Time and Cost Acceleration Analysis of Construction Project using Time Cost Trade Off Method on Sentuk 2
Bridge Project
Patricia Kanicia Djawu, Fathina Ammaturrahim Department of Civil Engineering, Mercu Buana University
Jakarta, Indonesia
[email protected], [email protected]
Abstract
One of the main purposes of a construction project plan is as a basis for measuring project performance. The purpose of this research is to find the optimal time and cost acceleration plan to complete the Sentuk 2 Bridge Project, which in its implementation experienced delays. The analysis was carried out using Time Cost Trade Off Method. This method provides an alternative to develop the best planning by exchanging time with costs. In this study, the acceleration analysis was carried out using two alternatives, the addition of working hours (overtime) and the addition of manpower. The analysis were carried out using Microsoft Project 2016 software to find the critical path and determine the activities to be accelerated. Then calculate the crash duration, crash cost, and cost slope on some activities that are on the critical path. The calculation continued by performing compression at the initial duration of the project, which is 161 days. From the optimal analysis results on the alternative of additional manpower produces a total duration of 137 days with a total cost of Rp.15,109,830,127.27, and the deviation of Rp.81,399,472.73.
Keywords:
Acceleration, Crash Cost, Crash Duration, Cost Slope, Time Cost Trade Off Method.
1. Introduction
Cost, quality, and time are very influential and determine the success or failure of a project. Short completion time with minimal costs without compromising the quality of the work is the benchmark for the success of a construction project. Delay in the completion of a project will have an impact, such as additional costs where the amount is greater than the initial estimated cost of the project, additional time for completion, late payments, loss of productivity and labor efficiency, payment of late fees, to the impact of company reputation. Therefore, to prevent delays in completion, it is necessary to make planning alternatives related to the project completion time which is faster than the initial duration of the project, so that the costs incurred can be less and more efficient. In the world of construction management, the Time Cost Trade Off Method is a method that provides an alternative to be able to develop the best planning so that optimal time and cost are obtained in completing a project. To achieve the optimal completion time, a planning scheme can be made to accelerate. Various methods and strategies can be used to create planning schemes to carry out the acceleration, such as increasing working hours (overtime), adding manpower, increasing equipment capacity, and changing construction methods. In this final project, we will discuss the acceleration analysis using the time cost trade off method to obtain optimal time and cost in the completion of the Sentuk 2 Bridge Project located in Loa Kulu, Kutai Kartanegara Regency, East Kalimantan by comparing the addition of working hours and the addition of manpower. The obstacles in the form of flood around the work area which is near by the river causes delays. The delay experienced by the project was -9.245%. The analysis was carried out using the help of Microsoft Project software. In its preparation, a project network must be created, looking for activities that are on a critical path, performing compression, to produce output in the form of project acceleration duration and optimal total cost.
2. Methodology
This research uses quantitative descriptive method to analyze Time Cost Trade Off (TCTO). The analysis in this research will be done by processing the data that has been obtained, then the results of the calculation comparison analysis are presented in mathematical form, tables, and graphs. Comparative analysis between the cost and time of acceleration with the addition of working hours, and the addition of manpower. Then calculate the cost efficiency compared to the initial cost of the project. The following are the steps the author takes in analyzing the data : (1) Draw up the Network Planning, (2) Determine work sequence that include the Critical Path, (3) Perform acceleration analysis with crash program to find crash cost and crash duration on work by using 2 acceleration alternatives : additional of work hour (overtime), and the additional of manpower, (4) Calculate the crash duration, (5) Calculate the Crash Cost, (6) Calculate the Cost Slope, (7) Perform compression on some works that are on the critical path and have the lowest cost slope, (8) Determine the optimal cost, (9) Determine the optimal time and cost of the two comparison calculations.
