ANALYST IS VALUE ENGINEERING ON THE
CONSTRUCTION OF FLATS FOR EDUCATORS UGM SLEMAN
Kharisma Indah Purwanty, Wateno Oetomo, Laksono Djoko Nugroho
Universitas
17 Agustus 1945 Surabaya, Indonesia
Email:
[email protected],
[email protected], [email protected]
|
KEYWORDS value engineering, flats, educators |
ABSTRACT The construction of UGM Educator Flats in
Sleman Regency has a total area of 7,035.5 m2 consisting of 6 floors in the
form of rooms and management rooms for flats and 1 rooftop floor. The problem
in implementing the construction of the UGM Educator Flats in Sleman Regency
is that the available funds are limited, so value engineering needs to be
carried out so that the construction can be completed as expected. Value
Engineering aims to obtain the best value for a project or process by
defining the functions required to achieve the value objectives and providing
these functions at the lowest cost, consistent with the required quality and
performance. The results of the study were (1) The work items for the UGM
Sleman Educator House building that have the potential to be efficient are
floor slab work t=12 cm, roof slab work t=15 cm, stair slab work t=15 cm and
beam work. (2) The replacement design alternatives are: a. For beam work
items, an alternative is to change formwork purchases to formwork leases, b.
For floor slab work items, roof slab work items, stair slab work items, there
are 2 alternatives chosen, namely replacing reinforcement with M10 wiremesh and changing formwork purchases to formwork
rentals. (3) Cost savings achieved after Value Engineering was carried out by
11.47%, with details of work items as follows: a. Beam work, savings of
3.66%, b. Floor slab work t = 12 cm, savings of 5.55%, c. Roof slab work,
t=15 cm, savings of 1.00 %, d. Ladder slab work, t=15 cm, savings of 1.26%.
Compared to the Initial Design Budget Plan (RAB) of the project as a whole,
the Alternative Design Budget Plan can save costs of 2.843%. |
INTRODUCTION
Value Engineering is a creative and
planned approach with the aim of identifying and streamlining unnecessary
costs. Value Engineering is used to find an alternative that aims to produce
costs that are better or lower than the pre-planned price with functional and
quality constraints of work.
The construction of the UGM
Educator Flats in Sleman Regency has a total area of 7,035.5 m2
consisting of 6 floors in the form of room rooms and management rooms for flats
and 1 rooftop floor. The construction of this flat includes foundation work,
1st to 6th floor structures, roof floor structures, light steel frames, stucco
walls, ceilings, roof tops, frame work, window doors and their accessories,
standard Mechanical and Electrical work, non-standard Mechanical and Electrical
Work.
�������� This
research aims to make the use of resources more efficient so as to produce a
final cost that is not too high but does not reduce the function of the Flats
research entitled Value Engineering Analysis on the Construction of UGM
Sleman Educator Flats. The construction of the UGM Educator Flats consists of 6
floors located in Sleman Regency which is the area of Gajah Mada
University, where the function of the building itself is as a residence or
residence for UGM educators.
Based on the background that has
been described, the problem can be formulated as follows:
1.
What are the
components of standard architectural work and standard structures of the UGM
Sleman Educator Flats building that have the potential to be efficient using
the Value Engineering method?
2.
What are the
alternatives to the initial design work components in Value Engineering analysis?
3.
How much cost saving is obtained from the application
of Value Engineering?
�������� Based on the�� formulation of the problem above, the
research guidelines are as follows:
1.
To analyze the
building components of the UGM Sleman Educators' House which have the potential
to be efficient using the Value Engineering
method.
2.
To analyze
alternative components of initial design work in Value Engineering analysis.
3.
To analyze the cost savings achieved before and after Value
Engineering.
�This research is expected to� provide benefits, especially for
1.
For Academia
Theoretically, academics can be used as a reference regarding
Value Engineering of Components of Flats
2.
For Practitioners���
Can be used as information about value engineering for the components of
flat buildings that can be applied directly to future projects
3.
