• Journal of the Korean BIBLIA Society for library and Information Science
• /
• v.5 no.1
• /
• pp.85-105
• /
• 1981

Information is an essential factor leading the rapid progress which is one of the distinguished characteristics in modem society. As more information is required and as more is supplied by individuals, governmental units, businesses, and educational institutions, the greater will be the requirement for efficient methods of communication. One possibility for improving the information dissemination process is to use computers. The capabilities of such machine are beginning to be used in the process of Information storage, retrieval and dissemination. An important problems, that must be carefully examined is whether one technique for information retrieval is better for worse than another. This paper examines problem of how to evaluate an information retrieval system. One specific approach is a cost accounting model for use in studying how to minimize the cost of operating a mechanized retrieval system. Through the use of cost analysis, the model provides a method for comparative evaluation between systems. The general cost accounting model of the literature retrieval system being designed by this study are given below. 1. The total cost accounting model of the literature retrieval system. The total cost of the literature retrieval system = (the cost per unit of user time X the amount of user time) + ( the cost per unit of system time X the amount of system time) 2. System cost accounting model system cost = (the pre-search system cost per unit of time X time) + (the search system cost per unit of time X time) + (the post search system cost per unit of time X time) 1) Pre-search system cost per unit of time = cost of channel per unit time + cost of central processing unit per unit time + cost of storage per unit time 2) Search system cost per unit of time = comparison cost + document representation cost. 3) Post-search system cost per unit of time. = cost of channel per unit time + cost of central processing unit per unit time + cost of storage per unit time 3. User cost accounting model Total user cost = [pre-search user cost per unit of time X (time + additional time) ] + [search user cost per unit of time X (time + additional time) ] + [post-search user cost per unit of time X (time + additional time) ].

• Journal of the Korea Safety Management & Science
• /
• v.13 no.3
• /
• pp.55-61
• /
• 2011

Unit cost for asbestos removal work which have been made out at government contract award for recent three years has been reviewed and shown with table. And the cost have been compared with ones made out by two agencies, American asbestos removal specialists, government ministry for making out comparison tables. First, legal and practical work status survey have been made to determine reasonability of introducing separate contract-awarding system, as a part of ensuring reasonable unit work cost. And then, two different status have been compared and there in introduction possibility of separate contract-awarding system, it is found out. In interior removal work case, it is thought that 50% by owner, 60% unit work cost by the expert of which removal specialist think as reasonable unit cost. the results for exterior and spray work method are shown with almost same context. Impact factors for determining unit work cost such as project mount, project kind, contract-awarding method, subcontract method have been compared with parties. Removal specialist and expert group have almost same ideas for project amount which has been hightestly weighed but owner's recognition has partially lower than specialists idea. There are almost no difference of recognition between three(3) parties for project kind. Idea comparison of reasonable unit work cost for asbestos removal work between three concerned parties has been analyzed and found out that expert group do unit work cost, 65% of which removal specialists estimate, in interior tex removal. And there is almost no difference between them in exterior roof slate removal. But there is considerable difference between them that owner estimates 50% unit cost of specialist one while expert group estimate 50% of specialist idea of unit removal cost.

• Korean Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
• /
• v.12 no.3
• /
• pp.131-139
• /
• 2011

In this Study, the Cost of Public Facility Construction in the VE Cost Model, and the Progress of the Construction Site Management, and Cost due to the Lack of Cpatial Information in Dispute Cost Work Type Recognize the limits of Historical Information, and to Overcome the Perception of Cost and Space Systems Unit In the Process of Transition that Began Seeking Ways to Improve Through this Study, Different Parts of the Proposed Area of Construction Work Unit System, the Core of Calculating Hourly and Detailed Engineering Information and Cost Information Generated Extension to Configure the Construction Unit in Every Space, Every Work Unit System, All Materials That Make Up Work Unit System, Unit Labor Costs, And All of the Configuration Items Enables Precise And Multidimensional Understanding is That.

• Journal of Applied Reliability
• /
• v.6 no.2
• /
• pp.151-161
• /
• 2006

This article is concerned with cost analysis model in periodic maintenance policy. The repair policy is differently applied according as unit importance during an item being used and unit restoration during an item being failed. So in this paper the repair policy with minimal repair is considered as follow : as the occurrence of failure between minimal repair and periodic interval time, unit is replaced by a spare unit until the periodic maintenance time arrived. Then total expected cost per unit time is calculated according to scale parameter of failure distribution in a view of customer's. The total expected costs are included repair and usage cost : operating, fixed, minimal repair, periodic maintenance and spare unit cost. Numerical example is shown in which failure time of item has Erlang distribution.

