PERMATAHATI, ADELIA (2025) ANALISIS PERHITUNGAN QUANTITY TAKE-OFF BERBASIS BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING PADA STRUKTUR BAWAH BANGUNAN TINGGI. S1 thesis, Universitas Mercu Buana Jakarta.
|
Text (HAL COVER)
01 COVER.pdf Download (783kB) | Preview |
|
![[img]](https://repository.mercubuana.ac.id/style/images/fileicons/text.png) |
Text (BAB I)
02 BAB 1.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (537kB) |
|
|
Text (BAB II)
03 BAB 2.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (498kB) |
|
|
Text (BAB III)
04 BAB 3.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (417kB) |
|
|
Text (BAB IV)
05 BAB 4.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (1MB) |
|
|
Text (BAB V)
06 BAB 5.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (209kB) |
|
|
Text (DAFTAR PUSTAKA)
07 DAFTAR PUSTAKA.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (211kB) |
|
|
Text (LAMPIRAN)
08 LAMPIRAN.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (1MB) |
Abstract
The implementation of Building Information Modeling (BIM) in construction projects has proven to provide numerous benefits in terms of efficiency and accuracy, including in the Quantity Take-Off (QTO) process. However, In the construction of the operational support facility building on Jl. Gatot Subroto, South Jakarta, BIM has only been utilized up to Level 2 or 3D, specifically for clash detection between elements, and has not yet been applied for QTO calculation. This raises the question of how much more accurate and efficient BIM-based methods are compared to conventional methods, particularly in calculating concrete and reinforcement volumes for substructure elements such as bored pile and pile cap. This study adopts a case study method with a comparative approach between two QTO methods: the conventional method using manual calculations in Excel, and the BIM-based method using Autodesk Revit 2023, referring to 2D design drawings. The substructure elements were modeled in Revit to obtain QTO data for gross concrete, net concrete, and reinforcement. The data from both methods were then analyzed and compared to identify any differences or deviations in the results. The analysis shows that the conventional QTO method yields slightly higher volumes and weights than BIM. The gross concrete QTO is 0,00104% higher, the nett concrete QTO is 0,11285% higher, and the reinforcement QTO is 1,80434% higher. These differences are primarily due to modeling approaches, particularly the inclusion of rebar overlap lengths in the conventional method and the automatic trimming of overlapping volumes in BIM. Although the percentage differences are minor, the actual volume differences are significant when applied to large-scale projects. Therefore, BIM is proven to be more efficient and accurate, supporting the reduction of potential material waste from the early stages of project planning. Keywords: BIM, Autodesk Revit, Quantity Take-Off (QTO), Concrete, Rebar, Substructure Penerapan Building Information Modeling (BIM) pada proyek konstruksi telah terbukti membawa manfaat dalam hal efisiensi dan akurasi, termasuk dalam proses perhitungan Quantity Take-Off (QTO). Namun, pada proyek pembangunan gedung fasilitas penunjang operasional perkantoran di Jl. Gatot Subroto, Jakarta Selatan, BIM baru digunakan sampai pada level 2 atau 3D, tepatnya sampai pada clash detection, yaitu pendeteksi konflik atau tabrakan antar elemen, dan belum dimanfaatkan untuk perhitungan QTO. Hal ini menimbulkan pertanyaan mengenai sejauh mana metode BIM dapat memberikan hasil yang lebih akurat dan efisien dibandingkan metode konvensional, terutama dalam perhitungan volume beton dan pembesian pada struktur bawah bangunan lebih tepatnya pada elemen bored pile dan pile cap. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode studi kasus dengan pendekatan komparatif antara dua metode QTO, yaitu metode konvensional berbasis perhitungan manual menggunakan Excel, dan metode BIM menggunakan aplikasi Autodesk Revit 2023, yang mengacu pada gambar desain 2D. Permodelan struktur bawah dilakukan dengan Revit untuk memperoleh data QTO beton gross, beton nett, dan pembesian. Seluruh data dari kedua metode kemudian dianalisis dan dibandingkan untuk mengidentifikasi selisih (deviasi) hasilnya. Hasil analisis menunjukkan bahwa QTO metode konvensional menghasilkan volume dan berat yang sedikit lebih besar dibandingkan BIM. QTO beton gross lebih besar 0,00104%, beton nett lebih besar 0,11285%, dan pembesian lebih besar 1,80434%. Selisih ini disebabkan oleh perbedaan pendekatan dalam permodelan, terutama pada penghitungan overlap tulangan spiral serta pemotongan otomatis volume beton yang tumpang tindih dalam BIM. Meskipun perbedaan persentasenya kecil, nilai selisih QTO yang diperoleh cukup signifikan jika diterapkan dalam skala proyek besar. Oleh karena itu, BIM terbukti lebih efisien dan akurat, serta dapat mengurangi potensi waste material sejak tahap awal perencanaan proyek. Kata kunci: BIM, Autodesk Revit, Quantity Take-Off (QTO), Beton, Pembesian, Struktur Bawah.
| Item Type: | Thesis (S1) |
|---|---|
| Call Number CD: | FT/SIP. 25 165 |
| NIM/NIDN Creators: | 41121010056 |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | BIM, Autodesk Revit, Quantity Take-Off (QTO), Beton, Pembesian, Struktur Bawah. |
| Subjects: | 600 Technology/Teknologi > 620 Engineering and Applied Operations/Ilmu Teknik dan operasi Terapan > 624 Civil Engineering/Teknik Sipil 600 Technology/Teknologi > 620 Engineering and Applied Operations/Ilmu Teknik dan operasi Terapan > 624 Civil Engineering/Teknik Sipil > 624.1 Structural Engineering and Underground Construction/Teknik Struktural dan Konstruksi Bawah Tanah |
| Divisions: | Fakultas Teknik > Teknik Sipil |
| Depositing User: | khalimah |
| Date Deposited: | 07 Oct 2025 05:31 |
| Last Modified: | 07 Oct 2025 05:31 |
| URI: | http://repository.mercubuana.ac.id/id/eprint/98866 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