For construction
service providers
Provide information or recommendations on alternatives that can streamline
the cost of work on the project.
4.
For the Government
Provide an alternative or ideas that can streamline the budget expenditure
of flats.
RESEARCH METHOD
In the information
will identify and determine the activities to be engineered the value of� diman will first be grouped types of work based on their respective components
of work� and later a percentage value of
the cost of each component of the work will be obtained. The steps at this
information stage�� are to determine the
cost model, breakdown, after that make a pareto chart� chart and
perform function analysis. The work item to be analyzed by value engineering is
the structure work item.
1)
Breakdown
The analysis is carried out by identifying the work to be done by value
engineering in the details of the cost of work on the construction of the UGM
Sleman Educator Flats. To see the potential of a work item to be performed by
Value Engineering, the cost of that work item is compared to the total cost of
the entire project.
Table 1 Cost
Breakdown
Source: (Dell'Isola, 1974)
2)
CostModel
Costmodel is done by creating
a job chart grouped according to the elements of each job. The chart also
includes a budget plan for the cost of each work item. This cost model
is created to determine which jobs will be done value engineering by
looking at the flow of the job chart. We can see the difference in the cost of
each element of work that we use as a guide in value engineering analysis.
3)
Pareto Chart Analysis
Pareto analysis is carried out to determine the highest costs on projects
that have the potential to be carried out value engineering analysis.
Pareto's Law applies: that is, 80 % of the total cost is contained by 20 % of
its components.
Vilfredo Pareto (1848-1923) in (Gomes, 2016) in Pareto's distribution law
states that 20% of the share of an item has a weight of 80% of the cost.
Figure 1 Pareto
Distribution Law Graph
Source: Koh, 2017
To find out the
building components of the UGM Sleman Educators' House that have the potential
to be saved, a cost analysis is carried out by applying pareto analysis. The
analysis is applied to the work of the superstructure in particular to the work
of the roof, floor slab and working walls. The calculation steps are as
follows:
1.
Sort the total
component costs from largest to smallest
2.
Cumulatively sum up
the total component costs
3.
Calculate the
percentage of the components of the work and add up cumulatively.
4.
Calculate the
percentage of total component costs
�
5.
Sum up the percentage
of total component costs cumulatively.
6.
Cumulative plot of
percentage of job components (X-axis) with Cumulative percentage of total
component costs (Y-axis)
A.
Function Analysis Stage
Function analysis analyzes the main function and supporting function of
each work item so that it can find out the comparison between the cost and the
function produced to produce the function. In this study, work items with the
highest cost / worth value will be taken. The higher the cost / worth value,
the higher the possibility of savings that can be made.
Table 2 Form Analysis Function
Sumber: (Zimmerman &
Hart, 1982)
���������
B. Creative
Stage
C. Analysis
Stage
In this stage, an analysis of ideas or alternative inputs is held. Bad
ideas are eliminated. Alternatives or ideas that arise are formulated and
considered their advantages and disadvantages which are viewed from various
angles.
Value Engineering
The work plan (Job Plan) in value
engineering for this research is divided into several work items, namely:
A.
Information Stage
The data that was successfully collected was data from the work of the
Construction of UGM Sleman Educators ' Flats with job owners from the Java III
Housing Provision Implementation Center-Satker for Housing
Provision in D.I. Yogyakarta Province.�
which is done by PT.� Abadi Prima
Inti Karya. The construction of the UGM Sleman
Educator Flats has a building area of 7,035.5 m 2 and consists of 6
floors with a borepiled foundation depth of 12 m and
uses a conventional structure.
The data that has been obtained are:
1.
Planing Budget Costs
2.
Standard Unit Price of
District District. Sleman
3.
Plan Drawings
The steps at�� this information stage
are to determine the cost model, breakdown, after that create a
pareto chart and perform function analysis. The work item to be analyzed by
value engineering is the structure work item.
a.
