China Safety Science Journal ›› 2025, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (12): 8-17.doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.12.1724
• Safety social science and safety management • Previous Articles Next Articles
GUO Chen1,2(
), WU Chengsen1,2, LI Xianyue3,**(
)
Received:2025-07-20
Revised:2025-10-10
Online:2025-12-27
Published:2026-06-28
Contact:
LI Xianyue
CLC Number:
GUO Chen, WU Chengsen, LI Xianyue. Study on work safety job shop scheduling considering worker boredom perception[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(12): 8-17.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: http://www.cssjj.com.cn/EN/10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.12.1724
Table 1
Experimental example
| 算 例 | 工件 总数 | 工序 总数 | 机器 总数 | 工人 总数 | 工序类 型总数 | 操作等 级总数 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D1 | 9 | 48 | 6 | 4 | 6 | 4 |
| D2 | 12 | 59 | 7 | 4 | 8 | 4 |
| D3 | 15 | 78 | 10 | 8 | 8 | 4 |
| D4 | 18 | 87 | 14 | 10 | 8 | 6 |
| D5 | 19 | 91 | 14 | 12 | 8 | 6 |
| D6 | 21 | 105 | 15 | 12 | 10 | 6 |
| D7 | 22 | 116 | 16 | 12 | 8 | 6 |
| D8 | 26 | 131 | 18 | 15 | 8 | 8 |
| D9 | 28 | 150 | 20 | 16 | 8 | 8 |
| D10 | 30 | 164 | 19 | 14 | 8 | 8 |
| K1 | 10 | 55 | 6 | 4 | 6 | 4 |
| K2 | 10 | 58 | 6 | 4 | 7 | 5 |
| K3 | 15 | 150 | 8 | 6 | 10 | 9 |
| K4 | 15 | 90 | 8 | 5 | 8 | 5 |
| K5 | 15 | 106 | 4 | 3 | 8 | 6 |
| K6 | 10 | 150 | 15 | 10 | 7 | 8 |
| K7 | 20 | 100 | 5 | 4 | 9 | 4 |
| K8 | 20 | 225 | 10 | 8 | 7 | 7 |
| K9 | 20 | 240 | 10 | 8 | 10 | 9 |
| K10 | 20 | 240 | 15 | 10 | 9 | 8 |
Table 4
Contrast experimental results of HV and IGD
| 算例 | HV | IGD | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MO-FTTA | ENSGA-II | MMA | TS-MOPSO | MO-FTTA | ENSGA-II | MMA | TS-MOPSO | |
| D1 | 0.962 4 | 0.475 7 | 0.637 5 | 0.813 3 | 0.071 5 | 0.414 0 | 0.211 7 | 0.236 7 |
| D2 | 0.913 8 | 0.697 5 | 0.799 6 | 0.750 8 | 0.096 4 | 0.332 6 | 0.359 7 | 0.148 1 |
| D3 | 0.971 2 | 0.660 1 | 0.736 4 | 0.843 7 | 0.054 6 | 0.317 3 | 0.305 3 | 0.245 8 |
| D4 | 1.222 2 | 0.845 2 | 0.862 7 | 0.858 6 | 0.193 0 | 0.713 0 | 0.447 0 | 0.309 5 |
| D5 | 1.097 2 | 0.310 8 | 0.630 2 | 0.753 6 | 0.166 7 | 0.594 9 | 0.555 3 | 0.318 6 |
| D6 | 1.031 8 | 0.771 2 | 0.791 0 | 0.811 6 | 0.143 6 | 0.680 5 | 0.357 0 | 0.259 6 |
| D7 | 1.310 3 | 0.516 2 | 0.797 1 | 1.056 1 | 0.051 9 | 0.580 9 | 0.539 3 | 0.475 8 |
| D8 | 1.534 0 | 0.449 8 | 0.734 5 | 0.824 0 | 0.204 4 | 0.851 5 | 0.771 7 | 0.565 2 |
| D9 | 1.476 0 | 0.517 6 | 0.734 7 | 0.854 9 | 0.131 7 | 0.689 9 | 0.462 6 | 0.352 4 |
