Науковий вісник НГУ

Development of an approach to risk management in the safety system of technogenic objects

• 
• 

User Rating:  / 1

PoorBest 

Details

Category: Content №1 2026

Last Updated on 27 February 2026

Published on 30 November -0001

Hits: 2348

Authors:

V. A. Tsopa, orcid.org/0000-0002-4811-3712, MIM-Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

A. O. Khorolskyi, orcid.org/0000-0002-4703-7228, Branch for Physics of Mining Processes of the M. S. Poliakov Institute of Geotechnical Mechanics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Dnipro, Ukraine

O. V. Deryugin, orcid.org/0000-0002-2456-7664, Dnipro University of Technology, Dnipro, Ukraine, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

O. R. Mamaikin*, orcid.org/0000-0002-2137-0516, Dnipro University of Technology, Dnipro, Ukraine, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

L. M. Cheberiachko, orcid.org/0009-0001-2685-7809, Dnipro University of Technology, Dnipro, Ukraine, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

* Corresponding author e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

повний текст / full article

Naukovyi Visnyk Natsionalnoho Hirnychoho Universytetu. 2026, (1): 084 - 092

https://doi.org/10.33271/nvngu/2026-1/084

Abstract:

Purpose. Development of a risk management process for complex hazardous events in safety management systems of technogenic facilities.

Methodology. To develop the process of managing risks caused by a complex of hazardous events, the most common “Bow-Tie” model was taken as a basis, which allows determining a cause-and-effect relationship between a hazard, a hazardous event and the severity of the consequences.

Findings. The model of cause-and-effect relationship between the occurrence of a primary hazardous event and the severity of consequences from each secondary hazardous event triggered by the primary one has been improved. A risk management process has been developed for safety management systems of technogenic facilities. The process consists of eight steps and includes a specific feature which differs from the known identification of secondary hazardous events and associated hazardous factors that emerge as a result of a primary hazardous event. To determine the severity scale of consequences, it is proposed to assess the damage caused to the sustainable functioning of the infrastructure of a given facility, taking into account the costs of accident localization and elimination, as well as environmental harm.

Originality. The approach involves the development of a risk management process that accounts for complex hazardous events in safety management systems of technogenic facilities. Unlike the existing approaches, this process includes an assessment of the severity of consequences resulting from a primary hazardous event.

Practical value. It consists in the development of a risk management process for hazards and losses within a safety management system, caused by a complex of hazardous events. This process differs from the known approaches by additionally identifying losses resulting from secondary hazards that manifest after the occurrence of a primary hazardous event.

Keywords: technogenic objects, risk, hazardous event, safety management

References.

1. Pochepov, V. M., Mamaikin, O. R., Sheka, I. V., Krukovskyi, O. P., Lapko, V. V., & Ashcheulova, O. M. (2024). Tool for management and planning of the fuel and energy complex taking into account the production potential of coal-mining enterprises. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1415(1), 012028. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1415/1/012028

2. Geng, J., Fang, W., Liu, M., Yang, J., Ma, Z., & Bi, J. (2024). Advances and future directions of environmental risk research: A bibliometric review. Science of The Total Environment, 954, 176246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.176246

3. Manisalidis, I., Stavropoulou, E., Stavropoulos, A., & Bezirtzoglou, E. (2020). Environmental and Health Impacts of Air Pollution: A Review. Frontiers in Public Health, 8, 14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.00014

4. Sudiarno, A., & Ma’arij, A.M.D. (2023). System Safety Assessment of the Warehouse Operation Using Functional Resonance Analysis Method and Resilience Analysis Grid. Kesmas, 18(4), 271-278. https://doi.org/10.21109/kesmas.v18i4.7396

5. Văduva, R., & Voiculescu, M. (2024). Former gas stations in Timișoara area ‒ Inventory and analysis of recognised environmental conditions. Forum geografic. Studii și cercetări de geografie și protecția mediului, XXIII(2), 256-267. https://doi.org/10.5775/fg.2024.2.3666

