A Hierarchical Analysis Method for Evaluating the Risk Factors of Pile Foundation Construction for Offshore Wind Power

Abstract

To improve the safety level of pile foundation construction for offshore wind power, in this study, the risk indicators of pile foundation construction were evaluated using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and comprehensive evaluation methods. The pile foundation construction operation process for offshore wind power mainly includes four phases: preparation for construction, pile sinking, end of construction, and foundation scour protection construction. Pile foundation construction risk indicators are systematically identified as human factors, material factors, management factors, and environmental factors. The most important indicators for pile foundation construction for offshore wind power were evaluated using AHP and comprehensive evaluation methods, which included five indicators: piling equipment, protective equipment, special skills, safety awareness, and emergency management. The four more important indicators are workplace environment, lifting equipment, fire protection systems, and operations. According to the results of our evaluation of the pile foundation construction safety indicators presented herein, corresponding recommendations are made that consider four aspects—human factors, material factors, management factors, and environmental factors. The construction industry should focus on improving the safety measures related to aspects with greater risk indicators. Pile foundation construction for offshore wind power can be evaluated using the method discussed in this paper, allowing industry stakeholders to prioritize and focus on improving safety measures related to aspects with greater risk indicators.

1. Introduction

The use of traditional fossil fuels emits a large amount of greenhouse gasses, posing significant challenges and contributing to global climate change [1,2,3,4,5,6]. Wind power is a clean and harmless way of utilizing renewable energy, meaning it is of great significance in realizing sustainable energy development and coping with global climate change [7]. In 2023, China’s new onshore and offshore wind power installations provided 69 GW and 6.3 GW of power, respectively, and the world’s new onshore and offshore wind power installations generate about 106 GW and 10.8 GW of power, respectively, with China’s share of new onshore and offshore wind power installations accounting for 65% and 58% of the power generated, respectively. Considering all of China’s onshore and offshore wind power installations, in 2023, they generated 403 GW and 37.8 GW of power, respectively, while the world’s total onshore and offshore wind power installations generated 945 GW and 75 GW of power, respectively, meaning that China’s share of the total wind power generated by onshore and offshore installations was 43% and 50%, respectively [8]. The timeline regarding the development of offshore wind power is relatively short, and the history of the development of new offshore wind power installations in China and the world (excluding China) in the past decade is shown in Figure 1. The number of new offshore wind power installations is increasing annually, and the growth rate of new offshore wind power installations in China has ballooned in recent years [9,10,11]. Figure 1 also forecasts the development of new offshore wind power installations in China and the world (excluding China) over the next ten years. According to the forecast below, the number of new offshore wind power installations will steadily increase year on year [12].

Many scholars have studied the risk assessment aspect of wind power projects. Tan et al. [13] assessed the risk of investment in wind power construction projects from the three aspects of the price risk, the risk of project costs, and the risk of abandonment, and obtained the size of an investment’s economic benefits in four resource areas. Liu et al. [14] proposed a method using a back-propagation neural network to identify the risk in order to evaluate the investment risk of a wind power project and used the numerical simulation method for verification. Zhou et al. [15] proposed a multi-criteria decision-making method, including wind resources, construction conditions, economy, environment, and risk, to evaluate the optimal construction location of offshore wind power and validated it using the Jiangsu offshore wind power project as an example. Zhao et al. [16] evaluated safety risk factors in the design phase of wind power construction based on structural equations and mutation theory and constructed and validated a risk assessment model for the design phase of wind power construction. Chou et al. [17] identified and evaluated the risk factors during the construction and operation of offshore wind power in Taiwan based on A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge and proposed targeted safety measures. Li et al. [18] established a quantitative model of wind power operation and management risk in China from the aspects of the sales price of wind power and wind power generation and validated the model with a wind farm in Inner Mongolia as an example. Yamada et al. [19] proposed a wind power operation efficiency model, including indicators such as spot electricity price, region-wide wind power production index, and local wind conditions, and conducted a validation analysis with data from Japan. Qian et al. [20] constructed an optimal coordination model of multi-source power systems to withstand the impacts of typhoons and validated it with the example of multi-source power systems in typhoon coastal areas, which proved that the model can reduce the total cost of power system coordination. Cheng et al. [21] developed an investment risk assessment model for the transportation, construction, and installation of underwater foundations for offshore wind power and validated the model with the Tai-power Offshore Wind Power Project (second phase) as an example. While extensive research has been conducted on the risk assessment of wind power projects, further studies are needed to deepen the understanding of certain areas.