3. Result and Discussion
3.1. Acceleration PlanThe acceleration plan is carried out by adding resources to some works that are on a critical path, each acceleration alternative has different additional resources depending on the type of acceleration to be carried out. In addition, acceleration is also based on the duration and volume of work. The crashing method used in this acceleration plan is divided into several stages, step by step the crashing will be carried out until it finds the optimal cost. The following is a scenario of the two acceleration alternatives : (1) The addition of working hours (overtime) is done by adding 4 hours of work, productivity with the addition of 4 hours of work (overtime) is 60% of the normal productivity of workers. In the addition of the first 1 hour of working time, the worker will get an additional wage of 1.5 times the normal hour wage and in the next additional working hours will get 2 times the normal hour wage. (2) The addition of manpower planned by the author in this study is 50% of the workforce needs of the work sequence per day. The addition of this manpower can speed up the completion time of the work.
Table 1. Acceleration Plan No Job Description on a Critical Path Duration
Alternative Additions Working Hours
(Overtime) Workforce Pekerjaan Persiapan
1 Mobilization & Demobilization Equipment 7
2 Land Clearing 2
Pekerjaan Sheet Pile
3 Pemancangan Sheet Pile 14
4 Tulangan Pile Cap 10
5 Bekisting 7
6 Beton Pile Cap Sheetpile 1
Pekerjaan Abutment A1
7 Pekerjaan Urungan Pasir 1
8 Pekerjaan Tulangan Abutment 1 10
9 Pekrjaan Tulangan Wingwall A1 7
10 Pekerjaan Bekisting Abutment 1 10
11 Pekerjaan Pengecoran Abutment K-350 3
12 Pekerjaan Pengecoran Beton Ready Mix K-350
Wingwaall A1 1
Pekerjaan Abutment A2
13 Pekerjaan Urungan Pasir 1
14 Pekerjaan Tulangaan Abutment 2 10
15 Pekrjaan Tulangan Wingwall A2 7
16 Pekerjaan Bekisting Abutment 2 10
17 Pekerjaan Pengecoran Abutment K-350 3
18 Pekerjaan Pengecoran Beton Ready Mix K-350
Wingwaall A 2 1
Pekerjaan Struktur Atas Pekerjaan PCI Girder
19 Elastomeric Bearing Pad 7
20 Pekerjaan Erection I Girder 15
Pekerjaan Diafragma
21 Diafragma Type A 10
22 Diafragma Type B 10
23 Stand Diafragma 11
24 Grouting Strand Diafragma 1
25 Upah Grouting Strand Diafragma 1
Pekerjaan Deck Beton
26 Pekerjaan Tulangan Deck Beton 14
Barier Beton
27 Pekerjaan Tulangaan 14
28 Pekerjaan Bekisting 7
29 Pekerjaan Pengecoran Beton K-350 1
30 Railing 7
31 Pipa Drainase 10
Pekerjaan Perkerasan
32 Asphalt Concrete-Wearing Course (AC-WC) 14
3.2 Crashing Method
1. Additional Working Hours (Overtime) Alternative a. Crash Duration
The following step is an example of calculating the crash duration of rebar work :
1) Normal Daily Productivity = (Work Volume)/(Normal Duration) = 3.105,00/10 = 310,50 kg⁄day
2) Productivity per Hour (8 Working Hours) = (Daily Productivity)/(Normal Working Hours Per Day) = 310,50/8 = 38,81 kg⁄hour
3) Overtime Productivity (4 Working Hours) = Productivity per Hour × Number of Overtime Hours × Overtime Productivity = 38,81 kg⁄hour × 4 hours × 60% = 93,15 kg
4) Daily Productivity After Crash = Normal Daily Productivity + Overtime Productivity = 310,50 + 93,15 = 403,65 kg
5) Crash Duration = (Work Volume)/(Daily Productivity After) = 3.105,00/403,65 = 8 days Table 2. Calculation Results of Alternative Crash Duration Addition Working Hours (Overtime)
Cash Duration
No. Job Description Vol Unit
Durati on (HK)
Productivity
Crash Duration
(HK) Normal
Daily
Per hour
Overti me (4 Hours)
After the crash 1 Pemancangan
