The 3rd International Conference on Engineering of Tarumanagara (ICET) 2017
Faculty of Engineering, Tarumanagara University, Jakarta‐Indonesia, October 4‐5th, 2017
ISBN: 00‐00‐00‐00‐00
DREDGER SELECTION METHOD BASED ON
TRIPLE CONSTRAINTS OF CONSTRUCTION
Ruddy Yusuf 1) and Onnyxiforus Gondokusumo2)
1)
Student, Civil Engineering, Tarumanagara University, West Jakarta 11440, Indonesia
2)
Lecturer, Civil Engineering, Tarumanagara University, West Jakarta 11440, Indonesia
Abstract
Reclamation is one way to answer the human needs of land and to promote economic growth. Many land
reclamations have been done in the world and Indonesia is one of them. In every reclamation works,
dredging is always a part of the job, either it is to move the filling material from the quarry to the reclamation
point, or dredging to shape the reclaimed land as design. Due to its importance, selecting the right dredger is
crucial for the success of the project. The purpose of this research is to determine a method on selecting the
best dredger based on its performance and the project owner needs. There are three kinds of dredgers will be
analyzed and scored based on its each performance in term of triple constraint of construction (cost, quality,
and time), those dredgers are cutter suction dredger, modified sand pump, and long-arm excavator. Besides
that each constraint will be scored base on its importance in the eyes of the project owner. Several
combination of the dredger scores and constraint scores will be given in a matrix to remove the subjectivity
in scoring. The score of the dredgers performace multiplied with the constraints importancy will result the
total score of the dredgers. Based on the research, cutter suction dredger is the best dredger with the highest
total score. The result of this analysis shows that cutter suction dredger is the best dredger with average total
score of 8.41, followed by modified sand pump with average total score of 4.73, and the last is long-arm
excavator with average total score of 4.34.
Keywords: reclamation, dredging, triple constraint, cutter suction dredger, matrix.
1. INTRODUCTION
Jakarta is a growing city with total population of over 10 million people and
over 1% population growth rate per year in 2015 [1], and available land becomes a
luxury thing to get in recent years. Home in the city has transformed from landed to
high rises. Long before this becomes an issue, in 1995 President of Indonesia made a
decree to build several reclaimed island on the North of Jakarta bay to expand the city
and promote the economic growth even more. And now some of the reclamation
islands have been built and more to come not only in Jakarta, but also in a few other
cities.
In every reclamation work, dredging is a crucial item to finish the job. Dredging is
an activity of excavating or moving soil or rock by dredger [2]. Dredging has to be done to
bring up the excess fill material outside the island boundary and shape the island with a
steeper slope than a natural shaped slope built by reclamation works. Due to its
importance, it is necessary to choose a right dredger base on the needs of the project.
Currently there is not much information regarding dredging in reclamation
works in Jakarta so it is difficult to choose a dredger for the future reclamation works.
So the purpose of this research is to give some information regarding the performance
of the dredgers being used in reclamation works in Jakarta, and more importantly to
look for a method on selecting a dredger that in line with the project owner needs in
the term of cost, quality, and time for future reclamation projects, as the success of a
project is defined as the completion of an activity within the constraints of time, cost,
and performance or specification level [3].
The 3rd International Conference on Engineering of Tarumanagara (ICET) 2017
Faculty of Engineering, Tarumanagara University, Jakarta‐Indonesia, October 4‐5th, 2017
ISBN: 00‐00‐00‐00‐00
2. RESEARCH METHOD
To determine which dredger is the most comply with the needs of the project
owner, first each dredger should be scored based on its performance in term of cost,
quality, and time. Beside that, cost, quality, and time also should be scored based on its
level of importance in the eyes of project owner. The multiplication between the dredger
performance score with the score of importance will result the total score of each dredger.
Dredger with the highest total score is the best dredger that comply with the project owner
needs in term of cost, quality, and time.
Survey of the seabed elevation was done to calculate the volume of material
dredged and the quality result of the dredging. Single beam bathymetry survey was used in
this research. Bathymetry originally referred to the ocean’s depth relative to sea level [4].
