Research on causes of dispatcher fatigue based on AWAHP

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.04.0969

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to further ensure the safety of railway operation, this article conducted a survey and analysis on the fatigue factors of railway train dispatchers. Firstly, according to the characteristics of the work content of railway train dispatchers, a fatigue causation evaluation index system for railway train dispatchers was established based on extensive literature review, consultation with railway train dispatching experts and human factors engineering experts. The index system consists of four first-level indicators: work content, job rotation arrangement, personnel quality, and external factors, as well as 18 second-level indicators. Secondly,AWAHP method was used to calculate the weight of different experts' own evaluation were calculated and the final weights of the final indicators were obtained. Finally, the dispatch center of a certain railway bureau was taken as an example for a comprehensive evaluation of the impact weights of dispatcher fatigue-cause factors based on AWAHP. The results show that emergency response, operation time period, continuous operation time, railway busy degree, and work complexity are the significant factors affecting dispatcher fatigue. The key factors of railway train dispatcher fatigue were effectively identified, and analysis and countermeasures were proposed for the key factors.

Key words: adaptive weighted analytic hierarchy process (AWAHP), railway train dispatcher, fatigue causes, evaluation index system, comprehensive evaluation

CLC Number:

X951交通运输安全

CHEN Liang, ZHENG Wei. Research on causes of dispatcher fatigue based on AWAHP[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(4): 42-49.

Figures/Tables 8

Tab.1

Tab.2

Fig.1

Tab.3

Tab.4

A-B layer subjective weight calculation

专家	判断矩阵	一致性检验	权重/%
1	$1 1 / 3 5 317 1 / 5 1 / 7 1 773 1 / 7 1 / 7 1 / 3 1$	$λ m a x = 4.228$ $C i = 0.007 6$ $C r = 0.086$	30.00
			56.54
			8.79
			4.66
2	$117115 1 / 7 1 / 5 1 953 1 / 9 1 / 5 1 / 3 1$	$λ m a x = 4.152$ $C i = 0.051$ $C r = 0.057$	47.85
			37.98
			9.19
			4.98
3	$1 1 / 3 3 317 1 / 3 1 / 7 1 373 1 / 3 1 / 7 1 / 3 1$	$λ m a x = 4.152$ $C i = 0.051$ $C r = 0.057$	22.82
			60.37
			10.66
			6.15
4	$175 1 / 7 1 1 / 3 1 / 5 31 937 1 / 9 1 / 3 1 / 7 1$	$λ m a x = 4.206$ $C i = 0.069$ $C r = 0.078$	64.53
			9.42
			21.93
			4.13
5	$113113 1 / 3 1 / 3 1 551 1 / 5 1 / 5 1 1$	$λ m a x = 4.033$ $C i = 0.011$ $C r = 0.012$	39.67
			39.67
			11.64
			9.02
6	$113115 1 / 3 1 / 5 1 973 1 / 9 1 / 7 1 / 3 1$	$λ m a x = 4.057$ $C i = 0.019$ $C r = 0.022$	40.34
			43.05
			11.84
			4.77
7	$135 1 / 3 13 1 / 5 1 / 3 1 953 1 / 9 1 / 5 1 / 3 1$	$λ m a x = 4.076$ $C i = 0.025$ $C r = 0.029$	58.11
			25.49
			11.40
			5.00