Sheetpile 554,22 m 14 39,59 4,95 11,88 51,46 11
2 Tulangan Pile Cap
Sheetpile 3.105,00 kg 10 310,50 38,81 93,15 403,65 8
3 Bekisting Pile Cap
Sheetpile 82,8 m2 7 11,83 1,48 3,55 15,38 6
4 Pekerjaan Tulangan Abutment A1
59.840,0
0 kg 10 5984,00 748,00 1795,2
0
7779,2
0 8
5 Pekerjaan Tulangan
Wingwall A1 3.255,00 kg 7 465,00 58,13 139,50 604,50 6
6 Pekerjaan Bekisting
Abutment A1 215,60 m2 10 21,56 2,70 6,47 28,03 8
7 Pekerjaan Tulangan Abutment A2
68.508,0
0 kg 10 6850,80 856,35 2055,2
4
8906,0
4 8
8 Pekerjaan Tulangan
Wingwall A2 4.231,50 kg 7 604,50 75,56 181,35 785,85 6
9 Pekerjaan Bekisting
Abutment A2 259,60 m2 10 25,96 3,25 7,79 33,75 8
10 Strand diafragma 132,00 kg 11 12,00 1,50 3,60 15,60 10
11 Pekerjaan Tulangan Deck Beton
51.744,0
0 kg 14 3696,00 462,00 1108,8
0
4804,8
0 11
12 Pekerjaan Tulangan
Barier 2.032,80 kg 14 145,20 18,15 43,56 188,76 11
13 Pekerjaan Bekisting
Barier 64,68 m2 7 9,24 1,16 2,77 12,01 6
14
Asphalt Concrete - Wearing Course
(AC-WC)
51,04 ton 14 3,65 0,42 1,09 4,74 11
b. Crash Cost
The following step is an example of calculating the crash cost of rebar work :
1) Calculation of Normal Work Wage Unit Price = Total Wage Unit Price = Labor Coefficient × Labor Wage Price = Rp 1.915,20/kg
2) Normal Daily Wage Price = Daily Productivity × Normal Work Wage Unit Price = 310,50 kg⁄hour × Rp 1.915,00 = Rp 594.670,00
3) Wage Price per Hour (8 Working Hours) = Productivity per Hour × Normal Work Wage Unit Price = 38,81 kg⁄hour× Rp 1.915,00 = Rp 74.334,00/hour
4) Price of Overtime Wages (4 Working Hours) = 1.5 × Normal 1 Hour Wage + 3 × (2 × Normal 1 Hour Wage) = (1,5 × Rp 74.334,00) + 3 × (2 × Rp 74.334,00) = Rp 557.503,00
5) Addition of Electricity Cost (4 Working Hours) = (Electricity cost/month/30 days/8 hours) × 4 hours = (Rp 1.400.564/30 days/8 hours) × 4 hours = Rp 23.343,00
6) Crash Cost Per Day = Daily Wage + Overtime Wage Per Day + Addition of Electricity Cost (4 Working Hours) = Rp 594.000,00 + Rp 557.000,00 + Rp 23.343,00 = Rp 1.175.515/day
7) Crash Cost Total = Crash Cost per Day × Crash Duration = Rp 1.175.515 × 8 days = Rp 9.404.121,00
Table 3. Calculation Results of Alternative Crash Cost Addition Working Hours (Overtime)
c. Cost Slope
1) Cost Slope = (Crash Cost – Normal Cost)/(Normal Duration – Crash Duration) = (Rp 9.404.121,00 – Rp 5.946.696,00)/(10 – 8) = Rp 1.728.712,00
Table 4. Calculation Results of Alternative Cost Slope Addition Working Hours (Overtime)
2. Additional of Manpower Alternative a. Crash Duration
The following step is an example of calculating the crash cost of rebar work :
1) Normal Daily Productivity = Work Volume/Normal Duration = 3.105,00/10 = 310,50 kg⁄day
2) Productivity after the Additional of Manpower = Normal Daily Productivity × 50% Total manpower = 310,50 kg⁄day × 50% = 155,25 kg⁄day
3) Daily Productivity After Crash = Normal Daily Productivity + Productivity after the Additional of Manpower = 310,50 kg⁄day + 155,25 kg⁄day = 465,75 kg⁄day
4) Crash Duration = Work Volume/Daily Productivity After Crash = 3.105,00/465,75 = 7 days
Table 5. Calculation Results of Alternative Crash Duration Addition of Manpower
b. Crash Cost
The following step is an example of calculating the crash cost of rebar work : 1) Additional of Manpower
c. Additional of Manpower = (50% × Labor Coefficient) + Labor Coefficient = (50% × 0,0700) + 0,0700
= 0.1050 Labor Coefficient
d. Additional of Rebar Worker = (50% × Labor Coefficient) + Labor Coefficient = (50% × 0,0700) + 0,0700 = 0,1050 Labor Coefficient