To reduce the subjectivity in scoring, several scorings are given to the dredger
performance and factors in one single matrix of sensitivity analysis. The dredger
performance score is given by the field workers, as for the score to the level of importance
are given by the management. Several results of the dredger total score plotted into chart
to show the score area of each dredger, this is to show either one dredger is better than the
other or they are more or less in the same range of score.
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
There were 3 types of dredgers were analyzed in this research, those are cutter
suction dredger (CSD), modified sand pump, and long-arm excavator. Each dredger was
analyzed in term of time, cost, and quality. The result of the analysis became the base to
score each dredger performance in each term.
3.1. Time
The time needed for the dredgers to finish the work is calculated based on its
productivity. Productivity is defined as the output produced per unit of time [5]. The
productivity of each dredger is very dependent to the natural condition and the dredging
material. Based on observation on site, at least there are 3 factors those are influencing
productivity rate of the dredgers, those factors are:
1. Wave height,
2. Sea water level, and
3. Trapped garbage in the dredging material.
Each dredger was affected by at least one of the factor mentioned above in the time
of working. CSD (Figure 1) was affected by the garbage in the dredging material. The
principle of CSD is based on a combination of mechanical and suction dredging [6]. The
material to be dredged is cut with the dredger’s cutter head and loosened with the erosive
action of the water which flows towards the suction mouth by the vessel’s pumping action.
Based on this working principal, if there are a lot of garbage in the dredging material
especially plastic waste, the garbage will follow the dredging material sucked into the
suction mouth and will clog the mouth.
The 3rd International Conference on Engineering of Tarumanagara (ICET) 2017
Faculty of Engineering, Tarumanagara University, Jakarta‐Indonesia, October 4‐5th, 2017
ISBN: 00‐00‐00‐00‐00
Fig. 1. Cutter suction dredger (CSD)
(Source: North Jakarta reclamation project site)
Same as CSD, modified sand pump (figure 2) is working based on the combination
of mechanical and suction. But the different is that modified sand pump was designed to
move only in vertical direction. That means to move the pump horizontally, the pump has
to be pulled up first before the barge move to the next area. For CSD, the cutter can move
horizontally by swinging the arm.
Fig. 2. Modified sand pump
(Source: North Jakarta reclamation project site)
Because of the same working principal, modified sand pump productivity is very
affected by the garbage quantity in the dredging material. Other than that, because of the
vessel of the pump is only a small vessel (figure 3), it is also affected by the wave height.
The high wave cause the unstable vessel so it is not safe for workers to stay on it.
The 3rd International Conference on Engineering of Tarumanagara (ICET) 2017
Faculty of Engineering, Tarumanagara University, Jakarta‐Indonesia, October 4‐5th, 2017
ISBN: 00‐00‐00‐00‐00
Fig. 3. The vessel for modified sand pump
(Source: North Jakarta reclamation project site)
The last dredger that was analyzed is a long-arm excavator standing on a barge.
Because the size of the barge, there were 3 excavators working in the same time on the
barge without having problem with the working space (figure 4). But because of the
reaching limit of the excavator, so the sea water level was very affecting the productivity
of the equipment as it can only work in low tide time.
Fig. 4. Long-arm excavator
(Source: North Jakarta reclamation project site)
To determine the productivity, first the volume of the dredging was calculated
based on the difference between the seabed level before and after the works in a sample
area on the reclamation project. As for the time, it was the days needed for the dredger to
finish the dredging works on the area where the dredging volume was calculated before.
The productivity value based on the data on site can be seen in table 1.
Table 1. Dredger real productivity
Productivity
Dredger
(m3/day)
CSD 865.88
Modified sand pump 38.46
Long-arm Excavator 591.49
The 3rd International Conference on Engineering of Tarumanagara (ICET) 2017
Faculty of Engineering, Tarumanagara University, Jakarta‐Indonesia, October 4‐5th, 2017
ISBN: 00‐00‐00‐00‐00
After that, the total dredging volume for the whole reclamation works divided by
the productivity value of each dredger was done to calculate the total time needed for each
dredger to finish the work of the whole dredging work in the reclamation project was given
to it as shown in table 2.
