IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ijsaem/v15y2024i7d10.1007_s13198-024-02348-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Theoretical semi-quantitative risk assessment methodology for tunnel design and construction processes

Author

Listed:
  • Ozgur Satici

    (Karayollari Genel Mudurlugu
    Social Sciences University of Ankara)

  • Esra Satici

    (Karayollari Genel Mudurlugu)

Abstract

All engineering projects involve risk management applications. Sometimes, risks cannot be effectively managed, leading to catastrophic consequences. Engineers must consciously or unconsciously manage these risks. Regardless of how risks are handled, project risks need to be systematically evaluated. Therefore, risk management procedures must be implemented in every project, particularly in geo-engineering projects, to mitigate undesirable consequences and achieve project objectives. However, the use of risk management procedures in underground excavation projects is not common. Numerous commonly employed underground excavation techniques lack assessment of risks, notably geotechnical risks. Most of them only evaluate rock structures and excavation stability in accordance with the geological structure. This paper combines a universal risk management perspective with the underground engineering discipline. The tunnel engineering design and construction steps were evaluated for uncertainties using Scenario Structuring Modeling techniques to identify both technical and non-technical risks associated with underground excavation. Bayesian Network models were employed to identify connections that contribute to risk. To achieve this, objective and quantitative risk assessment tables have been devised using risk management philosophy, in accordance with tunnel design engineering principles and Turkish procurement laws. The primary objective of this study is to increase awareness of the use of risk management processes in tunnel construction projects and introduce a systematic approach to risk assessment in tunnel engineering projects. As a result, a semi-quantitative risk assessment method based on risk management philosophy is proposed for tunnel design and construction for the first time, evaluating not only geotechnical and engineering risks but also human, financial, and various other sources of risks.

Suggested Citation

  • Ozgur Satici & Esra Satici, 2024. "Theoretical semi-quantitative risk assessment methodology for tunnel design and construction processes," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 15(7), pages 3385-3405, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:ijsaem:v:15:y:2024:i:7:d:10.1007_s13198-024-02348-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s13198-024-02348-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13198-024-02348-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13198-024-02348-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stanley Kaplan & B. John Garrick, 1981. "On The Quantitative Definition of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(1), pages 11-27, March.
    2. Heeyoung Chung & Jeongjun Park & Byung-Kyu Kim & Kibeom Kwon & In-Mo Lee & Hangseok Choi, 2021. "A Causal Network-Based Risk Matrix Model Applicable to Shield TBM Tunneling Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-23, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xi Zhang & Te Zhang & Xin Wei & Zhanpeng Xiao & Weiwen Zhang, 2024. "Reducing potential dual-use risks in synthetic biology laboratory research: a dynamic model of analysis," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-14, December.
    2. Gundula Glowka & Andreas Kallmünzer & Anita Zehrer, 2021. "Enterprise risk management in small and medium family enterprises: the role of family involvement and CEO tenure," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 1213-1231, September.
    3. Bani-Mustafa, Tasneem & Flage, Roger & Vasseur, Dominique & Zeng, Zhiguo & Zio, Enrico, 2020. "An extended method for evaluating assumptions deviations in quantitative risk assessment and its application to external flooding risk assessment of a nuclear power plant," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    4. Sakurahara, Tatsuya & Schumock, Grant & Reihani, Seyed & Kee, Ernie & Mohaghegh, Zahra, 2019. "Simulation-Informed Probabilistic Methodology for Common Cause Failure Analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 84-99.
    5. Benischke, Mirko H. & Guldiken, Orhun & Doh, Jonathan P. & Martin, Geoffrey & Zhang, Yanze, 2022. "Towards a behavioral theory of MNC response to political risk and uncertainty: The role of CEO wealth at risk," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 57(1).
    6. Victor Bolbot & Gerasimos Theotokatos & LA Wennersberg & Jerome Faivre & Dracos Vassalos & Evangelos Boulougouris & Ørnulf Jan Rødseth & Pål Andersen & Ann-Sofie Pauwelyn & Antoon Van Coillie, 2023. "A novel risk assessment process: Application to an autonomous inland waterways ship," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 237(2), pages 436-458, April.
    7. S. Cucurachi & E. Borgonovo & R. Heijungs, 2016. "A Protocol for the Global Sensitivity Analysis of Impact Assessment Models in Life Cycle Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(2), pages 357-377, February.
    8. Yacov Y. Haimes & Kenneth Crowther & Barry M. Horowitz, 2008. "Homeland security preparedness: Balancing protection with resilience in emergent systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(4), pages 287-308, December.
    9. Amirhossein Mokhtari & H. Christopher Frey, 2005. "Sensitivity Analysis of a Two‐Dimensional Probabilistic Risk Assessment Model Using Analysis of Variance," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(6), pages 1511-1529, December.
    10. K. Karthikeyan & S. Bharath & K. Ranjith Kumar, 2012. "An Empirical Study on Investors’ Perception towards Mutual Fund Products through Banks with Reference to Tiruchirapalli City, Tamil Nadu," Vision, , vol. 16(2), pages 101-108, June.
    11. Nicola Paltrinieri & Nicolas Dechy & Ernesto Salzano & Mike Wardman & Valerio Cozzani, 2012. "Lessons Learned from Toulouse and Buncefield Disasters: From Risk Analysis Failures to the Identification of Atypical Scenarios Through a Better Knowledge Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(8), pages 1404-1419, August.
    12. Terje Aven, 2013. "On How to Deal with Deep Uncertainties in a Risk Assessment and Management Context," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(12), pages 2082-2091, December.
    13. Louis Anthony (Tony) Cox, Jr., 2012. "Community Resilience and Decision Theory Challenges for Catastrophic Events," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(11), pages 1919-1934, November.
    14. Chen, Fuzhong & Hsu, Chien-Lung & Lin, Arthur J. & Li, Haifeng, 2020. "Holding risky financial assets and subjective wellbeing: Empirical evidence from China," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    15. Jennifer Kuzma, 2021. "Procedurally Robust Risk Assessment Framework for Novel Genetically Engineered Organisms and Gene Drives," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 1144-1165, October.
    16. Niël Almero Krüger & Natanya Meyer, 2021. "The Development of a Small and Medium-Sized Business Risk Management Intervention Tool," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-14, July.
    17. Paolo Gardoni & Colleen Murphy, 2014. "A Scale of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1208-1227, July.
    18. James H. Lambert & Rachel K. Jennings & Nilesh N. Joshi, 2006. "Integration of risk identification with business process models," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(3), pages 187-198, September.
    19. Johnson, Caroline A. & Flage, Roger & Guikema, Seth D., 2021. "Feasibility study of PRA for critical infrastructure risk analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    20. Kasai, Naoya & Matsuhashi, Shigemi & Sekine, Kazuyoshi, 2013. "Accident occurrence model for the risk analysis of industrialfacilities," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 71-74.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:ijsaem:v:15:y:2024:i:7:d:10.1007_s13198-024-02348-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.