The research appears in Formosa Journal of Science and Technology (FJST) and evaluates whether replacing conventional cast-in-place structural work with a precast structural system can deliver measurable economic and scheduling advantages in hospital development projects.
As Indonesia continues expanding access to healthcare services, construction efficiency has become a strategic issue. Hospital projects require strict quality control, accelerated delivery schedules, and controlled budgets. Delays in completion can postpone healthcare access, increase operational costs, and affect broader public service targets.
Borong Regional Hospital in East Manggarai Regency was selected as the case study because it is part of a government-supported hospital upgrading initiative intended to strengthen regional healthcare capacity. The hospital is being upgraded from Class D to Class C standards, requiring additional facilities, expanded clinical space, and higher technical performance.
Against that backdrop, the researchers examined whether precast structural construction could improve project performance compared with conventional concrete methods.
Rather than relying on laboratory experiments, the study used a quantitative descriptive evaluation based on real project implementation data. The researchers compared two structural scenarios: conventional concrete construction and precast structural construction.
Their analysis used:
- structural working drawings
- project cost estimates (RAB)
- implementation schedules
- structural element calculations for columns, beams, and floor slabs
- timeline comparison using project scheduling methods
The evaluation focused on practical outcomes: how much time could be reduced and how much money could be saved.
Conventional concrete construction requires most activities to occur directly on-site. Workers install formwork, place reinforcement, pour concrete, wait for curing, and remove temporary supports before moving to the next stage.
Precast construction changes that sequence.
Structural components are manufactured in advance under controlled conditions and then transported to the project site for installation. Because fabrication and site preparation can happen simultaneously, project activities overlap rather than proceed one after another.
The differences produced measurable results.
From a cost perspective, the conventional structural method required approximately IDR 11.10 billion.
The precast alternative reduced structural expenditure to approximately IDR 9.95 billion.
That created total savings of:
- IDR 1,150,515,798.29
- equivalent to 5.18% of total structural cost
The cost reduction came primarily from lower labor requirements, reduced formwork usage, shorter site operations, and less material waste.
Time performance showed an even larger advantage.
The conventional structural process required approximately 110 working days.
Using precast construction reduced the implementation period to 64 days.
That means:
- project acceleration of 46 days
- equivalent to 20.91% time efficiency
According to the authors, the improvement occurred because structural elements were fabricated while site activities continued in parallel. Installation became faster and dependence on weather conditions decreased.
The researchers also noted that precast systems improve workflow predictability because production occurs in more controlled environments than open construction sites.
At the same time, the study acknowledges that precast construction is not universally easier to implement.
It requires stronger coordination between fabrication, transportation, lifting operations, and installation planning. Upfront investment may also be higher because specialized equipment and technical expertise are needed.
However, for projects with repetitive structural layouts and tight delivery targets—especially hospitals—the efficiency gains can outweigh those additional requirements.
In their evaluation, Lubis, Rumihin, and Gan concluded that precast structural systems offer stronger project performance when supported by proper production management and installation planning.
Their findings suggest that future healthcare infrastructure projects may benefit from moving beyond traditional construction approaches and adopting more industrialized building methods.
The implications extend beyond hospitals.
Faster and more economical construction can help governments deliver public facilities more efficiently, reduce pressure on infrastructure budgets, and improve service readiness. For contractors and project owners, the findings provide evidence that productivity gains do not necessarily require reducing building quality.
Instead, changing how buildings are constructed may generate meaningful improvements in cost and delivery outcomes.
0 Komentar