Analysis Selection of The Work Methods Pier Head Cast in Situ Toll Road Bridge on Hilly Topography

Abdul Kholiq; Tri Joko Wahyu  Adi

doi:10.36418/syntax-literate.v7i10.13103

Abdul Kholiq Department of Civil Engineering, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember
Tri Joko Wahyu Adi Department of Civil Engineering, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember

DOI: https://doi.org/10.36418/syntax-literate.v7i10.13103

Keywords: pier head cast in situ, AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process), Construction Project

Abstract

The implementation of construction projects must be managed professionally with good and appropriate management. One of them is through the selection of work methods in the implementation process. In bridge construction, several main parts, such as pier head construction, need special attention. This study aims to analyze the selection of the best work method in implementing pier head cast in situ in the construction of toll road projects from several alternative pier head work methods, including full shoring system, bracket truss system, and corbel truss systems. The best alternative method is selected using the AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) Method. Decision-making variables, which include four criteria and ten sub-criteria, were obtained from in-depth literature reviews and discussions with experts through FGD (Focus Group Discussion). From the results of the analysis using AHP, the values for corbel truss (0.530), full shoring (0.318), and bracket truss (0.152) were obtained. Compared to other alternatives, the corbel truss system method has advantages in duration, characteristics, and performance criteria. Hence, the corbel truss system method is the best alternative to be used as a pier head cast in situ bridge work method.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aliahmadi, Alireza, Seyed Jafar Sadjadi, and Meisam Jafari-Eskandari. 2011. Design a New Intelligence Expert Decision Making Using Game Theory and Fuzzy AHP to Risk Management in Design, Construction, and Operation of Tunnel Projects (Case Studies: Resalat Tunnel), International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 53 (5â€“8): 789â€“98.

G.A., Mendoza et al. 1999. Guidelines for applying multi-criteria analysis to the assessment of criteria and indicators Guidelines for Applying Multi-Criteria Analysis to the Assessment of Criteria and Indicators.

Saaty, Thomas L. 2001. Fundamentals of the Analytic Hierarchy Process : 15â€“35.

Saaty, Thomas L. 2003. Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenevector necessary (Vol. 145).

Soemardi, Biemo W, R D Wirahadikusumah, M Abduh, and N Pujoartanto. 2006. Konsep Earned Value Untuk Pengelolaan Proyek Konstruksi. Institut Teknologi Bandung: 1â€“13.

Supriyadi, Bambang., and Agus Setyo Muntohar. 2007. â€œJembatan (Edisi Pertama).â€ : 1â€“244.

Wang, Tao et al. 2016. A Major Infrastructure Risk-Assessment Framework: Application to a Cross-Sea Route Project in China. International Journal of Project Management 34 (7): 1403â€“15.

Wijono, Djoko & Idham Ibty. 2015. Penggunaan Metode Analytic Hierarchy Process Dalam Pengambilan Keputusan Penentuan Prioritas Program Kerja Dompet Dhuafa Yogyakarta. Telaah Bisnis, Volume 16, Nomor 1, Juli 2015

Youssef, Mohamed A., Chimay J. Anumba, and Tony Thorpe. 2005. Proceedings of the 2005 ASCE International Conference on Computing in Civil Engineering Intelligent Selection of Concrete Bridge Construction Methods in Egypt.