자율무인체계 운용을 위한 모델링 및 시뮬레이션과 디지털 트윈의 적용 기준 제안

현철¹^{, *} ; 김동건¹ ; 김현승² ; 정동민¹

1LIG넥스원 해양연구소 수석연구원
2LIG넥스원 해양연구소 선임연구원

Proposing Application Criteria for Modeling & Simulation and Digital Twin for Autonomous Systems Operation

Chul Hyun¹^{, *} ; Donggeon Kim¹ ; Hyunseung Kim² ; Dongmin Jeong¹

1Chief research engineer, Maritime R&D Center, LIG Nex1
2Research engineer, Maritime R&D Center, LIG Nex1

Correspondence to: ^*Chul Hyun Maritime R&D Center, LIG Nex1 333 Pangyo-ro, Bundang-gu, Seongnam-si, Gyeonggi-do, 13488, Republic of Korea Tel: +82-31-5178-4293 Fax: +82-31-5179-7086 E-mail: chul.hyun@gmail.com

초록

자율무인체계의 운용 환경은 실시간 대응성, 제한적인 자원 조건, 복잡한 외부 요인 등으로 인해 기술 선택 시 보다 정교한 판단이 요구된다. 본 논문에서는 모델링 및 시뮬레이션(M&S)과 디지털 트윈(DT)의 구조적 차이를 정리하고, 자율무인체계 운용 단계에 따라 두 기술을 선택적으로 적용할 수 있는 기준을 제시하였다. AUV(autonomous underwater vehicle)를 사례로 각 운용 단계별 기술 적합성을 분석하였으며, 판단 기준 매트릭스와 적용 흐름도를 통해 실무적 가이드라인을 도출하였다. 제안된 구성은 단일 기술의 일괄 적용을 지양하고, 운용 목적과 자원 조건에 따른 유연한 기술 조합을 가능하게 하는 판단 틀로 활용될 수 있다.

Abstract

Autonomous unmanned systems operate under complex conditions such as real-time responsiveness, limited onboard resources, and environmental uncertainty, requiring careful selection of supporting technologies. This paper distinguishes the structural characteristics of modeling & simulation (M&S) and digital twin (DT), and proposes criteria for selecting between them across operational stages. Using an autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV) as a case study, the suitability of each approach is analyzed by phase, and a decision matrix and application flowchart are provided. The proposed framework avoids one-size-fits-all adoption and enables flexible integration of M&S and DT technologies based on mission requirements and system constraints.

Keywords:

Autonomous Unmanned System, Digital Twin, Modeling and Simulation, Technology Selection Criteria, Operational Phase Analysis

키워드:

자율무인체계, 디지털 트윈, 모델링 및 시뮬레이션, 기술 선택 기준, 운용 단계 분석

References

Michael Grieves, “Digital Twin: Manufacturing Excellence through Virtual Factory Replication,” White Paper, Florida Institute of Technology, Florida, 2014.
Fei Tao, He Zhang, Ang Liu and A. Y. C. Nee, “Digital Twin in Industry: State-of-the-Art,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 2405–2415, IEEE, New Jersey, 2019. [https://doi.org/10.1109/tii.2018.2873186]
Inuk Kang and Jahun Oh, “Review of the Application of Digital Twins to Defense,” Journal of Digital Contents Society, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 383–393, Digital Contents Society, Seoul, 2024. [https://doi.org/10.9728/dcs.2024.25.2.383]
Chul Hyun, Donggeon Kim, Hyunseung Kim and Dongmin Jeong, “Proposal of a Lightweight Digital Twin Framework for AUV Operational Optimization,” J. Korean Inst. Def. Technol., Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 13–19, Korean Institute of Defense Technology, Daejeon, 2025. [https://doi.org/10.52682/jkidt.2025.7.1.13]
VM Software House, “Simulations vs Digital Twins: Choose the Best,” VM Software House, Warsaw, 2024, https://vmsoftwarehouse.com/simulations-vs-digital-twins-choose-the-best
Yousuf D. Iren, “Digital Twins: Virtual Representation of Physical Systems,” Open Universiteit, Heerlen, 2021.
Andrew S. Hahn, Jenna deCastro, Minami Tanaka and Christopher Lamb, “Evaluation of Digital Twin Modeling and Simulation (SAND2023-09884),” Sandia National Laboratories, U.S. Department of Energy, Albuquerque and Livermore, 2023, https://www.sandia.gov/app/uploads/sites/273/2024/11/SAND_Digital_Twins_Final.pdf
Amazon Web Services, “Digital Twin and IoT Integration for Edge-Based Systems,” Seattle, 2022.
Zhao Zhang, Zhihua Wang, Xin Wang and Wei Chen, “A Hybrid Evaluation Method for Digital Twin Platforms Based on BWM and FCE,” Scientific Reports, Vol. 14, No. 1, Article no. 5855, Nature Portfolio, London, 2024, https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-82154-8