components of a specific problem into hierarchies. Each component is broken down into smaller sub-components divided into layers, and the hierarchy represents the basis of sub-components. If the paired comparison matrices used in this hierarchical analysis have perfect radix coherence, then the measurement of the weights is not a problem. However, in the actual response, the response to the pair comparison does not have complete consistency.

The consistency analyzer 170 analyzes the response to the importance questionnaire to determine consistency. The consistency analyzer 170 calculates the inconsistency ratio (IR), which can be verified that each evaluator has made a consistent judgment on the importance questionnaire from the matrix equation obtained from the result of the pair comparison, according to Equation 1 . Equation 1 for the inconsistency ratio (IR) has been proposed in "Saaty, T.L. 1980. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Where CI is the consistency index and RI is the random index.

And Timey suggested that if the inconsistency ratio (IR) is less than 10%, the pairwise comparison is considered to have a reasonable consistency, and if it is within 20%, it can be tolerated. In the present invention, a hierarchical analysis is performed on a pair of comparison matrices having an inconsistency ratio (IR) of 20% or less.

The importance analyzing unit 150 analyzes the importance importance survey for each region and the index importance for each final indicator by analyzing the importance questionnaire determined that the inconsistency ratio (IR) is less than 20% in the consistency analyzing unit 170, And the final importance score reflecting both the analyzed region importance and the indicator importance is obtained (S18).

5 shows an example of the area importance and the index importance in each area.

In FIG. 5, (a) shows the analysis results of the relative importance of the three landscape evaluation areas, i.e., functionality, ecology and landscape, (b) shows the index importance of the final indicators included in the functional area and the landscape area The results are shown in Fig. (b), the results of the index importance analysis for the ecological area are omitted because there is no need for the relative evaluation because only the index of vegetation coverage around the dam is included as the final index in the ecological area.

(a), the functional area was estimated to have the highest importance of 0.599, followed by the landscape area of 0.203 and the ecological area of 0.198. In the functional area, the structural index of the dam was 0.428. The height of the dam and the significance of the index of hydrophilic function were 0.309 and 0.262, respectively. For the landscape area, the arrangement of the dam was the highest with 0.464, and the construction material and design index were evaluated as importance of 0.295 and 0.242, respectively.

Meanwhile, the importance analyzer 150 multiplies the final importance of each final indicator by the area importance and the indicator importance, and obtains them as shown in Tables 5 and 6.

6 is a graph showing the final importance.

As shown in Table 5, the structure of the four-dam structure was the highest at 0.257, and the degree of vegetation cover around the dam and the height of the dam were also highly evaluated as 0.198 and 0.185. On the other hand, the relative importance of design and construction material indexes was analyzed as 0.049 and 0.060, respectively.

  The final significance derived from the above results can be used as a criterion for weighting or setting points in the development of evaluation criteria and checklists for scenic landscapes.

When the final importance level is set in the importance level analyzer 150, the detailed criteria setting unit 180 sets a detailed criterion for each of the plurality of final indicators so that the multi-dam scenery evaluation can be performed using a plurality of final indicators (S19 ).

The detailed criteria for each final indicator may be stored together with the previous related related research when stored in the indicator candidate storage unit 110 after each indicator candidate. The detailed criteria setting unit 180 can acquire detailed criteria for each of the selected final indicators from the indicator candidate storage unit 110 and set them. At this time, if the plurality of different detailed criteria are set for the same indicator candidates, the detailed criteria setting unit 180 may acquire and set the detailed criterion having the highest frequency, or may acquire and set an average value.

Table 6 shows an example of the sub-criteria set in the sub-criteria setting unit 180.

In Table 6, the height of the four-way dam in the functional index is an index for evaluating the pressure and stability according to the height of the four-way dam. The detailed standard is set to 5m, which is the average total height of the four- . The detailed criteria were set to be transmissive, partially transmissive, and impermeable. The hydrophilic function of the dam was evaluated on the existence of the hydrophilic space, and the existence of the hydrophilic space was set as the detailed standard. The degree of vegetation cover around the dam is the only ecological evaluation index to evaluate the shielding of the work using the vegetation and the relation of the cover with the surrounding vegetation. The detailed criteria are set as the vegetation cover rate for the damaged area. As for the landscape area, the construction material is used to evaluate the heterogeneity of the construction material and the surrounding environment, and the detailed standard is set with materials such as stone, concrete, steel, and wood. The sidewalk dam design is an index for evaluating the influence of the design elements such as the shape of the structure, the linearity, etc. on the landscape formation. The detailed criteria are estheticness, quality, attractiveness (originality). In the case of the submerged dam arrangement, it is an index for evaluating the systematicity through linkage with the surrounding structures of the same mooring phase, and the harmonization between the structures and the harmony with the surrounding environment are set as detailed standards.