| D10 | 2.108 1 | 0.762 8 | 1.052 1 | 1.134 8 | 0.033 9 | 0.477 1 | 0.421 0 | 0.376 6 |
| K1 | 1.393 0 | 0.565 8 | 0.962 3 | 0.944 4 | 0.183 7 | 0.878 4 | 0.342 9 | 0.350 3 |
| K2 | 1.561 9 | 0.697 8 | 0.994 7 | 1.233 3 | 0.123 8 | 0.448 6 | 0.326 4 | 0.203 3 |
| K3 | 1.059 6 | 0.708 1 | 0.739 0 | 0.912 3 | 0.078 0 | 0.206 9 | 0.215 6 | 0.070 7 |
| K4 | 1.969 2 | 0.739 8 | 0.731 6 | 0.998 7 | 0.099 3 | 0.562 5 | 0.376 3 | 0.150 8 |
| K5 | 1.802 5 | 0.574 9 | 0.734 6 | 0.753 9 | 0.119 1 | 0.386 7 | 0.214 4 | 0.284 4 |
| K6 | 2.292 0 | 0.936 9 | 0.798 9 | 0.814 6 | 0.233 9 | 0.314 2 | 0.699 9 | 0.482 6 |
| K7 | 1.079 1 | 0.746 1 | 0.770 3 | 0.820 7 | 0.358 9 | 0.563 6 | 0.528 7 | 0.463 7 |
| K8 | 1.077 0 | 0.517 7 | 0.636 9 | 0.996 2 | 0.475 7 | 0.690 9 | 0.490 1 | 0.485 3 |
| K9 | 1.911 3 | 0.744 1 | 0.773 5 | 0.829 0 | 0.292 1 | 0.458 1 | 0.429 4 | 0.379 8 |
| K10 | 1.993 0 | 1.565 8 | 0.962 3 | 1.044 4 | 0.183 7 | 0.478 4 | 0.242 9 | 0.250 3 |
Table 5
Contrast experimental results of C
| 算例 | C(q1,q2) | C(q2,q1) | C(q1,q3) | C(q3,q1) | C(q1,q4) | C(q4,q1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D1 | 1.000 0 | 0.000 0 | 1.000 0 | 0.038 4 | 1.000 0 | 0.135 8 |
| D2 | 0.935 4 | 0.025 7 | 0.875 4 | 0.000 0 | 0.864 9 | 0.000 0 |
| D3 | 0.881 2 | 0.000 0 | 0.867 9 | 0.000 0 | 0.826 9 | 0.000 0 |
| D4 | 1.000 0 | 0.000 0 | 1.000 0 | 0.034 9 | 1.000 0 | 0.000 0 |
| D5 | 1.000 0 | 0.070 6 | 0.845 2 | 0.142 3 | 0.762 0 | 0.247 5 |
| D6 | 0.941 5 | 0.036 4 | 0.755 8 | 0.163 4 | 0.751 5 | 0.182 6 |
| D7 | 1.000 0 | 0.073 0 | 1.000 0 | 0.025 1 | 0.896 0 | 0.093 1 |
| D8 | 0.995 2 | 0.016 1 | 1.000 0 | 0.081 6 | 1.000 0 | 0.000 0 |
| D9 | 1.000 0 | 0.095 8 | 0.782 8 | 0.239 9 | 0.651 9 | 0.254 9 |
| D10 | 1.000 0 | 0.000 0 | 1.000 0 | 0.000 0 | 1.000 0 | 0.000 0 |
| K1 | 0.994 8 | 0.045 2 | 0.930 4 | 0.043 9 | 0.834 4 | 0.154 3 |
| K2 | 1.000 0 | 0.019 4 | 1.000 0 | 0.078 4 | 1.000 0 | 0.019 6 |
| K3 | 0.919 6 | 0.000 0 | 0.955 3 | 0.000 0 | 0.828 6 | 0.085 2 |
| K4 | 1.000 0 | 0.000 0 | 1.000 0 | 0.020 8 | 1.000 0 | 0.000 0 |
| K5 | 1.000 0 | 0.049 1 | 0.950 0 | 0.061 6 | 0.908 6 | 0.027 3 |
| K6 | 0.942 3 | 0.005 6 | 1.000 0 | 0.064 2 | 0.903 1 | 0.104 3 |
| K7 | 0.968 2 | 0.000 0 | 0.937 4 | 0.052 5 | 0.909 5 | 0.044 5 |
| K8 | 1.000 0 | 0.022 1 | 0.925 1 | 0.000 0 | 0.855 9 | 0.138 9 |
| K9 | 1.000 0 | 0.014 1 | 1.000 0 | 0.000 0 | 1.000 0 | 0.000 0 |
| K10 | 1.000 0 | 0.000 0 | 0.930 4 | 0.043 9 | 0.914 4 | 0.054 3 |
Table 6
Comparison results of target average values of each algorithm