Table 2. Total time needed by dredger to complete overall dredging work
Productivity Total dredging Total time Total time
Dredger volume
(m3/day) (m3) (day) (month)
(1) (2) (3) (4) = (3) / (2) (5) = (4) / 30
CSD 865.88 1,199.4 39.98
Modified sand pump 38.46 1,038,544 27,003.2 900.11
Long-arm Excavator 591.49 1,755.8 58.53
3.2. Cost
Cost will be calculated based the cost of each dredger to do the whole dredging
work and compare to the time needed to finish the work calculated using net present worth
(NPW) which can be calculated by deducting the present worth of benefits with the present
worth of cost [7,8]. The total contract price of each dredger to finish all dredging work by
itself can be seen in table 3 below.
Table 3. Total contract price of each dredger for overall dredging work
Total dredging
Unit Price Total price
Dredger volume
(Rp) (Rp)
(m3)
(1) (2) (3) (4) = (2) × (3)
CSD 72,000 74,775,168,000
Modified Sand Pump 60,000 1,038,544 62,312,640,000
Long-arm Excavator 63,000 65,428,272,000
The time for the NPW analysis was taken from table 2, but not all dredgers were
included in the NPW calculation. Based on time analysis, modified sand pump needs 600
month to finish the work which is not feasible anymore in term of time and cost. The NPW
analysis for CSD and long-arm excavator as below:
NPW CSD 22,432,550,400 1,308,565,440 (P/A,40,0.5) 64,000,000,000 (P/A,19,0.5)
(P/F,41,0.5)
22,432,550,400 1,308,565,440 36.1722 64,000,000,000 18.0824 0.8151
22,432,550,400 47,333,690,809 943,293,711,360
Rp 873,527,470,151
NPWexcavator 19,628,481,600 776,267,634 (P/A,59,0.5)
19,628,481,600 776,267,634 50.9842
19,628,481,600 39,577,384,305
Rp 59,205,865,905
The assumption for the calculation is that in the first month, project owner has to
pay contractor the 30% down payment from total contract price. The rest of the contract
The 3rd International Conference on Engineering of Tarumanagara (ICET) 2017
Faculty of Engineering, Tarumanagara University, Jakarta‐Indonesia, October 4‐5th, 2017
ISBN: 00‐00‐00‐00‐00
price will be equally divided into monthly payment progress for as long as the time needed
to complete the work. As CSD will finish the work 19 month earlier than excavator, it is
assumed that in that period, every month there will be 20 unit of house can be sold with
average price of the house is IDR 3.2 billion/unit. House assumed can be sold only after
the work is finished and the interest in calculation was assumed 6% p.a.
As can be seen in the calculation above, the NPW result of CSD has become
positive which is better than NPW result of excavator which is still in negative value. This
shows CSD has a better performance than excavator in term of cost.
3.3. Quality
The quality of the dreging was analyzed based on the result of the dredging
compared to the design. The dredging result can be called as a good result if the slope
produced by the dredger is according to the design line with tolerance of 20 cm higher and
10 cm lower than the design line. The dredging result of each dredger can be seen in figure
5 to 7.
Dredging boundary
Fig. 5. Dredging result by CSD
(Source: North Jakarta reclamation project site)
Dredging boundary
Fig. 6. Dredging result by modified sand pump
(Source: North Jakarta reclamation project site)
The dredging result by CSD and modified sand pump that are showed in figure 5
and 6 are considered as a good dredging result. The red line represents the slope made after
the dredging was done. As seen in those images, the lines are more or less on the design
line.
Fig. 7. Dredging result by long-arm excavator
(Source: North Jakarta reclamation project site)
As for the dredging result done by long-arm excavator as shown in figure 7, it
shows bad result with an area over-dredged by almost 1.5 m. It can be concluded that long-
The 3rd International Conference on Engineering of Tarumanagara (ICET) 2017
Faculty of Engineering, Tarumanagara University, Jakarta‐Indonesia, October 4‐5th, 2017
ISBN: 00‐00‐00‐00‐00
arm excavator gave the worst dredging result compare to the CSD and modified sand
pump.
3.4. Matrix of sensitivity analysis
After the analysis of the dredger performance in term of cost, quality, and time,
every dredger were scored based on the performance in the range of 0 – 10. According to
the research, the score for each dredger is shown in table 4.