However, it is necessary to verify whether the detailed criteria set in the detailed criteria setting unit 180 can be used as an objective criterion.

Therefore, the question analyzing unit 160 generates a fitness questionnaire for the set sub-criteria and transmits the questionnaire to the specialist (S20). Then, by receiving and analyzing the reply to the fitness questionnaire, the fitness of the detailed criteria is evaluated (S21). Table 7 shows the evaluation results of the detailed criteria for each final indicator shown in FIG.

As shown in Table 7, the detailed criteria for the final indicators set out in Table 5 were analyzed to have a good fit of 80% or more with respect to the four-way dam structures, construction materials, and dam layout indicators among the seven landscape indicators. It was evaluated to have a fitness of 70% or more.

In the above description, the fitness of the detailed criteria is evaluated using the fitness questionnaire and a separate fitness questionnaire. However, since the detailed criteria can be set when the final indicator is selected by the secondary indicator government, In practice, the importance questionnaire and the conformity questionnaire are written to the integrated questionnaires, sent to the experts, and received by the reply, so that the fitness evaluation can be performed simultaneously with the importance analysis.

The checklist generating unit 200 generates a checklist for performing a landscape evaluation using the plurality of final indicators for which the fitness evaluation for the detailed criteria is completed (S22). The check list generating unit 200 generates a check list including check items in accordance with detailed criteria for a plurality of final indicators and a plurality of final indicators, and selects a check item by an evaluator who wants to evaluate the scenery of the Sambang dam So that evaluation can be performed.

Here, the checklist generation unit 200 may generate the checklist by dividing the checklist into a checklist for evaluating a landscape of New Sampama dam and a checklist for evaluating an existing Sampama dam landscape. Here, a new dam is a new dam to be constructed, and an existing dam is a new dam that has been built for a certain period of time (for example, 3 to 5 years).

In this way, the checklist generating unit 200 is divided into a checklist for the evaluation of the landscape of New Sampam dam and a checklist for the evaluation of the scenery of the Sampan dam. In contrast, in the case of the new Sambang dam, From the feasibility study stage of the construction, it is possible to complement the scenic evaluation of each project stage so that the Sambang Dam can be constructed considering the scenery. However, the existing Sambang Dam is limited in complementing the scenery.

In addition, since the landscape evaluation for the new Sambang Dam is preferably performed for each stage of the project and the landscape is complemented for each stage, a checklist for each stage of the project can be separately generated. Here, each project stage for construction of the dam can be divided into five stages: feasibility assessment and investigation stage, basic planning stage, implementation design stage, construction stage, and maintenance stage. However, in the 5th stage, the maintenance stage is practically the same as that of the existing Sambang Dam, and the checklist for the existing Sambang Dam can be used as it is. As there is no data on the Sambang Dam, Is not generated.

However, since it is inefficient to separately generate various checklists for each business stage, the checklist generating unit 200 may generate an integrated checklist for selectively recording check items according to each business stage. Integrated checklists may include common, key, and referential indicators. Here, the common index is an index item that should be commonly checked at all stages of the project regardless of the stage of the project. The core index must be checked according to each stage of the project. The recommended indicators are the progress of the Sambang dam construction project, This item can be selectively applied considering the surrounding environment.

Table 8 shows key indicators and recommendation indicators classified by business stages in the integrated checklist, and Table 9 shows some of them as an example of the created integrated checklist.

Although not shown in Table 9, the final importance analyzed by the importance analysis unit 150 is assigned as a weight to each check item in the checklist so that items checked at the time of evaluation of the Sampam dam landscape can be digitized later.

1, the index candidate storage unit 110, the Delphi survey execution unit 120, the primary index selection unit 130 and the secondary index selection unit 140 may be integrated into the final index extraction unit, 150, the question analyzing unit 160, the consistency analyzing unit 170, the detailed criteria setting unit 180, and the fitness evaluation unit 190 may be integrated into the final indicator evaluation unit.

FIG. 7 shows a method of evaluating a landscape dam according to an embodiment of the present invention.