| 算例 | MO-FTTA | ENSGA-II | MMA | TS-MOPSO | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| f1 | f2/% | f1 | f2/% | f1 | f2/% | f1 | f2/% | |
| D1 | 12.158 6 | 1.91 | 16.815 3 | 2.74 | 15.252 2 | 2.72 | 14.232 3 | 2.68 |
| D2 | 15.411 3 | 2.42 | 18.067 0 | 4.79 | 19.884 7 | 3.82 | 17.643 5 | 3.75 |
| D3 | 12.128 5 | 1.81 | 16.543 6 | 2.53 | 15.659 4 | 3.36 | 14.993 6 | 3.93 |
| D4 | 12.116 5 | 1.83 | 16.125 9 | 1.75 | 14.076 8 | 2.25 | 14.043 3 | 4.06 |
| D5 | 11.219 3 | 0.54 | 13.801 4 | 0.89 | 14.849 5 | 2.52 | 12.300 | 1.71 |
| D6 | 13.698 9 | 3.45 | 17.868 0 | 3.47 | 15.639 9 | 4.62 | 16.821 2 | 3.07 |
| D7 | 12.485 7 | 1.28 | 16.623 1 | 3.83 | 14.523 3 | 3.77 | 15.172 1 | 2.81 |
| D8 | 13.279 1 | 1.66 | 18.561 3 | 2.23 | 15.485 2 | 2.73 | 14.264 1 | 4.92 |
| D9 | 12.192 9 | 1.34 | 13.835 8 | 2.69 | 13.132 5 | 3.29 | 14.725 9 | 1.49 |
| D10 | 19.047 4 | 3.38 | 22.963 2 | 4.47 | 22.702 5 | 4.76 | 23.363 0 | 3.85 |
| K1 | 50.794 8 | 2.32 | 62.330 4 | 3.40 | 60.814 4 | 3.66 | 62.084 8 | 4.81 |
| K2 | 41.153 6 | 1.85 | 54.526 5 | 2.99 | 52.311 4 | 3.49 | 65.099 6 | 3.60 |
| K3 | 326.419 6 | 2.51 | 393.855 3 | 3.61 | 402.028 6 | 2.47 | 341.113 2 | 4.62 |
| K4 | 87.259 5 | 2.76 | 94.986 1 | 3.60 | 102.614 1 | 4.25 | 101.593 7 | 3.22 |
| K5 | 340.931 3 | 3.05 | 397.550 0 | 3.43 | 383.908 6 | 4.25 | 357.127 8 | 5.74 |
| K6 | 71.742 3 | 3.68 | 89.819 0 | 4.49 | 83.303 1 | 4.67 | 91.123 7 | 4.14 |
| K7 | 261.508 2 | 2.56 | 332.407 4 | 3.41 | 297.909 5 | 4.24 | 289.242 2 | 3.35 |
| K8 | 639.121 1 | 2.25 | 697.955 1 | 3.33 | 691.655 9 | 3.48 | 651.961 8 | 4.52 |
| K9 | 596.725 3 | 2.53 | 603.646 8 | 4.41 | 649.702 9 | 3.50 | 671.352 7 | 4.92 |
| K10 | 431.794 8 | 2.17 | 512.330 4 | 3.84 | 493.814 4 | 2.63 | 542.084 8 | 2.26 |
Table 7
Process information of structural components
| 结构 件 | 工序 | 可加工 设备 | 对应加工 时间/min | 工序 类型 | 工序 等级 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| J1 | O11 | M1/M3/M5 | 20/25/18 | 3 | 3 |
| O12 | M1/M4/M5 | 15/17/14 | 3 | 1 | |
| O13 | M2/M3/M4 | 12/13/11 | 1 | 3 | |
| O14 | M2/M4/M5 | 12/10/19 | 2 | 3 | |
| J2 | O21 | M1/M4/M5 | 14/16/13 | 3 | 3 |
| O22 | M2/M3/M5 | 10/11/9 | 1 | 3 | |
| O23 | M2/M3/M4 | 18/17/19 | 4 | 1 | |
| J3 | O31 | M1/M4/M5 | 18/20/17 | 2 | 2 |
| O32 | M1/M2/M3 | 35/40/33 | 2 | 2 | |
| O33 | M1/M3/M5 | 25/28/23 | 3 | 3 | |
| O34 | M2/M3/M5 | 13/15/12 | 3 | 1 | |
| O35 | M1/M2/M4 | 14/12/12 | 1 | 1 | |
| J4 | O41 | M1/M4/M5 | 14/16/13 | 1 | 2 |
| O42 | M1/M2/M3 | 35/38/34 | 4 | 2 | |
| O43 | M3/M3/M4 | 28/30/27 | 2 | 2 | |
| O44 | M1/M3/M4 | 18/20/17 | 3 | 1 | |
| J5 | O51 | M1/M3/M5 | 22/25/20 | 1 | 2 |
| O52 | M1/M2/M4 | 28/30/27 | 3 | 2 | |
