Next Article in Journal
Spatiotemporal Variation in the Coupling Relationship between Human Activities and Soil Erosion—A Case Study in the Weihe River Basin
Next Article in Special Issue
Sustainable Intelligent Energy Management System for Microgrid Using Multi-Agent Systems: A Case Study
Previous Article in Journal
Sustainable Vitality and Learning: The Connotation, Scale, and Heterogeneity of Dualistic Psychological Thriving at Work
Previous Article in Special Issue
Implementation of EDGE Computing Platform in Feeder Terminal Unit for Smart Applications in Distribution Networks with Distributed Renewable Energies
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 14
10.3390/su151410801
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Constructing and Validating Professional Competence Indicators for Underwater Welding Technicians for Offshore Wind Power Generation in Taiwan

by
Chin-Wen Liao
1,2,†,
Kai-Chao Yao
1,*,†,
Chin-Tang Tsai
1,
Jing-Ran Xu
1,3,
Wei-Lun Huang
1,
Wei-Sho Ho
1,4,* and
Yu-Peng Wang
1,5
1
Department of Industrial Education and Technology, National Changhua University of Education Bao-Shan Campus, No. 2, Shi-Da Rd., Changhua City 500208, Taiwan
2
Center of Teacher Education, National Chung Hsing University, No. 145, Xingda Rd., South Dist., Taichung City 402202, Taiwan
3
Sheng Jen Industrial Co., Ltd., No. 49, Aly. 2, Ln. 226, Sec. 1, Zhongzheng Rd., Changhua City 500004, Taiwan
4
NCUE Alumni Association, National Changhua University of Education Jin-De Campus, No. 1, Jinde Rd., Changhua County, Changhua City 500207, Taiwan
5
EBARA-ELLIOTT SERVICE (TAIWAN) Co., Ltd., No. 1, Gongyequ 42nd Rd., Xitun Dist., Taichung City 407019, Taiwan
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Sustainability 2023, 15(14), 10801; https://doi.org/10.3390/su151410801
Submission received: 30 May 2023 / Revised: 24 June 2023 / Accepted: 1 July 2023 / Published: 10 July 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Critical Issues in Power Engineering and Renewable Energy Technologies)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study aims to develop professional competence indicators for underwater welding technicians for offshore wind power generation in Taiwan. A literature analysis methodology was employed to gather and investigate research studies related to competence indicators in the underwater welding domain of offshore wind power generation. Subsequently, the Delphi method was utilized to conduct a three-round questionnaire survey, aiming to seek expert opinions regarding the appropriateness and differentiation of these competency indicators. To examine the consistency and significance of expert opinions, the data were subjected to K–S single-sample analysis and K–W one-way analysis of variance. The study identified three main dimensions of professional competency indicators for underwater welding technicians in offshore wind power generation: professional skills, professional knowledge, and workplace attitudes. These dimensions further led to the identification of 10 sub-dimensions, including equipment operation, welding practice, welding inspection, metal materials, welding graphics, occupational safety, quality standards, process improvement, self-management, and teamwork. These sub-dimensions further informed the identification of 75 specific behavioral components as criteria. This study provides findings to enhance future staff training and talent recruitment, benefiting relevant units and managers. These results contribute to enhancing the competence and performance of personnel in underwater welding for offshore wind power generation.

1. Introduction

In response to the global warming issue, major countries around the world have focused on the development of green energy with clean, low-temperature greenhouse gas emissions and self-sufficient characteristics as one of the key considerations in future energy policies [1,2]. Taiwan is also actively promoting the emerging 3E green energy industry, green production equipment, and technological projects that emphasize energy saving, environmental protection, and economic development. These initiatives not only drive industrial transformation but also create increased demand for talent and job opportunities in the market, positioning workers in the green energy industry as in-demand green-collar professionals. Among all renewable energy sources, in addition to large-scale hydropower, wind power and solar photovoltaic have received significant global attention. Among these, wind power is one of the most mature and commercially viable renewable energy technologies with promising prospects for commercial development [3]. According to the “Global Offshore Wind Speeds Rankings“ by 4C Offshore, the Taiwan Strait is a prime region for resources worldwide. Among the top 20 offshore wind sites with the most favorable wind conditions, the Taiwan Strait accounts for 16 of them [4]. Furthermore, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) indicates that the coastal region of Changhua consistently experiences wind speeds exceeding 7 m/s throughout the year, with an average wind power density surpassing 750 W/m2. This unique and advantageous environment has led to the development of the largest-scale offshore wind farms within this region in Taiwan [5]. Various studies have consistently demonstrated the excellent wind energy resources in Taiwan, particularly in offshore wind power generation, which exhibits significant development prospects and potential. Consequently, the government has been continuously revising and expanding its renewable energy goals over the years. In 2010, a target of 10,858 MW was announced, followed by a revision in 2011 to increase the target to 12,502 MW. In 2014, the target was further elevated to 13,750 MW, and in 2015, a substantial revision was made to the new energy policy goal, aiming to raise the proportion of renewable energy generation to 20% by 2025 [6]. The detailed contents of the plan are presented in Table 1.
Under the policies and trends of the green energy industry, certain issues arise in terms of infrastructure, localization of the industry chain, and the demand for green manpower. The “4-Year Offshore Wind Power Promotion Plan” produced by Taiwan’s Bureau of Energy, Ministry of Economic Affairs, implements a policy of “demonstration first, potential second, and block development later”, as well as a policy of “shallow waters first, deep waters later” for offshore wind power installation. Due to favorable policy factors, numerous Taiwanese companies have entered the offshore wind power industry, producing components for offshore wind turbines. In the construction of offshore wind farms, apart from the core offshore wind turbine, the most crucial aspect is the sturdy construction of the turbine tower and underwater foundation to withstand Taiwan’s natural disasters and environmental threats. The construction of underwater foundations is an essential part of the localization of the wind power industry in Taiwan [6].
According to the preliminary requirements of the “Industrial Development Plan” produced by the Bureau of Industrial Development, Ministry of Economic Affairs, offshore wind farm developers are required to commit to using underwater foundations manufactured by domestic companies. This has attracted various companies to enter this field, and the demand for welding professionals has also increased to enhance the capacity to produce underwater foundations [7]. Taking into account safety, economic value, and referencing the development trends in offshore wind power in Europe and America, most domestic wind farm developers prefer to use monopile foundations and jacket foundations as their main products. Monopile foundations are chosen due to their simple structure, low manufacturing costs enabled by automated welding equipment, and sufficient structural strength and support capabilities. They are suitable for the hard seabed soil on the northwest coast north of Miaoli. On the other hand, jacket foundations have a more complex overall structure and often require manual welding techniques, making them more expensive to produce. However, they possess relatively stronger structural strength and can withstand Taiwan’s harsh weather conditions. They are suitable for the soft seabed soil on the southwest coast south of Miaoli [8].
The construction techniques for offshore wind power projects are not only challenging but also require specialized expertise. As Taiwan is still in the early stages of offshore wind power development, many underwater foundation welding techniques need to be learned from Europe. Based on the experience of several European underwater foundation manufacturers, the fabrication of underwater foundations mainly involves the assembly of steel structures, with a significant demand for skilled welding personnel. Each production line requires at least 200 professional welders, and during peak periods, may accommodate up to 600 welders working simultaneously [9].
Therefore, the demand for welding professionals is also a challenge that domestic manufacturers face when entering the production process. For offshore wind power developers in Europe, apart from manufacturing capabilities, one of the most important aspects is having engineering expertise that meets international certifications. Not only must welding personnel qualifications meet the requirements of ISO 9606-1:2012 [10], but compliance with EN 1090-1: 2009 + A1:2011, EN 1090-2:2018, EN 1090-3:2008, EN 1090-4:2018, EN 1090-5:2017 (EU structural steel certification) [11,12,13,14,15] and ISO 3834-1:2021, ISO 3834-2:2021, ISO 3834-3:2021, ISO 3834-4:2021 (welding quality management system certification) [16,17,18,19] has also become one of the qualification requirements for manufacturing companies. This serves to demonstrate that their welding engineering management adheres to international standards [20].
Welding is an indispensable foundational technique in industry, with applications in various large structures such as steel buildings, bridges, boilers, storage tanks, chemical equipment, machinery, vehicles, ships, aircraft, offshore wind power substructures, and towers. Its application scope is extensive. In the construction of offshore wind power substructures, the selection of steel materials must meet the stringent weather conditions in Taiwan. High-strength steel plates certified by DNV-GL (Det Norske Veritas-Germanischer Lloyd) specifications, such as S355ML, S420ML, S460ML, S555ML, are chosen for this purpose [21]. When welding steel materials, it is crucial to control the preheating temperature and employ appropriate heat treatment procedures to avoid temperature-induced changes in the base material’s properties and ensure compliance with quality requirements. The quality of welding has a significant impact on the structural integrity and safety of the products. However, relying solely on post-weld inspections is insufficient to guarantee that the quality meets the requirements. Proper control measures must be implemented throughout the manufacturing process, including pre-weld design, material selection, construction, and inspections. This comprehensive approach ensures that the quality of the welded joints meets the required standards [22]. Especially for jacket-type substructures in offshore wind power, the structural components are predominantly composed of pipe steel. The fabrication of joint steel pipe openings is complex, making it impractical to use automated equipment for welding operations. Moreover, the joint design involves multiple orientations and various joint configurations such as T-shaped, Y-shaped, K-shaped, X-shaped, and saddle-shaped joints. These require skilled welding techniques performed by manual labor. The welded joints must undergo 100% non-destructive testing and meet the acceptance criteria [23]. Consequently, the welding process planning, expertise, and proficiency of welding personnel significantly impact the quality control activities of the construction company. Welding is considered a specialized process within the quality control framework, highlighting the importance of the professional competence of the related technical personnel. Through the exploration of professional competencies, a comprehensive understanding of the required skill sets, including key job tasks, corresponding behavioral indicators, work outputs, knowledge, skills, and attitudes, can be achieved [2,24]. The purpose of this study is to explore and analyze the professional competencies required for welding technicians involved in offshore wind power substructure fabrication. The findings of this study will serve as a reference for future recruitment and training programs for technical personnel.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Construction and Definition of Professional Competencies