Cost Model -
Breakdown
Cost model-Breakdown is created by
classifying similar work items and then sorting them from highest cost to
lowest cost. Such as immersing plate concrete work, slab fixing and slab
formwork into the plate work. This is important to do to facilitate research
Table 3 Cost Model Table
|
No. |
Work Items |
Fee (Rp) |
Percentage |
|
A |
B |
C |
D |
|
1. |
Preparatory Work |
163.691.240 |
0,30 |
|
2. |
RK3K Construction Work |
29.790.000 |
0,05 |
|
3. |
Standard Structure Work |
13.640.206.569,90 |
24,78 |
|
4. |
Standard Architecture Work |
16.234.254.308,30 |
29,49 |
|
5. |
ME Standart Jobs |
5.237.623.170,03 |
9,51 |
|
6. |
Non-Standard Structural Work |
7.094.320.025,33 |
12,89 |
|
7. |
Non Standart Architectural
Work |
2.646.313.696,18 |
4,81 |
|
8. |
Non Standart Landscape
Architecture Work |
1.591.852.864,18 |
2,89 |
|
9. |
Non Standard ME Jobs |
8.412.483.840,91 |
15,28 |
|
Total |
55.050.537.715 |
100 |
|
� Source : Analysis Results
Table 3 shows the results of the cost consumption in each component of the
work. From the results of the identification, it can be seen that the
components of standard architectural work have the highest percentage of costs
of Rp. 16,234,254,308.30 or equal to 29.49% of the total total
value, then continued with standard structural work of Rp. 13,640,206,569.90 or
equal to 24.78%, of the total total value. So that at
this stage it can be identified which components of the works are selected for
value engineering.
����������� Furthermore, the work items
contained in the standard structure work component, are selected to be
broken down or sorted from the one with the highest percentage of cost to
the percentage of the lowest costh.
Table 4 Breakdown of Standard Structure Jobs
|
Work Items |
�Fee (Rp) |
Percentage |
Cumulative percentage |
|
|
Floor-wide
work |
||||
|
A |
B |
�C |
D |
And |
|
1 |
Beam |
� 4.830.771.851,77 |
35,42% |
35,42% |
|
2 |
Column |
� 3.896.612.064,30 |
28,57% |
63,98% |
|
3 |
Floor slab, t=12 cm |
� 3.211.994.641,73 |
23,55% |
87,53% |
|
4 |
Roof plate, t=15 cm |
���� 660.109.762,46 |
4,84% |
92,37% |
|
5 |
Ladder plate, t=15
cm |
���� 398.489.545,38 |
2,92% |
95,29% |
|
6 |
Ground floor slab,
t=10 cm |
���� 368.999.883,59 |
2,71% |
98,00% |
|
7 |
Rafter beam work |
������ 84.388.468,36 |
0,62% |
98,62% |
|
8 |
Stair roof plate, t=12
cm |
������ 62.910.394,75 |
0,46% |
99,08% |
|
9 |
Steel column work
SC 1 |
������ 50.032.794,23 |
0,37% |
99,44% |
|
10 |
Staircase bordes beams |
������ 48.862.471,15 |
0,36% |
99,80% |
|
11 |
Gording work |
������ 27.034.692,17 |
0,20% |
100,00% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
13.640.206.569,90 |
100,00% |
||
Source:
Analysis Results
b.
Diagram Pareto
Based on the
breakdown, an analysis was carried out to determine the limits of high-cost
work items using the legal basis of pareto distribution to determine 80% of the
total cost derived from 20% of high-cost work items. Pareto distribution graphs
are created by determining the cumulative amount of costs and the amount of
work in percentage form which is then plotted in a graph consisting of an
x-axis for the cumulative percentage of work and a y-axis for a cumulative
percentage of costs.