The wind energy sector is gradually shifting towards a preference for offshore wind power generation [22], yet offshore wind power operations include greater challenges [23,24,25,26,27,28,29]. Pile foundation construction for offshore wind turbines is the basic guarantee for the stability of pile foundations, and many scholars have studied the process for constructing pile foundations [30,31,32,33]. Zhong et al. [34] used numerical simulation to study the fatigue damage of pile foundation construction for offshore wind power and found that the fatigue damage of the pile foundation over 27 years could meet the requirements. Won et al. [35] proposed a new type of pile foundation construction process for offshore wind power and found that the pre-pile template is mainly affected by three factors: wave conditions, winch speed, and ship type. The noise generated during the construction of offshore wind pile foundations is a serious impediment to construction, and Tsouvalas [36] provided a literature review and summary of noise calculation models, including noise mitigation techniques and modeling. Lavanya et al. [37] studied the types of pile foundations required for onshore and offshore wind power, obtained the applicable types of pile foundations for different sea depths, and analyzed the treatment measures for soft foundations. The wind energy sector is increasingly favoring offshore wind power generation, which presents unique challenges, particularly in the construction of pile foundations which are essential for stability.

The analysis highlights that the rapid advancement of wind power technology also introduces significant construction risks. This paper examines the construction of offshore wind power pile foundations as a case study, identifying the associated risks during the construction process. By employing the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method, the study conducts a thorough risk evaluation and proposes specific safety measures based on the evaluation outcomes. The findings offer a valuable reference for safety assessment methodologies in offshore wind power construction, enabling relevant construction entities to implement targeted safety measures to enhance overall safety standards.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Construction Workflow

The pile foundation construction process for offshore wind power mainly includes four phases: preparation for construction, pile sinking, end of construction, and foundation scour protection construction. The pile foundation construction workflow for offshore wind power is shown in Figure 2.

2.2. AHP

The AHP is a decision analysis method that is based on systems theory, a hierarchical weighted decision analysis method proposed by Saaty, a professor at the University of Pittsburgh and an American operations researcher, in the early 1970s [38,39]. The AHP is as follows [40,41]:

(1)

Hierarchical analytical modeling

The results of the risk analysis are divided into three layers: the target layer, the criterion layer, and the indicator layer, and a hierarchical analysis model is established. The target layer is the highest layer with only one factor, which is the goal of the hierarchical analysis and evaluation; the criterion layer is the middle layer, which is the intermediate link involved in realizing the evaluation goal; and the indicator layer is the lowest level of judging factors, which are the various basic factors for evaluating the goal.

(2)

Constructing a judgment matrix

The judgment matrix represents a comparison of the relative importance of n factors at a certain level to a factor in the previous level. Assuming that the factor a_k in level A is related to B₁, B₂,…, and B_n in the next level, the general form of constructing the judgment matrix is shown in Equation (1).

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}{a}_1& B_1& B_2& \dots & B_n\\ B_1& b_{11}& b_{12}& \dots & b_{1n}\\ B_2& b_{21}& b_{22}& \dots & b_{2n}\\ ⋮& ⋮& ⋮& \dots & ⋮\\ B_n& b_{n1}& b_{n2}& \dots & b_{nn}\end{array}$$

(1)

The importance of two factors compared at the same level is the scale, i.e., the quantitative relationship of the judgment matrix, as shown in

Table 1. Meanings of scale measures.

Scale	Meaning
1	Two factors are equally important
3	The former is slightly more important than the latter
5	The former is significantly more important than the latter
7	The former is strongly more important than the latter
9	The former is extremely more important than the latter
2, 4, 6, 8	The median of the above two neighboring judgments
Reciprocal	The scale of factor Ai to factor Aj is aij, and vice versa 1/aij

.

(3)

Calculate the judgment matrix

According to positive matrix theory, the matrix has the unique maximum eigenvalue ${\lambda }_{max}$, and the maximum eigenvalue and eigenvector of the judgment matrix are found. We normalize the eigenvectors to obtain the weight vector, W = (w₁,w₂,…w_n)^T, which is the importance ranking of evaluation factors.

