PSI - Issue 84

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect

Procedia Structural Integrity 84 (2026) 489–496

© 2026 The Authors. Published by ELSEVIER B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0) Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Conference Keywords: Landslide Risk Assessment; Smart Risk Priorization; Visual Inspection; Structural Distress; Infrastructure Smart Management; Resilience. Abstract The multilayered structure of the Italian Guidelines for the safety management of bridges and viaducts is designed to help identify those requiring the most urgent attention and to efficiently allocate available resources. This is particularly relevant in the first levels of analysis that must be applied to all structures. However, when it comes to landslide risk, the current framework presents some limitations. The assessment is often based on rapid surveys, which may not provide sufficiently reliable estimates of the phenomenon or of the potential interaction between the landslide and the structure. Some secondary parameters used in the evaluation tend to raise the attention class, potentially flattening the prioritization by clustering many structures into the highest classes. Furthermore, the use of only five attention classes does not allow for effective discrimination between structures within the same class, nor does it enable the quantification of the type and severity of damage resulting from the interaction between the infrastructure and the landslide. The method proposed in this work tries to address these issues by introducing two scoring-based priority indices, calculated both before and after the Level 1 inspection. The first index, derived after the census phase, helps in scheduling inspections more efficiently. The second index provides a more detailed ranking of each structure's condition relative to others, specifically regarding landslide risk and the need for further investigation. This approach allows for dynamic prioritization based on field observations, especially where signs of structural distress are present. The scoring system is aligned with the categories already defined in the Italian Guidelines, ensuring integration with the existing procedures while improving the ability to manage and mitigate landslide-related risks. III Fabre Conference: Existing Bridges, Viaducts, and Tunnels: Research, Innovation, and Applications Beyond the Classes: Enhancing Landslide Risk Prioritization for Bridges and Viaducts Alessandro Scala a , Lorenzo Brezzi a, *, Luca Simoni a , Fabiola Gibin a , Paolo Simonini a a University of Padova, ICEA Department, via Ognissanti 39, 35129 Padova, Italy

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 39-049-827-7992. E-mail address: lorenzo.brezzi@unipd.it

2452-3216 © 2026 The Authors. Published by ELSEVIER B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0) Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Conference 10.1016/j.prostr.2026.06.063