����������� ������������ Figure 3 Pareto Analysis Chart
Structural Work
������� Source :
Research Results
Based on the
calculation results of pareto analysis, 6 work items were obtained that had a high cost value. These work items include:
- beam work with a
percentage of costs of 35.42%,
- column work with
a percentage of costs of 28.57%,
- floor slab work
(t=12 cm) with a percentage of 23.55%,
- roofing plate
work (t=15 cm) with a percentage of 4.84%,
- ladder plate
work (t=15) with a percentage of 2.92%,�
- ground floor slab work (t=10 cm) with a percentage
of 2.71%
From the results of the description above, �the author is quite concentrated on �the 6 jobs with the
highest percentage. �From �the results of collecting information data, then analyzing the functions of each work item
included in the pareto calculation results
c.
Function Analysis
������ Table 5 Analysis
of Column Work Functions
|
Column Work Function: 1.
Load bearing 2.
Thorough successor
of the load to the base of the building |
||||
|
No |
Description |
Function |
Cost (Rp) |
Worth (Rp) |
|
1 |
Concrete f'c 30 mpa |
Load bearing |
675.835.582,26 |
675.835.582,26 |
|
2 |
Fixing |
Load Bearing |
2.995.472.284,91 |
2.995.472.284,91 |
|
3 |
Formwork |
Molding Concrete |
225.304.197,13 |
- |
|
Total |
3.896.612.064,30 |
3,671.307.867,17 |
||
|
C/W |
1,061 |
|||
������
Table 6 Analysis of Beam Work Functions
|
Beam Work Function: 1.
Load bearing 2.
Funneling the load
to a column |
||||
|
No |
Description |
Function |
Cost (Rp) |
Worth (Rp) |
|
1 |
Concrete f'c 30 mpa |
Load bearing |
893.106.251,47 |
893.106.251,47 |
|
2 |
Fixing |
Load Bearing |
2.657.126.638,71 |
2.657.126.638,71 |
|
3 |
Formwork |
Molding Concrete |
1.280.538.961,59 |
- |
|
Total |
4.830.771.851,77 |
3.550.232.890,18 |
||
|
C/W |
1,361 |
|||
Source: Analysis
Results
Table 7 Analysis of
Floor Slab Work Function t=12 cm
|
Floor Slab Work t=12 cm Function: 1.
Load bearing 2.
As a barrier to the
lower and upper floors 3.
As a place to stand
on the upper floors 4.
As a construction
stiffener in the horizontal plane |
||||
|
No |
Description |
Function |
Cost (Rp) |
Worth (Rp) |
|
1 |
Concrete f'c 30 mpa |
Load bearing |
640.786.162,96 |
640.786.162,96 |
|
2 |
Fixing |
Load Bearing |
1.167.938.502,11 |
1.167.938.502,11 |
|
3 |
Formwork |
Molding Concrete |
1.403.269.976,66 |
- |
|
Total |
3.211.994.641,73 |
1.808.724.665,07 |
||
|
C/W |
1,776 |
|||
Source: Analysis Results
Table 8 Analysis of Roof Plate Work Function t=15 cm
|
Roof Plate Work t=15 cm Function: As a construction stiffener in the horizontal plane |
||||
|
No |
Description |
Function |
Cost (Rp) |
Worth (Rp) |
|
1 |
Concrete f'c 30 mpa |
Load bearing |
155.755.751,75 |
155.755.751,75 |
|
2 |
Fixing |
Load Bearing |
231.479.990,94 |
231.479.990,94 |
|
3 |
Formwork |
Molding Concrete |
272.874.019,77 |
- |
|
Total |
660.109.762,46 |
387.235.742,69 |
||
|
C/W |
1,705 |
|||
Source: Analysis
Results
������������������������� Table 9 Analysis
of Ladder Plate Work Function t=15 cm
|
Stair Plate Work
t=15 cm Function: 1. As a construction stiffener in the horizontal plane 2. Footing tools when climbing stairs |
|
||||||
|
No |
Description |
Function |
Cost (Rp) |
Worth (Rp) |
|||
|
1 |
Concrete f'c 30 Mpa |
Load bearing |
101,303,365,93 |
101,303,365,93 |
|||
|
2 |
Fixing |
Load Bearing |
188.151.639,45 |
188.151.639,45 |
|||
|
3 |
Formwork |
Molding Concrete |
109.034.540,00 |
- |
|||
|
Total |
398.489.545,38 |
289.455.005,38 |
|
||||
|
C/W |
1,377 |
|
|||||
Source: Analysis Results
Table 10 Analysis of Ground Floor Slab Work Function t=10 cm
|
Ground Floor Slab Work t=10 cm Function: 1.
