Investigating Cost, Quality, and Time Comparisons in Multi-Utility Tunnel Construction at Indonesia’s New Capital City
Main Article Content
Abstract
The Multi-Utility Tunnel (MUT) constitutes a critical infrastructure component in the development of Indonesia’s New Capital City (Ibu Kota Nusantara, IKN), serving as the backbone of integrated underground utility networks. Accelerating MUT construction is essential to ensure timely support for subsequent infrastructure development phases. This study investigates and compares the phenolic hollow formwork and sliding formwork methods in terms of cost, quality, and time performance. The analysis is based on actual project implementation data obtained from the Pembangunan Jalan Lingkar Sepaku Tahap 2 project. Cost evaluation is presented as percentage deviations relative to the Owner’s Estimated Cost (RBP). The findings indicate that the sliding formwork method achieves higher productivity, improving work efficiency by approximately 30–50% compared with the conventional phenolic–hollow formwork system. However, sliding formwork results in a cost increase of approximately 5–6% per meter relative to the RBP, whereas phenolic–hollow formwork yields cost savings of 1–6%. In terms of quality, sliding formwork produces more uniform and precise concrete surfaces, thereby reducing the need for additional finishing work. Although the initial cost of sliding formwork is higher, its advantages in time efficiency and construction quality make it more suitable for long and repetitive MUT structures. These findings provide practical insights for selecting appropriate formwork methods in large-scale infrastructure projects, particularly in high-priority national development areas.
Article Details
Section

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
References
Ahvenniemi, H., Huovila, A., Pinto-Seppä, I., & Airaksinen, M. (2017). What are the differences between sustainable and smart cities?. Cities, 60, 234-245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2016.09.009
Atkinson, R. (1999). Project management: cost, time and quality, two best guesses and a phenomenon, its time to accept other success criteria. International journal of project management, 17(6), 337-342.
Bibri, S. E., & Krogstie, J. (2017). Smart sustainable cities of the future: An extensive interdisciplinary literature review. Sustainable cities and society, 31, 183-212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2017.02.016
Hanna, A. S., Camlic, R., Peterson, P. A., & Nordheim, E. V. (2002). Quantitative definition of projects impacted by change orders. Journal of construction Engineering and Management, 128(1), 57-64. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2005)131:1(57)
Zargarian, R., Hunt, D. V., Braithwaite, P., Bobylev, N., & Rogers, C. D. (2018, October). A new sustainability framework for urban underground space. In Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Engineering Sustainability (Vol. 171, No. 5, pp. 238-253). Thomas Telford Ltd.
Hwang, B. G., Zhao, X., & Ng, S. Y. (2013). Identifying the critical factors affecting schedule performance of public housing projects. Habitat International, 38, 214-221.
Lin, C. L., & Huang, H. M. (2010). Errata for “Improved Baseline Productivity Analysis Technique” by Chien-Liang Lin and Hong-Ming Huang. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(9), 1062-1063.
Love, P. E., Edwards, D. J., & Smith, J. (2016). Rework causation: Emergent theoretical insights and implications for research. Journal of construction engineering and management, 142(6), 04016010.
Pan, W., Gibb, A. G., & Dainty, A. R. (2012). Strategies for integrating the use of off-site production technologies in house building. Journal of construction engineering and management, 138(11), 1331-1340.
Randolph Thomas, H., & Horman, M. J. (2006). Fundamental principles of workforce management. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(1), 97-104. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2006)132:1(97)
Wu, J., Bai, Y., Fang, W., Zhou, R., Reniers, G., & Khakzad, N. (2021). An integrated quantitative risk assessment method for urban underground utility tunnels. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 213, 107792.
Zhang, X., Li, H., & Shen, L. (2016). Integrated underground utility tunnel construction: A case study and performance evaluation. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 55, 152–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2015.12.007