Although not shown, the method of evaluating the landscape view can be performed by providing an evaluation server and at least one evaluator terminal. The evaluation server may store a checklist prepared in advance on the basis of the evaluation index items for the evaluation of the landscape of the new and existing four-way dams, and transmit the check list to the evaluator terminal. Upon receiving the check status of the checklist from the evaluator terminal, . The evaluation server may be configured to include an indicator evaluation server.

Referring to FIG. 7, the method for evaluating the landscape of the present invention will be described. First, the evaluation server acquires the to-be-watermarked dam information to be evaluated (S110). One or more of the four-way dam information stored in the evaluation server may be selected as the to-be-watched dam information to be evaluated in response to a request from at least one evaluator terminal have.

When the to-be-verified dam information to be evaluated is acquired, the evaluation server determines whether the obtained to-be-watermarked dam information is information on the newly-planned future dam or information on the existing planned dam (S120). If it is determined that the information is about the existing four-way dam, it is converted to the A step. The step A will be described again in Fig.

However, if it is judged that the information is about the planned dam site, the evaluation server evaluates the feasibility of establishing the dam dam in a predetermined manner (S130). The feasibility assessment of the Sambang Dam can be carried out in various ways by the existing Sambang Dam construction, but it is not explained in detail here. If it is judged that the feasibility of the feasibility evaluation is insufficient, the construction of Sabang Dam may be canceled, but it is assumed that the present invention is valid because it is the invention of the landscape evaluation method for the Sambang dam. The feasibility assessment may be performed by a specialized agency such as the Forest Service, and the results of the feasibility assessment may be sent to the evaluation server.

After the evaluation, the evaluation server obtains and stores the preliminary landscape data (S140). A preliminary landscape survey is a process of acquiring and storing landscape data of a place planned to be newly built, and may receive preliminary landscape data from at least one evaluator terminal, and may receive other user terminals or various online and offline information It can also be saved. The preliminary scenic survey will examine the surrounding environment prior to the construction of the Sambang Dam and determine whether the Sambang Dam, which is to be newly constructed, should be subject to the landscape evaluation (S150). This is because all the newly built dams are not subject to landscape evaluation.

The criterion for determining whether or not a landscape evaluation object is to be determined may be variously set, but it is assumed that the present invention discriminates based on five criteria of functional, ecological, landscape, adjacency and safety shown in Table 10 for example.

Whether or not the scenery evaluation object is to be evaluated is transmitted to the at least one evaluator terminal by the evaluation server shown in Table 10 together with the acquired preliminary landscape data and the evaluation result for the evaluation standard is received from each of the at least one evaluator terminal and analyzed , The landscape evaluation target can be identified. For example, if three or more of the five evaluation criteria are unsatisfactory, a landscape evaluation will be conducted. Otherwise, a new project can be conducted without a landscape evaluation.

If it is judged that it is the subject of the scenery evaluation, the evaluation server determines a basic plan for establishing the Sambang dam (S160). The basic plan for the construction of the Sambang Dam is to plan the new Sambang Dam structure, the basic specifications of the Sambang Dam such as the length and height, and the location of the building. When the basic plan is determined, the evaluation server applies the plan check list to perform landscape evaluation of the new airport to be newly installed (S160). Here, the planning checklist shows the key indicators and recommendation indicators shown in the planning stage in the integrated checklist shown in Table 7.

The evaluation server transmits the determined basic plan and the plan check list to at least one evaluator terminal, and when a check result for the plan check list is received at each of the at least one evaluator terminal, the evaluation server analyzes the check result for the received plan check list It is determined whether the plan evaluation result is equal to or greater than a predetermined first evaluation reference value (S180). As described above, each of the evaluation indicators of the plan check list can be quantized by assigning weights. The evaluation server digitizes the evaluation indicators in a predetermined manner and derives the plan evaluation result using a statistical technique such as an average value, The plan evaluation result can be compared with the first evaluation reference value.

If it is determined that the plan evaluation result is less than the first evaluation reference value, the evaluation server transmits a modification request for the basic plan to the predetermined user terminal or at least one evaluator terminal, and receives the modified result (S190). Then, the basic plan is determined again (S160).

However, if it is determined that the plan evaluation result is equal to or larger than the first evaluation reference value, the four-way dam is designed (S200). At this time, the evaluation server does not directly design the four-way dam but receives the design information for the four-way dam from a user terminal such as a designer and stores the information.

Then, the design check list is applied to the stored information on the design of the square dam, and the landscape evaluation of the dam is performed (S210). Landscape assessments using a design checklist can be performed in the same manner as landscape assessments using a plan checklist, except that the design phase is applied in the integrated checklist in Table 7.

