Articole

Integrated Dynamic Risk Assessment Model for Bank Stabilization Works

AM
A. MOISE
National University of Science and…
AT
A. TRIFU
National University of Science and…
MG
M. GHEORGHE
National University of Science and…
CE
C.I. ENACHE
National University of Science and…
LR
L.F. RADU
National University of Science and…
Vol. 1 / Nr. 1 pp. 213–222 Engleză DOI: 10.65631/JFD.1(37).2026.26
Journal of Fiability and Durability · 2026
Bank stabilization works represent one of the most hazardous activities in the construction sector, particularly in the context of deep excavations and variable geotechnical conditions. Although effective technical solutions exist, accidents continue to occur due to the complex interaction between technical, organizational, and human factors. In this context, the paper proposes an original dynamic risk assessment model – MIP‑SM (Integrated Prevention Model – Bank Stabilization). The model integrates three main risk components and introduces a dynamic component based on changes in site conditions. In addition, a simplified digital implementation method is proposed, based on an Excel/Google Sheets calculator, which allows rapid risk assessment and continuous updating. The results highlight the usefulness of the model in accident prevention and in supporting the decision‑making process on construction sites.
risk assessment bank stabilization occupational safety and health dynamic model accident prevention
Publicat
01.04.2026
AM
A. MOISE Corespondent
National University of Science and Technology POLITEHNICA Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania
AT
A. TRIFU
National University of Science and Technology POLITEHNICA Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania
MG
M. GHEORGHE
National University of Science and Technology POLITEHNICA Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania
CE
C.I. ENACHE
National University of Science and Technology POLITEHNICA Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania
LR
L.F. RADU
National University of Science and Technology POLITEHNICA Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania
A. MOISE, A. TRIFU, M. GHEORGHE, C.I. ENACHE, L.F. RADU (2026). Integrated Dynamic Risk Assessment Model for Bank Stabilization Works. Journal of Fiability and Durability, 1(1), 213–222. https://doi.org/10.65631/JFD.1(37).2026.26
[1]. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). (2015). Trenching and Excavation Safety. U.S. Department of Labor.
[2]. Kekeç, B., Bilim, N., & Bilim, A. (2023). Occupational health and safety in excavation works. International Civil Engineering and Architecture Congress.
[3]. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. (2014). Construction safety risks and prevention.
[4]. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). (1994). Soil Classification for Excavations.
[5]. Jeelani, I., Albert, A., & Gambatese, J. (2016). Why do construction hazards remain unrecognized? Journal of Construction Engineering and Management.
[6]. Kale, Ö. A., Aşıkoğlu, Ö. L., & Baradan, S. (2018). Work-related injuries and fatalities in geotechnical site works. Safety Science.
[7]. Tixier, A. J. P., Hallowell, M. R., & Rajagopalan, B. (2016). Construction safety risk modeling and simulation. Automation in Construction.
[8]. Baykuş, N. (2024). Role of the regulation framework in occupational safety. Safety (MDPI).
[9]. Sorlini, A. et al. (2023). Occupational safety improvements through digital technologies. Infrastructures Journal.
[10]. Wang, Z., Shafieezadeh, A., et al. (2022). Optimal monitoring location for geotechnical risk tracking. Engineering Structures.
[11]. Legea nr. 319/2006 – securitatea și sănătatea în muncă
[12]. HG 300/2006 – șantiere temporare sau mobile
[13]. Reason, J. – Human Error
[14]. Heinrich, H. – Industrial Accident Prevention
[15]. NP 120-2022 – lucrări geotehnice
Scroll to Top