Load bearing 2.
As a barrier to the lower and upper floors 3.
As a place to stand on the upper floors |
||||
|
No |
Description |
Function |
Cost (Rp) |
Worth (Rp) |
|
1 |
Urugan sirtu floor elevation t = 35
cm (ex-excavation) |
Stabilizes the original ground surface
and spreads the load |
85.390.978,94 |
85.390.978,94 |
|
2 |
Soil
compaction CBR > 6% |
1.
Improves soil shear strength 2.
Reduced soil compressibility 3.
Reduced soil permeability 4.
Reducing volume changes as a result of changes in
moisture content |
46.560.369,74 |
46.560.369,74 |
|
3 |
Urug sand on urug soil t=10 cm
(in buildings) |
Stabilizes the original ground surface
and spreads the load |
25.791.472,41 |
25.791.472,41 |
|
4 |
Cast concrete working floor t=5 cm (in buildings) |
Load Bearing |
40.301.288,63 |
40.301.288,63 |
|
5 |
Concrete f'c 30 MPa |
Load Bearing |
137.008.184,44 |
137.008.184,44 |
|
6 |
Iron Wiremesh M-8 |
Load Bearing |
33.947.589,42 |
33.947.589,42 |
|
Total |
368.999.883,59 |
368.999.883,59 |
||
|
C/W |
1 |
|||
B.
Creative Stage
� At��
this creative stage, it comes up with alternative ideas for high-cost
work items that� will then be selected to
determine the� best� alternative replacement at the� analysis stage. �Some alternative designs that the
author gets:
Table 11 Job Replacement Alternatives
|
Work Items |
Alternative 1 |
Alternative 2 |
|
|
1 |
Beam Work |
Replacing conventional formwork with formwork rental |
Replacing conventional formwork with formwork rental |
|
2 |
Floor Slab Work t=12 cm |
Replacing
conventional formwork with formwork rental |
� Replacing conventional formwork with formwork rental � Replacing reinforcing iron with wiremesh |
|
3 |
Roof Plate Work t=15 cm |
Replacing
conventional formwork with formwork rental |
� Replacing conventional formwork with formwork rental � Replacing reinforcing iron with wiremesh |
|
4 |
Stair Plate Work t=15 cm |
Replacing
conventional formwork with formwork rental |
� Replacing conventional formwork with formwork rental � Replacing reinforcing iron with wiremesh |
Source: Data processing results
C. �Analysis Stage
In the calculation of unit price analysis, the coefficient value figure �used refers to the annex to the Pupr Regulation No. 1
/ PRT / M / 2022 and for the unit price, �the rental price of the ��formwork follows the unit price of �the Sleman Regency area.