The construction and design of competency indicators can be categorized into two main types: quantitative and qualitative. Within these two categories, there are further subdivisions including Delphi method, questionnaire survey method, analytic hierarchy process, factor analysis, nomination group, regression analysis method, professional group model, focus group method, expert judgment method, brainstorming method, and literature review [25]. There are numerous ways to construct competency indicators, but most of them distinguish key competencies based on behavioral capabilities and outstanding performance. It is emphasized that even after constructing the competency model, it is essential to validate its effectiveness [26]. Considering the comprehensiveness of research methods, questionnaire reliability, tight research schedules, and limited resources, the Delphi method is often adopted as the research approach [27,28]. Due to the potential conflicts arising from open discussions or debates during face-to-face meetings, the Delphi method is implemented in an anonymous manner. This allows all experts to express their opinions based on their professional experience without feeling threatened. Through multiple rounds of questionnaire surveys, expert opinions are obtained, analyzed, and consolidated to achieve consensus among the majority of experts. This research method can be considered as a form of collective decision making [29]. The Delphi method offers several advantages, including its cost-effectiveness and convenience. It ensures that experts can freely express their genuine opinions without feeling threatened. However, the multiple rounds of questionnaires can be time-consuming and complex. Additionally, relying on written communication may lead to differences in interpretation and difficulties in integrating opinions [30]. The use of the Delphi method for constructing competency indicators is a widely recognized research approach in academia. In this study, we have also adopted the Delphi method as the primary research method. Through questionnaire surveys, we aim to gather the rich professional experience of Delphi experts, enabling us to enhance the construction of competency indicators for underwater foundation welding technicians in the offshore wind power industry.
With the advent of globalization and changes in industrial structure, talent plays a crucial role in a company’s competitiveness. Enterprises are increasingly emphasizing the development of employees’ competencies, and competency-based talent cultivation and assessment have become mainstream practices. In recent years, the Labor Development Agency has allocated substantial funding to assist organizations in constructing comprehensive competency frameworks. The iceberg theory model, proposed by scholars Spencer and Spencer, divides individual competency traits into the following five categories: motive, trait, self-concept, knowledge, and skill [31]. The knowledge and skills evident above the surface can be enriched through training methods to achieve a transformative effect. However, the implicit core traits below the surface, such as self-concept, personality traits, and motivation, are less susceptible to change and development. The visible information, which accounts for 20% of the iceberg, includes education, experience, expertise, and personal intuition. On the other hand, the submerged portion represents the internalized individual traits, such as thinking patterns, behavioral characteristics, occupational interests, job suitability, or alignment between work and personal interests [32]. The analysis of professional competencies confirms that the performance of professional personnel in their work and tasks goes beyond the combination of knowledge, skills, and attitudes; it also involves the practical application of theoretical concepts [33]. Based on the experiences of different organizations, utilizing competency-based approaches in functions such as recruitment and selection, performance management, and succession planning in human resource management activities can enable organizations to better match individuals with suitable positions and tasks [34]. The importance of competencies lies in assessing one’s strengths and weaknesses, thereby improving individual job performance. By utilizing these competencies, individuals can achieve self-fulfillment through effective communication, coordination, and interdisciplinary thinking [35].
Based on the definitions of professional competence provided by scholars both domestically and internationally, it is evident that professional knowledge, technical skills, and workplace attitudes are essential qualities for individuals and organizations to achieve present and future performance in the workplace. In this study, these three aspects will serve as the core focus, and through a review of the relevant literature and expert interviews, we will examine the job content and professional competencies of welding personnel in the offshore wind power industry, ensuring the appropriateness of the identified competencies for job requirements. This analysis will help identify critical human resource gaps in the industry.

2.2. The Development Status of Offshore Wind Power Underwater Generation Foundations

Green energy is a trend of the future, and Taiwan possesses excellent conditions for its development. The favorable wind resources along the western coast offer enormous investment benefits, particularly in the offshore area of Changhua, which has been planned as the largest wind farm in the country. This has stimulated the development of the related construction industry chain. According to the “Implementation Plan for the Offshore Wind Power Industry” by the Industrial Development Bureau of the Ministry of Economic Affairs, the manufacturing of offshore wind turbine towers and underwater foundations is identified as one of the priority localization projects of the pre-commercialization phase, as shown in Table 2 [7]. Another publication also indicates that a critical factor for ensuring the success of the construction lies in the ability of the underwater foundation to withstand severe weather conditions and challenging terrains while providing robust support for wind power equipment. This is essential to guarantee the normal operation of the wind turbine for a minimum duration of 20 years in a marine environment [36]. As a result, domestic steel structure manufacturers have been attracted to shift their business strategies and venture into the field of manufacturing offshore wind power underwater foundations. Domestic manufacturing and processing companies also possess the capability to produce components. However, domestic manufacturers currently lack experience in the design and manufacturing of underwater foundations. During the manufacturing process, quality inspection and testing must adhere to international standards [37].
The components of an offshore wind turbine include the tower, transition piece, and underwater foundation. The transition piece serves as an intermediate structure connecting the tower to the underwater foundation, while the underwater foundation is responsible for transmitting the upper load to the seabed below the transition piece [38]. Based on the experiences of international wind farm development, the commonly seen types of underwater foundations are as follows: monopile foundation, jacket foundation, tripod foundation, and gravity foundation, as shown in Figure 1. The European Wind Energy Association predicts that significant breakthroughs in underwater foundation development may not occur in the short term. However, in the medium to long term, wind farms are expected to expand into deeper waters. Additionally, in order to increase the power generation capacity of wind turbines, the structures of underwater foundations are likely to evolve towards larger sizes.
The main types of underwater foundations in Taiwan are the monopile and jacket foundations. Monopile foundations are commonly used in seabeds composed of gravel, sand, or clay. The wind turbine tower is connected to the monopile underwater structure through flanges or grout joints, allowing the transfer of the load from the wind turbine system to the supporting seabed foundation. Monopile foundations are typically applied in water depths ranging from 20 to 25 m. They offer advantages such as simplicity in structure, ease of manufacturing, and low development costs. This type of foundation is widely used in offshore wind farms in Europe. Jacket foundations, on the other hand, feature a more complex structure. They consist of a steel truss system formed by the interconnection of four chord members with additional bracing members. The structural components of jacket foundations are primarily steel pipes. The fabrication process involves intricate machining of the pipe openings, which requires the creation of beveled edges. The joint types at the nodes predominantly include T-shaped, Y-shaped, K-shaped, X-shaped, and saddle-shaped configurations, as shown in Figure 2. The design of the nodes is complex, involving multiple directions. Moreover, the welds in the node pipes must undergo 100% non-destructive testing and meet the required standards. Therefore, the manufacturing of jacket foundations poses challenges to the fabricators in terms of welding process planning and the expertise and proficiency of welding personnel [39].
The offshore wind power manufacturing verification regulations have long been dominated by Europe, and the manufacturing criteria follow the requirements of DNV-GL, a Norwegian/German classification society. Taiwan’s experience in underwater foundation processes is still not fully matured. It will take several years of accumulated experience from the manufacturing of offshore wind power equipment and wind farm construction to fully grasp the technology. Moreover, during the initial stage of industry development, manpower and technology heavily rely on foreign suppliers. Therefore, ensuring that Taiwan’s welding technology and workforce can adequately support localized underwater foundation manufacturing and establishing an independent industrial supply chain are crucial and urgent tasks [40].

2.3. Professional Competencies for Underwater Technicians for Offshore Wind Power Generation

Offshore wind power has become an important area of construction in recent years as part of the government’s forward-looking infrastructure initiatives. Due to a lack of domestic expertise in the design and manufacturing of subsea foundations in the early stages of the industry’s development, many manufacturing techniques and workforce requirements rely on assistance from foreign developers. Consequently, the cultivation and recruitment of welding personnel for subsea foundation steel component production and manufacturing management have become urgent issues for domestic companies. The current utilization of talent recruitment by subsea foundation industry companies according to the “Taiwan Offshore Wind Power Subsea Foundation Professional Talent Demand” research report by the Taiwan Advisory and Intelligence Service Program in 2019 is illustrated in Figure 3. The figure shows that 43% of domestic companies reported “difficulties in finding talent” and “insufficient talent”. Additionally, 43% of domestic companies mentioned that “talent supply is limited, but talent can still be found with extended recruitment time”, indicating a “balanced supply and demand” situation. In contrast, only 14% of companies indicated “sufficient talent”, revealing that there is still a shortage of professional talent supply and recruitment in Taiwan’s subsea foundation industry [41]. Based on these findings, although the underwater foundation industry has promising market prospects and related industry chain manufacturers possess basic technical capabilities, the lack of practical experience and high talent requirements result in skill shortages among both existing and new employees, making it difficult to meet industry demands.
In Taiwan, the construction of offshore wind power underwater foundation projects follows the manufacturing standards of DNV-GL (Det Norske Veritas Germanischer Lloyd), and the related certification and regulatory compliance for quality assurance are shown in Table 3. The materials used in underwater foundation construction must undergo various mechanical performance tests according to the DNV-GL standards, while personnel qualifications are certified and accredited based on European ISO standards for welding personnel skills and certifications. The representative standards include ISO 3834-1:2021, ISO 3834-2:2021, ISO 3834-3:2021, ISO 3834-4:2021 Part 1-4 “Quality requirements for welding” [16,17,18,19], ISO 9606-1:2012 [10] “Qualification testing of welders”, and ISO 14732:2013 “Approval testing of welding operators” [42], among others [22].
In place of welding certifications based on foreign standards, the domestic industry in Taiwan primarily relies on the Welding Technician Certificate issued by the Ministry of Labor as the basis for certification. The examination consists of theoretical assessments covering areas such as interpretation and drafting of drawings, material preparation, specimen processing and assembly, welding construction, slag removal, weld inspection, industrial safety and hygiene, and professional ethics. Additionally, there are practical assessments focusing on variations in workpiece specifications and welding positions, as shown in Table 4. Considering the higher requirements for underwater foundation welding technology, certain qualifications are required for personnel involved in underwater welding for offshore wind power. On-site welding technicians must possess skills in 6G-pipe axis 45° fixed joint welding or 6GR (6G + restricted ring) welding, along with documented records of welding technician qualifications. Only personnel certified in 6G/6GR welding technology are permitted to engage in the manufacturing and welding processes of underwater foundations [40].
Underwater welding is a process in which heat is generated underwater using methods such as gas flame, arc, or resistance heating to fuse two or more pieces of metal or non-metal together. Due to reduced visibility underwater and limited freedom of movement, there is an increased risk of welded joint defects [57]. In addition, the high cooling rate, the high hydrogen content in deposited metal, and residual stresses in the underwater welding environment can also have an impact on the quality of the joints [58]. Common welded joint defects include cold cracks, hot cracks, porosity, lack of fusion, slag and slag-lines, end cracks, lack of penetration, burn through, and undercuts, etc. [59]. Due to the particular characteristics of underwater welding processes, advanced techniques and adherence to appropriate technological regimes are necessary to ensure welding quality. Currently, common welding methods used in underwater foundation welding processes for offshore wind power generation include Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW), Submerged Arc Welding (SAW), Gas Metal Arc Welding with inert gas (GMAW), and Flux-Cored Arc Welding (FCAW) [60]. Flux-Cored Arc Welding (FCAW) is commonly used in the industry due to its advantages such as smooth arc characteristics, minimal spatter, high deposition rates, and suitability for all-position welding. Although FCAW tends to produce more fume and slag during the welding process, its high welding efficiency outweighs these drawbacks. As a result, FCAW is widely adopted in the industry [61]. Defects in welded joints can have an impact on the strength, fatigue life, and structural deformation of metal structures. Therefore, effective methods need to be employed during or after the welding fabrication process to eliminate residual stresses, and enhance the strength, dimensional stability, and fatigue life of the welded structures. Currently, one of the more advanced methods is Ultrasonic Impact Treatment (UIT). UIT involves supplying energy to an ultrasonic transducer to excite the resonant pulses in an acoustic-tuned object. The high-frequency pulses are directed into the surface of the object being treated through specially designed steel needles, eliminating harmful residual tensile stresses and introducing compressive residual stresses in the surface layer of metals and their alloys. This helps reduce stress concentration in the weld toe region, improves the mechanical properties of the surface layer, and increases material fatigue life. UIT is characterized by its lightweight and compact equipment, good controllability, flexible and convenient use, minimal noise, high efficiency, minimal restrictions in application, suitability for various welded joints, low cost, and energy efficiency, making it an effective technique for increasing the fatigue life of welded components while being environmentally friendly [62,63].
Due to the emphasis on welding technology and quality management in the fabrication process of offshore wind power substructures, particularly for jacket-type substructures that often cannot utilize automated welding processes, manual welding techniques are required at critical joints to overcome manufacturing challenges. Moreover, the base material used is ultra-thick high-strength steel, which necessitates compliance with specified heat treatment procedures prior to welding operations. The difficulty level of welding techniques is significantly high, thereby driving the demand for technical personnel in the industry. Therefore, the professional training of welding and cutting practitioners becomes even more crucial. The training channels for welding personnel in Taiwan mainly consist of vocational schools, government vocational training programs, specialized skill enhancement classes, and in-house training provided by companies. Early vocational education was designed to cater to the industry’s need for specialized technical personnel, but today the industry requires individuals with creativity and diverse capabilities [64]. In terms of vocational school education, Taiwan currently does not have dedicated departments or majors specifically for welding. The training of welding technicians is typically provided through specialized subjects and internship programs within the mechanical group of vocational education. Since welding places great emphasis on practical skills and experience, schools also provide facilities for conducting relevant hands-on courses such as manual arc welding, tungsten inert gas (TIG) welding, CO2 semi-automatic welding, oxy-acetylene cutting and welding, etc. These practical courses are designed with progressive levels of difficulty, allowing students to learn various welding methods and positions for different metals or special materials. The goal is to achieve the required industry-standard skills and to apply them flexibly in various industries and components [40].