Tab.4

Tab.5

Tab.6

Tab.7

References 19

[1]	赵跃, 叶龙, 沈梅. 铁路调度系统中人的失误原因分析及控制对策[J]. 北方交通大学学报, 2001, 25(5):77-79.
	ZHAO Yue, YE Long, SHEN Mei. Analysis on the cause of human errors and study on preventive countermeasures of railway dispatching system[J]. Journal of North Jiaotong University, 2001, 25(5):77-79.
[2]	SAATY T L. Applications of analytical hierarchies[J]. Mathematics Computers in Simulation, 1979, 21(1):1-20.
[3]	李相勇, 蒋葛夫. 层次分析法(AHP)在驾驶疲劳致因分析中的运用[J]. 人类工效学, 2003, 9(2):58-60.
[4]	HAN Keeyoul, BACK Y S. A study on the priority making of human error prevention business using AHP[J]. Journal of the Korea Safety Management & Science, 2012, 14(3):DOI:10.12812/ksms.2012.14.3.111.
[5]	张晓全, 潘晶, 王欢, 等. 机务人员疲劳致因影响分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2013, 23(2):97-102.
	ZHANG Xiaoquan, PAN Jing, WANG Huan, et al. Analysis of fatigue causes for aircraft maintenance personnel[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2013, 23(2):97-102.
[6]	孙瑞山, 胡臻, 汪磊, 等. 基于权的最小平方法和熵权法的机务维修人员疲劳影响因素研究[J]. 安全与环境工程, 2016, 23(3):167-170.
	SUN Ruishan, HU Zhen, WANG Lei, et al. Influencing factors of maintenance personnel fatigue based on wlsm and entropy weight method[J]. Safety and Environmental Engineering, 2016, 23(3):167-170.
[7]	杨昌其, 谭娟. 基于层次分析法的空中交通管制员疲劳致因分析[J]. 安全, 2017, 38(9):36-39.
[8]	胡一秋, 朱琳, 郭婧, 等. 基于W/INDEX模型的轨道交通调度员工作负荷评价[J]. 人类工效学, 2020, 26(5):57-61,73.
[9]	张光远, 王亚伟, 王灿, 等. 基于脑电信号特征的高铁调度员作业疲劳分析评价研究[J]. 综合运输, 2022, 44(11):106-111,150.
	ZHANG Guangyuan, WANG Yawei, WANG Can, et al. Analysis and evaluation of work fatigue of high-speed rail dispatchers based on EEG signal characteristics[J]. China Transportation Review, 2022, 44(11):106-111,150.
[10]	张晖, 倪定安, 曾科, 等. 人机共驾环境下驾驶疲劳研究综述[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(3):204-211. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.03.0512
	ZHANG Hui, NI Ding'an, ZENG Ke, et al. A review of driving fatigue research in human-machine co-driving environment[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(3):204-211. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.03.0512
[11]	王煜坤. 民航货运飞行员疲劳致因和预防措施分析[J]. 中国航务周刊, 2023(20):72-74.
[12]	杨奎. 铁路列车调度员疲劳机理与发展规律研究[D]. 成都: 西南交通大学, 2017.
	YANG Kui. Research on fatigue mechanism and development law of railway train dispatcher[D]. Chengdu: Southwest Jiaotong University, 2017.
[13]	王健, 高扬, 邢科家, 等. 铁路运输岗位疲劳研究综述[J]. 中国铁路, 2023(3):16-25.
	WANG Jian, GAO Yang, XING Kejia, et al. Overview of research on fatigue of railway transport posts[J]. China Railway, 2023(3):16-25.
[14]	李响, 徐玉萍, 章海亮. 机车司机驾驶疲劳风险动态量化评价研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2017, 27(2):18-23. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2017.02.004
	LI Xiang, XU Yuping, ZHANG Hailiang. A study on dynamic quantitative evaluation of train driver's fatigue risk[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2017, 27(2):18-23. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2017.02.004
[15]	高宏斌. 加强高铁列车调度员队伍建设的思考与建议[J]. 企业改革与管理, 2020(15):218-219.
[16]	VIDAL L A, MARLE F, BOCQUET J C. Using a delphi process and the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to evaluate the complexity of projects[J]. Expert Systems with Applications, 2011, 38(5): 5388-5405.
[17]	谭跃进, 陈英武, 易进先. 系统工程原理[M]. 长沙: 国防科技大学出版社, 1999: 66-70.
[18]	许树柏. 层次分析法原理[M]. 天津: 天津大学出版社, 1988:14-37.
[19]	朱喜安, 魏国栋. 熵值法中无量纲化方法优良标准的探讨[J]. 统计与决策, 2015(2):12-15.