(4)

Consistency check

Since the expert’s knowledge of the actual problem is not ideal, the judgment matrix is inconsistent; generally, a judgment matrix inconsistency of less than 10% is acceptable. The check standard is shown in Equation (2):

$$CR={\displaystyle \frac{CI}{RI}}$$

(2)

CI is calculated as shown in Equation (3), and RI is calculated as shown in

Table 2. RI values corresponding to each order matrix.

n	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15
RI	0	0	0.52	0.89	1.12	1.25	1.35	1.40	1.45	1.49	1.52	1.54	1.56	1.58	1.59

.

$$CI={\displaystyle \frac{{\lambda }_{max}-n}{n-1}}$$

(3)

where n is the order of the judgment matrix.

3. Safety Evaluation

3.1. Risk Identification

The identification of risks related to pile foundation construction for offshore wind power is based on the Classification and Code of Hazardous and Deleterious Factors in Production Process (GB/T13861-2022) [42], which was revised by consulting experts to systematically identify the risk indicators of offshore wind power pile foundation construction considering the aspects of human factors, material factors, management factors, and environmental factors.

(1)

The human factors

The physical condition of the workers: Failure to verify the physical condition of operators prior to the execution of an offshore wind project results in them operating in an unfavorable state, such as in a state of fatigue or drunkenness. Such negligence may pose serious safety hazards, not only affecting work efficiency but also potentially causing personal harm and property damage.

The psychological condition of the workers: Before operations commence, it should be taken into account that operators are affected by a variety of factors, such as work pressure, personal problems, or environmental influences, which can seriously alter one’s psychological state and, therefore, have a serious negative impact on normal operations. To ensure smooth operations, these psychological state issues need to be attended to and addressed to improve operator efficiency and safety.

The load of the workers: High workloads increase the physical strength of personnel, reduce their functioning, and increase the risk of personnel operational errors.

Special skills of the worker: If the main operator does not obtain the relevant operation certificate for pile foundation construction for offshore wind power, their technical level is not up to standard, and/or their work experience is not sufficient, the operation could fail, thus causing great losses. Personnel should also have good emergency response abilities before or during accidents to maximize their own safety and ensure the safe use of operating equipment.

The safety awareness of the workers: Safety awareness plays a pivotal role in construction and is of great significance in safeguarding construction personnel, improving the quality of construction, reducing construction costs, enhancing the image of the enterprise, and complying with laws and regulations.

Worker operations: Pile foundation operators should strictly follow the construction program and specifications to ensure the highest standards of quality and safety.

Conducting workers: The conductor bears the important responsibility of organizing, managing, and coordinating, which directly affects the safety, efficiency, and quality of construction. An experienced and skillful conductor can effectively promote the smooth progress of construction work and guarantee the successful implementation of a project. Violation of the conductor’s commands on the ground is likely to lead to accidents in pile foundation construction operations.

Supervision of the workers: Supervisors carry out multiple tasks, such as supervision, inspection, coordination, and risk management, which is why having a supervisory team is one of the most important guarantees for the smooth implementation and successful completion of a project. An efficient and professional supervisory team can effectively improve the quality, safety, and efficiency of construction and ensure the smooth progress of a project.

(2)

The material factors

Equipment defects: There are many kinds of equipment facilities, tools, and accessories in pile foundation construction for offshore wind power, including transportation systems, lifting equipment, fire protection systems, piling equipment, safety monitoring devices, foundation leveling devices, communication equipment, construction auxiliary facilities, and other related equipment. This equipment is the key foundation of the construction process, and the aging of the equipment and other defects will occur during long-term use. Hence, the failure to find and replace pieces of equipment in time will result in significant risks.

Protective equipment: Ensuring that protective equipment is worn and that protective measures are prepared during construction is a rather important task. Due to the complexity of the construction environment, operators may be affected by natural factors such as sea wind, waves, tides, etc., so they need to wear waterproof and non-slip equipment to ensure safety.

Noise: During offshore construction, noise from machinery or nature may be encountered, such as the friction of machinery and the wind at sea, etc. These sounds can greatly affect personnel and construction equipment, resulting in unforeseen consequences, so the impact of noise during the construction process cannot be ignored.

Logos and signage: During the construction process, logos and signage are mainly used to indicate the safe and dangerous areas of the site or to indicate special requirements and/or prohibited behaviors in the construction process. By setting up clearly visible logos and signage around dangerous areas, workers can be reminded of the relevant prohibited behaviors or be forced to pay attention to them, thus reducing the likelihood of accidents occurring, ensuring the safety of workers, and helping to maintain the order and safety of the construction site.

(3)

The management factors

Safety education and organization: Well-applied safety education and organization not only protects the safety and health of workers, prevents accidents, and improves the quality of construction but also contributes to employee morale and well-being.

Safety regulations: Rules and regulations should include provisions on personal protection, equipment operation, and the handling of emergencies to help workers avoid accidents and safeguard their safety and health, as this helps to ensure safety and compliance during the construction process and also helps to improve the efficiency and quality of the construction process and reduce risks and costs.

Emergency management: When implementing emergency plans and emergency response training, it is vital to offer field operators emergency response training to ensure that they can avoid injury or death when operational risks occur.

Safety operation rules: Practical and safe operating rules are essential in construction; they are put in place to help construction workers and instructors carry out construction work instructions to ensure the safe and efficient completion of construction projects.

Inputs for safety and health: The offshore construction environment presents many potential hazards and risks, and the health and safety of workers can be protected by investing in necessary resources and making an effort to provide the necessary safety equipment, training, and supervision to minimize the likelihood of accidents occurring during the construction process.

(4)

The environmental factors

Maritime traffic conditions: Good sea traffic management can ensure the safety and smooth progress of the construction process; therefore, sea traffic management should be given sufficient attention in the construction plan.

Submarine geological environment: Geomorphological features such as pits, reefs, and isolated rocks on the seabed surface in the installation area, as well as the type of seabed soils, will have a significant impact on the sinking of the suction conduit for frame foundations. Abandoned anchors, sunken ships, industrial and agricultural waste, and other disturbances in the installation area may prevent complete penetration of the seabed, and these seabed obstructions may, in turn, cause serious problems such as an in-sufficient bearing capacity and the buckling of the suction pile structure.

Workplace environment: The outdoor operation scenario mainly includes the wind power pile foundation construction area and an offshore platform, while the indoor operation scenario mainly involves the maintenance, overhauling, and processing of construction equipment and tools.

Marine meteorological disasters: Under extreme weather conditions, such as heavy rain and hail, the construction vessel may need to evacuate the offshore construction site in an emergency. If the piling work is only half-finished at this time, the piling operation can be temporarily interrupted. However, once construction resumes, hammer refusal may be encountered, thus increasing the number of safety risks and uncertainty in the construction process.

3.2. Comprehensive Security Evaluations

Based on the results of our risk identification, carried out to establish an AHP model, the AHP model for safety evaluation of pile foundation construction for offshore wind power is shown in Figure 3.

Eight experts with relevant experience were invited to a consultation meeting and to complete a questionnaire survey on the aforementioned factors of pile foundation construction for offshore wind power. The experts’ profiles are shown in

Table 3. The experts’ profiles.

Expert	Background	Education Level	Specialized Field	Work Age	Organizational Position
Expert 1	Project manager of a construction unit	Master	Engineering project management	27	Senior engineer
Expert 2	The chief safety officer of a construction unit	Doctor	Construction safety management	10	Senior engineer
Expert 3	Deputy manager of the construction unit	Master	Wind power construction	21	Senior engineer
Expert 4	Construction unit safety supervisor	Undergraduate	Construction safety management	30	Senior engineer
Expert 5	Vice-president of a university	Doctor	Engineering project management	24	Professor
Expert 6	Dean of a university	Doctor	Engineering project management	18	Professor
Expert 7	Dean of a college	Doctor	Security assessment	15	Professor
Expert 8	Head of department at a university	Doctor	Risk identification	10	Associate professor

.

The scores of these eight experts were taken as the arithmetic mean and divided into nine levels. We carried out an offshore wind power pile foundation construction safety evaluation of the target layer corresponding to the criterion layer to establish a judgment matrix (C-C) based on the criterion layers of workers, equipment, management, and environment (

Table 4. C-C judgment matrix.

The Target Layer	C1	C2	C3	C4
C1	1	1/2	1	2
C2	2	1	1	1
C3	1	1	1	1
C4	1/2	1	1	1

). The workers, equipment, management, and environmental factors of the four criterion layers of the respective corresponding indicator layer factors of the judgment matrix (C₁-P, C₂-P, C₃-P, and C₄-P) are shown in

Table 5. C₁-P judgment matrix.

C1	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5	P6	P7
P1	1	1/3	1/5	1/5	1/3	3	3
P2	3	1	1/3	1/3	3	3	5
P3	5	3	1	1	5	6	5
P4	5	3	1	1	5	6	7
P5	3	1/3	1/5	1/5	1	1	5
P6	1/3	1/3	1/6	1/6	1	1	3
P7	1/3	1/5	1/5	1/7	1/5	1/3	1

,

Table 6. C₂-P judgment matrix.

C2	P8	P9	P10	P11	P12	P13	P14	P15
P8	1	1/5	1/6	1/7	1/3	1/7	1/3	1
P9	5	1	3	1/3	4	1/3	3	5
P10	6	1/3	1	1/3	3	1	3	3
P11	7	3	3	1	5	1	5	5
P12	3	1/4	1/3	1/5	1	1/5	1	1
P13	7	3	1	1	5	1	5	3
P14	3	1/3	1/3	1/5	1	1/5	1	1
P15	1	1/5	1/3	1/5	1	1/3	1	1

,

Table 7. C₃-P judgment matrix.

C3	P16	P17	P18	P19	P20
P16	1	1/3	1/7	3	5
P17	3	1	1/5	5	5
P18	7	5	1	7	7
P19	1/3	1/5	1/7	1	1
P20	1/5	1/5	1/7	1	1

, and

Table 8. C₄-P judgment matrix.

C4	P21	P22	P23	P24
P21	1	1/5	1/6	1/3
P22	5	1	1/3	3
P23	6	3	1	5
P24	3	1/3	1/5	1

, respectively.

The safety evaluation target layer corresponds to the judgment matrix of the criterion layer, and each of the four criterion layers of workers, equipment, management, and environment corresponds to the judgment matrix of the factors of the indicator layer, and the normalized weights obtained by calculating them are shown in Figure 4a–e.

The safety evaluation target layer corresponds to the judgment matrix of the criterion layer, and each of the four criterion layers of workers, equipment, management, and environment corresponds to the judgment matrix of the factors of the indicator layer, and the ${\lambda }_{max}$ and the CR obtained by calculating them are shown in

Table 9. ${\lambda }_{max}$ and CR.

	C-C	C1-P	C2-P	C3-P	C4-P
${\lambda }_{max}$	4.1855	7.5871	8.4826	5.3909	4.1503
CR	0.0695	0.0720	0.0489	0.0873	0.0563

, showing values rounded to the fourth decimal place.

In the decision summary analysis, in order to prevent the reverse order, the weight vectors of each criterion and indicator layer are first idealized, then the criterion layer and indicator layer are combined by the product method, and finally the combined weights of the indicator layer are ranked [43]. The combined weights were normalized to obtain the percentage of each indicator in all indicators. The results are shown in

Table 10. Weighting and ranking of indicator layers for offshore wind power pile foundation construction safety.

The Indicator Layer	Idealized Weights	Combined Weights	Normalized Combined Weights	Ranking
Piling equipment (P11)	1	1	0.111976	1
Protective equipment (P13)	0.84864	0.84864	0.095027	2
Special skills (P4)	1	0.84517	0.094639	3
Safety awareness (P3)	0.97522	0.824227	0.092294	4
Emergency management (P18)	1	0.79807	0.089365	5
Workplace environment (P23)	1	0.69711	0.07806	6
Lifting equipment (P9)	0.62023	0.62023	0.069451	7
Fire protection system (P10)	0.47765	0.47765	0.053485	8
Operation (P2)	0.47673	0.402918	0.045117	9
Submarine geological environment (P22)	0.47917	0.334034	0.037404	10
Safety regulations (P17)	0.36755	0.293331	0.032846	11
Conductor (P5)	0.28105	0.237535	0.026598	12
Psycho-physiological condition (P1)	0.21886	0.184974	0.020713	13
Noise (P14)	0.18447	0.18447	0.020656	14
Equipment aging (P12)	0.17838	0.17838	0.019974	15
Logo (P15)	0.16433	0.16433	0.018401	16
Safety education and organization (P16)	0.20489	0.163517	0.01831	17
Marine meteorological disasters (P24)	0.21523	0.150039	0.016801	18
Supervision (P6)	0.17066	0.144237	0.016151	19
Transport system (P8)	0.10064	0.10064	0.011269	20
Load (P7)	0.09402	0.079463	0.008898	21
Maritime traffic conditions (P21)	0.1061	0.073963	0.008282	22
Safety operation rules (P19)	0.08245	0.065801	0.007368	23
Inputs for safety and health (P20)	0.07739	0.061763	0.006916	24