- Alternative
Design Analysis 1
Table 12
Comparison of Initial Design ��Budget Plans (RAB) And Alternative
Design 1
|
No. |
Work Items |
Initial Design |
Alternative Design 1 |
Percentage Against The Value
Of Standard Structure Work |
|
A |
B |
�C |
D |
And |
|
1 |
Beam |
� 4.830.771.851,77 |
4.331.021.633,86 |
3.66 % |
|
2 |
Column |
�
3.896.612.064,30 |
3.896.612.064,30 |
0,00 % |
|
3 |
Floor slab, t=12 cm |
� 3.211.994.641,73 |
2.515.939.728,57 |
5,10 % |
|
4 |
Roof plate, t=15 cm |
660.109.762,46
|
524.757.830,22 |
0,99 % |
|
5 |
Ladder plate, t=15
cm |
���� 398.489.545,38 |
356.545.015,125 |
0,31 % |
|
6 |
Ground floor slab, t=10 cm |
�����
368.999.883,59 |
�� 368.999.883,59
|
0,00 % |
|
7 |
Rafter beam work |
�����
84.388.468,36 |
����
84.388.468,36 |
0,00 % |
|
8 |
Stair roof plate, t=12 cm |
������
62.910.394,75 |
����
62.910.394,75 |
0,00 % |
|
9 |
Steel column work SC 1 |
������
50.032.794,23 |
����
50.032.794,23 |
0,00 % |
|
10 |
Staircase bordes beams |
�����
48.862.471,15 |
����
48.862.471,15 |
0,00 %���� |
|
11 |
Gording work |
�����
27.034.692,17 |
����
27.034.692,17 |
0,00 %���� |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
13.640.206.569,90
|
12.267.104.976,325 |
10,07 % |
|
b.
Alternative
Design Analysis �2
Table 13 Comparison of Initial Design ��Budget Plans (RAB) And Alternative
Design 2
|
No. |
Work Items |
Initial Design |
Alternative Design 2 |
Percentage Against The Value
Of Standard Structure Work |
|
A |
B |
�C |
And |
|
|
1 |
Beam |
�
4.830.771.851,77 |
4.331.021.633,86 |
3,66 % |
|
2 |
Column |
�
3.896.612.064,30 |
3.896.612.064,30 |
0,00 % |
|
3 |
Floor slab, t=12 cm |
�
3.211.994.641,73 |
2.455.440.426,46 |
5,55 % |
|
4 |
Roof plate, t=15 cm |
����
660.109.762,46 |
523.362.239,75 |
1,00 % |
|
5 |
Ladder plate, t=15 cm |
����
398.489.545,38 |
226.546.392,78 |
1,26 % |
|
6 |
Ground floor slab, t=10 cm |
�����
368.999.883,59 |
�� 368.999.883,59
|
0,00 % |
|
7 |
Rafter beam work |
�����
84.388.468,36 |
����
84.388.468,36 |
0,00 % |
|
8 |
Stair roof plate, t=12 cm |
������
62.910.394,75 |
����
62.910.394,75 |
0,00 % |
|
9 |
Steel column work SC 1 |
������
50.032.794,23 |
����
50.032.794,23 |
0,00 % |
|
10 |
Staircase bordes beams |
�����
48.862.471,15 |
����
48.862.471,15 |
0,00 % |
|
11 |
Gording work |
�����
27.034.692,17 |
����
27.034.692,17 |
0,00 % |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
13.640.206.569,90 |
12.075.211.461,40 |
11,47 % |
|
From the results of
the RAB comparison in table 4.17 and table 4.18, a percentage value of standard
structure work was obtained, namely in alternative design 1 of� 10.07% and in� alternative�
design 2� of 11.47%.
D. Recommendations
Of the 2 alternative designs �that have been analyzed, the author recommends alternative designs� 2, namely:
a.
The purchase of� conventional
formwork was replaced by a �good formwork �rental �for beams, a 12 cm
floor slab,� a 15 cm
roof �floor plate
and �a� 15 cm�
ladder plate
b.