班次	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
甲	日	夜	—	日	夜	—	—	—
乙	—	日	夜	—	—	—	日	夜
丙	—	—	日	夜	—	日	夜	—
丁	夜	—	—	—	日	夜	—	日

目标层	准则层	指标层	备注
调度员疲劳致因A	工作内容B₁	工作复杂程度C₁	监控(感知)、打电话通知调度事项(决策)、运行图调整及施工安排(操作)
		线路繁忙程度C₂	繁忙干线、干线、其他线路
		调度台类型C₃	指挥货运、普速列车、高铁等列车时的不同对象、分散自律调度集中系统、列车调度指挥系统
		管辖线路长度C₄	管辖线路的长度、管辖的的车站数量
		岗位分工C₅	计划员、主调度员、助理调度员、临时辅助调度员
		应急突发处置C₆	突发应急情况处置工作,具体是指评估铁路列车调度员的应急突发事件处理能力水平,涉及调度员应对紧急情况、处理突发状况和做出决策的能力
	轮岗安排B₂	作业时间段C₇	早白班、晚白班、前夜班、后夜班
		持续作业时长C₈	持续调度指挥工作时长
		岗前休息天数C₉	岗前休息的天数
		岗前睡眠时长C₁₀	岗前最近一次的睡眠时长
	人员素质B₃	工作经验C₁₁	工作经验、感知反应能力和标准化作业水平,以及工作年限; 侧重评估铁路列车调度员的实际工作经验和业务熟练程度
		生理素质C₁₂	年龄、健康状况、生活规律和睡眠质量等
		情绪素质C₁₃	低落、平常、亢奋等情绪
		心理素质C₁₄	承担压力的心理素质,包括安全压力、工作压力等
	环境因素B₄	气象条件C₁₅	风、雨、雪、雾等不同气象条件
		调度大厅环境C₁₆	调度大厅的照明、温度、振动、噪声
		调度台人机工程C₁₇	座椅舒适度、桌子高度、显示器排布角度等
		睡眠环境C₁₈	睡眠环境包括寓所、家里或其他临时休息区域

专家编号	信息熵值e	权重/%
1	0.831	15.385
2	0.851	13.572
3	0.832	15.336
4	0.835	15.037
5	0.857	13.027
6	0.847	13.907
7	0.849	13.736

准则层	一层权重	次级指标层	次级权重	总权重
A₁-B₁	44.67	C₁	15.23	6.80
		C₂	17.02	7.60
		C₃	5.77	2.58
		C₄	4.79	2.14
		C₅	7.14	3.19
		C₆	50.05	22.36
A₂-B₂	37.64	C₇	44.66	16.81
		C₈	35.15	13.23
		C₉	7.61	2.86
		C₁₀	12.58	4.74
A₃-B₃	12.22	C₁₁	35.20	4.30
		C₁₂	11.97	1.46
		C₁₃	24.41	2.98
		C₁₄	28.42	3.47
A₄-B₄	5.47	C₁₅	36.66	2.00
		C₁₆	12.25	0.67
		C₁₇	13.31	0.73
		C₁₈	37.79	2.07

指标	总权重		排序
C₆	22.36		1
C₇	16.81		2
C₈	13.23		3
C₂	7.60		4
C₁	6.80	5
C₁₀	4.74	6
C₁₁	4.30	7
C₁₄	3.47	8
C₅	3.19	9
C₁₃	2.98	10
C₉	2.86	11
C₃	2.58	12
C₄	2.14	13
C₁₈	2.07	14
C₁₅	2.00	15
C₁₂	1.46	16
C₁₇	0.73	17
C₁₆	0.67	18