2) Wage Unit Price After Crash = Labor Coefficient Crash × Labor Wage Price = Rp 2.755,20/kg
3) Additional of Manpower Crash Cost per Day = Daily Productivity After Crash × Wage Unit Price After Crash = 465,75 kg⁄day × Rp 2.755,20/kg = Rp 1.283.234,40/day
4) Crash Cost Total = Additional of Manpower Crash Cost per Day × Crash Duration = Rp1.283.234,40/day
× 7 days = Rp 8.982.641,00
Table 6. Calculation Results of Alternative Crash Cost Addition of Manpower
e. Cost Slope
1) Cost Slope = (Crash Cost – Normal Cost)/(Normal Duration – Crash Duration) = (Rp 8.982.641,00 – Rp 5.946.696,00)/(10 – 7) = Rp 1.011.982,00
Table 7. Calculation Results of Alternative Cost Slope Addition of Manpower
3. Time Cost Trade Off Analysis
In this analysis, compression is carried out on time and cost, the compression is carried out at the initial duration of the project in stages, the stages are based on the order of work that has the lowest cost slope, the goal is that the additional costs incurred are as minimal as possible. The following is an example for time cost trade off analysis with additional working hours (overtime) on diaphragm strand work items and the calculation steps:
a. Initial Project Duration = Obtained from the initial project schedule for 161 days.
b. Normal Duration of the Activity = Obtained from the initial activity schedule for 11 days.
c. Crash Duration = Obtained from the calculation of productivity, for 10 days.
d. Total Crash Duration = Normal Duration of the Activity – Crash Duration = 11 – 10 = 1 day.
e. Total Duration = Initial Project Duration – Total Crash Duration = 161 days – 1 day = 160 days.
f. Cost Slope = Obtained from the calculation of the cost slope of Rp 376,941.33 g. Direct Cost = Obtained from the project data, amount of Rp 12,148,605,000.00
h. Direct Cost for 160 days = Direct Cost + Cost Slope = Rp 12.148.605.000,00 + Rp 376.941,33 = Rp 12.148.981.941,33
i. Indirect Cost per day = Obtained from data Indirect Costs, amount of Rp 6,636,892.00 per day.
j. Profit = Obtained from project data, Rp 1,974,084,352.82
k. Total Indirect Cost = Indirect Cost per day × Total Duration = Rp 6.636.892,00 × 160 days = Rp 1.061.902.754,96
l. Total Cost = Direct Cost for 160 days + Profit + Indirect Cost = Rp 12.148.981.941,33 + Rp 1.974.084.352,82 + Rp 1.061.902.754,96 = Rp 15.184.969.049,11
The results of the calculation of the time and cost analysis of these two alternative accelerations are then compiled into a calculation table. The following is a table for calculating the total cost of alternative working hours (overtime) and additional manpower :
Table 8. Calculation of Total Alternative Cost of Additional Working Hours (Overtime)
Table 9. Calculation of Total Alternative Cost of Additional Manpower
From the calculations that have been carried out in the previous stage, the direct costs, indirect costs, and total project costs for the duration of the crash are obtained. From the calculation of the total alternative cost of additional working hours (overtime) in table 7, it can be seen that the optimal cost is obtained after reaching the 5th stage of the Asphalt Concrete – Wearing Course (AC-WC) Work. In the calculation results of the alternative total cost of addinal manpower in table 8, it can be seen that the optimal cost is obtained after reaching the 8th stage of the A1 WingWall Reinforcement Work. After that, the results of the time and cost calculations are presented into a graphic of the relation between time and costs. The next stage is to find the optimal time and cost by comparing the two alternatives.
