Risk-based approach to assessment of industrial facilities within the framework of lifecycles

Introduction. The authors developed and pilot-tested an approach to the lifecycle prognostication for load-bearing steel structures of industrial facilities using a cost-based risk assessment paradigm. The authors’ approach is based on principles of discounted cash flows and itemized decomposition of each stage of a lifecycle, from pre-project studies to disposal, with a focus on the reconstruction phase of steel structures as a key cost generator.

Materials and methods. The core element of this research work is to integrate probabilistic risks of accidents (mechanical risks, corrosion, fatigue, etc.) into a classical model of cost assessment using event tree analysis.

Results. A risk-based approach was developed to assess lifecycles of industrial facilities. A roof truss with a 24-meter span served as an example for a detailed calculation made to illustrate the cost and risk pattern over a 40-year planning time-frame. The results, presented in tabular form, demonstrate that the risk share can reach 20–25 % of the total cost for solutions with minimal upfront investments. A comparative analysis of alternatives with basic and enhanced protection confirms the economic feasibility of preventive investments which reduce the total cost of the lifecycle by 35–45 % due to a severe reduction in operating costs and the probability of disastrous failures. Sensitivity was analyzed to identify dependence of the final cost on the discount rate, the cost of production downtime, and reliability of initial probabilistic data.

Conclusions. The proposed approach can be contributed to feasibility studies of projects to choose structural solutions for industrial buildings constructed as part of industrial facilities.

1. Eminyan K.M. Optimality and equilibrium of economic events as a unity of contradictions. Discussion. 2024; 2(123):6-10. DOI: 10.46320/2077-7639-2024-2-123-6-10. EDN JMRZXA. (rus.).

2. Basu M., Kaja N., Rao P. Study on life cycle assessment and life cycle sustainability assessment of buildings : a review. Journal of The Institution of Engineers (India): Series A. 2024; 105(3):749-766. DOI: 10.1007/s40030-024-00831-3. EDN SUEZGK

3. Moutik B., Summerscales J., Graham-Jones J., Pemberton R. Life cycle assessment research trends and implications : a bibliometric analysis. Sustainability. 2023; 15(18):13408. DOI: 10.3390/su151813408. EDN MDNTYO.

4. Aleksetsev A.V. Scientific foundations of optimization of reinforced concrete structures using genetic algorithms : dis. for the degree of Doctor of Technical Sciences. Moscow, 2021; 481. EDN GMVSGI. (rus.).

5. Terekhov I.G., Varivoda V.A., Sukhinin D.A. Theory of calculation of reinforced concrete structures in construction: technical and economic aspects. Human Progress. 2024; 10(12). DOI: 10.46320/2073-4506-2024-12a-7. EDN AEHKLA. (rus.).

6. Udisi B., Gorgolewski M. A systematic review of consequential life cycle assessment in whole building life cycle assessment. Environmental Research Communications. 2025; 7(2):022003. DOI: 10.1088/2515-7620/adb669. EDN OOPNKO.

7. Kisel T.N., Mishlanova M.Yu., Galeev K.F. Study of the risks of investment and construction projects of participants in the context of the introduction of information modeling technologies. Real Estate: Economics, Management. 2023; (4):37-40. DOI: 10.22337/2073-8412-2022-4-37-40. EDN ADNFTG. (rus.).

8. Canyurt O.E., Hajela P. Cellular genetic algorithm technique for the multicriterion design optimization. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization. 2010; 40(1-6):201-214. DOI: 10.1007/s00158-008-0351-3

9. De Almeida P.R., Solas M.Z., Renz A., Buh-ler M.M., Herbert P., Castagnino S. et al. Shaping the future of construction: a breakthrough in thinking and technology. Geneva, World Economic Forum, 2016.

10. Elsner Ju., Gabriel A., Ackermann T., Körkemeyer Ja., Schmitt R.H. Auf digitalen zwillingen basiertes life cycle assessment. ZWF. Zeitschrift fuer Wirtschaftlichen Fabrikbetrieb. 2023; 118(12):883-887. DOI: 10.1515/zwf-2023-1167. EDN PJRGCD

11. Golej Ju., Veverková D., Schwarz M., Sečkár M. Life cycle assessment and software tools comparison. International Journal of Environment and Sustainable Development. 2024; 1(1). DOI: 10.1504/ijesd.2024.10064669. EDN AOHVCE.

12. Martínez-Ramón N., Calvo-Rodríguez F., Iribarren D., Dufour Ja. Frameworks for the application of machine learning in life cycle assessment for process modeling. Cleaner Environmental Systems. 2024; 14:100221. DOI: 10.1016/j.cesys.2024.100221

13. Adel G., Othman A.A.E., Harinarain N. Integrated Project Delivery (IPD): An Innovative Approach for Achieving Sustainability in Construction Projects. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering. 2023; 195-209. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-97748-1_16

14. Flyvbjerg B., Bruzelius N., Rothengatter W. Megaprojects and Risk. UK; New York, Cambridge University Press, 2003.

15. Kanatova E.A., Medvedeva M.N., Smirnva A.A. Strengthening metal structures during reconstruction. Science. Engineering. Technology (polytechnical bulletin). 2024; 1:57-62. EDN ZSOPBT. (rus.).

16. Kasulanati M.L., Pancharathi R.K. Optimizing multi-recycled concrete for sustainability: aggregate gradation, surface treatment methods and life cycle impact assessment. Construction and Building Materials. 2024; 449:138510. DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.138510

17. Marcinkowski A., Haręża P. Integration of life cycle sustainability assessment indicators in different energy sectors. Economics and Environment. 2025; 91(4):799. DOI: 10.34659/eis.2024.91.4.799

18. Tamrazyan A., Alekseytsev A.V. Optimization of reinforced concrete beams under local mechanical and corrosive damage. Engineering Optimization. 2023; 55(11):1905-1922. DOI: 10.1080/0305215x.2022.213-4356

19. Wood J.G.M. Collapse of the parking lot on Pipers Row: risk definition. Concrete. 2003; 37(9):29-31.

20. Xudong H., Shuli S., Pu C., Tao L. A multi-scenario analysis method for collapse risks due to initial local failure of building structures. Structures. 2023; 58:105479. DOI: 10.1016/j.istruc.2023.105479