3. Methodology

This study is based on relevant domestic and international literature and utilizes “professional competencies” as the research framework. Through the analysis, indicators of professional competencies for offshore wind power underwater welding technicians were identified and classified into three hierarchical levels: primary dimensions, secondary dimensions, and indicator behavioral elements. A preliminary Delphi Technique questionnaire was developed based on these dimensions. After expert review and revision, the questionnaire was finalized as the official Delphi Technique questionnaire. Multiple rounds of Delphi Technique surveys were then conducted based on this framework, collecting expert opinions and data. The collected data were compiled and summarized. After achieving consensus among the experts’ opinions, the professional competencies of offshore wind power underwater welding technicians were selected and constructed.

3.1. Participants

3.1.1. Expert Interviews

In order to align the formal questionnaire with practical applications and requirements, while considering both theory and practice, this study developed the initial draft of the questionnaire based on the literature review. Experts and experienced technical professionals with expertise in engineering and technical education, welding skills, metal forming skills, and offshore wind power underwater foundation welding skills were invited to review the content of the questionnaire for its validity. The formal questionnaire was then revised based on the expert opinions and suggestions.

3.1.2. Expert Interviews

This study adopts the Delphi technique as the research method. The Delphi experts were selected through purposive sampling, considering their practical experience and theoretical knowledge in the relevant professional fields of the research topic [65,66]. When the number of experts in the Delphi panel reaches 10 or more, the group error can be minimized, and consequently, the reliability of the results is expected to be highest [67]. This study invited a total of 15 experts to form the Delphi expert panel, including experts and scholars in the field of offshore wind power underwater welding, as well as experienced professionals in related fields.

3.2. Research Instrument

The research instrument used in this study was the “Delphi Technique Questionnaire for Constructing Professional Competency Indicators of Offshore Wind Power Underwater Welding Technicians”. It was developed through the collection of relevant literature from domestic and international sources, followed by preliminary organization and analysis. The questionnaire was then subjected to expert review for content validity. Based on the feedback received from the experts, necessary revisions were made to finalize the questionnaire as the official version. Subsequently, the questionnaire was administered in three rounds of Delphi surveys conducted by the Delphi panel of experts. After achieving consensus among the experts, the indicators for professional competencies of offshore wind power underwater welding technicians were summarized and compiled.

3.2.1. The Expert Review Questionnaire

The expert review questionnaire consisted of four sections: Instructions for Completing the Questionnaire, Glossary of Terms, Hierarchical Structure of Indicators, and Indicator Screening. The Indicator Screening section was further divided into three parts: First-level Main Constructs, Second-level Sub-Constructs, and Third-level Behavioral Dimensions, which included a total of 3 main constructs, 10 sub-constructs, and 64 behavioral dimensions. These components were consolidated to form the “Delphi Technique Questionnaire for Expert Review of Professional Competency Indicators of Offshore Wind Power Underwater Welding Technicians”. The questionnaire was then submitted for review by scholars and industry experts, who were asked to express their opinions on each item by selecting one of the three options: “Retain”, “Retain with Modifications”, or “Delete”. Suggestions or modifications could be provided in the “Modification Comments” column next to each item, and additional constructs or behavioral dimensions could be added in the “Additional Items” section below. Once the revisions were completed, the questionnaire became the official Delphi Technique survey instrument with expert validity.

3.2.2. Delphi Technique Formal Survey Questionnaire

This study invited offshore wind power underwater foundation welding experts to participate in multiple rounds of Delphi surveys. The purpose was to confirm and discuss the questionnaire content and gather the experts’ valuable insights and opinions.
(1)
First Round of Survey
Based on the suggestions from the expert review of the questionnaire’s content validity, it was revised into the first-round questionnaire. The questionnaire consisted of four parts: Instructions for Completion, Glossary of Terms, Hierarchical Structure of Indicators, and Indicator Screening. The Indicator Screening section utilized a Likert scale with five response options [68]. The Delphi panel experts were requested to evaluate the importance of each indicator on a scale of 1 to 5, with higher numbers indicating greater importance. Open-ended fields were also included to allow experts to provide comments.
(2)
Second Round of Survey
The second-round questionnaire was developed based on the revisions made in response to the feedback from the first round. It included the opinions and data collected from the first round, as well as the individual responses of the experts, serving as references for the second round of expert assessment.
(3)
Third Round of Survey
The results from the previous two rounds were synthesized and revised to create the third round questionnaire. This questionnaire served as a reference for further Delphi expert surveys. The process was repeated iteratively until a consensus was reached among the experts, at which point the survey implementation could be concluded.

3.3. Research Implementation

3.3.1. The Expert Review Questionnaire

The purpose of the expert questionnaire review was to invite experts from academia and industry to examine the appropriateness of the main constructs, sub-constructs, and behavioral contents of the professional competence indicators for offshore wind power underwater foundation welding technicians. Based on their feedback and suggestions, necessary revisions were made to construct the final Delphi survey questionnaire.

3.3.2. Delphi Technique Formal Survey Questionnaire

The Delphi survey questionnaire in this study was conducted to determine the professional competence indicators of offshore wind power underwater foundation welding technicians. The questionnaire was administered by contacting expert members via telephone or communication software. The questionnaire was provided to the experts through methods such as face-to-face delivery, postal mail, or electronic transmission. The questionnaire included instructions for completing the survey. After the industry experts had completed the questionnaire, a predetermined time was set for collecting the questionnaires. Upon collecting the questionnaires, they were immediately subjected to statistical analysis and coding. Based on the opinions and suggestions of the Delphi experts, adjustments were made to the content of the professional competence indicators in this study, aiming to achieve consensus among the experts’ opinions. Ultimately, the construction of the professional competence indicators for offshore wind power underwater foundation welding technicians was completed.

3.4. Data Processing

The data from the questionnaire survey conducted in this study were analyzed using the SPSS statistical software, version 27. The analysis aimed to examine the reliability and validity of the questionnaire, as well as assess the accuracy and consistency of the collected data. The questionnaire employed a Likert five-point scale, and based on the responses provided by the Delphi method experts, the average, mode, importance, and dispersion of each item were calculated. The important levels of each indicator’s main dimension, sub-dimension, and behavioral content were based on the average scores. The threshold for “important” was set as an average score greater than or equal to 3.5 and less than or equal to 4.5, while a score greater than 4.5 indicated a level of “very important” [69]. The mode was used to understand the distribution of responses from the Delphi experts for each indicator. If the mode tended towards high scores, it indicated that the surveyed experts agreed on the importance of the item. The standard deviation represented the degree of divergence among the Delphi experts’ opinions on each competency indicator. A larger standard deviation indicated a higher degree of divergence, implying that the opinions of the Delphi experts were more dispersed. The standard deviations from the second and third rounds of questionnaires were compared to determine whether the opinions of the Delphi experts were approaching stability. A standard deviation of less than 1 was used as the criterion to assess the stability of the experts’ opinions [70].
The K–S (Kolmogorov–Smirnov) test is used to determine whether two random samples follow the same distribution. The K–S test was employed to analyze the consistency of opinions among the Delphi experts. If an indicator did not exhibit consistency (p > 0.05), it was removed from the analysis [71,72]. The K–W (Kruskal–Wallis) test is a nonparametric statistical method used to test whether independent groups from multiple non-normally distributed populations have equal medians. The K–W test was used to examine the consistency among different groups of experts grouped by their professional backgrounds. The aim was to understand whether there were differences in the perceived importance of indicators among these expert groups. When an indicator showed a significant difference (p < 0.05) among the groups, it was removed from further analysis [73].

4. Results

Based on the expert review questionnaire and the results of the Delphi method questionnaire survey regarding the professional competency indicators for offshore wind power underwater foundation welding technicians, the data were compiled and analyzed.

4.1. Expert Interview Process Analysis Results

This study conducted a literature review to organize and summarize the initial draft of the survey questionnaire. Experts were invited to evaluate the content validity of the questionnaire. Based on their feedback, modifications were made. The primary dimension retained its original 3 indicator items, while the sub-dimension maintained its original 10 indicator items. In the third-level behavioral connotations, 15 new connotations were added, 5 were removed, and the wording of the remaining 27 connotations was revised. As a result, the number of behavioral connotations increased from 64 to 74 after the revisions. With these modifications, the first round of the Delphi survey questionnaire was developed.

