Pramudya, Irwanda Hardhika (2026) Analisis Perbandingan Risiko, Waktu, Dan Biaya Antara Metode Kombinasi Blasting-Mekanis Dan Metode Full Mekanis Pada Pekerjaan Galian Proyek Jalan Tol Probolinggo-Banyuwangi Paket 3. Other thesis, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember.
|
Text
5012201095-Undergraduate_Thesis.pdf - Accepted Version Restricted to Repository staff only Download (37MB) | Request a copy |
Abstract
Pemilihan metode konstruksi yang tepat pada pekerjaan galian sangat menentukan efisiensi waktu dan biaya dalam proyek jalan tol, khususnya pada kondisi geoteknik yang menantang. Pada Proyek Jalan Tol Probolinggo–Banyuwangi Paket 3, pekerjaan galian batuan keras dilaksanakan dengan metode kombinasi peledakan (blasting) dan mekanis (excavator breaker). Karena lokasi berdekatan dengan PLTU Paiton, penerapan peledakan dibatasi sehingga porsi peledakan aktual hanya 19,1% dari total volume galian 2.826.757 m³, sementara sisanya dikerjakan secara mekanis. Meskipun relatif cepat, metode kombinasi menimbulkan tantangan dampak lingkungan, keselamatan kerja, dan perizinan. Penelitian ini bertujuan membandingkan risiko, waktu, dan biaya antara metode kombinasi tersebut dengan metode alternatif full mekanis (100% alat berat). Perbandingan difokuskan pada tiga aspek: risiko keselamatan kerja dan lingkungan, durasi pelaksanaan, dan total biaya. Risiko dinilai menggunakan metode HIRARC berdasarkan kuesioner terhadap 27 responden praktisi proyek. Durasi dianalisis dengan Critical Path Method (CPM), dan biaya dihitung berdasarkan Analisis Harga Satuan Pekerjaan (AHSP) sesuai Permen PUPR No. 1 Tahun 2022. Geometri peledakan mengacu pada persamaan empiris Konya (1995), dengan data teknis bersumber dari MC-0 dan BoQ PT PP serta hasil uji laboratorium batuan (UCS rata-rata 24,27 MPa). Hasil penelitian menunjukkan metode full mekanis tercatat memiliki 11 bahaya kategori High (total skor risiko 127,24) dibandingkan 17 bahaya kategori High (total skor risiko 199,45) pada metode kombinasi, serta tidak menimbulkan dua bahaya berdampak eksternal (getaran terhadap PLTU Paiton dan permukiman warga) yang hanya terdapat pada metode kombinasi; setelah pengendalian, seluruh bahaya metode full mekanis turun ke kategori Medium, sedangkan satu bahaya metode kombinasi tetap berkategori High; adapun skor risiko rata-rata kedua metode relatif berimbang (11,73 berbanding 11,57). Dari aspek waktu, kedua metode praktis setara, yaitu 424 hari kerja untuk full mekanis dan 425 hari kerja untuk kombinasi. Dari aspek biaya — yang mencakup biaya langsung dan biaya tidak langsung berbasis AHSP, namun belum mencakup keseluruhan biaya penerapan mitigasi risiko — total biaya metode full mekanis lebih rendah, yaitu Rp 174,46 miliar dibandingkan Rp 181,17 miliar (selisih 3,7%); selisih ini tidak signifikan dan sensitif terhadap asumsi produktivitas excavator breaker. Hasil komparatif ketiga aspek tersebut menunjukkan adanya trade-off antar metode dan menjadi dasar pengambilan keputusan bagi pemangku kepentingan proyek; pemilihan metode disesuaikan dengan skala prioritas terhadap risiko, waktu, dan biaya.
==================================================================================================================================
The choice of excavation method strongly determines time and cost efficiency in toll road projects, particularly under challenging geotechnical conditions. In the Probolinggo–Banyuwangi Toll Road Project Package 3, hard rock excavation is carried out using a combination of blasting and mechanical (excavator breaker) methods. Owing to the site's proximity to the Paiton Power Plant (PLTU), blasting is restricted to only 19.1% of the total excavation volume of 2,826,757 m³, with the remainder excavated mechanically. Although relatively fast, this method poses environmental, occupational-safety, and permitting challenges. This study compares the risk, time, and cost of the combination method against a full mechanical alternative (100% heavy equipment). The comparison focuses on three aspects: occupational and environmental safety risk, execution duration, and total cost. Risk was assessed using HIRARC based on a questionnaire of 27 project practitioners. Duration was analyzed using the Critical Path Method (CPM), and cost was calculated using the Unit Price Analysis (AHSP) per PUPR Ministerial Regulation No. 1 of 2022. Blasting geometry followed Konya's (1995) empirical equations, with technical data from PT PP's MC-0 and BoQ documents and rock laboratory tests (average UCS 24.27 MPa). The results show that the full mechanical method has a lighter risk profile: 11 High-category hazards (aggregate risk score 127.24) versus 17 (199.45) in the combination method, with no external-impact hazards (vibration toward the Paiton Power Plant and nearby settlements); after controls, all full mechanical hazards fall to Medium, while one combination hazard remains High; average risk scores are nevertheless practically equivalent (11.73 versus 11.57). In terms of time, the methods are practically equivalent (424 versus 425 working days). In terms of cost — covering AHSP-based direct and indirect costs, but not yet the full cost of risk-mitigation measures — the full mechanical method is lower at IDR 174.46 billion versus IDR 181.17 billion (3.7%); this margin is not significant and is sensitive to the assumed excavator breaker productivity. These results reveal a trade-off between the two methods and provide a basis for stakeholder decision-making; the final choice depends on stakeholders' priorities regarding risk, time, and cost.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Other) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Alat berat, Blasting, Efisiensi biaya, Efisiensi waktu, Metode galian, Proyek jalan tol, Risiko. |
| Subjects: | T Technology > TA Engineering (General). Civil engineering (General) T Technology > TC Hydraulic engineering. Ocean engineering > TC175.2 Sediment transport |
| Divisions: | Faculty of Civil, Planning, and Geo Engineering (CIVPLAN) > Civil Engineering > 22201-(S1) Undergraduate Thesis |
| Depositing User: | Irwanda Hardhika Pramudya |
| Date Deposited: | 05 Aug 2026 04:12 |
| Last Modified: | 05 Aug 2026 04:12 |
| URI: | http://repository.its.ac.id/id/eprint/143925 |
Actions (login required)
![]() |
View Item |