Figure 1. Graph of Relation between Time and Cost in Alternative Working Hours (Overtime)
Figure 2. Graph of the Relation between Time and Cost on Alternatives for Additional Manpower
It was found that in terms of costs, the final result, the total cost of the acceleration analysis using the time cost trade off method with the addition of manpower is less than the alternative of additional working hours (overtime), it means that the alternative is more profitable. This happened because the total crash duration of 24 days obtained from the alternative of additional manpower was greater than the additional of working hours (overtime) which resulted in a total crash duration of 12 days.
Table 10. Comparison of Duration and Cost of Acceleration Results using 2 Alternatives
4. Optimal Time and Cost Efficiency
After determining the optimal acceleration alternative obtained from the results of the analysis, then the efficiency can also be calculated. This efficiency is not only measured in terms of cost but can also be taken into account the efficiency of the duration of the project. Calculation of cost efficiency is done by comparing the total cost with the initial cost of the project. Time efficiency calculation is done by comparing the duration after acceleration with the initial duration of the project, and is expressed in percent.
m. Efficiency Calculation of Alternative Working Hours (Overtime)
1) Time Efficiency Calculation = Initial Project Duration–Project Duration after Crashing = 161 days –149 days = 12 days. Calculated in percent = (161 – 149)/161 × 100% = 7,45%
2) Calculation of Cost Efficiency = Initial Project Cost – Total Cost after Crashing = Rp 15.191.229.600,00 – Rp 15.146.736.151,88 = Rp 44.493.448,12. Calculated in percent = (Rp 15.191.229.600,00 – Rp 15.146.736.151,88)/(Rp 15.191.229.600,00 )×100% = 0,293%
f. Calculation of Efficiency in Alternatives of Additional Manpower
1) Time Efficiency Calculation = Initial Project Duration–Project Duration after Crashing = 161 days – 137 days = 24 days. Calculated in percent = (161 – 137)/161 × 100% = 14,91%
2) Calculation of Cost Efficiency = Initial Project Cost–Total Cost after Crashing = Rp 15.191.229.600,00 – Rp 15.109.830.127,27 = Rp 81.399.472,73. Calculated in percent = (Rp 15.191.229.600,00 – Rp 15.109.830.127,27)/(Rp 15.191.229.600,00 ) × 100% = 0,536%
4. Conclusion
Based on the results of the time and cost acceleration analysis using the time cost trade off method with two alternatives on Sentuk 2 Bridge Construction Project, it can be concluded:
1. The optimal duration of the calculation of crash duration in the alternative of additional working hours (overtime) results in a total duration of 149 days from the normal duration of 161 days, so the alternative has a crash duration of 12 days. Meanwhile, from the alternative of additional manpower produces a total duration of 137 days from the normal duration of 161 days, so the alternative has a crash duration of 24 days. Therefore, the optimal duration of the two alternatives is 137 days with the additional manpower because it has 12 days faster than the alternative of additional working hours (overtime).
2. The optimal cost of calculating the crash cost on the alternative of additional working hours (overtime) results in a total cost of Rp. 15,146,737,151.88 from the normal cost of Rp. 15,191,229,600.00, with a difference of Rp. 44,493,448.12. Meanwhile, the calculation of the crash cost on the alternative of additional manpower resulted in a total cost of Rp. 15,109,830,127.27 from the normal cost of Rp. 15,191,229,600.00, with a difference of Rp. 81,399,472.73. Therefore, the optimal cost of the two alternatives is Rp 15,109,830,127.27 because it has a reduction cost of Rp 36,906,024.61 which is lower than the alternative of additional working hours (overtime).
3. The time efficiency of the alternative additional of working hours (overtime) is 7.45%, while from the alternative of additional manpower, the time efficiency is 14.91%. Therefore, the alternative of additional manpower more efficient than the additional of working hours (overtime). The cost efficiency of the alternative of additional working hours (overtime) is 0.293%, while from the alternative of additional manpower the cost efficiency is 0.536%. Therefore, the alternative of additional manpower is more efficient than the additional of working hours (overtime).
References
Agritama, R. P., Huda, M., & Rini, T. S. (2018). Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi Keterlambatan Proyek Konstruksi di Surabaya. Jurnal Rekayasa Dan Manajemen Konstruksi, 6(1), 25–32.