4.2. Delphi Survey Analysis Results

After three rounds of the Delphi survey and data consolidation, the statistical results of the first-level indicator dimension and the second-level indicator sub-dimension in the third round of responses are presented in Table 5. The arithmetic mean of each indicator in the third round is greater than 3.5, with an average of 4.35, higher than the second-round average of 4.31. This indicates that all experts recognize the importance of these indicators, and the behavioral connotations of the indicators reached a level of importance or higher. Among them, nine indicators have a minimum arithmetic mean of 3.53, while three indicators had the highest arithmetic mean of 5. The standard deviations in the third round were all below 1, with an average of 0.575, lower than the second-round average of 0.682. Additionally, the difference in standard deviations between the second and third rounds was 0.107, significantly smaller than the difference of 0.130 between the first and second rounds. These findings indicate that the opinions of the Delphi experts have converged toward stability and consensus.

4.2.1. Kolmogorov–Smirnov Test Results

After conducting three rounds of Delphi questionnaire surveys in this study, the average standard deviation had decreased by the third round. To further verify the consensus among all three groups of Delphi experts with different backgrounds regarding the behavioral indicators of offshore wind power underwater welding technicians’ professional competencies, a non-parametric Kolmogorov–Smirnov (K–S) single-sample test was conducted. The results of the statistical analysis are shown in Table 6, Table 7 and Table 8. The statistical analysis indicated that all 76 behavioral indicators of professional competencies reached a significant level (p < 0.05), indicating consensus among the three groups of experts with different backgrounds.

4.2.2. Kruskal–Wallis Analysis Results

To examine whether the three groups of experts hold different views on the professional competence indicators of offshore wind power underwater foundation welding technicians due to differences in their professional backgrounds, a Kruskal–Wallis (K–W) one-way analysis of variance was conducted in this study, as shown in Table 9, Table 10 and Table 11. The results of the statistical analysis indicated that for the indicator “2-3-6 Understanding of basic safety training in offshore wind power” one indicator behavior reached a significant level, suggesting that experts from different backgrounds have different views on the behavior of this indicator. Therefore, this indicator behavior was deleted.
Based on the results of the K–S test and the K–W analysis, only the K–W analysis resulted in the deletion of one indicator item. Consequently, the number of indicator behavioral connotations changed from 76 to 75, while the total number of professional competence indicators for offshore wind power underwater foundation welding technicians remained unchanged. In summary, the professional competence indicators consist of three primary dimensions, ten sub-dimensions, and 75 indicator behavioral connotations.

5. Discussion

After conducting three rounds of Delphi technique questionnaire surveys in this study, a convergence of expert opinions was achieved. After aggregating the statistical data from the third round, it was confirmed that the professional competence indicators for offshore wind power underwater foundation welding technicians consisted of three primary dimensions, ten sub-dimensions, and 75 indicator behavioral connotations.

5.1. First-Level Professional Competence Indicators (Dimension Indicators)

The three main dimensions of professional competence indicators for offshore wind power underwater foundation welding technicians were all rated as “extremely important” in this study. Among them, “professional skills” and “workplace attitude” were considered the most important, followed by “professional knowledge”. All the Delphi experts in this study ranked “professional skills” and “workplace attitude” as the highest in importance. This is mainly because the offshore wind power underwater foundation industry is one of the most important in domestic manufacturing, but there is a lack of design and manufacturing experience with underwater foundations in the country. Additionally, the welding process technology for underwater foundations has high requirements. Therefore, in the early stages of industry development, domestic companies need assistance from foreign wind farm developers to introduce design and manufacturing processes for underwater foundations. As a result, welding technicians in the offshore wind power underwater foundation field need to possess the basic competency requirements of “professional skills”, including equipment operation, welding practices, and welding inspection, to complete their work.
In addition to establishing the foundation of basic competencies through professional skills, individuals should possess traits listed under “workplace attitude” to enhance work efficiency and improve themselves in their professional field. These traits include process improvement, self-management, and teamwork. Although “workplace attitude” is considered an implicit core trait according to Spencer and Spence’s (2008) iceberg model theory and is less susceptible to change and development, it has a significant impact on job performance and learning outcomes. Therefore, to shorten the technology transfer and training period and immediately demonstrate job performance, all Delphi experts unanimously agree that when recruiting welding technicians in the offshore wind power underwater foundation field, priority should be given to “professional skills” and “workplace attitude” as professional competencies [31].
Furthermore, although the importance of “professional knowledge” is slightly lower, it is still an indispensable explicit competency trait. It is easily perceptible and can be manifested through learning and training outcomes. As welding is a technical industry, professional technicians are the main practitioners in the manufacturing industry. Therefore, compared with “professional skills” and “workplace attitude”, the importance of “professional knowledge” is slightly lower. However, research suggests that if professional knowledge is combined with job execution requirements and accompanied by practical work skills, experience, endurance, problem-solving abilities, and work attitude, individuals can be competent in their roles, enhancing their personal value and the company’s competitiveness [74].

5.2. Second-Level Professional Competence Indicators (Orientation Indicators)

The professional competence indicators for offshore wind power underwater foundation welding technicians consisted of 10 sub-dimensions. Among them, 8 sub-dimensions were rated as “highly important”. Based on the consensus of all Delphi experts, the four highest-ranked sub-dimensions were “equipment operation”, “welding practice”, “occupational safety”, and “quality standards”. Following them were “self-management” in second place and “teamwork” in third place.
The sub-dimensions of “equipment operation”, “welding practice”, “occupational safety”, and “quality standards” were considered essential competencies for underwater foundation welding technicians in the offshore wind power industry. Welding is a crucial part of metal processing, requiring the use of welding equipment to heat specific areas of two or more metal workpieces to the appropriate temperature, causing them to melt and fuse together. Given the lack of automated welding processes for most socket-type underwater foundation structures and the high demands of welding in the industry, a thorough understanding of welding equipment and professional welding skills and experience is necessary for underwater foundation welding technicians to successfully fulfill their job responsibilities.
The quality of welding directly affects the structural integrity and safety of products. Therefore, appropriate control measures must be implemented during the pre-welding design, material selection, and construction inspection processes to ensure that the post-welding workpiece meets the required quality standards. Welding is considered a special process within quality control activities, making the expertise of welding technicians even more important. Additionally, welding is classified as a 3K industry (dangerous, laborious, and dirty), highlighting the significance of occupational safety awareness and competence for underwater foundation welding technicians. By prioritizing occupational safety, not only can the well-being of employees be protected, but also the foundation for the company’s profitability can be maintained.
The second-ranked sub-dimension, unanimously deemed important by all Delphi experts, is “self-management”. As key human resources in the offshore wind power underwater foundation industry, welding technicians with good self-management abilities can not only enhance their own professional knowledge and skills but also conscientiously complete welding work and adhere to process specifications to ensure the delivered products meet quality requirements and improve work efficiency.
Lastly, the third-ranked sub-dimension identified by all Delphi experts was “teamwork”. This is primarily due to the high-risk working environment of underwater foundation welding. By paying attention to the safety of others during welding work, offering timely reminders, and providing assistance to colleagues, the occurrence of hazardous incidents can be reduced and the overall work performance during underwater foundation welding operations can be improved.

5.3. Third-Level Professional Competence Indicators (Detailed Indicators)

The professional competency indicators for offshore wind power underwater welding technicians consisted of 75 indicators and behavioral characteristics. Among them, 40 indicators were rated as “highly important”, while the remaining 35 were rated as “important”. The top three indicators in terms of importance were: (1) “Meet the non-destructive testing requirements and ensure quality”, (2) “Carrying out welding operations in quality standards”, and (3) “Ensures compliance with all requirements in the welding process”. Following closely were nine indicators, including “Ability to operate semi-automatic welding machines” in various positions (1G, 2G, 3G, 4G, 5G, 6G/6GR), and “Welder qualification and recording of welding parameters for welding. “The third highest-ranking indicators included “Prevention of illnesses and hazards associated with welding work”, “Selection of appropriate protective equipment for welding work”, and “Obtaining welding personnel qualifications in quality standards.“
The top three indicators in terms of importance aligned with the prioritization of the main constructs, namely welding practices, quality standards, and self-management. This indicates a unanimous agreement among the experts regarding the importance of these indicators. Analyzing the top three indicators in terms of importance, which included the ability to meet non-destructive testing requirements, adhere to quality standards, and follow welding process requirements for offshore wind power underwater foundations, as well as other important indicators such as proficiency in operating semi-automatic arc welding machines, passing certification tests for various welding positions, and practicing safety measures, it becomes evident that professional skills are the most crucial capabilities for welding technicians in the offshore wind power underwater welding process. Mastery of these skills, including obtaining certifications for specific welding positions, adhering to welding specifications throughout the process, and ensuring compliance with non-destructive testing standards, is essential for achieving the required welding quality according to European standards. Furthermore, selecting appropriate protective equipment in line with safety standards is crucial for minimizing occupational hazards and ensuring the well-being of personnel involved in welding operations.

6. Summary

This study conducted three rounds of Delphi technique questionnaire surveys, and consensus among all experts in the field of welding was reached. The construction of professional competence indicators for offshore wind power underwater foundation welding technicians was completed. The results of the dimension analysis indicate unanimous agreement among all Delphi experts that the dimensions of “professional skills”, “workplace attitude”, and “professional knowledge” are essential professional competence traits for offshore wind power underwater foundation welding technicians. Among them, “professional skills” and “workplace attitude” were considered the most important, followed by “professional knowledge”. The results of the sub-dimension analysis indicate unanimous agreement among all Delphi experts that the sub-dimension indicators of “equipment operation”, “welding practice”, “occupational safety”, and “quality standards” are of high importance. The next important sub-dimension indicators are “self-management”, “teamwork”, “welding inspection”, and “process improvement”, among others. After analyzing the behavioral content of the indicators, it is evident that the entire expert panel unanimously recognized the significant importance of each indicator. Notably, the highest average scores of 5 were achieved for the behavioral content related to “meeting non-destructive testing requirements and ensuring quality”, “performing welding operations in accordance with quality standards”, and “ensuring compliance with all requirements in the welding process”.
In the welding process of offshore wind power underwater foundations, emphasis is placed on the practical experience of technicians. Therefore, individuals should not only possess the ability to operate welding equipment, perform simple maintenance, and use tools but also complete welding work according to the specified requirements based on the welding positions of on-site components and perform relevant non-destructive testing standards to meet quality requirements. While working, it is essential to prioritize the occupational safety and potential risks associated with the work environment, avoiding irreversible consequences by pursuing short-term convenience. Lastly, the experts believe that welding technicians are practitioners, and ensuring welding quality is the most important professional skill and job responsibility. Therefore, the importance of aspects such as “metal materials” knowledge and “welding graphics” knowledge is relatively lower. However, if professionals can apply their expertise to meet work requirements and possess practical skills and experience in completing workplace tasks, it will further highlight their performance within the team. These findings align closely with the importance of various competencies identified through the review of relevant literature and analysis. They can serve as a reference for future development of professional competency indicators for welding technicians in offshore wind power underwater foundations. By utilizing these indicators, it will be possible to enhance the competence of personnel and increase industry competitiveness.

