International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET)

Volume 10, Issue 03, March 2019, pp. 1-8. Article ID: IJMET_10_03_001
Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijmet/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=10&IType=3
ISSN Print: 0976-6340 and ISSN Online: 0976-6359

© IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed

RISK ASSESSMENT IN SHIP REPAIR

SCHEDULING
Muhammad Badrus Zaman
Head, Department of Marine Engineering
Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya. Indonesia.

Nurhadi Siswantoro
Laboratory of Marine Operation & Maintenance, Department of Marine Engineering,
Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya. Indonesia.

Rizky R. Nandiansyah
Department of Marine Engineering,
Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya. Indonesia.

Semin
Professor, Department of Marine Engineering,
Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya. Indonesia

ABSTRACT
A shipyard is one of the most important element in the shipping industry for
carrying out a job as building and repairing ship. The purpose of this research is
developing a recommendation for the shipyard to get the best schedule, and not get
the risk of delays in ship repair, in this case, is PT. ASS. The result showed that the
delay on ship repair project is using schedule risk delay software is 5 days maximum
delay from the designated delay dates. The high impact cause of the delays is bad
weather condition and worker accident. In the present work, an attempt has been
made to experimentally investigate the performance of a flat plate solar air heater.
Experiments were performed to find the energy and exergy efficiency at the different
mass flow rate of air. It is observed that for a 16% increase in the mass flow rate of
air, energy efficiency increases by 20%, whereas exergy efficiency increases by 36%.
Keywords: Project management, risk assessment, scheduling.
Cite this Article: Muhammad Badrus Zaman, Nurhadi Siswantoro, Rizky R.
Nandiansyah and Semin, Risk Assessment in Ship Repair Scheduling, International
Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology, 10(3), 2019, pp. 1-8.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=10&IType=3

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 1 editor@iaeme.com
 Risk Assessment in Ship Repair Scheduling

1. INTRODUCTION
Shipyard is one of the most important element in shipping industry for carrying out a job as
building and repairing ship. In maritime industry itself, ship repair is become second most
important aspect, approximately 40% of the operation costs in a marine shipping organization
is attributable to maintenance [1]. That mean, ship repair is too important to deny.
Indonesia is one of the country that improve its maritime sector, based on data from
ministry of industry in 2015 there is 250 shipyard in Indonesia and the ministry of industry
also predicting that the number will keep increasing in order to maintain the demand on
shipbuilding and ship repair industry, parallel to number of shipyard, the number of ship
repair demand is increasing [2]. In fact, in Indonesia 40% of ship repair project is delayed
every year. In global cases, 30% of large construction project is delayed with extended time
10%-30% [3].
PT. Adiluhung Sarana Segara (ASS) is one of the national shipyard in Indonesia provided
ship repair and ship building services. Based on the previous research, in 2015 there is 25%
ship repair delays in shipyard in Surabaya. That means, almost halve of the ship repair
demand in shipyard in Surabaya is delayed. Although the shipbuilding industry is
characterized as high-risk, there are only limited applications of risk management
incorporated into the various production processes. Since formal risk analyses have not been
implemented commonly in the shipbuilding industry, this study represents an effort to assess
the risk assessment process within Indonesian shipyards using PT. ASS as a case study. The
majority of the ship repairs are delayed to various degrees beyond their anticipated
completion dates.

2. METHOD
The location and object of research are KM. Dharma Kartika III that been repaired at PT.
ASS. The research is based on the repair time in real time and the planning repair time on the
shipyard. The research object is using passenger ship that has many objects to repair to
determine the delay time. The ship project itself is planned to start on 11 July 2018 and end
on 24 July 2018.
Observation study to determine the duration of repair activities in real time, is the duration
in real time, the duration of activities in real time is used to determine the activities time in
project planning software to find the critical path of the project, the critical path of the project
is the key if the project is going to delay or not. After finding the critical path, the next step is
to input the risk register and assess the delay risk of the project.
The result of the research is the ship will likely delay on minimum time is at 24 July 2018
it means no delay, and have 50 % chance of having a delay and the project end at 25 July
2018. And the maximum time of delay is on 29 July 2018. The result of mitigation process
simulation on the project, based on discussion with the expert and the shipyard worker, the
result is the maximum time of delay after mitigated is 26 July 2018, but the mitigation process
also determines the cost of the mitigation process, the mitigation process cost around 5,207
dollars each mitigation activities [4-11]. In other countries such as China, CPM is used as a
tool to control projects that are running [12].
The method of simulation is using project management software, the software provided
the schedule arranging and can determine the critical path of the process and also can
determine the risk of the schedule. KM. Dharma Kartika III is a passenger ship with
specification as follows:
Length Over All : 71.82 meter
Breadth : 14.70 meter