Anugerah, Z. S. P., Pratami, D., & Akbar, M. D. (2021). Designing Project Schedule Using Crashing Method to Compress The Fiber to The Home Project Schedule. International Journal of Industrial Optimization, 2(1), 51.
https://doi.org/10.12928/ijio.v2i1.3025
Arumningsih, D. (2012). Perencanaan dan Estimasi Biaya pada Proyek Pembangunan Jembatan Patihan Kabupaten Sragen. Jurnal Teknik Sipil Dan Arsitektur.
Biswas, S. K., Karmaker, C. L., & Biswas, T. K. (2016). Time-Cost Trade-Off Analysis in a Construction Project Problem : Case Study. International Journal of Computational Engineering Research (IJCER), 06(10), 32–38.
Caesaron, D., & Thio, A. (2015). Analisa penjadwalan waktu dengan metode jalur kritis dan pert pada proyek pembangunan ruko (jl. pasar lama no.20, glodok). Journal of Industrial Engineering & Management Systems, 8(2), 59–82.
Desyllia, Chendra, F., & Chandra, H. P. (2011). Model Faktor-Faktor Penyebab dan Dampak Keterlambatan Proyek Konstruksi di Surabaya. Jurnal Teknik Sipil, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-79061-9_6201
Ervianto, W. I. (2006). Manajemen Proyek Konstruksi-Edisi Revisi. In Manajemen Proyek Konstruksi-Edisi Revisi.
Penerbit ANDI.
Ervianto, W. I. (2008). Pengukuran Produktivitas Kelompok Pekerja Bangunan Dalam Proyek Konstruksi (Studi Kasus Proyek Gedung Bertingkat Di Surakarta). Jurnal Teknik Sipil Universitas Atma Jaya Yogyakarta, 9(1), 31–42.
Fardila, D., & Adawyah, N. R. (2021). Optimasi Biaya dan Waktu Proyek Konstruksi dengan Lembur dan Penambahan Tenaga Kerja. Jurnal Teknik Sipil, 17(1), 35–46. https://doi.org/10.21831/inersia.v17i1.39499 H.Bachtiar, I. (1993). Rencana dan Estimate Real Of Cost. Bumi Aksara.
Izzah, N. (2017). Analisis Pertukaran Waktu dan Biaya Menggunakan Metode Time Cost Trade Off (TCTO) pada Proyek Pembangunan Perumahan di PT. X. Rekayasa, 10(1), 51–58. https://doi.org/10.21107/rys.v10i1.3604 Katti, A., & Darade, M. (2016). Project Crashing to Solve Time-Cost Trade-Off. International Journal of Civil
Engineering, 3(1), 10–27. https://doi.org/10.14445/23488352/ijce-v3i1p103
Kerzner, H. (2006). Project Management. In Anasthesiologie Intensivmedizin Notfallmedizin Schmerztherapie (Vol.
34, Issue 12). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-1999-230
Khoirul, Pristianto, H., & Rusmin, M. (2017). Analisis Penyebab Keterlambatan Pekerjaan Konstruksi Jembatan.
Jurnal Teknik Sipil : Rancang Bangun, 2(2), 27–36. https://doi.org/10.33506/rb.v2i2.481
Kisworo, R. W., Handayani, F. S., & Sunarmasto. (2017). Analisis Percepatan Proyek Menggunakan Metode Time Cost Trade Off dengan Penambahan Jam Kerja Lembur dan Jumlah Alat. E-Jurnal MATRIKS TEKNIK SIPIL,
Kurniawan, F., Wulandari, D. A. R., & Ayu, L. A. (2018). Studi Kasus Keterlambatan Proyek Konstruksi di Provinsi Jawa Timur Berdasarkan Kontrak Kerja. Narotama Jurnal Teknik Sipil, 2(2), 21–31.
Laksito, B. (2005). Repetitif Menggunakan Metode Penjadwalan Berulang (Rsm) dan Metode Diagram Preseden (Pdm). Media Teknik Sipil, 85–92.
lr. Abrar Husen, M. (2009). Manajemen Proyek (Edisi Revi). Penerbit ANDI.