Author Contributions

All authors contributed meaningfully to this study. Research topic, C.-W.L., K.-C.Y., C.-T.T., J.-R.X., W.-L.H., W.-S.H. and Y.-P.W.; methodology, C.-W.L., K.-C.Y., C.-T.T., J.-R.X., W.-L.H., W.-S.H. and Y.-P.W.; validation, C.-W.L., K.-C.Y., C.-T.T., J.-R.X., W.-L.H., W.-S.H. and Y.-P.W.; formal analysis, C.-W.L., K.-C.Y., C.-T.T., J.-R.X., W.-L.H., W.-S.H. and Y.-P.W.; investigation, C.-W.L., K.-C.Y., C.-T.T., J.-R.X., W.-L.H., W.-S.H. and Y.-P.W.; resources, C.-W.L., K.-C.Y., C.-T.T., J.-R.X., W.-L.H., W.-S.H. and Y.-P.W.; data curation, C.-W.L., K.-C.Y., C.-T.T., J.-R.X., W.-L.H., W.-S.H. and Y.-P.W.; writing—original draft preparation, C.-W.L., K.-C.Y., C.-T.T., J.-R.X., W.-L.H., W.-S.H. and Y.-P.W.; writing—review and editing, C.-W.L., K.-C.Y., C.-T.T., J.-R.X., W.-L.H., W.-S.H. and Y.-P.W.; visualization, C.-W.L., K.-C.Y., C.-T.T., J.-R.X., W.-L.H., W.-S.H. and Y.-P.W.; supervision, C.-W.L., K.-C.Y., C.-T.T., J.-R.X., W.-L.H., W.-S.H. and Y.-P.W.; project administration, C.-W.L., K.-C.Y., C.-T.T., J.-R.X., W.-L.H., W.-S.H. and Y.-P.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was partially supported by the National Science and Technology Council, Taiwan, under the Grant No. MOST 109-2511-H-018-018-MY3.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