Replacement� of reinforcing iron to wiremesh on beams, 12
cm floor slabs,�� 15 �cm roof floor
slabs� and 15 cm� stair plates
Table 14 Cost Budget
Plan (RAB) Alternative Design 2
|
NO |
TYPES OF WORK |
TOTAL PRICE (Rp) |
|
I |
PREPARATORY WORK AND
CONSTRUCTION RK3K WORK |
193.481.240,00 |
|
|
Preparatory Work |
163.691.240,00 |
|
|
Construction R3K Work |
29.790.000,00 |
|
II |
STRUCTURE, ARCHITECTURE AND ME
WORK |
53.292.059.366,48 |
|
II.a |
STANDARD WORK |
33.547.088.939,73 |
|
|
Standard Structure Work |
12.075.211.461,40 |
|
|
Standard Architecture Work |
16.234.254.308,30 |
|
|
Standard Mechanical and Electrical Work |
5.237.623.170,03 |
|
II.b |
NON STANDARD WORK |
19.744.970.426,75 |
|
|
Non-Standard Structural Work |
7.094.320.025,33 |
|
|
Non Standart Architectural
Work |
2.646.313.696,33 |
|
|
Non-Standard Landscape Architecture Work |
1.591.852.864,18 |
|
|
Mechanical and Electrical Work |
8.412.483.840,91 |
|
|
Total I+II |
53.485.540.606,48 |
|
|
Rounded corners right |
53.485.540.000,00 |
|
|
PPN 11 % |
5.883.409.400,00 |
|
|
Total |
59.368.949.400,00 |
|
|
Rounded corners right |
59.368.949.000,00 |
Table 15
Percentage of Initial Design Values Against Alternative
�Design 1 and Alternative 2
|
NO |
RAB Design |
Job Value (Rp) |
Difference (Rp) |
Percentage
(%) |
|
1 |
Rab Initial Design |
61.106.093.850,00 |
- |
- |
|
2 |
Alternative Design
RAB 1 |
59.581.951.000,00 |
1.524.142.850,00 |
2,494 % |
|
3 |
Alternative Design
RAB 2 |
59.368.949.000,00 |
1.737.144.850 |
2,843 % |
CONCLUSION
Based on the results of the
analysis that has been carried out, it can be concluded that:
There are 4 work
done by Value Engineering, namely beam work, floor slab work t=12 cm, roof
floor plate work t=15 cm, stair work t=15 cm.
Alternative replacement designs
for these work items, namely:
For block work items, an
alternative replacement is to convert the purchase of formwork into a formwork
rental;
For floor slab work items, there
are 2 alternative substitutes chosen, namely replacing reinforcement fixing
with M10 wiremesh and converting the purchase of formwork
into formwork rental;
For roof floor plate work items,
there are 2 alternative replacements chosen, namely replacing reinforcement
fixing with M10 wiremesh and converting the purchase
of formwork into formwork rental;
For stair plate work items, there
are 2 alternative substitutes chosen, namely replacing reinforcement fixing
with M10 wiremesh and converting formwork purchases
into formwork rentals;
�The amount of savings obtained from the
analysis carried out, amounted to 2.843% for alternative design 2.
REFERENCES
�Abrar, Husen. 2011. �Project Management. Andi,
Yogyakarta
Agrama, Fatma
A., Maher T. Al-Nemr and Mohamad A. Abdo. 2014. Value
Engineering For Low-Cost Housing Construction In Egyptian Expansion Urban. Advanced
Research in Engineering Sciences. Vol. 2(2) April 2014.
Ahuja, H.N.,
1994.
Project Management Techniques in Planning and Controlling Construction
Projects.� John Wiley & Sons. Inc
New York.
Anugerahini,
Ajeng Tantri, Lila Ayu Ratna Winanda and Munasih. 2021.� Value�
Engineering Analysis on Building Projects (Case Study on� a 5-Storey�
Inpatient Building� at� Dr.�
Iskak Tulungagung). Sondir Journal. vol.5 No.2 of 2021, pp. 64-71.
https://ejournal.itn.ac.id /index.php/sondir.�
February 23, 2022
Armando, T.
2015.
Application of Value Engineering in the� Andalas
University Teaching
Hospital
Building Construction Project. Civil Engineering, Andalas University Padang.
Central
Statistics Agency� (BPS). 2019.� Statistics Indonesia 2019.
Central
Statistics Agency� (BPS). 2020.
Regulation of the Central Statistics Agency�
Number 2� of� 2020 concerning the Standard Classification
of� Indonesian Business Fields.
Barrie and
Poulson. 1984. Definition of Value Engineering According to� Experts. http://pengertian-pengertianinfo.
blogspot.co.id /2015/11/understanding-value- engineering according
to.html.� accessed 3 August 2022
Blaang,
Djemaboet, 1986.� Housing
and Settlements as Basic Necessities.�
Indonesian Torch Foundation, Jakarta.