6. Boryczko, K., Szpak, D., Żywiec, J., & Tchórzewska-Cieślak, B. (2022). The Use of a Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) in the Operator Reliability Assessment of the Critical Infrastructure on the Example of Water Supply System. Energies, 15(12), 4416. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15124416

7. Bouafia, A., Bougofa, M., Rouainia, M., & Medjram, M. S. (2020). Safety Risk Analysis and Accidents Modeling of a Major Gasoline Release in Petrochemical Plant. Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention, 20, 358-369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11668-020-00826-9

8. Safari, M., Naserbakht, A. H., Badri Kouhi, A., & Varmazyar, S. (2025). Artificial intelligence and emerging technologies in assessing ergonomic risk factors in the workplace: A systematic review. WORK, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/10519815251349793

9. Mavlioutov, R., & Chubenko, O. (2018). Development of machine-building enterprises controlling. MATEC Web Conf., 224(2018), 01099. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201822401099

10.      Montero, V. J., Logrosa, G., Calorio, J. L., Lato, J. I., Hassall, M., & Mata, M. A. (2025). Risk modeling with Bowtie method for decision-making towards public health and safety. Safety Science, 185, 106777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2025.106777

11.      Aust, J., & Pons, D. (2019). Bowtie Methodology for Risk Analysis of Visual Borescope Inspection during Aircraft Engine Maintenance. Aerospace, 6, 110. https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace6100110

12.      Rachmadhani, M. M., Gani, M., Histiarini, A. R., & Tuankotta, O. F. A. (2025). Risk Analysis on FGH Terminal Using Importance Index and Bowtie Analysis Methods. Engineering Proceedings, 84, 35. https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2025084035

13.      Lennon, J. W. O., Pavlychenko, А., Tsopa, V., Deryugin, O., Khorolskyi, A., & Cheberiachko, L. (2024). Causal Relationship Between Environmental Aspect and Environmental Risk. E3S Web of Conferences, 567, 01013(2024), Physical & Chemical Geotechnologies 2024. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202456701013

14.      UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (n.d.). Disaster losses & statistics. Retrieved from https://www.preventionweb.net/understanding-disaster-risk/disaster-losses-and-statistics

15.      Doregar Zavareh, R., Dana, T., Roayaei, E., Monavari, S. M., & Jozi, S. A. (2022). The Environmental Risk Assessment of Fire and Explosion in Storage Tanks of Petroleum Products. Sustainability, 14(17), 10747. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141710747

16.      Jones, D. F., Ivanov, O., Arsirii, O., Crook, P., Kanada, L., Labib, A., Teeuw, R. M., & Smyk, S. (2025). Multiple sustainability criteria mapping of gas station incident consequences and subsequent decision optimization. European Journal of Operational Research, 326(2), 16, 299-310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2025.04.026

17.      Karabyn, V., & Kochmar, I. (2025). Distribution of different forms of manganese in coal mining waste: A case study of the Vizeyska mine, Ukraine. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1499, 012045. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1499/1/012045

18.      Fu, J., Liu, Y., & Sun, F. (2021). Identifying and Regulating the Environmental Risks in the Development and Utilization of Natural Gas as a Low-Carbon Energy Source. Frontiers in Energy Research, 9, 638105. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2021.638105

19.      Saik, P., Tsopa, V., Koriashkina, L., Cheberiachko, S., Deryugin, O., & Lozynskyi, V. (2025). Influence of occupational safety culture on the occupational risk level in the organization. Frontiers in Public Health, 13, 1595869. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1595869

20.      Yang, P., Huang, X., Peng, L., Zheng, Z., Wu, X., & Xing, C. (2021). Safety evaluation of major hazard installations based on regional disaster system theory. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 69, 104346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2020.104346

• < Prev
• Next >