This study is grateful for the support of the Electrical Machinery Technology Laboratory of the National Changhua University of Education.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Liao, C.-W.; Liao, Y.-H.; Chen, B.-S.; Tseng, Y.-J.; Ho, W.-S. Elementary Teachers’ Environmental Education Cognition and Attitude: A Case Study of the Second Largest City in Taiwan. Sustainability 2022, 14, 14480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Liao, C.-W.; Liao, H.-K.; Chen, B.-S.; Tseng, Y.-J.; Liao, Y.-H.; Wang, I.-C.; Ho, W.-S.; Ko, Y.-Y. Inquiry Practice Capability and Students’ Learning Effectiveness Evaluation in Strategies of Integrating Virtual Reality into Vehicle Body Electrical System Comprehensive Maintenance and Repair Services Practice: A Case Study. Electronics 2023, 12, 2576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Chang, C.T.; Lee, H.C. Taiwan’s renewable energy strategy and energy-intensive industrial policy. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 64, 456–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. 4C Offshore. Global Offshore Wind Speeds Ranking. 2023. Available online: http://www.4coffshore.com/windfarms/windspeeds.aspx (accessed on 30 May 2023).
  5. Liao, S.-C.; Chang, S.-C.; Cheng, T.-C. Managing the Volatility Risk of Renewable Energy: Index Insurance for Offshore Wind Farms in Taiwan. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Bureau of Energy, Ministry of Economic Affairs, (R.O.C.). Four-Year Wind Power Promotion Plan. 2017. Available online: https://www.moeaboe.gov.tw/ECW/populace/content/ContentDesc.aspx?menu_id=5493 (accessed on 30 May 2023).
  7. Department of Industrial Development, Ministry of Economic Affairs, (R.O.C.). Outline Explanation of the Implementation Program for Offshore Wind Power Industry. 2018. Available online: https://www.moeaidb.gov.tw/ctlr?PRO=policy.rwdPolicyView&id=5614 (accessed on 30 May 2023).
  8. Chi, S.Y.; Liu, C.J.; Tan, C.H.; Chen, Y.H. Study of typhoon impacts on the foundation design of offshore wind turbines in Taiwan. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Forensic Eng. 2020, 173, 35–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Department of Industrial Development, Ministry of Economic Affairs, (R.O.C.). Current Status of Localization Development in Offshore Wind Power Industry. 2018. Available online: https://www.moeaidb.gov.tw/view/rwd_tw (accessed on 30 May 2023).
  10. ISO 9606-1:2012; Qualification Testing of Welders—Fusion Welding—Part 1: Steels; Technical Committee: ISO/TC 44/SC 11 Qualification Requirements for Welding and Allied Processes Personnel. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2012. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/54936.html (accessed on 30 June 2023).
  11. EN 1090-1: 2009 + A1:2011; Execution of Steel Structures and Aluminium Structures—Part 1: Requirements for Conformity Assessment of Structural Components. European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2011.
  12. EN 1090-2:2018; Execution of Steel Structures and Aluminium Structures—Part 2: Technical Requirements for Steel Structures. European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2018.
  13. EN 1090-3:2008; Execution of Steel Structures and Aluminium Structures—Part 3: Technical Requirements for Aluminium Structures. European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2008.
  14. EN 1090-4:2018; Execution of Steel Structures and Aluminium Structures. Technical Requirements for Cold-Formed Structural Steel Elements and Cold-Formed Structures for Roof, Ceiling, Floor and Wall Applications. European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2018.
  15. EN 1090-5:2017; Execution of Steel Structures and Aluminium Structures. Technical Requirements for Cold-Formed Structural Aluminium Elements and Cold-Formed Structures for Roof, Ceiling, Floor and Wall Applications. European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2017.
  16. ISO 3834-1:2021; Quality Requirements for Fusion Welding of Metallic Materials—Part 1: Criteria for the Selection of the Appropriate Level of Quality Requirements; Technical Committee: ISO/TC 44/SC 10 Quality Management in the Field of Welding. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2021. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/81650.html (accessed on 30 June 2023).
  17. ISO 3834-2:2021; Quality Requirements for Fusion Welding of Metallic Materials—Part 2: Comprehensive Quality Requirements; Technical Committee: ISO/TC 44/SC 10 Quality Management in the Field of Welding. ISO (International Standard Organization): Geneva, Switzerland, 2021. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/81651.html (accessed on 30 June 2023).
  18. ISO 3834-3:2021; Quality Requirements for Fusion Welding of Metallic Materials—Part 3: Standard Quality Requirements; Technical Committee: ISO/TC 44/SC 10 Quality Management in the Field of Welding. ISO (International Standard Organization): Geneva, Switzerland, 2021. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/81652.html (accessed on 30 June 2023).
  19. ISO 3834-4:2021; Quality Requirements for Fusion Welding of Metallic Materials—Part 4: Elementary Quality Requirements; Technical Committee: ISO/TC 44/SC 10 Quality Management in the Field of Welding. ISO (International Standard Organization): Geneva, Switzerland, 2021. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/81653.html (accessed on 30 June 2023).
  20. CSBC Corporation Taiwan. A brief description of the international standard “ISO3834” for fusion welding and the importance of welding coordinators for system requirements. CSBC Mon. 2018, 505, 1–12. Available online: https://lurl.cc/TGstGo (accessed on 30 June 2023).
  21. China Steel Corporation. Sinosteel Promotes the Construction of Offshore Wind Power Underwater Infrastructure Line. 2017. Available online: https://lurl.cc/qVzrEZ (accessed on 30 May 2023).
  22. Wu, L.J.; Chuang, S.C. ISO standards related to welding quality management—From ISO3834 quality requirements. Weld. Cut. 2014, 24, 24–27. Available online: https://vdocuments.mx/iso-iso-3834-welding.html?page=1 (accessed on 30 May 2023).
  23. Civera, M.; Surace, C. Non-Destructive Techniques for the Condition and Structural Health Monitoring of Wind Turbines: A Literature Review of the Last 20 Years. Sensors 2022, 22, 1627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Liao, C.-W.; Tseng, Y.-J.; Liao, Y.-H.; Chen, B.-S.; Ho, W.-S.; Wang, I.-C.; Lin, H.-I.; Chen, I.-M. A Practical Curriculum Design and Learning Effectiveness Evaluation of Competence-Oriented Instruction Strategy Integration: A Case Study of Taiwan Skills-Based Senior High School. Behav. Sci. 2023, 13, 43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Kau, C.Y. The Study of Indicator Inquiry Method of Educational Evaluation. J. Elem. Educ. 2001, 13, 275–285. Available online: https://tpl.ncl.edu.tw/NclService/JournalContentDetail?SysId=A01028212 (accessed on 25 May 2023).
  26. Huang, F.C. A Study on Competency Indicators of Home Care-Attendants. Master’s Thesis, National Changhua University of Education, Changhua, Taiwan, 2018. Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/11296/8du593 (accessed on 30 May 2022).
  27. Chen, H.L. The Construction of Professional Competency Indicators of Higher Education Student Affairs Practitioners in Taiwan. Stud. Aff. Guid. Couns. 2014, 53, 41–64. Available online: https://www.airitilibrary.com/Publication/alDetailedMesh?docid=20769490-201409-201410130005-201410130005-41-64#Citedliterature (accessed on 10 May 2023).
  28. Tseng, K.H. The Study of the Construction Core Competency Indicator of General Affairs of the Elementary School in Tainan City. Master’s Thesis, Taiwan Shoufu University, Tainan, Taiwan, 2015. Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/11296/hty2ff (accessed on 30 May 2022).
  29. Jason, L.; Glenwick, D. (Eds.) Handbook of Methodological Approaches to Community-Based Research: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2016; Available online: https://reurl.cc/qLmrdn (accessed on 3 May 2023).
  30. Avella, J.R. Delphi panels: Research design, procedures, advantages, and challenges. Int. J. Dr. Stud. 2016, 11, 305. Available online: http://ijds.org/Volume11/IJDSv11p305-321Avella2434.pdf (accessed on 15 June 2023). [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  31. Spencer, L.M.; Spencer, P.S.M. Competence at Work Models for Superior Performance; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2008; Available online: http://sde.sfedu.ru/files/learn_files/file_11942.pdf (accessed on 10 June 2023).
  32. Chen, Y.C.; Yang, Y.W. Professional Competencies of Human Resources Under Industry 4.0. J. Qual. 2022, 29, 267–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Shyr, W.-J.; Shih, F.-Y.; Liau, H.-M.; Liu, P.-W. Constructing and Validating Competence Indicators for Professional Technicians in Fire Safety in Taiwan. Sustainability 2021, 13, 7058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Yeh, C.C. Constructing Teaching Professional Competency for All-out Defence Education in Senior High Schools Teachers in Taiwan. Ph.D. Thesis, National Changhua University of Education, Changhua, Taiwan, 2018. Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/11296/h6tjw5 (accessed on 30 May 2022).
  35. Wu, T.K. Exploring the Professional Competency Taiwan’s Pop Music Concert Performers Should Possess. Master’s Thesis, National Taitung University, Taitung, Taiwan, 2018. Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/11296/fn24v8 (accessed on 30 May 2022).
  36. Cheng, M.-Y.; Wu, Y.-F. Investment Evaluation and Partnership Selection Model in the Offshore Wind Power Underwater Foundations Industry. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 1371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Kao, S.M.; Pearre, N.S. Administrative arrangement for offshore wind power developments in Taiwan: Challenges and prospects. Energy Policy 2017, 109, 463–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Ku, C.-Y.; Chien, L.-K. Modeling of Load Bearing Characteristics of Jacket Foundation Piles for Offshore Wind Turbines in Taiwan. Energies 2016, 9, 625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Sánchez, S.; López-Gutiérrez, J.-S.; Negro, V.; Esteban, M.D. Foundations in Offshore Wind Farms: Evolution, Characteristics and Range of Use. Analysis of Main Dimensional Parameters in Monopile Foundations. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Tseng, K.H.; Wang, L.T. Welding engineering and personnel skill requirements for offshore wind power underwater foundation. Biannu. J. Employ. Saf. 2019, 18, 29–37. [Google Scholar]
  41. Advisory & Intelligence Service Program. Taiwan Offshore Wind Power Subsea Foundation Professional Talent Demand. 2019. Available online: https://mic.iii.org.tw/AISP/ReportS.aspx?id=CDOC20190910002 (accessed on 30 May 2023).
  42. ISO 14732:2013; Welding Personnel—Qualification Testing of Welding Operators and Weld Setters for Mechanized and Automatic Welding of Metallic Materials; Technical Committee: ISO/TC 44/SC 11 Qualification Requirements for Welding and Allied Processes Personnel. ISO (International Standard Organization): Geneva, Switzerland, 2013. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/54935.html (accessed on 30 June 2023).
  43. ISO 9001:2015; Quality Management Systems—Requirements; Technical Committee: ISO/TC 176/SC 2 Quality Systems. ISO (International Standard Organization): Geneva, Switzerland, 2015. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/62085.html (accessed on 30 June 2023).
  44. ISO 14001:2015; Environmental management systems—Requirements with Guidance for Use; Technical Committee: ISO/TC 207/SC 1 Environmental Management Systems. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2015. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/60857.html (accessed on 30 June 2023).
  45. ISO 45001:2018; Occupational health and Safety Management Systems—Requirements with Guidance for Use; Technical Committee: ISO/TC 283 Occupational Health and Safety Management. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/63787.html (accessed on 30 June 2023).
  46. ISO 15609-1:2019; Specification and Qualification of Welding Procedures for Metallic Materials—Welding Procedure Specification—Part 1: Arc Welding; Technical Committee: ISO/TC 44/SC 10 Quality Management in the Field of Welding. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2019. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/75556.html (accessed on 30 June 2023).
  47. ISO 15609-2:2019; Specification and Qualification of Welding Procedures for Metallic Materials—Welding Procedure Specification—Part 2: Gas Welding; Technical Committee: ISO/TC 44/SC 10 Quality Management in the Field of Welding. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2019. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/75750.html (accessed on 30 June 2023).
  48. ISO 15609-3:2004; Specification and Qualification of Welding Procedures for Metallic Materials—Welding Procedure Specification—Part 3: Electron Beam Welding; Technical Committee: ISO/TC 44/SC 10 Quality Management in the Field of Welding. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2004. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/28405.html (accessed on 30 June 2023).
  49. ISO 15609-4:2009; Specification and Qualification of Welding Procedures for Metallic Materials—Welding Procedure Specification—Part 4: Laser Beam Welding; Technical Committee: ISO/TC 44/SC 10 Quality Management in the Field of Welding. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2009. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/43487.html (accessed on 30 June 2023).