Table 4. Dredger performance score
Score
Dredger
Cost Quality Time
CSD 8 9 8
Modified sand pump 3 8 1
Long-arm excavator 5 3 6
Besides that, score also given to cost, quality, and time based on its importance in
the eyes of the project owner. Score will be converted to percentage to know the level of
importance in total of 100%.
Table 5. Level of factor importance
Factor Score Weight
Cost 9 37.5%
Quality 8 33.3%
Time 7 29.2%
Total 100%
The total of performance score of each dredger in each factor multiplied by the
level of importance of each factor is the total score of dredger based on its real
performance and the project owner needs. The total score of each dredger based on the
scoring above is shown in table 6.
Table 6. Dredger total score
Score
Dredger Cost Quality Time Total Score
(Weight 37.5%) (Weight 33.3%) (Weight 29.2%)
CSD 3.00 3.00 2.33 8.33
Modified sand pump 1.13 2.67 0.29 4.07
Long-arm excavator 1.88 1.00 1.75 4.63
From table 6 above, CSD gets the highest total score with 8.33. Modified sand
pump and long-arm excavator gets total score far lower than CSD. In this case CSD is the
best dredger to be chosen. But with only one combination of performance score and level
of factor importance, it can be too subjective to take the decision as usually there are more
than 1 people in the management who are responsible for making decision. Also the
dredger performance score should be more than 1 combination as the scoring based on the
analysis can be different between people.
The 3rd International Conference on Engineering of Tarumanagara (ICET) 2017
Faculty of Engineering, Tarumanagara University, Jakarta‐Indonesia, October 4‐5th, 2017
ISBN: 00‐00‐00‐00‐00
To minimize the subjectivity in selecting the best dredger based on project owner
needs, more combination of scoring is needed. In this research, rectangular matrix analysis
was used to takes into account more than 1 management importance and more than 1
scoring of the dredger performance.
There are 8 combinations of the dredger performance score and 6 combinations of
level of importance by management were inputted in a 8 × 6 rectangular matrix to
determine the sensitivity of the dredger total score (table 7). For different project, a
different combination of scoring can be used depending on the project condition. All of the
score combinations in the level of importance are still showing that the cost is the most
important factor in the project.
Table 7. Matrix of sensitivity analysis for dredgers total score
Cost = 9 Cost = 8 Cost = 8 Cost = 8 Cost = 8 Cost = 8
Terms importance
Quality = 8 Quality = 8 Quality = 8 Quality = 7 Quality = 7 Quality = 6
Combination Dredger score
Time = 7 Time = 7 Time = 8 Time = 8 Time = 7 Time = 7
Cost Quality Time 1 2 3 4 5 6
CSD 8 9 8 8.33 8.35 8.25 8.30 8.32 8.29
1 Modified Sand Pump 3 8 1 4.07 4.15 3.96 3.80 3.96 3.79
Long-arm Excavator 5 3 6 4.63 4.60 4.62 4.75 4.68 4.75
CSD 9 9 8 8.71 8.70 8.58 8.65 8.68 8.67
2 Modified Sand Pump 3 9 1 4.40 4.50 4.29 4.10 4.28 4.08
Long-arm Excavator 5 1 5 3.68 3.60 3.63 3.80 3.72 3.84
CSD 8 8 8 8.00 8.00 7.92 8.00 8.00 8.00
3 Modified Sand Pump 2 7 1 3.36 3.45 3.30 3.15 3.28 3.12
Long-arm Excavator 5 2 6 4.30 4.25 4.29 4.45 4.36 4.46
CSD 9 8 9 8.67 8.65 8.58 8.70 8.68 8.71
4 Modified Sand Pump 2 7 1 3.36 3.45 3.30 3.15 3.28 3.12
Long-arm Excavator 4 3 7 4.54 4.55 4.62 4.75 4.64 4.70
CSD 8 9 8 8.33 8.35 8.25 8.30 8.32 8.29
5 Modified Sand Pump 5 8 6 6.28 6.35 6.27 6.25 6.28 6.20
Long-arm Excavator 5 3 6 4.63 4.60 4.62 4.75 4.68 4.75
CSD 9 9 8 8.71 8.70 8.58 8.65 8.68 8.67
6 Modified Sand Pump 5 8 5 5.99 6.05 5.94 5.90 5.96 5.87
Long-arm Excavator 5 1 5 3.68 3.60 3.63 3.80 3.72 3.84
CSD 8 8 8 8.00 8.00 7.92 8.00 8.00 8.00
7 Modified Sand Pump 4 7 5 5.28 5.35 5.28 5.25 5.28 5.20
Long-arm Excavator 5 2 6 4.30 4.25 4.29 4.45 4.36 4.46
CSD 9 8 9 8.67 8.65 8.58 8.70 8.68 8.71
8 Modified Sand Pump 4 7 6 5.57 5.65 5.61 5.60 5.60 5.53
Long-arm Excavator 4 3 7 4.54 4.55 4.62 4.75 4.64 4.70
After the total scores were calculated for each combination, all total scores were
plotted into a single chart to easily recognize the area of the total score of each dredger
(fig. 8). If the areas of the total score are separated, then best dredger can be directly
selected by looking for the dredger with the highest total score. But if the area of the total
score is on top of each other, then the decision can go to both dredgers or divide the work
equally to the dredgers.
