See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/321079288

Simulation of tunneling construction methods of the Cisumdawu toll road

Conference Paper  in  AIP Conference Proceedings · November 2017

DOI: 10.1063/1.5011583

CITATION READS
1 480

5 authors, including:

Muhamad Abduh Sapto Nugroho Sukardi

Bandung Institute of Technology Bandung Institute of Technology
46 PUBLICATIONS   122 CITATIONS    3 PUBLICATIONS   2 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Muhammad Rusdian La Ola Reini D. Wirahadikusumah

Bandung Institute of Technology Bandung Institute of Technology
2 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION    44 PUBLICATIONS   636 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Gambaran Perkembangan Teknologi Konstruksi di Indonesia View project

Ministry of Public Works Indonesia View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Muhamad Abduh on 26 November 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Simulation of tunneling construction methods of the Cisumdawu toll road
Muhamad Abduh, Sapto Nugroho Sukardi, Muhammad Rusdian La Ola, Anita Ariesty, and Reini D.
Wirahadikusumah

Citation: AIP Conference Proceedings 1903, 070014 (2017);

View online: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5011583
View Table of Contents: http://aip.scitation.org/toc/apc/1903/1
Published by the American Institute of Physics
 Simulation of Tunneling Construction Methods of the
Cisumdawu Toll Road
Muhamad Abduh1,a), Sapto Nugroho Sukardi2,b), Muhammad Rusdian La Ola2,c),
Anita Ariesty2, d), Reini D. Wirahadikusumah1, e)
1
Associate Professor, Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Jln. Ganesha
No. 10, Bandung, 40132, Indonesia
2
Graduate Student, Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Jln. Ganesha No.
10, Bandung, 40132, Indonesia
a)
Corresponding author: abduh@si.itb.ac.id
b)
saptosukardi@students.itb.ac.id
c)
rusdianlaola@students.itb.ac.id
d)
anitaariesty@students.itb.ac.id
e)
wirahadi@si.itb.ac.id

Abstract. Simulation can be used as a tool for planning and analysis of a construction method. Using simulation technique,
a contractor could design optimally resources associated with a construction method and compare to other methods based
on several criteria, such as productivity, waste, and cost. This paper discusses the use of simulation using Norwegian
Method of Tunneling (NMT) for a 472-meter tunneling work in the Cisumdawu Toll Road project. Primary and secondary
data were collected to provide useful information for simulation as well as problems that may be faced by the contractor.
The method was modelled using the CYCLONE and then simulated using the WebCYCLONE. The simulation could show
the duration of the project from the duration model of each work tasks which based on literature review, machine
productivity, and several assumptions. The results of simulation could also show the total cost of the project that was
modeled based on journal construction & building unit cost and online websites of local and international suppliers. The
analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the method was conducted based on its, wastes, and cost. The simulation
concluded the total cost of this operation is about Rp. 900,437,004,599 and the total duration of the tunneling operation is
653 days. The results of the simulation will be used for a recommendation to the contractor before the implementation of
the already selected tunneling operation.

INTRODUCTION
Nowadays, a construction operation is demanded to be more effective and efficient in using resources with the aim
to maximize the productivity of the construction operation itself. One way to reach that goal is to simulate the
construction operation during the planning phase. The CYCLONE (Cyclic Operations Network) modeling technique
is widely used for the simulation purpose because of its adaptability to cyclic construction operations, and because it
is a convenient system to use [1]. The CYCLONE modeling emphasizes the logical sequence of construction activities
and the effect of their interaction on productivity. For simulation purposes, the WebCYCLONE is a special purpose
simulation software that could measure construction operation productivity with only require programming code based
on construction operation based on the CYCLONE model [2].
The Cisumdawu Toll Road project is a strategic toll road project in Indonesia since this toll road becomes a
continuation of the Java toll road plan that links the Cikampek-Palimanan toll road with the Padalarang-Cileunyi toll
road, and then will connect two big cities in West Java Province, i.e., Bandung and Cirebon.
One of the critical construction activities in this Cisumdawu Toll Road project is the 362-meter long tunneling
operation. The tunneling operation is highly repetitive, and the most important activity is the actual advancement rate

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Construction and Building Engineering (ICONBUILD) 2017
AIP Conf. Proc. 1903, 070014-1–070014-10; https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5011583
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-1591-1/$30.00

070014-1
of the tunnel. Using a simulation model developed for the tunnel, it is possible to investigate the impact of each
important resource on the tunnel’s advancing rate.
The Cisumdawu toll road project is a 6-lane toll road divided into 2 tunnels of each 472 m long with a depth of
52.8 m. Tunnel construction is divided into 2 sections. The first section is a 110 m long tunnel portal located at the
end of the tunnel that will be constructed using cut & cover method. Furthermore, the second section of 362 m long
is planned to be constructed using New Austrian Tunneling Method (NATM) method.
This paper presents a study of an alternative method of tunnel construction that could be used in Cisumdawu Toll
Road Project for the contractor to be considered. The selected alternative method in the study is the Norwegian Method
of Tunneling (NMT) which is suitable for the project. This study aimed to give measure the productivity of tunneling
operation using NMT and analyze the advantages and disadvantages of NMT compared to the contractor’s chosen
method, the New Austrian Tunneling Method (NATM). A thorough literature search is conducted to select the suitable
tunneling method and input data. Different simulation models were generated and run, and a sensitivity analysis was
performed to show the effect of each variable on the tunnel advancement rate.

STUDY METHODS
The study was conducted as depicted in Fig. 1, and as follow:

1. Literature review and data collection.

2. Several literatures from international, journal, proceedings and magazines were reviewed to determine the
alternative tunneling method and cycle time of processes associated with the selected method. The selection
process to filter the literature was based on the correlation of the study and the similarity of work tasks that
were integrated with the selected alternative method. Visit to the site several times were conducted to observe
and collect field data.
3. Estimation of duration and cost.
4. Based on the literature and survey, the duration of each process was calculated and estimated, and the costs
associated with the resources were determined.
5. CYCLONE modeling.
6. Based on the process of the selected method, a CYCLONE model was constructed and then translated the
model into syntaxes and input for WebCYCLONE simulation.
7. Simulation run.
8. The validated model and input data were run in the WebCYCLONE site and then analyzed.
9. Sensitivity analysis.
10. Based on the result of simulation, a sensitivity analysis was performed to seek a productivity improvement
for the selected method.
11. Conclusion.
12. The results from the simulation would be able to generate information about the cost and duration of the
project. Compare the results with the contractor's plan to conclude the study.

FIGURE 1. Methodology

070014-2
 ASSUMPTIONS FOR TUNNELING
The NMT is most suitable for harder ground, where jointing and over break are dominant, and where drill and
blasting are the most usual methods of excavation [3]. Since the geological condition of Cisumdawu Toll Road Project
consists of silty clay and sandy clay (soft ground), therefore some adjustments should be made in order the NMT
method could be applicable. The NMT uses Q-system as shown in Fig.2 for geological mapping and classification
before selecting supports or reinforcements for the tunnel.

FIGURE 2. Q-system for tunnel supports [3]

The Q-system is based on 6 different parameters, and the Q-value is calculated by means of the following formula:
RQD J J
Q= × Jr × SRF
w
(1)
Jn a
where:
RQD = Rock Quality Designation
Jn = Joint Set Number
Jr = Joint Roughness Number
Ja = Joint Alteration Number
Jw = Joint Water Reduction Factor
SRF = Stress Reduction Factor

Chryssanthakis et.al. [4] Conducted a research about NMT implementation in soft ground in Patas, Greece. The
site consists marl and sand. Marl or marlstone is a calcium carbonate or lime-rich mud or mudstone which contains
variable amounts of clays and silt. Due to lack of geological data to determine the Q-value in the Cisumdawu Toll
Road project’s location, it was assumed that the tunnel’s geological condition in Cisumdawu Toll Road Project is
similar to the Patas Project, therefore:
10 1 1
Q= × × (2)
6-20 5 1-10

Q=0,01ሺminimumሻ-0,33(maximum) (3)

Using conservative approach based on the above Q-values that were projected to the Q-system (Fig.2), an
estimation of the support requirements is in category 8 where the installation of permanent support using B+S(fr), i.e.,
fiber reinforced shotcrete & bolting, and RRS, i.e., ribs reinforced concrete.

070014-3
 The estimated Q-values could also determine the temporary support for the tunnel face. Since the range of the
estimated Q-values is in all the tunnel face support criteria, thus the three criteria have the same possibility to be
chosen in the simulation.
The excavation sequence shown in Fig.3 where the upper part is the first part to be excavated. Maximum distance
for excavation is 60 cm, this assumption based on the length of bolting which is 3 m with 5 partitions, 60 cm each that
were installed as a temporary support.
TABLE 1. Q-system for temporary support [5]
Q-Value (Guiding) Support a Head of the Tunnel Face
0.001-0.02 Pipe screening/jet grouting/freezing
0.02-0.2 Boltingat face
Bolting at large blocks, almost horizontal
>0.2
stratification, low tension, and at outbreak

FIGURE 3. Excavation sequence

TUNNELING PROCESSES
The tunneling processes are similar for both left and right ways tunnel. This operation consists of the following
work tasks:
1. Perform a tunnel inspection to determine the Q-value for temporary tunnel support.
2. Install temporary tunnel support in accordance with the Q-value.
3. Perform excavation using excavator with 60 cm as maximum length of digging.
4. Perform scaling with excavator & labor crew.
5. Perform a tunnel inspection again to determine the Q-value for permanent tunnel support.
6. Install permanent tunnel support according to Q-value.
7. Repeat process 3–4 until excavation reaches 3 m.
8. Install precast tunnel wall using precast mounting machine as tunnel lining.
9. Move to the next section, repeat process 1–9 until 362 m tunnel constructed.

Resource units needed in this tunneling operation are:

1. Tunnel Section.
2. Tunnel Surveyor.
3. Spilling Bolt Machine.
4. Grouting Pump.
5. Ground Freezing Machine.
6. Excavator.
7. Labor Crew.
8. Reinforced Rib of Shotcrete (RRS).
9. Fiber reinforced shotcrete & Bolting [B + S (fr)].
10. Precast Concrete Tunnel Wall.
11. Precast Mounting Machine.

070014-4
 SIMULATION MODEL
The modeling of this tunneling operation used the CYCLONE modeling technique, and the result of modeling
could be found in Fig.4. Afterward, the model was translated into an input file for simulation using WebCYCLONE.
This is a discrete event simulation methodology and was used for estimating tunneling advancement rate based on
tunneling processes.

7
Ground Freezing
Machine

6
0.33
0.33
3 5 Tunnel Face Support
Q=0.001-0.02 Installation using
Ground Freezing

3 10
Spilling Bolt
Surveyor
Machine

4 9
2 0.34 16
1 Determining Q-value 0.34
4 8 Tunnel Face Support
Tunnel Face Ready to
Section Ready for temporary Q = 0.02 – 0.2 Installation using
Inspection Excavate
support Bolting at face
GEN
GEN SS

11
Grouting Pump

14
Spilling Bolt
Machine

13
0.33
0.33 12 Tunnel Face Support
Q > 0.2 Installation using
Bolting at large Blocks

15
Grouting Pump

17 19 25
22
Tunnel Excavation 24 Determining Q-
Ready for 21 Scalling
(max 60 cm) Tunnel Inspection Value for permanent
Scalling Tunnel Scalling Finished
support

`
20 23
Labor Crew Surveyor
18
Excavator

27 33
RRS Precast
Tunnel Wall

32 37
26 29 35
Permanent Support
31 Support 36 Move to the next
Q-Value Tunnel Lining
Installed section
determined Installation
CON
CON SS

30 34
Ready to Precast
28 Mounting
Excavate 2 B+S(fr) Machine

FIGURE 4. CYCLONE model for tunneling operation using Norwegian Method of Tunneling (NMT)

070014-5
 Variable cost of each resource was modeled in Rupiah per hour and the estimation was made based on the 2016
national journal construction and building unit cost (Edition 35), the 2016 public work and human settlement ministry
policy on unit cost analysis for construction works (28/Prt/M/2016), and online websites of local and international
suppliers. The variable cost for each resource used in the model is provided in Table 3.
Due to the tunnel construction in the Cisumdawu Toll Road project hasn’t started yet, the duration of each work
task used in the model was estimated based on literature review of similar work tasks that were performed in previous
projects [6, 7, 8, and 9]. Some work tasks’ durations that weren’t found in any literature were estimated based on its
productivity from the equipment information, while some were assumed based on judgment. The duration for each
work task used in the model are provided in Table 2.
TABLE 2. Works tasks and duration for simulation model
Duration (minutes)
Work tasks
Distribution Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 Part 4
Tunnel Face Inspection Beta 30 36 33 6,50
Determining Q-Value Deterministic 15
Ground Freezing Deterministic 1080
Bolting at Face Installation Uniform 1340 1650
Bolting at Large Blocks Installation Uniform 1340 1650
Excavating Beta 34 48 40 29.35
Scaling Uniform 24 26
Tunnel Inspection Beta 30 36 33 6.5
Determining Q-Value Deterministic 15
Permanent Support Installation Beta 101.74 118.44 109.26 19.34
Tunnel Lining Deterministic 48

TABLE 3. Variable cost for simulation model

Work Tasks Variable Cost (per hour)
Surveyor Rp. 340,650
Ground Freezing Machine Rp. 34,828,254.17
Spiling Bolt Machine Rp. 525,661
Grouting Pump Rp. 150,000
Spiling Bolt Machine Rp. 525,661
Grouting Pump Rp. 164,125
Excavator Rp. 312,175
Labor Crew Rp. 14,125
Surveyor Rp. 340,650
RRS Rp. 5,918,207
B + S(fr) Rp. 24,524,982
Precast Tunnel Wall Rp. 13,725,000
Precast Mounting Machine Rp. 4,193,175

RESULTS
The productivity for this operation was 0.000385 unit/min. The simulation defined 1 unit as 3 m of tunnel lining.
If 1 work day is defined as 8 hours and both left and right tunnels were constructed at the same time, thus the duration
of the tunnel construction:

Productivity=0.000385×60×8×3 (4)

Productivity=0.554 m/day (5)

362 m
Duration= =653 days (6)
0.554 m/day

070014-6
 The cost per production unit for this operation is Rp 3,731,092,560.49. The simulation defined 1 unit as 3 m of
tunnel lining. Thus, the cost of 2 tunnels with 362 m length in the Cisumdawu Toll Road Project:
362
Total Cost=2× 3
×Rp 3,731,092,560.49 (7)

Total Cost=Rp 900,437,004,599 (8)

The simulation also provides the idleness of each resource as depicted in Table 4.
TABLE 4. Resource idleness statistics
Average Max Idle Times Not Total Sim Average Units at
Name Type % Idle
Units Idle Units Empty Time Wt Time End
Section Ready QUEUE 0 1 0 0 259541.5 0 0
Surveyor QUEUE 1 1 253729.5 97.76 259541.5 2512.2 1
Q=0,001-0,02 QUEUE 0 1 0 0 259541.5 0 0
Ground Freezing
QUEUE 0.8 1 219444.2 84.55 259541.5 5930.9 1
Machine
Q=0,02-0,2 QUEUE 0 1 0 0 259541.5 0 0
Spilling Bolt
QUEUE 0.9 1 217754.1 83.50 259541.5 8065.0 1
Machine
Grouting Pump QUEUE 0.9 1 217754.1 83.50 259541.5 8065.0 1
Q>0,2 QUEUE 0 1 0 0 259541.5 0 0
Spilling Bolt
QUEUE 0.8 1 189377.5 72.97 259541.5 4855.8 1
Machine
Grouting Pump QUEUE 0.8 1 189377.5 72.97 259541.5 4855.8 1
Ready to
GEN 0.9 5 93188.6 35.91 259541.5 466.0 0
Excavate
Excavator QUEUE 0.9 1 225798.6 87.00 259541.5 450.7 1
Ready for
QUEUE 0 1 0 0 259541.5 0 0
Scaling
Labor QUEUE 1 1 246825.1 95.10 259541.5 492.7 1
Scaling Finished QUEUE 0 1 0 0 259541.5 0 0
Surveyor QUEUE 0.9 1 241860.3 93.19 259541.5 482.8 1
Q-Value
QUEUE 0 1 0 0 259541.5 0 0
Determined
RSS QUEUE 0.8 1 201535.1 77.65 259541.5 402.3 1
S(FR) QUEUE 0.8 1 201535.1 77.65 259541.5 402.3 1
Ready to
QUEUE 0.6 1 143004.6 55.10 259541.5 285.4 1
Excavate 2
Support Installed QUEUE 0 1 0 0 259541.5 0 0
Precast Tunnel
QUEUE 1 1 254741.5 98.15 259541.5 2522.2 1
Wall
Precast
Mounting QUEUE 1 1 254741.5 98.15 259541.5 2522.2 1
Machine

The productivity chart for 100 cycle’s simulation is shown in Fig. 5, the productivity reaches steady state.

070014-7
 FIGURE 5. Productivity chart for tunneling operation using NMT for 100 cycles

DISCUSSION
Norway and Austria are two major countries that have long traditions in using shotcrete and rock bolts for tunnel
support. Yet there are significant differences in philosophy and areas of application for NATM and NMT. The NATM
is most suitable for soft ground where the ground can be machine or hand excavated, where jointing and over break
are not dominant. The NMT is most suitable for harder ground, where jointing and over break are dominant, and where
drill and blasting are the most usual methods of excavation [3].
The NMT uses Q-system for geological mapping and classification to determine the tunnel supports. The Q-system
is a forward predictive method and therefore differs significantly from NATM methods, which apparently depend on
monitoring to decide on the timing and amount of additional support to classify its geological condition. The important
point is that forward prediction of conditions and agreed modifications for unexpected conditions should each be done
as early and as accurately as possible to minimize disputes and tunnel instability.
The NATM recommends and applies primary S(mr) (mesh reinforced shotcrete), in the case of NMT the choice is
S(fr) (fiber reinforced shotcrete), which is essential for actively supporting rock with over-break, instead of leaving
inevitable voids and 'shadows' when reinforcement is applied in the form of mesh instead of as fibers [9].

FIGURE 6. The difference between S(mr) (left) and S(fr) (right) [9]

Lattice girders and steel arches that are usually used in NATM cannot be used in NMT. They will attract extra
deformation and cause failures when they are applied as part of the Q-system. Moreover, the use of S(mr) attracts
deformation, and can even be dangerous, as it is an inefficient, multi-process and therefore delayed support measure.
In unstable rock, arches of S(fr) can be built rapidly by robot application (with non-alkali accelerator). The arches are

070014-8
then systematically bolted and internally reinforced with steel bars. These composite RRS (rib reinforced shotcrete)
arches are inevitably far superior to lattice girders or steel arches [9].
TABLE 5. Sensitivity analysis
Number of Number of Labor Productivity Per Unit
Cost Per Unit Time Cost Per Prod Unit
Excavator Crews Time
1 1 0.0004 Rp. 1.425.809 Rp. 3.731.092,560
1 2 0.0004 Rp. 1.426.044 Rp. 3.737.719.432
1 3 0.0004 Rp. 1.426.280 Rp. 3.667.857.541
2 1 0.0004 Rp. 1.431.012 Rp. 3.784.635.117
2 2 0.0004 Rp. 1.431.247 Rp. 3.836.408.874
2 3 0.0004 Rp. 1.431.483 Rp. 3.737.481.413
3 1 0.0004 Rp.1.436.215 Rp. 3.752.870.669
3 2 0.0004 Rp. 1.436.450 Rp. 3.766.920.050
3 3 0.0004 Rp. 1.431.686 Rp. 3.715.799.065

Based on the results of the simulation, using NMT would make the operation faster than the NATM that is planned
by the contractor. The difference total duration between the two methods is 203 days. The acceleration of the tunnel
construction using NMT in the simulation occurs because of these reasons:
1. The implementation of Q-system
2. Q-system could predict the geological condition of the tunnel to prevent delay.
3. The usage of precast tunnel wall for tunnel lining
4. Precast tunnel wall doesn’t take time to settle like the cast on site lining.
5. Work task duration
6. The duration of each work task used in the model was based on the literature review, machine productivity,
and judgment, thus the productivity of the work task probably could not represent the actual condition on the
site.
7. Assumptions used in simulation
8. Simplification and assumption of construction process that were applied to the model affects the results of the
project duration.

In this study, a sensitivity analysis was conducted by changing numbers of excavator and labor to improve the
productivity of the operation. The results, as shown in Table 5, concludes that the number of excavator and labor will
not affect the productivity of the tunneling operation. This can be explained due to the nature of sequential operation
of tunneling; a work task in the operation needs to wait for the predecessor work task to be done to begin. As a result,
the idle of machines and workers are above 70%. That could explain why changing the numbers of machines or
workers will not affect the productivity of tunneling construction significantly.
Due to lack of field data during the study and site visit because of the tunnel construction hasn’t begun yet, the
result of this study should be seen only as an alternative plan. There should be more extended study regarding the
resources and the geological conditions needed in the NMT method in order this method could be applicable in the
Cisumdawu Toll Road project, especially for decision making process before the tunneling construction starts.

CONCLUSIONS
This paper presents a study on simulation of the tunneling operation using NMT in the Cisumdawu Toll Road
project. This study is expected to be an example for consideration and education for contractor, student, and researcher
in construction engineering field.
The simulation concluded the total cost of this operation is about Rp 900.437.004.599 and the productivity for this
operation is 0.554 m/day that makes total duration for the tunneling operation is 653 days; which is 203 days faster
than the NATM method that is chosen by the contractor. The acceleration of the tunnel construction using NMT in
the simulation occurs because of the implementation of Q-system, the usage of precast tunnel wall for tunnel lining,
work task duration, and assumptions used in simulation. Moreover, changing the numbers of machines or workers
won’t affect the productivity significantly due to the nature of sequential processes of tunneling construction operation.

070014-9
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study was a final project in a course, entitled Planning and Analysis Construction Operation, offered in
Construction Engineering and Management Graduate Program in Civil Engineering, Faculty of Civil and
Environmental Engineering, ITB, Indonesia. This study was fully supported by the Institut Teknologi Bandung. We
would also like to show our gratitude to the Project Implementation Unit of the Cisumdawu Toll Road Project, the
Ministry of Public Works and Human Settlement, and the contractors MCC–WIKA–NINDYA–WASKITA Joint
Operation which provided data, insight, and expertise that greatly assisted the study. We also thank our class-mate in
this course for the support during the study.

REFERENCES
1. Halpin, D.W., Planning and Analysis of Construction Operation (John Wiley and Sons, Inc., Canada, 2002).
2. Halpin, D.W., Senior, A.B., WebCYCLONE User’s Manual. Construction Management (John Wiley and Sons,
Inc., Hoboken, 2011)
3. Barton, N., Norwegian Method of Tunneling. World Tunneling (1992).
4. Chryssanthakis, P., Barton, N., Loset, F., Dallas, A., Mitsotakis, K., 8th International IAEG Congress. (1998).
5. Norwegian Tunneling Society, Rock Support in Norwegian Tunneling Publication No. 19. (NFF, Oslo, 2010).
6. Park, N.J., Kim, H.S., Moon, H., Kang, L., Korean Society of Civil Engineers, 32, 41–49 (2012).
7. Guo, S.J., Can. J. Civ. Eng. 28, 26–34 (2001).
8. Vargas, J.P., Koppe, J.C., Perez, S., Hurtado1, J.P., “Planning Tunnel Construction Using Markov Chain Monte
Carlo (MCMC),” Hindawi Publishing Corporation Mathematical Problems in Engineering (2015).
9. Barton, N., TAC Workshop Support Pre-Injection (2013).
10. Barton, N., “Forty Years with the Q-System in Norway and Abroad”, Bergmekanikk/Geoteknikk (2014).

070014-10
View publication stats