  50. ISO 15609-5:2011; Specification and Qualification of Welding Procedures for Metallic Materials—Welding Procedure Specification—Part 5: Resistance Welding; Technical Committee: ISO/TC 44/SC 6 Resistance Welding and Allied Mechanical Joining. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2011. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/53804.html (accessed on 30 June 2023).
  51. ISO 15609-6:2013; Specification and Qualification of Welding Procedures for Metallic Materials—Welding Procedure Specification—Part 6: Laser-arc Hybrid Welding; Technical Committee: ISO/TC 44/SC 10 Quality Management in the Field of Welding. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2011. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/52216.html (accessed on 30 June 2023).
  52. ISO 15614-1:2017/Amd 1:2019; Specification and Qualification of Welding Procedures for Metallic Materials—Welding Procedure Test—Part 1: Arc and Gas Welding of Steels and Arc Welding of Nickel and Nickel Alloys—Amendment 1; Technical Committee: ISO/TC 44/SC 10 Quality Management in the Field of Welding. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2019. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/75553.html (accessed on 30 June 2023).
  53. ISO 17637:2016; Non-Destructive testing of Welds—Visual Testing of Fusion-Welded Joints; Technical Committee: ISO/TC 44/SC 5 Testing and Inspection of Welds. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2016. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/67259.html (accessed on 30 June 2023).
  54. ISO 17638:2016; Non-Destructive Testing of Welds—Magnetic Particle Testing; Technical Committee: ISO/TC 44/SC 5 Testing and Inspection of Welds. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2016. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/67261.html (accessed on 30 June 2023).
  55. ISO 17640:2018; Non-Destructive Testing of Welds—Ultrasonic Testing—Techniques, Testing Levels, and Assessment; Technical Committee: ISO/TC 44/SC 5 Testing and Inspection of Welds. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/75737.html (accessed on 30 June 2023).
  56. ISO 9712:2021; Non-Destructive Testing—Qualification and Certification of NDT Personnel; Technical Committee: ISO/TC 135/SC 7 Personnel Qualification. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2021. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/75614.html (accessed on 30 June 2023).
  57. Fydrych, D.; Raczko, P.; Świerczyńska, A.; Landowski, M.; Wolski, A.; Rogalski, G. Effect of arc strikes on high strength low alloy steels welded by SMAW. Adv. Sci. Technol. Res. J. 2023, 17, 160–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Tomków, J.; Fydrych, D.; Rogalski, G. Role of Bead Sequence in Underwater Welding. Materials 2019, 12, 3372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  59. Gyasi, E.A. Welding Processes of Metals for Offshore Environment: Underwater Welding; 2019; Volume 103, pp. 1–60. ISBN 97 8-952-335-433-3. ISSN 2243-3376. Available online: https://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-335-433-3 (accessed on 5 June 2023).
  60. Tomków, J.; Fydrych, D.; Wilk, K. Effect of Electrode Waterproof Coating on Quality of Underwater Wet Welded Joints. Materials 2020, 13, 2947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Zhang, Y.; Jia, C.; Zhao, B.; Hu, J.; Wu, C. Heat input and metal transfer influences on the weld geometry and microstructure during underwater wet FCAW. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2016, 238, 373–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Ono, Y.; Yıldırım, H.C.; Kinoshita, K.; Nussbaumer, A. Damage-Based Assessment of the Fatigue Crack Initiation Site in High-Strength Steel Welded Joints Treated by HFMI. Metals 2022, 12, 145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Yuan, K.; Sumi, Y. Simulation of residual stress and fatigue strength of welded joints under the effects of ultrasonic impact treatment (UIT). Int. J. Fatigue 2016, 92, 321–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Chang, R.H. The future of technical vocational education. Educ. Bimon. 2018, 608, 1–5. Available online: http://ericdata.com/tw/detail.aspx?no=391718 (accessed on 6 June 2023).
  65. Hsu, C.C.; Sandford, B.A. The Delphi Technique: Making Sense of Consensus. Pract. Assess. Res. Eval. 2019, 12, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Zeng, S.Y. A Study on the Construction of Professional Competency Indicators of the Community University Administrative Personnel in Taiwan. Master’s Thesis, National Hsinchu University of Education, Hsinchu, Taiwan, 2008. Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/11296/396p9s (accessed on 30 May 2022).
  67. Zhu, Z.X. A Study on the Construction of Professional Competence Indicators for Renovation Technicians of Lifting Equipment. Master’s Thesis, National Changhua University of Education, Changhua, Taiwan, 2017. Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/11296/7h2w9n (accessed on 30 May 2022).
  68. Likert, R. A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Arch. Psychol. 1932, 140, 1–55. Available online: https://legacy.voteview.com/pdf/Likert_1932.pdf (accessed on 7 June 2023).
  69. Chang, H.-F.; Liang, T.-L.; Kuo, F.Y.; Lin, W.-T.; Chen, H.-Y. Development and Verification the Scale of Professional Competency for Chinese Restaurant Service Staff. J. Hosp. Tour. 2018, 15, 51–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Tseng, M.K. A Study of Core Competencies of the Accountant in Non-profit Organization. Master’s Thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  71. Massey, F.J., Jr. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for goodness of fit. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 1951, 46, 68–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Berger, V.W.; Zhou, Y. Kolmogorov–smirnov test: Overview. In Wiley Statsref: Statistics Reference Online; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Ostertagova, E.; Ostertag, O.; Kováč, J. Methodology and application of the Kruskal-Wallis test. In Applied Mechanics and Materials; Trans Tech Publications Ltd.: Stafa-Zurich, Switzerland, 2014; Volume 611, pp. 115–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Hsiao, S.C. Developing Professional Competency for Garment Patternmaker. Master’s Thesis, Tainan University of Technology, Tainan, Taiwan, 2016. Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/11296/8m4299 (accessed on 30 May 2022).
Sustainability 15 10801 g001 550
Figure 1. The types of underwater foundations.
Figure 1. The types of underwater foundations.
Sustainability 15 10801 g001
Sustainability 15 10801 g002 550
Figure 2. The joint types at the nodes.
Figure 2. The joint types at the nodes.
Sustainability 15 10801 g002
Sustainability 15 10801 g003 550
Figure 3. The current situation of domestic recruitment of talents in the underwater foundation industry.
Figure 3. The current situation of domestic recruitment of talents in the underwater foundation industry.
Sustainability 15 10801 g003
Table
Table 1. Promotion goals for renewable energy development in Taiwan.
Table 1. Promotion goals for renewable energy development in Taiwan.
Year201520202025
Installed Capacity (MW)Electricity Production (100 GWh)Installed Capacity (MW)Electricity Production (100 GWh)Installed Capacity (MW)Electricity Production (100 GWh)
Solar photovoltaic842965008120,000250
Onshore wind power6471581419120029
Offshore wind power00520193000111
Geothermal energy001501020013
Biomass energy741367685681359
Hydropower208945210047215048
Fuel cell0022.52605
Total431910510,87523427,423515
Source: Self-drawn.
Table
Table 2. Localization goals and timeline for offshore wind power industry development.
Table 2. Localization goals and timeline for offshore wind power industry development.
TimelineScheduleIndustrial Development Projects
2021Preparatory stage
  • Towers
  • Underwater foundations
  • Power facilities: 1. transformers, 2. switchgear, 3. distribution panels.
(These three are onshore power equipment)
  • Maritime engineering planning, design, construction, supervision, and manufacturing:
1. Construction and supervision of surveys, cable laying, surveys, etc., planning and design of vessels and equipment, safety management
(Ministry of Economic Affairs).
2. Providing industry supply chain for construction vessels that need to be newly built or renovated, including surveys, support, organization, transportation, and cable-laying vessels (Industrial Development Bureau).
2022Preparatory stagePreparatory projects before 2021
2023Stage 1
  • Wind turbine components: cabin assembly, transformers, distribution panels, uninterrupted power systems, nose cones, cables, wheel hub castings, fasteners.
  • Submarine cables.
  • Maritime engineering planning, design, construction, supervision, and manufacturing:
1. Construction and supervision of tower, underwater foundation, etc., planning and design of vessels and equipment, safety management (Ministry of Economic Affairs).
2. Shipbuilding: providing industry supply chain for construction vessels that need to be newly built or renovated, including transportation, installation vessels (Industrial Development Bureau).
  • Preparatory projects in 2021 and 2022.
2024Stage 2
  • Wind turbine components: Gearboxes, generators, power conversion systems, blades and their resin, nacelle covers, tower base castings.
  • Maritime engineering planning, design, construction, and supervision: construction and supervision of wind turbines, planning and design of vessels and equipment, safety management (Ministry of Economic Affairs).
  • Preparatory projects in 2021 and 2022.
  • Stage 1 projects in 2023.
2025Stage 2
  • Preparatory projects in 2021 and 2022.
  • Stage 1 projects in 2023.
  • Stage 2 projects in 2024.
Source: Self-drawn.
Table
Table 3. Certifications required for the underwater foundation supply chain.
Table 3. Certifications required for the underwater foundation supply chain.
Quality Assurance for Underwater FoundationsRelevant Certifications and Regulatory Compliance
Quality systemISO 9001:2015 [43], ISO 14000:2015 [44], ISO 45001:2018 [45], ISO 3834-1:2021 [16], ISO 3834-2:2021 [17], ISO 3834-3:2021 [18], ISO 3834-4:2021 [19], EN 1090-1: 2009 + A1:2011 [11], EN 1090-2:2018 [12], EN 1090-3:2008 [13], EN 1090-4:2018 [14], EN 1090-5:2017 [15], CPR(CE Marking for Raw Materials and Welding Consumables), DNV-GL Certification.
Manufacturing and inspection regulationsDNV-GL-OS-C401, EN 1090-1: 2009 + A1:2011 [11], EN 1090-2:2018 [12], EN 1090-3:2008 [13], EN 1090-4:2018 [14], EN 1090-5:2017 [15], ISO 15609-1:2019 [46], ISO 15609-2:2019 [47], ISO 15609-3:2004 [48], ISO 15609-4:2009 [49], ISO 15609-5:2011 [50], ISO 15609-6:2013 [51], ISO 15614-1:2017 + A1:2019 [52], ISO 17637:2016 (VT) [53], ISO 17638:2016 (MT) [54], ISO 17640:2018 (UT) [55].
Personnel qualificationsISO 9606-1:2012 [10], ISO 14732:2013 [42], ISO 9712:2021 [56], VT, MT, UT, GWO.
Source: Self-drawn.
Table
Table 4. Certification codes and positions for welding technicians.
Table 4. Certification codes and positions for welding technicians.
Skill CodeWelding Position
F-Flat Weld (1G)Sustainability 15 10801 i001
H-Horizontal Weld (2G)Sustainability 15 10801 i002
V-Vertical Weld (3G)Sustainability 15 10801 i003
O-Overhead Weld (4G)Sustainability 15 10801 i004
VF-Pipe Axis Vertical Fixed Weld (2G)Sustainability 15 10801 i005
HF-Pipe Axis Horizontal Fixed Weld (5G)Sustainability 15 10801 i006
VH-Pipe Axis 45° Fixed Weld (6G/6GR)Sustainability 15 10801 i007Sustainability 15 10801 i008
The welding position codes (1G~6G/6GR) in parentheses in the table are references to the welding position codes based on the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) regulations
Source: Self-drawn.
Table
Table 5. Statistical analysis of indicator dimension and sub-dimension in the third round of the Delphi survey.
Table 5. Statistical analysis of indicator dimension and sub-dimension in the third round of the Delphi survey.
IndicatorModeMeanSD
1Professional skills55.000.000
1-1Equipment operation55.000.000
1-2Welding practices55.000.000
1-3Welding inspection54.600.611
2Professional knowledge54.800.400
2-1Metal materials54.200.833
2-2Welding drafting44.070.772
2-3Occupational safety55.000.000
2-4Quality standards55.000.000
3Workplace attitude55.000.000
3-1Process improvement54.530.618
3-2Self-management54.930.249
3-3Teamwork54.800.400
Source: Self-drawn.
Table
Table 6. Consistency data analysis of professional skills indicators using the K–S test.
Table 6. Consistency data analysis of professional skills indicators using the K–S test.
1-1Equipment OperationMSDK–S Test (Z Value)
1-1-1Ability to operate manual electric welding machines3.800.7481.549 *
1-1-2Ability to operate semi-automatic welding machines4.930.2493.615 *
1-1-3Ability to operate tungsten inert gas welding machines4.330.7892.066 *
1-1-4Ability to operate submerged arc welding machines4.400.8002.324 *
1-1-5Ability to operate oxy-acetylene cutting equipment3.800.8331.807 *
1-1-6Ability to operate plasma cutting machines3.870.8841.807 *
1-1-7Understanding of the use and characteristics of shielding gases4.600.4902.324 *
1-1-8Ability to operate carbon arc gouging equipment4.200.8331.807 *
1-1-9Ability to operate grinding machines4.600.6112.582 *
1-1-10Ability to maintain and repair welding equipment4.130.6181.420 *
1-2Welding PracticesMSDK–S Test (Z Value)
1-2-1Perform manual arc welding in the flat position 1G3.530.6182.066 *
1-2-2Perform manual arc welding in the horizontal position 2G3.530.6182.066 *
1-2-3Perform manual arc welding in the vertical position 3G3.530.6182.066 *
1-2-4Perform manual arc welding in the overhead position 4G3.530.6182.066 *
1-2-5Perform manual arc welding on a vertically fixed axis 2G3.530.6182.066 *
1-2-6Perform manual arc welding on a horizontally fixed axis 5G3.530.6182.066 *