The 3rd International Conference on Engineering of Tarumanagara (ICET) 2017
Faculty of Engineering, Tarumanagara University, Jakarta‐Indonesia, October 4‐5th, 2017
ISBN: 00‐00‐00‐00‐00
Fig. 8. Chart of dredger total score area
As shown in figure 8 above, CSD has the highest total score area which in line with
the first total score calculation result. As for modified sand pump and long-arm excavator,
the total score areas are on top of each other. It means for the second best decision, it can
go to either modified sand pump or long-arm excavator.
4. CONCLUSIONS
Based on the analysis, the following conclusions can be taken:
1. The method to choose the best dredger should be based on the total score. To
reduce the subjectivity in scoring, several input of dredger performance score and
level of terms importance is taken and inputted in matrix of sensitivity analysis.
2. Based on the real data analysis in reclamation projects, in between dredgers that
were analyzed, CSD is the best dredger to be chosen with the the highest average
total score of 8.41, followed by modified sand pump with average total score of
4.73, and the last is long-arm excavator with average total score of 4.34.
In general, CSD is the best dredger to be chosen in between 3 types of dredgers
that being analyzed. But in common practices, reclamation project does not only use 1
type of dredger to do the whole dredging work. Due to dredger limitation such as the draft
of the dredger that is not analyzed in this research, different dredger is needed to finish the
work.
REFERENCES
[1] Statistics Indonesia, Population and Population Growth Rate by Regency/City in DKI
Jakarta Province, 2010, 2014, and 2015, available at:
https://jakarta.bps.go.id/linkTabelStatis/view/id/136.
[2] Bray R. N., Bates A. D., and Land J. M., 1997, Dredging: A Handbook for Engineer,
Second edition, London: Arnold, p. 3.
The 3rd International Conference on Engineering of Tarumanagara (ICET) 2017
Faculty of Engineering, Tarumanagara University, Jakarta‐Indonesia, October 4‐5th, 2017
ISBN: 00‐00‐00‐00‐00
[3] Kezner H., 2009, Project Management: A Systems Approach To Planning, Scheduling,
and Controlling, Tenth Edition, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, p. 7.
[4] National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2017, What is Bathymetric?,
available at: https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/bathymetry.html.
[5] Rojas, E. M., ed. Productivity: A Practical Guide for Building and Electrical
Contractor, 2008, Fort Lauderdale: J. Ross Publishing, p. 3.
[6] Van’t Hoff, J. and van der Kolff, A. N., eds. Hydraulic Fill Manual: For Dredging and
Reclamation Works, 2012, AK Leiden: CRC Press, p. 72.
[7] Newman D. G., Eschenbach T. G., and Lavelle J. P., 2004, Engineering Economics
Analysis, Ninth Edition, New York: Oxford, p. 151.
[8] Ardalan A., 2000, Economic and Financial Analysis for Engineering and Project
Management, Pennsylvania: Technomic Publishing, p. 20.