| O53 | M1/M4/M5 | 15/18/14 | 4 | 1 | |
| O54 | M2/M3/M4 | 8/10/9 | 4 | 2 | |
| J7 | O71 | M1/M2/M3 | 11/12/10 | 4 | 3 |
| O72 | M3/M4/M5 | 18/16/15 | 1 | 2 | |
| O73 | M1/M3/M4 | 13/12/11 | 2 | 3 | |
| J8 | O81 | M1/M3/M5 | 16/14/15 | 2 | 1 |
| O82 | M2/M3/M4 | 21/20/19 | 1 | 1 | |
| O83 | M1/M3/M5 | 12/15/13 | 2 | 3 | |
| O84 | M2/M3/M4 | 10/12/14 | 4 | 1 |
| [1] |
钟茂华, 魏玉东, 范维澄, 等. 事故致因理论综述[J]. 火灾科学, 1999, 8(3):36-42.
|
|
|
|
| [2] |
刘全龙, 彭雨蒙, 赵盼, 等. 基于HFACS模型的制造企业机械伤害事故致因分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(3):51-59.
doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.03.1128 |
|
doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.03.1128 |
|
| [3] |
doi: 10.1108/00483480710774007 |
| [4] |
doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2009.07.010 |
| [5] |
doi: 10.1177/001872679304600305 |
| [6] |
doi: 10.3109/01612840.2015.1084554 pmid: 26864838 |
| [7] |
|
| [8] |
|
| [9] |
|
| [10] |
doi: 10.3923/jas.2014.3464.3471 |
| [11] |
张冰鉴, 苏秦, 刘海龙. 基于FTA-BN的云ERP不安全事件的人因失误分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(2):38-47.
doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.02.0412 |
|
doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.02.0412 |
|
| [12] |
doi: 10.1016/S0925-7535(03)00047-X |
| [13] |
|
| [14] |
|
| [15] |
|
| [16] |
|
| [17] |
|
| [18] |
|
| [19] |
doi: 10.1007/BF02023073 |
| [20] |
doi: 10.1109/TASE.2020.2969469 |
| [1] | JIAO Yu, MA Yulei, LI Xian, MA Hongliang, KANG Yutao. Analysis on characteristics and severity of major work safety accidents in China [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(2): 94-102. |
| [2] | LI Min, ZHU Baijian, CHEN Tingwei, HE Shan, SHI Shiliang, LU Yi. Statistical analysis of major chemical work safety accidents in recent 20 years [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(11): 43-50. |
| [3] | ZHU Fangyan, ZHOU Xianfeng, GAO Jian, WANG Shuai. Characteristics and prevention of work safety accidents in summer based on SAS analysis [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(S1): 23-28. |
| [4] | YANG Tianzi, WANG Tieli, PENG Hengming, DUAN Hailin. Evaluation on emergency response vulnerability for work safety accidents in small and micro enterprises [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2021, 31(12): 176-183. |
| [5] | YANG Jia, HUANG Yuecheng. Research on composition and classification of cost elements of emergency response to work safety accidents [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2019, 29(7): 143-149. |
| Viewed | ||||||
|
Full text |
|
|||||
|
Abstract |
|
|||||