Dimyati &
Nurjaman. 2014.� Project
Management. Faithful Library. Bandung
Dell�Isola, A.
J. 1974.� Value
Engineering in the Construction Industry. Construction Publishing Corp.,
Inc., New York
Dell�Isola, A.
J. 1997.� Value
engineering : practical applications for design, construction, maintenance
& amp; operations. Mass. : R. S. Means Company, Kingston
Donomartono.
1999.
Application of Value Engineering to Optimize Costs at
the� Planning Stage of Building� Construction with Prestressed Concrete Block Structures.�� Faculty of� Engineering,�
Sepuluh Nopember Institute of Technology, Surabaya
Dipohusodo,
Istimawan. 1996. �Project & Construction Management.� Kanisius, Jogjakarta.
Ervianto,
Wulfram I. 2005. Construction Project Management. Andi
Yogyakarta, Yogyakarta.
Ervianto,
Wulfram I. 2006.��
Exploration of technology in�
construction:� Precast concrete
O�Brien, James
J. 1978. Value Analysis in Design and Construction. McGraw-Hill,
New York.
Pranata, Y. A.
& Yunizar. 2011.�
Modeling of Field Shear Walls� as
Equivalent Column� Elements in� Low-Rise Reinforced Concrete� Buildings.�
Journal of Civil Engineering, VII(1), pp. 85-97.
Priyanto, Herry.
2010.�� Optimization of the� application of value engineering at the
building design stage in Indonesia.�
Thesis of� the Faculty of� Engineering, University of Indonesia.
Ramadan, Fitra
Al and Dwi Dinariana. 2018. Application of Value� Engineering in Rusunawa Development Project
in Sidoarjo.� Journal of IKRA-ITH
Technology Vol 2 No 3, November 2018, ISSN 2580-4308.
Rondinelli, A.
Dennis. 1990.� Development
Projects as Integrated Management:� An
Adoptive Approach to Public services.��
Bumi Aksara, Jakarta.
Sepira, Bella.
2020.
Application of Value Engineering in Ubud Batu Malang Hotel Development
Project.� Malang National� Institute of Technology.
Soehendradjati,
R. J. B., 1987. �Construction Management.� Gadja Mada University Press,
Yogyakarta.
Subagya. 2000. �Project Management Analysis.�� Graha Pena, Bekasi.
Thoengsal,
James. 2014. Efficiency of Using Construction Materials� in Reducing the Emergence of Waste
Materials.��� http://jamest hoeng
sal.blogspot.co.id/p/blog-page_20.html, accessed June 25,� 2022.
Ustoyo, Dwi Ari.
2007.
Application of� Value Engineering to
Elements and Foundations of� the
Rectorate Building� Project of the� University of Muhammadiyah Semarang. Semarang
State University.
Wahyudi, Wachid
Hashim and Dhian D.� Prayuda. 2020.� Value� Engineering Studies as One of� the Approaches to� Selecting Building� Floor�
Plates Using the AHP (Analytical Hierarcy Process) Method.� Journal of�
Infrastructure Engineering.�
Volume 4 Number 1, June 2020: 1-8
Wardana,
Mohammad Roy, Rudi Waluyo and Yenywaty Simamora. 2019.
Engineering Analysis� of the� Value�
of� Gedueng Building Beam and
Column Structure Work� (Case Study
of� the Investment Agency and� One-Stop Integrated Service of Palangka
Raya� City). Journal of Engineering.� Volume 2, No. 2, April 2019: 101 � 111
Zainudin. 2011.� Project Management. Andi Offset,
Yogyakarta
Copyright Holders:
Kharisma Indah Purwanty,
Wateno Oetomo, Laksono Djoko Nugroho (2023)
First publication
right:
Devotion - Journal
of Research and Community Service
This article is licensed under
a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International