Maddepungeng, A., Suryani, I., & Hermawan, D. (2015). Analisis Optimasi Biaya dan Waktu dengan Metode TCTO (Time Cost Trade Off) (Studi Kasus : Proyek Pembangunan Pasar Petir Serang Banten). Jurnal Fondasi, 4(1), 20–27.
Maia, J. X. S., Mulyadi, L., & Putanto, E. H. D. (2018). Analysis of Scheduling Acceleration of Worship Building Construction in Dili Timor-Leste using Time Cost Trade Off (TCTO) Method. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, 7(2), 56–70.
Messah, Y. unit., Widodo, T., & Adoe, M. (2013). Kajian Penyebab Keterlambatan Pelaksanaan Proyek Konstruksi Gedung di Kota Kupang. Jurnal Teknik Sipil, II(2), 157–168.
Nugroho, A. W., Hasyim, M. H., & Unas, S. E. (2014). Analisa Produktivitas Pekerjaan Pelat Lantai M-Panel, Beton Bertulang, Dan Sni Pekerjaan Pelat Beton Bertulang. Mahasiswa Jurusan Teknik Sipil, 1(2), 235–242.
Priyo, M., & Raa’uf Aulia, M. (2015). Aplikasi Metode Time Cost Trade Off Pada Proyek Konstruksi : Studi Kasus Proyek Pembangunan Gedung Indonesia. Jurnal Ilmiah Semesta Teknika, 18(1), 30–43.
Priyo, M., & Sumanto, A. (2016). Analisis Percepatan Waktu Dan Biaya Proyek Konstruksi Dengan Penambahan Jam Kerja (Lembur) Menggunakan Metode Time Cost Trade Off : Studi Kasus Proyek Pembangunan Prasarana. Jurnal Ilmiah Semesta Teknika, 19(1), 1–15.
Prof. Dr. Suryana, Ms. (2010). Metodologi Penelitian Model Prakatis Penelitian Kuantitatif dan Kualitatif.
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, 1–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-014-0173-7.2 Soeharto, I. (1997). Manajemen Proyek. Penerbit Erlangga.
Soeharto, I. (1999). Manajemen Proyek (Edisi Kedu). Penerbit Erlangga.
Sudarsono, T. M., & Christie, O. (2014). Analisis Frekuensi, Dampak, dan Jenis Keterlambatan pada Proyek Konstruksi. Jurnal Dimensi Pratama Teknik Sipil, 3(2), 1–8.
Suherman, & Hariono, Q. P. (2016). Optimasi Waktu dan Biaya Menggunakan Metode Time Cost Trade Off pada Proyek Access Road Construction and Soil Clean Up. Jurnal Teknik Industri: Jurnal Hasil Penelitian Dan Karya Ilmiah Dalam Bidang Teknik Industri, 2(2), 199–211. https://doi.org/10.24014/jti.v2i2.5094
Sukamto, A. Q., Unas, S. El, & Hasyim, M. H. (2013). Analisa Perbandingan Harga Satuan Pekerjaan Beton Bertulang Berdasarkan SNI dan Software MS Project. Jurusan Teknik Sipil Universitas Brawijaya, 1–8.
Tiwari, N., & Sharma, M. (2020). Literature Review: Project Time-Cost Trade-Off in Construction Projects.
International Journal of Engineering and Technical Research (IJETR), 10(3), 30–36.
https://doi.org/10.31873/ijetr.10.3.73
Triarman, C., & Sekarsari, J. (2018). Analisi Faktor Penyebab Keterlambatan Waktu pada Pekerjaan Struktur Atas Proyek Konstruksi. Jurnal Penelitian Dan Karya Ilmiah Lembaga Penelitian Universitas Trisakti, 3(2), 1–9.
Utomo, T. (2012). Estimasi Biaya Tahap Konseptual Bangunan Gedung Perkuliahan Umum dengan Metode Jaringan Syaraf Tiruan. Universitas Indonesia.
Widiasanti, I. dan L. (2013). Manajemen Konstruksi. Remaja Rosdakarya.
Biographies
Fathina Ammaturrahim, Born in Jakarta on November 11, 1996. Graduated from Diploma 3 program of Civil Engineering Politeknik Negeri Jakarta. Currently pursuing a Bachelor's Degree in Civil Engineering Universitas Mercu Buana.