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 2 editor@iaeme.com
 Muhammad Badrus Zaman, Nurhadi Siswantoro, Rizky R. Nandiansyah and Semin

Height : 4.10 meter

Draft : 3.10 meter
Goss Tonnage : 2,624 ton
Analyzing time for the normal duration of the project is based on the repair schedule of
KM. Dharma Kartika III and repair list that have been agreed by PT. ASSand ship owner.
Based on the schedule, the date of the ship repair of KM. Dharma Kartika 3 is from 11 July
2018 to 24 July 2018. The activities work breakdown structure can be seen in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Work Breakdown Structure of the Project

2.1. Risk Matrix

The schedule risk delay is based on probability and impact of the risk register, the risk
Register then summarized to determine the risk score of the risk register, the risk score is used
to plot the risk matrix and determine the level of the risk register. The risk matrix in this
research is using the 5x5 risk matrix, the risk matrix can be seen in Figure 2.

Figure 2 5x5 Risk matrix using for the Risk analysis

2.2. Determining Impact

The worst impact that can happen to the project finish dates must be identified and reviewed
when analyzing the consequence. The consequence data must be the impact of the schedule
project delay.
The impact criteria that used in this research is reviewed and approved by the production
division in the shipyard based on the duration of the delay that can affect the project in every
activities section on Table 1 is the Impact criteria based on delays impact.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 3 editor@iaeme.com
 Risk Assessment in Ship Repair Scheduling

Table 1 Impact criteria on schedule delay

Impact Index Impact Rating Description
1 Very Low <=1 day
2 Low >1 day
3 Medium >2 day
4 High >3 day
5 Very High >3 day delay

2.3. Determining Probability

The probability is the qualitative answer of how many the risk event occur in the activity that
causes the activities delay. On Table 2 the description about probability criteria of the delay
risk, the probability criteria is based on the previous researcher and approved by the
production division of the shipyard.
The simulation is using project management software, the software can also assess the risk
of the schedule delay of the project. The main goal of the software is to assess the risk of the
project schedule and applied it to schedule to see the estimated delay time. The software also
can apply the mitigation process and the result after the mitigation process to simulate the
difference between the schedule at risk, normal schedule, and the schedule after the mitigation
process.

Table 2 Probability criteria on schedule delay

Probability index Probability rating Probability
1 Very Low <10%
2 Low 10% - 30%
3 Medium 31% - 50%
4 High 51% - 70%
5 Very High >70%
After getting the risk score, then plotting the risk score to risk matrix and developing the
simulation in project management software to determine the delay date. The risk register can
be seen in Table 3. The matrix can be configured in Primavera Risk analysis, the plotting
result can be seen in Figure 3 and the highest risk is on bad weather condition and worker
accident with score 24.

Table 3 Risk register and score based on project management software

Risk Pre-mitigation
ID Type Title Probability Schedule Cost Performance Score
Bad Weather
Risk 1 Threat L VH N N 24
Condition
Lack of
Risk 2 Threat M M N N 10
Material
Lack of
Risk 3 Threat L L N N 3
equipment
New to
Risk 4 Threat System L M N N 6
design
Worker
Risk 5 Threat L VH N N 24
Accident

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 4 editor@iaeme.com
 Muhammad Badrus Zaman, Nurhadi Siswantoro, Rizky R. Nandiansyah and Semin

Risk Pre-mitigation
ID Type Title Probability Schedule Cost Performance Score
Pipeline
Risk 6 Threat M M N N 10
Design
Lack of
Risk 7 Threat L M N N 6
worker
Delays in
Risk 8 Threat Material L M N N 6
from owner

Figure 3 Risk Register after Inputting the Risk Register Score to Risk Matrix

3. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

The simulations have done 1000 iteration based on the software. The simulation is done
between the normal duration of the project, the risk schedule delay, and the post-mitigation
after assessing the risk. By Inputting the risk register into the schedule is the very maximum
date of delay is 29 July 2018 it means 5 days delay from the planned date, and the simulation
on 1000 iterations have 50% delay on 25 July 2018 and the minimum number on 24 July
2018, the result of the simulation can be seen in Figure 4. The Mitigation process after the
risk analysis has 8 mitigation.
The mitigation process is based on the discussion with the expert and the worker at the
shipyard. Almost all of the mitigation process is increasing work hour of the worker to reduce
the delay risk of the project. The complete mitigation process and the result can be seen in
Figure 5. After input the mitigation process, the software also calculating the delay date after
mitigating process. The result at Figure 6 shown that the mitigation process has the big impact
on the delayed schedule, the delay is likely to reduce from 5 days to only 2 days maximum,
and the 70% iterations are on 24 July 2018, that means the schedule is 70% not having the
delay after mitigating process. Comparing the simulation result of the normal dates, the risk
assessment, and after mitigating process can be seen in Figure 7, from the result can be seen
the impact of the risk on the planned schedule is it can increase the cost of the project and also
increasing the work hour of the worker. The difference maximum time between the normal
dates, the risk schedule and after mitigation is 5 maximum days on the risk schedule and 2
maximum days on after mitigation process to planned dates.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 5 editor@iaeme.com
 Risk Assessment in Ship Repair Scheduling

Figure 4 Simulation Result after Inputting the Risk on the Schedule

Figure 5 the mitigation process and the score after mitigation process

Figure 6 Simulation Result after Inputting the Mitigation Process.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 6 editor@iaeme.com
 Muhammad Badrus Zaman, Nurhadi Siswantoro, Rizky R. Nandiansyah and Semin

Figure 7 Comparison Result between the Planned Dates, The Risk Schedule, and after Mitigation.

4. CONCLUSIONS
This Paper presented the risk of the ship repair project schedule on the passenger’s ship
annual survey. The project has delayed on maximum days in 5 days delay from the planned
schedule, and 2 days maximum from the planned dates after mitigating process, the very
impacted cause of the delays is bad weather condition and the worker accident. And the
mitigation process is increasing work hour of the worker and third-party supplier for the
shipyard to decrease the delay risk from procurement.
From simulations, the project was delayed for 5 days, but delays reduced to 2 days after
mitigation from planned date. It means 3 days faster than risk delay dates. The mitigation
process is focused on increasing work hour based on discussion with the expert because
increasing work hour is the easiest mitigation process and also have low cost. In the future,
this research will not only be applied to guidelines for scheduling on passenger ships survey
but also for other types of ships.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors thank the member of the Laboratory of Marine Operation and Maintenance,
Department of Marine Engineering, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember (ITS) for their
assistance and continuous support on the analysis and evaluation of simulation and other data.
And LPPM ITS for the support of this research.

REFERENCES
[1] A. y. mohammed, "Development of Ship Maintenance Performance Measurement
Framework to Assess the Decision Making Process to Optimise in Ship Maintenance
Planning," Manchester, 2011.
[2] I. M. o. Industry, "Indutrial in Indonesia," Indonesian Ministry of Industry, 2014.
[3] S. A. Assaf and S. Al-Hejji, "Causes of delay in large construction projects. International
Journal of Project Management," Science and Education, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 349-357,
2006.
[4] g. j. s. b. e. Khodakaram salimifard, "resolving resource conflicts in a ship repair project,"
International journal of modeling and optimization, vol. 2, no. 5, 2012.
[5] S. Zareei, "Project scheduling for constructing biogas plant using critical path method,"
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, pp. 756-759, 2018.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 7 editor@iaeme.com
 Risk Assessment in Ship Repair Scheduling

[6] P. X. X. L. X. W. R. Z. e. Nini Xia, "A hybrid BN-HFACS model for predicting safety
performance in construction projects," Safety Science, vol. 101, pp. 332-343, 2018.
[7] R. Flanagan, Risk management and construction, Oxford, Boston: Blackwell Scientific,
2003.
[8] V. Holzmann, "Developing risk breakdown structure for information technology
organizations," International Journal of Project Management, pp. 537-546, 2011.
[9] N. P. I. S. Roy Gelbard, "Integrating system analysis and project management tools,"
International Journal of Project Management, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 461-468, 2002.
[10] C. G. J. Stevens and R. L. Flood, "From Sequencing to “Thinking” In Large-Scale
Projects," in From Sequencing to “Thinking” In Large-Scale Projects, Springer, Boston,
MA, 1989.
[11] C. W. A. M. S. L. C. T. J. P. Mark F. Nagata PSP, "Construction Delays (Third Edition),"
in Chapter Seven - Delay Analysis Using Critical Path Method Schedules, Butterworth,
Heinemann, 2018, pp. 133-202.
[12] Y. Z. G. L. Tao Zhou, "Comparison of critical success paths for historic district renovation
and redevelopment projects in China," Habitat International, pp. 54-68, 2017.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 8 editor@iaeme.com