. The idealized weight of the criterion layer is W = (0.84517, 1, 0.79807, 0.69711)^T.

The factors affecting the safety of pile foundation construction for offshore wind power have differing levels of importance. The five most important indicators are piling equipment (P₁₁), protective equipment (P₁₃), special skills (P₄), safety awareness (P₃), and emergency management (P₁₈). The four more important indicators are workplace environment (P₂₃), lifting equipment (P₉), fire protection system (P₁₀), and operation (P₂). To ensure the safety of pile foundation construction for offshore wind power, it is necessary to focus on the five aforementioned most important indicators and the four more important indicators mentioned above in order to implement safety measures and reduce the risks in pile foundation construction for offshore wind power.

4. Discussion

Among the five most important indicators and the four more important indicators mentioned above, there are four indicators for material factors, three for human factors, and one each for management factors and environmental factors. This indicates that the highest risks in pile foundation construction for offshore wind power are those related to the material and human indicators, meaning that focus should be placed on these two aspects when planning safety measures. Offshore wind power pile foundation construction is in a stage of rapid development, and the material and human aspects are the greatest sources of risks.

According to the results of the evaluation of safety indicators for pile foundation for offshore wind power, enterprises should prioritize and focus on implementing safety measures that could address serious risk indicators. Based on the results of our evaluation, we suggest that enterprises aiming to improve the safety of offshore wind power pile foundation construction implement the following:

(1)

Personnel training

In ordinary work, we must pay attention to the safety training of construction workers; improve their safety awareness, special skills, and operational capabilities; and ensure that they can cope with the complex maritime environment. The content of such training programs could encompass safety operation rules, emergency treatment protocols, water lifesaving, and other aspects.

(2)

Equipment improvements

In offshore wind power pile foundation construction, it is crucial to make continuous technological innovations and improvements to equipment. Evaluating the performance of equipment is the basis for improving safety, and improving the intrinsic safety level of equipment related to offshore wind power pile foundation construction can help mitigate risks. A data collection and monitoring system could be established to monitor the environmental conditions and construction progress at the construction site in real time so that potential safety hazards and construction problems can be promptly found and addressed.

(3)

Improved management

Emergency management is a remedial measure that can be taken when there is a danger of losses occurring, and good management can make up for safety defects to a certain extent. Emergency management for pile foundation construction includes emergency plans, emergency drills, emergency supplies and equipment, etc. Enterprises should closely cooperate and establish good partnerships with shipping companies, technology suppliers, regulatory agencies, etc., to deal with the challenges and risks that may be encountered during construction.

(4)

Improvements in environmental and ecological protection for operators

A good operating environment can reduce risk levels, and the operating environments of pile foundation construction for offshore wind power should be improved. In the process of pile foundation construction, enterprises should pay attention to sustainable development and ecological protection to reduce the impact on the marine ecological environment.

5. Conclusions

The pile foundation construction process comprises four primary phases: construction preparation, pile sinking, construction completion, and foundation scour protection. In this study, we systematically identified risk indicators for offshore wind power pile foundation construction, considering human factors, material factors, management factors, and environmental factors. The most important indicators were evaluated using hierarchical analysis and comprehensive evaluation methods, focusing on five key indicators: piling equipment, protective equipment, specialized skills, safety awareness, and emergency management. Additionally, four more important indicators were identified: workplace environment, lifting equipment, fire protection systems, and operational procedures. Based on our evaluation, we provided recommendations addressing the four key areas—human, material, management, and environmental factors. The methodology presented in this paper offers a robust framework for assessing risks in pile foundation construction for offshore wind power, enabling enterprises to prioritize and enhance safety measures related to the most critical risk indicators.