• Nuclear Engineering and Technology
• /
• v.47 no.3
• /
• pp.306-314
• /
• 2015

This paper examines the difference in the value of the nuclear fuel cycle cost calculated by the deterministic and probabilistic methods on the basis of an equilibrium model. Calculating using the deterministic method, the direct disposal cost and Pyro-SFR (sodium-cooled fast reactor) nuclear fuel cycle cost, including the reactor cost, were found to be 66.41 mills/kWh and 77.82 mills/kWh, respectively (1 mill = one thousand of a dollar, i.e., $10^{-3}$ $). This is because the cost of SFR is considerably expensive. Calculating again using the probabilistic method, however, the direct disposal cost and Pyro-SFR nuclear fuel cycle cost, excluding the reactor cost, were found be 7.47 mills/kWh and 6.40 mills/kWh, respectively, on the basis of the most likely value. This is because the nuclear fuel cycle cost is significantly affected by the standard deviation and the mean of the unit cost that includes uncertainty. Thus, it is judged that not only the deterministic method, but also the probabilistic method, would also be necessary to evaluate the nuclear fuel cycle cost. By analyzing the sensitivity of the unit cost in each phase of the nuclear fuel cycle, it was found that the uranium unit price is the most influential factor in determining nuclear fuel cycle costs.

• Nuclear Engineering and Technology
• /
• v.47 no.7
• /
• pp.849-858
• /
• 2015

This study set the pyroprocess facility at an engineering scale as a cost object, and presented the cost consumed during the unit processes of the pyroprocess. For the cost calculation, the activity based costing (ABC) method was used instead of the engineering cost estimation method, which calculates the cost based on the conceptual design of the pyroprocess facility. The calculation results demonstrate that the pyroprocess facility's unit process cost is $194/kgHM for pretreatment, $298/kgHM for electrochemical reduction, $226/kgHM for electrorefining, and $299/kgHM for electrowinning. An analysis demonstrated that the share of each unit process cost among the total pyroprocess cost is as follows: 19% for pretreatment, 29% for electrochemical reduction, 22% for electrorefining, and 30% for electrowinning. The total unit cost of the pyroprocess was calculated at $1,017/kgHM. In the end, electrochemical reduction and the electrowinning process took up most of the cost, and the individual costs for these two processes was found to be similar. This is because significant raw material cost is required for the electrochemical reduction process, which uses platinum as an anode electrode. In addition, significant raw material costs are required, such as for $Li_3PO_4$, which is used a lot during the salt purification process.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Building Construction Conference
• /
• 2014.05a
• /
• pp.46-47
• /
• 2014

Recently, BAI(Board of Audit and Inspection of Korea) has recommended that "Result unit cost" of Korean government apply to national power plant construction project when plant owner corporations estimate budget price for tender. but nuclear industry have difficulties with this suggestion. the purpose of this study is to review the "Result unit cost" and problem with application of NPP construction cost estimating. And proposed the direction of application of "Result unit cost" to NPP construction cost estimating.

• Industrial Engineering and Management Systems
• /
• v.11 no.1
• /
• pp.11-17
• /
• 2012

Along with the recent trend toward increasing variety and shorter life of products in the market, evaluation of risk for economic investment alternatives is of practical importance in manufacturing companies. This paper assumes that each alternative is composed of demand volume and unit sales price as income factors, and unit variable cost and fixed cost as expense factors. The paper assumes that these four factors move worse from the originally expected values, toward the direction of decreasing profit. Values of these four factors are also assumed to fluctuate from year to year over the entire multi-period. By applying the analysis of the breakeven points to each of the four factors, safer area against these changes is represented on the two dimensional domain called normalized total-cost unit-cost domain. A practical numerical example is analyzed to verify the validity of the proposed method.

• Industrial Engineering and Management Systems
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.107-120
• /
• 2010

In today's uncertain economic environment, the evaluation of safety for investment alternatives is of practical importance in manufacturing companies. This paper examines a method of quantitatively evaluating profitability and risk for multiple alternatives using the total-cost unit-cost domain. The paper assumes such factors as unit sales price, sales and production volume, unit variable cost, fixed cost, and yield for each alternative. The paper incorporates the relationship between production capacity and demand, distinguishing between cases of production capacity surplus and shortage for each year over the entire planning horizon. The paper investigates the case in which the values of each factor independently move in the direction of decreasing profit each year, and clarifies the procedure of comparing safety among multiple investment alternatives on a single consolidated total-cost unit-cost domain. The difficulty of the problem lies in the method of consolidating multiple total-cost unit-cost domains into a single domain since the combination of years of capacity surplus and shortage depends upon the change values in each factor under consideration. A systematic method of evaluating profitability as well as risk is presented, and the validity of the proposed method is verified using a numerical example.

• Journal of Applied Reliability
• /
• v.6 no.3
• /
• pp.195-203
• /
• 2006

This paper deals with cost analysis model in periodic maintenance policy. The repair policy with minimal repair is considered as follow : as the occurrence of failure between minimal repair and periodic interval time, unit is replaced by a new unit before the periodic maintenance time comes. Then total expected cost per unit time is calculated according to time delta t in a view of customer's. The total expected costs are included repair and usage cost : operating, fixed, minimal repair, periodic maintenance and new unit expected cost. Numerical example is shown in which failure time of item has Normal distribution.