The evaluation server analyzes the check result of the design check list received at each of the at least one evaluator terminal to determine whether the design evaluation result is equal to or greater than a predetermined second evaluation reference value at step S220.

If it is determined that the design evaluation result is less than the second evaluation reference value, the evaluation server transmits a modification request for the design information to the predetermined user terminal or at least one evaluator terminal, and receives the modified design information (S230). Then, the modified design information is evaluated by applying the design check list again (S210).

However, if it is determined that the design evaluation result is equal to or higher than the second evaluation reference value, the structural stability of the designed four-way dam is evaluated (S240). Although the present invention is an invention for a landscape evaluation method for a four-way dam, stability is a matter that should be considered as a top priority in designing a four-way dam. Therefore, even if the landscape evaluation result of the design information is higher than the second reference value, the evaluation server evaluates the structural stability in a predetermined manner. Then, it is determined whether the structural stability is secured (S250).

If it is determined that the structural stability is not ensured, the evaluation server transmits the modification request for the design information to the predetermined user terminal or the at least one evaluator terminal to receive the modified design information (S230). If it is determined that the structural stability is secured, the construction state information according to the construction of the four-way dam is received based on the design information and stored (260).

Then, during the construction or after completion of the construction, the design check list is applied to the construction situation information to perform the landscape evaluation of the four-way dam (S270). The evaluation server sends the construction check list together with the construction status information to at least one evaluator terminal, and receives and analyzes the check result.

The evaluation server determines whether the design evaluation result of the construction status check list received at each of the at least one evaluator terminal is equal to or greater than a predetermined third evaluation reference value (S280).

If the design evaluation result is less than the third evaluation reference value, the evaluation server transmits a construction repair request (S290). On the other hand, if the value is equal to or more than the third evaluation reference value, the operation is switched to the maintenance step (S300). Since the Sambang Dam converted to the maintenance stage here can be viewed as an existing Sambang Dam instead of a new Sambang Dam, the landscape evaluation will proceed in the same manner as the existing Sambang Dam.

If it is determined that the evaluation result of the landscape evaluation object (S150) is not the object of evaluation, a four-way dam is newly constructed (S280) without the evaluation of the Sambang dam using the check list in the same manner as the existing one. That is, the basic plan is determined (S160), the four-way dam is designed (S200), the structural safety is evaluated (S210), and the four-way dam is constructed (S230).

Fig. 8 shows an example of a landscape evaluation method for an existing rectangular dam.

As described above, since the four-way dam is completed in the same manner as the existing four-way dam, the landscape evaluation method for the existing four-way dam in FIG. 8 can be similarly applied to the maintenance step 270 of the new four-way dam.

Referring to FIG. 8, the landscape evaluation method for an existing rectangular dam first determines whether a predetermined evaluation period has arrived (S310). In the case of the existing Sambang Dam, it is necessary to regularly evaluate the scenery evaluation. Accordingly, the evaluation server determines whether the evaluation period has arrived by calculating the elapsed time since the new dam was newly built or the time since the previous scenic evaluation was received by the existing dam.

If it is determined that the evaluation period has arrived, the evaluation server transmits an existing check list for the existing rectangular dam to the at least one evaluator terminal together with the existing rectangular dam status information, and receives and analyzes the check result to obtain the existing evaluation result (S320). Here, unlike the plan check list, the design check list, and the construction check list shown in FIG. 7, the existing check list may be composed of only seven evaluation indicators selected as the final charge. This is because, unlike the new Sambang Dam, there is little room for revising the Sambang Dam regardless of the evaluation result for the existing Sambang Dam.

Table 11 shows an example of calculating a score in consideration of the importance of the evaluation index.

Table 11 is an example of ranking the seven final indicators shown in Table 6, and is a result of performing grading based on the importance shown in Table 5.

Table 12 shows the scores of the seven final indicators shown in Table 11 in more detail.

Table 12 shows that the evaluation server can quantify the landscape evaluation for the Sambang dam by the same allocation criterion table, and can perform the objective and reliable evaluation of the Sambang dam scenery.

Then, the evaluation server determines whether the existing evaluation result is equal to or greater than a predetermined fourth evaluation reference value (S330). If it is determined that the existing evaluation result is less than the fourth evaluation reference value, the evaluation server transmits an alternative request for improving the scenery to the predetermined user terminal or at least one evaluator terminal, and receives the modified alternative information (S340). Then, landscape evaluation is performed by applying an existing check list to the received alternative information (S320).

However, if it is determined that the existing evaluation result is equal to or higher than the fourth evaluation reference value, the stability of the existing four-way dam is evaluated (S350). The safety of the dam is important as mentioned above, so it needs to be assessed periodically as well as the landscape evaluation. The evaluation server then evaluates the stability of the existing dam in a predetermined manner. Then, it is determined whether stability of the evaluation result is confirmed (S360).

If it is determined that the stability is not ensured, the evaluation server transmits the stability supplement to the predetermined user terminal or at least one evaluator terminal to receive the stability supplement information (S370). If it is determined that the stability is confirmed, it is determined whether the evaluation period comes again (S310)

As a result, the method of evaluating the landscape of the dam according to the present invention can be applied not only to the subjective opinion of the evaluator who evaluates the landscape of the dam, but also to the objectivity From the point of view, it is possible to evaluate the landscape of the dam, and the evaluation time can be shortened. In addition, it is possible to efficiently construct and manage landscape information in various areas and environments, so that it can compare the landscape of each site, and can help the efficient design of the site. Also, in case of the new Sambang Dam, it is possible to construct the Sambang Dam considering the scenery by carrying out the landscape evaluation for each stage of the project from the planning stage, thereby reducing the opposition of the local residents to the Sambang Dam and protecting the nature.

The method according to the present invention can be implemented as a computer-readable code on a computer-readable recording medium. A computer-readable recording medium includes all kinds of recording apparatuses in which data that can be read by a computer system is stored. Examples of the recording medium include ROM, RAM, CD-ROM, magnetic tape, floppy disk, optical data storage, and the like.

While the present invention has been particularly shown and described with reference to exemplary embodiments thereof, it is evident that many alternatives, modifications and variations will be apparent to those skilled in the art.

Accordingly, the true scope of the present invention should be determined by the technical idea of the appended claims.

Claims (11)

A method for evaluating the progress of a square dam in a landscape dam evaluation system comprising an evaluation server and at least one evaluation terminal,
The evaluation server evaluates the fitness for each of the plurality of indicator candidates previously stored as the evaluation index for the landscape view evaluation, selects at least one final indicator, sets a detailed criterion and final importance for each of the final indicators, Generating and storing a check list including a plurality of check items for evaluating the landscape view on the basis of the detailed criteria and the final importance;
Wherein the evaluation server selects one of the at least one four-way dam information previously stored in response to the selection signal transmitted from the at least one evaluation terminal as the to-be-tested dam information and outputs the selected four- Determining whether the information is about the dam;
Transmitting the check list classified according to each building step of the Sambam dam to the at least one evaluation terminal if the Sambang dam information is newly planned Sambang dam information, receiving a check result, and performing a new Sambam dam landscape evaluation; And
Transmitting the check list to the at least one evaluation terminal to the existing multistory dam if the multiview information is the existing multiview information, and receiving the check result to perform the existing multivariate landscape evaluation; Lt; / RTI >
The step of generating and storing the checklist
Wherein the final index extracting unit of the evaluation server generates questionnaire information for evaluating the fitness of each of the plurality of indicator candidates previously stored as the evaluation index for evaluating the sidewalk scenery in a predetermined form, Transmitting the information to a plurality of experts according to a Delphi survey method, and analyzing and analyzing a survey response to select the at least one final indicator among the plurality of indicator candidates;
The final indicator evaluation unit of the evaluation server compares the fitness of the sub-criteria corresponding to each of the at least one final indicators among the sub-criteria stored corresponding to each of the plurality of indicator candidates in the final indicator extraction unit, Generating a questionnaire for assessing the importance of each of the indicators, transmitting the questionnaire to the plurality of experts using the expert information, analyzing and analyzing the reply to determine the final importance of each of the final indicators, ; And
Generating a check list in which a plurality of check items are written based on the sub-criteria and the final importance for each of the final indicators; / RTI >
The step of setting the final importance and subcriteria comprises:
Generating an importance questionnaire based on a hierarchical comparison method between the indicators based on the hierarchical analysis method for the at least one final indicator;
Generating a goodness-of-fit questionnaire that evaluates a goodness of fit of the sub-criteria corresponding to each of the at least one final indicators;
Transmitting the importance questionnaire and the fitness questionnaire to the plurality of experts and returning a response;
Analyzing the response to the importance questionnaire to obtain a significance level included in the importance questionnaire where the inconsistency ratio of the response is less than or equal to a predetermined ratio and using the obtained significance to calculate a final significance level for each of the at least one final indicator ; And
Analyzing a response to the fitness questionnaire to set the subcriteria corresponding to each of the at least one final indicators; / RTI >
The inconsistency ratio < RTI ID = 0.0 > (IR)

(Where CI is the consistency index and RI is the random index).
≪ / RTI >
The step of generating the checklist
Creating a new checklist for a new construction site to be newly constructed; And
Creating a pre-existing checklist for an existing existing square dam constructed in the past; Lt; / RTI >
The step of generating the new check list
A design check list, a construction check list, and a construction check list corresponding to each of the basic planning stage, the execution design stage, and the construction stage, which are the business stages of the new construction of the four-way dam, are separately generated. delete The method of claim 1, wherein the step of selecting the final indicator comprises
Generating first questionnaire information in which importance of the plurality of indicator candidates is stored in a relative evaluation form, transmitting the first questionnaire information to the plurality of experts in response to the expert information, and returning a response;
Selecting at least one indicator candidate whose relative evaluation score is equal to or greater than a preset reference value as the primary indicator in the reply;
Transmitting second questionnaire information to each of the plurality of experts to evaluate the fitness for each of the at least one primary indicators with scores and returning a response; And
Analyzing the reply to the second questionnaire information by a recurring scale method, numerically expressing the fitness for each of the primary indicators, selecting at least one secondary indicator based on the average value of the numerical fitness, Setting at least one secondary indicator to the final indicator; And a step of determining the shape of the sidewall. 4. The method of claim 3, wherein the step of selecting as the primary indicator
Selecting at least one indicator candidate whose relative evaluation score is equal to or greater than a preset reference value as a primary indicator;
Selecting an indicator candidate in which the relative evaluation score is within a predetermined range from the reference value among the indicator candidates as the primary indicator; And
Further selecting an evaluation index newly recommended in the reply to the primary survey information as the primary index; And a step of determining the shape of the sidewall. delete 5. The method of claim 4, wherein the step of setting the final importance comprises:
Analyzing region importance for each of the plurality of regions;
Analyzing the indicator importance for each of the at least one final indicator; And
Obtaining the final importance by combining the area importance and the index importance in a predetermined manner; And a step of determining the shape of the sidewall. delete delete The method according to claim 1, wherein the step of performing the evaluation of the new landscape
Acquiring and storing basic plan information of the new dam;
Transmitting the basic plan information together with the plan check list to the at least one evaluator terminal, receiving and analyzing a check result of the plan check list to obtain a plan evaluation result;
Comparing the plan evaluation result with a predetermined first evaluation reference value, and transmitting a plan modification request if the plan evaluation result is less than the first evaluation reference value;
Acquiring design information of the four-way dam if the plan evaluation result is not less than the first evaluation reference value;
Transmitting the design information of the four-way dam to the at least one evaluator terminal along with the design check list, receiving and analyzing the check result of the design check list to obtain a design evaluation result;
Comparing the design evaluation result with a predetermined second evaluation reference value, and if the design evaluation result is less than the second evaluation reference value, transmitting a design modification request;
Acquiring construction information of the four-way dam if the design evaluation result is equal to or more than the second evaluation reference value;
Transmitting the construction information of the four-way dam to the at least one evaluator terminal together with the construction check list, receiving and analyzing the check result of the construction check list to obtain a construction evaluation result;
Comparing the construction evaluation result with a predetermined third evaluation reference value, and transmitting a construction supplementation request if the comparison result is less than the third evaluation reference value; And
If the construction evaluation result is equal to or more than the third evaluation reference value, switching the all-road dam information to maintenance management; And a step of determining the shape of the sidewall. 10. The method according to claim 9, wherein the step of performing the evaluation of the existing side-
Evaluating the structural stability of the four-way dam with respect to the design information before acquiring the construction information of the four-way dam; And
Transmitting a design modification request when it is determined that the structural stability is not secured as a result of the structural stability evaluation; Further comprising the steps of: The method according to claim 1, wherein the step of performing the evaluation of the existing facade dam
Determining whether an evaluation period for the existing four-way dam has arrived;
If it is determined that the evaluation period for the existing four-way dam has arrived, the existing check list is transmitted to the at least one evaluator terminal together with the previously collected existing three-way dam status information, and the check result of the existing check list is received and analyzed Obtaining an existing evaluation result; And
Comparing the existing evaluation result with a predetermined fourth evaluation reference value, and if the evaluation result is less than the fourth evaluation reference value, transmitting an alternative request; And a step of determining the shape of the sidewall.

Images