1-2-7Perform manual arc welding on a 45° fixed axis 6G/6GR3.530.6182.066 *
1-2-8Perform semi-automatic arc welding in the flat position 1G4.930.2493.615 *
1-2-9Perform semi-automatic arc welding in the horizontal position 2G4.930.2493.615 *
1-2-10Perform semi-automatic arc welding in the vertical position 3G4.930.2493.615 *
1-2-11Perform semi-automatic arc welding in the overhead position 4G4.930.2493.615 *
1-2-12Perform semi-automatic arc welding on a vertically fixed axis 2G4.930.2493.615 *
1-2-13Perform semi-automatic arc welding on a horizontally fixed axis 5G4.930.2493.615 *
1-2-14Perform semi-automatic arc welding on a 45° fixed axis 6G/6GR4.930.2493.615 *
1-2-15Perform tungsten inert gas welding in the flat position 1G3.670.7892.066 *
1-2-16Perform tungsten inert gas welding in the horizontal position 2G3.670.7892.066 *
1-2-17Perform tungsten inert gas welding in the vertical position 3G3.670.7892.066 *
1-2-18Perform tungsten inert gas welding in the overhead position 4G3.670.7892.066 *
1-2-19Perform tungsten inert gas welding on a vertically fixed axis 2G3.670.7892.066 *
1-2-20Perform tungsten inert gas welding on a horizontally fixed axis 5G3.670.7892.066 *
1-2-21Perform tungsten inert gas welding on a 45° fixed axis 6G/6GR3.730.7721.807 *
1-2-22Analyze the welding defects and improvement operations4.400.6111.807 *
1-2-23Control interpass temperature and input heat in the welding zone4.600.6112.582 *
1-2-24Proficiently use various methods to relieve welding stresses3.800.7481.549 *
1-2-25Select appropriate welding methods and materials for construction4.670.4712.582 *
1-2-26Understand the welding current and voltage parameters4.730.4422.840 *
1-2-27Ability to prevent and correct weld distortion4.670.4712.582 *
1-2-28Determine sequence, terminology, joint types, and compare methods4.670.4712.582 *
1-2-29Select suitable tools for pre, during, and post-weld cleaning4.730.5733.098 *
1-2-30Perform various groove preparation methods for different thicknesses4.330.7892.066 *
1-2-31Meet the non-destructive testing requirements and ensure quality5.000.000-
1-3Welding InspectionMSDK–S Test (Z Value)
1-3-1Knowledge of non-destructive testing types and applications3.930.8541.549 *
1-3-2Visual inspection of weld quality4.600.6112.582 *
1-3-3Understanding of mechanical testing types, methods, and applications3.530.8062.582 *
1-3-4Proficiency in using welding gauges4.330.6991.807 *
1-3-5Welder qualification and recording of welding parameters for welding4.930.2493.615 *
1-3-6Understanding of pre, during, post-weld surface cleanliness requirements4.670.4712.582 *
Source: Self-drawn. * p < 0.05.
Table
Table 7. Consistency data analysis of the professional knowledge indicators using the K–S test.
Table 7. Consistency data analysis of the professional knowledge indicators using the K–S test.
2-1Metal MaterialsMSDK–S Test (Z Value)
2-1-1Familiarity with heat treatment procedures for metallic materials3.600.6111.807 *
2-1-2Understanding of the characteristics and weldability of metallic materials4.400.7122.066 *
2-1-3Knowledge of the effects of temperature on metallic materials4.400.7122.066 *
2-2Welding DraftingMSDK–S Test (Z Value)
2-2-1Ability to interpret welding construction drawings4.200.6531.420 *
2-2-2Analysis of symbols, terminology, drawing, and specifications3.670.7892.066 *
2-2-3Understanding of mechanical design drawing3.530.7182.324 *
2-3Occupational SafetyMSDK–S Test (Z Value)
2-3-1Knowledge of occupational safety and health practices4.800.5423.357 *
2-3-2Prevention of illnesses and hazards associated with welding work4.870.4993.615 *
2-3-3Selection of appropriate protective equipment for welding work4.870.4993.615 *
2-3-4Taking appropriate protective measures in the event of accidents4.800.5423.357 *
2-3-5Evaluation of occupational safety risks in the work environment4.800.5423.357 *
2-3-6Understanding of basic safety training in offshore wind power4.530.8062.840 *
2-4Quality StandardsMSDK–S Test (Z Value)
2-4-1Carrying out welding operations in quality standards5.000.000-
2-4-2Recording and inspecting welding procedures in quality standards4.600.4902.324 *
2-4-3Obtaining welding personnel qualifications in quality standards4.870.3403.357 *
2-4-4Meeting the surface appearance requirements of welded joints4.800.4003.098 *
Source: Self-drawn. * p < 0.05.
Table
Table 8. Consistency data analysis of the workplace attitude indicators using the K–S test.
Table 8. Consistency data analysis of the workplace attitude indicators using the K–S test.
3-1Process ImprovementMSDK–S Test (Z Value)
3-1-1Able to identify problems and propose improvements in welding work4.600.6112.582 *
3-1-2Accepts innovative concepts and techniques in welding work.4.400.7122.066 *
3-1-3Capable of managing resources and effectively scheduling progress4.400.7122.066 *
3-2Self-ManagementMSDK–S Test (Z Value)
3-2-1Actively explores new knowledge and engages in self-learning4.530.6182.324 *
3-2-2Adopts and maintains rationality in the face of workplace pressure4.600.6112.582 *
3-2-3Sets personal goals with a proactive and determined attitude4.530.6182.324 *
3-2-4Performs workplace tasks diligently and meticulously4.730.5733.098 *
3-2-5Ensures compliance with all requirements in the welding process5.000.000-
3-3TeamworkMSDK–S Test (Z Value)
3-3-1Values others’ opinions and engages in communication and sharing4.600.6112.582 *
3-3-2Provides timely assistance to colleagues in need4.600.6112.582 *
3-3-3Coordinates and resolves conflicts to foster positive interactions4.600.6112.582 *
3-3-4Pays attention to the safety of others and provides mutual reminders4.600.6112.582 *
3-3-5Emphasizes teamwork in the workplace to enhance work efficiency4.600.6112.582 *
Source: Self-drawn. * p < 0.05.
Table
Table 9. Consistency data analysis of the professional skills indicators using the K–W test.
Table 9. Consistency data analysis of the professional skills indicators using the K–W test.
1-1Equipment OperationFK–W (p Value)
1-1-1Ability to operate manual electric welding machines0.0540.973
1-1-2Ability to operate semi-automatic welding machines2.7500.253
1-1-3Ability to operate tungsten inert gas welding machines1.8240.402
1-1-4Ability to operate submerged arc welding machines1.5850.453
1-1-5Ability to operate oxy-acetylene cutting equipment3.8250.148
1-1-6Ability to operate plasma cutting machines3.9620.138
1-1-7Understanding of the use and characteristics of shielding gases0.5830.747
1-1-8Ability to operate carbon arc gouging equipment3.9800.137
1-1-9Ability to operate grinding machines2.6990.259
1-1-10Ability to maintain and repair welding equipment3.5690.168
1-2Welding PracticesFK–W (p Value)
1-2-1Perform manual arc welding in the flat position 1G0.3500.839
1-2-2Perform manual arc welding in the horizontal position 2G0.3500.839
1-2-3Perform manual arc welding in the vertical position 3G0.3500.839
1-2-4Perform manual arc welding in the overhead position 4G0.3500.839
1-2-5Perform manual arc welding on a vertically fixed axis 2G0.3500.839
1-2-6Perform manual arc welding on a horizontally fixed axis 5G0.3500.839
1-2-7Perform manual arc welding on a 45° fixed axis 6G/6GR0.3500.839
1-2-8Perform semi-automatic arc welding in the flat position 1G2.0000.368
1-2-9Perform semi-automatic arc welding in the horizontal position 2G2.0000.368
1-2-10Perform semi-automatic arc welding in the vertical position 3G2.0000.368
1-2-11Perform semi-automatic arc welding in the overhead position 4G2.0000.368
1-2-12Perform semi-automatic arc welding on a vertically fixed axis 2G2.0000.368
1-2-13Perform semi-automatic arc welding on a horizontally fixed axis 5G2.0000.368
1-2-14Perform semi-automatic arc welding on a 45° fixed axis 6G/6GR2.0000.368
1-2-15Perform tungsten inert gas welding in the flat position 1G0.5620.755
1-2-16Perform tungsten inert gas welding in the horizontal position 2G0.5620.755
1-2-17Perform tungsten inert gas welding in the vertical position 3G0.5620.755
1-2-18Perform tungsten inert gas welding in the overhead position 4G0.5620.755
1-2-19Perform tungsten inert gas welding on a vertically fixed axis 2G0.5620.755
1-2-20Perform tungsten inert gas welding on a horizontally fixed axis 5G0.5620.755
1-2-21Perform tungsten inert gas welding on a 45° fixed axis 6G/6GR1.3690.504
1-2-22Analyze the welding defects and improvement operations0.7780.678
1-2-23Control interpass temperature and input heat in the welding zone1.8310.400
1-2-24Proficiently use various methods to relieve welding stresses1.9080.385
1-2-25Select appropriate welding methods and materials for construction2.3100.315
1-2-26Understand the welding current and voltage parameters4.6930.096
1-2-27Ability to prevent and correct weld distortion0.2100.900
1-2-28Determine sequence, terminology, joint types, and compare methods0.2100.900
1-2-29Select suitable tools for pre, during, and post-weld cleaning0.2340.890
1-2-30Perform various groove preparation methods for different thicknesses1.8240.402
1-2-31Meet the non-destructive testing requirements and ensure quality0.0001.000
1-3Welding InspectionFK–W (p Value)
1-3-1Knowledge of non-destructive testing types and applications2.3420.310
1-3-2Visual inspection of weld quality0.8810.644
1-3-3Understanding of mechanical testing types, methods, and applications1.3890.499
1-3-4Proficiency in using welding gauges1.8510.396
1-3-5Welder qualification and recording of welding parameters for welding2.7500.253
1-3-6Understanding of pre, during, post-weld surface cleanliness requirements0.2100.900
Source: Self-drawn.
Table
Table 10. Consistency data analysis of the professional knowledge indicators using the K–W test.
Table 10. Consistency data analysis of the professional knowledge indicators using the K–W test.
2-1Metal MaterialsFK–W (p Value)
2-1-1Familiarity with heat treatment procedures for metallic materials1.8090.405
2-1-2Understanding of the characteristics and weldability of metallic materials1.1250.570
2-1-3Knowledge of the effects of temperature on metallic materials2.2260.329
2-2Welding DraftingFK–W (p Value)
2-2-1Ability to interpret welding construction drawings2.5320.282
2-2-2Analysis of symbols, terminology, drawing, and specifications4.1740.124
2-2-3Understanding of mechanical design drawing1.1930.551
2-3Occupational SafetyFK–W (p Value)
2-3-1Knowledge of occupational safety and health practices1.3100.520
2-3-2Prevention of illnesses and hazards associated with welding work2.7500.253
2-3-3Selection of appropriate protective equipment for welding work2.7500.253
2-3-4Taking appropriate protective measures in the event of accidents1.3100.520
2-3-5Evaluation of occupational safety risks in the work environment1.3100.520
2-3-6Understanding of basic safety training in offshore wind power6.1500.046 *
2-4Quality StandardsFK–W (p Value)
2-4-1Carrying out welding operations in quality standards0.0001.000
2-4-2Recording and inspecting welding procedures in quality standards1.2310.540
2-4-3Obtaining welding personnel qualifications in quality standards1.2120.546
2-4-4Meeting the surface appearance requirements of welded joints0.0970.953
Source: Self-drawn. * p < 0.05.
Table
Table 11. Consistency data analysis of the workplace attitude indicators using the K–W test.
Table 11. Consistency data analysis of the workplace attitude indicators using the K–W test.
3-1Process ImprovementFK–W (p Value)
3-1-1Able to identify problems and propose improvements in welding work0.6900.708
3-1-2Accepts innovative concepts and techniques in welding work.0.5950.743
3-1-3Capable of managing resources and effectively scheduling progress0.5950.743
3-2Self-ManagementFK–W (p Value)
3-2-1Actively explores new knowledge and engages in self-learning2.4910.288
3-2-2Adopts and maintains rationality in the face of workplace pressure2.6990.259
3-2-3Sets personal goals with a proactive and determined attitude5.1740.075
3-2-4Performs workplace tasks diligently and meticulously2.3040.316
3-2-5Ensures compliance with all requirements in the welding process0.0001.000
3-3TeamworkFK–W (p Value)
3-3-1Values others’ opinions and engages in communication and sharing0.4080.815
3-3-2Provides timely assistance to colleagues in need0.4080.815
3-3-3Coordinates and resolves conflicts to foster positive interactions0.4080.815
3-3-4Pays attention to the safety of others and provides mutual reminders0.4080.815
3-3-5Emphasizes teamwork in the workplace to enhance work efficiency0.4080.815
Source: Self-drawn.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Liao, C.-W.; Yao, K.-C.; Tsai, C.-T.; Xu, J.-R.; Huang, W.-L.; Ho, W.-S.; Wang, Y.-P. Constructing and Validating Professional Competence Indicators for Underwater Welding Technicians for Offshore Wind Power Generation in Taiwan. Sustainability 2023, 15, 10801. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151410801

AMA Style

Liao C-W, Yao K-C, Tsai C-T, Xu J-R, Huang W-L, Ho W-S, Wang Y-P. Constructing and Validating Professional Competence Indicators for Underwater Welding Technicians for Offshore Wind Power Generation in Taiwan. Sustainability. 2023; 15(14):10801. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151410801

Chicago/Turabian Style

Liao, Chin-Wen, Kai-Chao Yao, Chin-Tang Tsai, Jing-Ran Xu, Wei-Lun Huang, Wei-Sho Ho, and Yu-Peng Wang. 2023. "Constructing and Validating Professional Competence Indicators for Underwater Welding Technicians for Offshore Wind Power Generation in Taiwan" Sustainability 15, no. 14: 10801. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151410801

APA Style

Liao, C. -W., Yao, K. -C., Tsai, C. -T., Xu, J. -R., Huang, W. -L., Ho, W. -S., & Wang, Y. -P. (2023). Constructing and Validating Professional Competence Indicators for Underwater Welding Technicians for Offshore Wind Power Generation in Taiwan. Sustainability, 15(14), 10801. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151410801

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop