Analisis Faktor Penentu Prioritas Penjadwalan Outage Maintenance Pembangkit Listrik Pada Sistem Terisolasi Menggunakan Metode AHP
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55826/jtmit.v5i2.1824Keywords:
Outage Maintenance, Sistem Tenaga Listrik Terisolasi, AHPAbstract
Penelitian ini membahas pengembangan model prioritisasi Outage Maintenance pada sistem tenaga listrik terisolasi dengan menggunakan metode Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). Sistem kelistrikan terisolasi di Indonesia memiliki keterbatasan cadangan daya dan ketergantungan tinggi terhadap pembangkit lokal, sehingga sangat rentan terhadap gangguan operasional. Pendekatan Time-Based Maintenance (TBM) yang umum digunakan memiliki keterbatasan karena tidak mempertimbangkan kondisi aktual peralatan maupun konsekuensi kegagalan secara komprehensif. Oleh karena itu, penelitian ini mengusulkan pendekatan berbasis Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) yang mengintegrasikan berbagai kriteria penting berdasarkan standar ISO 14224. Metode penelitian dilakukan melalui studi literatur sistematis untuk mengidentifikasi kriteria utama, dilanjutkan dengan penyusunan struktur hierarki AHP yang mencakup kriteria Failure Consequences, Historical Failure & Maintenance Records, serta Resources. Data diperoleh melalui penilaian 10 orang expert dengan metode pairwise comparison. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Failure Consequences menjadi kriteria paling dominan dengan bobot 67,04%, diikuti oleh Historical Failure & Maintenance Records sebesar 21,78% dan Resources sebesar 11,18%. Pada tingkat sub-kriteria, faktor Safety memiliki bobot tertinggi. Hasil ini menunjukkan bahwa prioritisasi Outage Maintenance lebih dipengaruhi oleh risiko keselamatan dan dampak kegagalan dibandingkan faktor sumber daya. Model yang diusulkan mampu memberikan pendekatan yang lebih adaptif, objektif, dan terstruktur dalam pengambilan keputusan pemeliharaan pada sistem tenaga listrik terisolasi.
References
[1] D. J. Ketenagalistrikan, K. Energi, D. A. N. Sumber, D. Mineral, and R. Indonesia, “Statistik 2024,” no. 38, 2025.
[2] Reliability and Security Technical Committee, “Reliability Guideline Operating Reserve Management: Version 3,” pp. 1–24, 2021, [Online]. Available: https://www.nerc.com/comm/RSTC_Reliability_Guidelines/Reliability_Guideline_Template_Operating_Reserve_Management_Version_3.pdf
[3] R. K. Mobley, Maintenance Fundamentals. 2004.
[4] Wartsila, “Engine Operation and Maintenance Manual (O&MM),” pp. 1–658, 2014, [Online]. Available: www.wartsila.com
[5] G. Kabir, R. Sadiq, and S. Tesfamariam, “A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for infrastructure management,” Struct. Infrastruct. Eng., vol. 10, no. 9, pp. 1176–1210, 2014, doi: 10.1080/15732479.2013.795978.
[6] E. Committee, IEEE Standard Definitions for Use in Reporting Electric Generating Unit R e l i a b i l i t y , Av a i l a b i l i t y , and Productivity, vol. 2006, no. March. 2007.
[7] H. Moradi and S. Shadrokh, “A robust reliability-based scheduling for the maintenance activities during planned shutdown under uncertainty of activity duration,” Comput. Chem. Eng., vol. 130, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.compchemeng.2019.106562.
[8] M. Geurtsen, J. B. H. C. Didden, J. Adan, Z. Atan, and I. Adan, “Production, maintenance and resource scheduling: A review,” Eur. J. Oper. Res., vol. 305, no. 2, pp. 501–529, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2022.03.045.
[9] E. Özcan, T. Danışan, R. Yumuşak, and T. Eren, “An artificial neural network model supported with multi criteria decision making approaches for maintenance planning in hydroelectric power plants [Planowanie utrzymania ruchu w elektrowniach wodnych w oparciu o model sztucznej sieci neuronowej wsparty wi,” Eksploat. i Niezawodn., vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 400–418, 2020, [Online]. Available: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85091887440&doi=10.17531%2Fein.2020.3.3&partnerID=40&md5=ebbc0edab173f165560f32b1469f8c74
[10] H. Seiti and A. Hafezalkotob, “Developing the R-TOPSIS methodology for risk-based preventive maintenance planning: A case study in rolling mill company,” Comput. Ind. Eng., vol. 128, no. January, pp. 622–636, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2019.01.012.
[11] A. Azadeh, V. Salehi, M. Jokar, and A. Asgari, “An Integrated Multi-Criteria Computer Simulation-AHP-TOPSIS Approach for Optimum Maintenance Planning by Incorporating Operator Error and Learning Effects,” Intell. Ind. Syst., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 35–53, 2016, doi: 10.1007/s40903-016-0039-8.
[12] G. Ayalew and G. Ayalew, “Integrating Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy TOPSIS Models for Construction Equipment Maintenance Strategy Selection,” Int. J. Manag. Fuzzy Syst., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 33–61, 2025, doi: 10.11648/j.ijmfs.20251102.11.
[13] C. N. Wang, M. H. Hsueh, D. O. Tran Thi, T. D. M. Le, and Q. T. Dinh, “Optimal Maintenance Strategy Selection for Oil and Gas Industry Equipment Using a Combined Analytical Hierarchy Process–Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to an Ideal Solution: A Case Study in the Oil and Gas Industry,” Processes, vol. 13, no. 5, 2025, doi: 10.3390/pr13051389.
[14] E. ÖZCAN, Ş. GÜR, and T. EREN, “A Hybrid Model to Optimize the Maintenance Policies in the Hydroelectric Power Plants,” Politek. Derg., vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 75–86, 2021, doi: 10.2339/politeknik.626171.
[15] R. Favar et al., “Power Plants,” no. Mcdm, 2021.
[16] K. E. Mahardika and M. I. Irawan, “Hybrid AHP Topsis Method for Selection and the Four Disciplines of Execution (4DX) for Monitoring the Animal Disturbance Reduction Program (Case Study: PLN UP3 East Bali),” Syntax Lit. ; J. Ilm. Indones., vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 4374–4392, 2025, doi: 10.36418/syntax-literate.v10i4.58615.
[17] M. Dachyar, R. Nurcahyo, and Y. Tohir, “Maintenance strategy selection for steam power plant in range of capacity 300 - 625 MW in Indonesia,” ARPN J. Eng. Appl. Sci., vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 2571–2580, 2018.
[18] C. S. Syan and G. Ramsoobag, “Maintenance applications of multi-criteria optimization : A review,” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., vol. 190, no. November 2018, p. 106520, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2019.106520.
[19] E. Özcan, R. Yumuşak, and T. Eren, “A novel approach to optimize the maintenance strategies: A case in the hydroelectric power plant,” Eksploat. i Niezawodn., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 324–337, 2021, doi: 10.17531/EIN.2021.2.12.
[20] M. Andersson, “Maintenance manual 1”.
[21] International Standard, “ISO 14224 : Petroleum, petrochemical and natural gas industries-Collection and exchange of reliability and maintenance data for equipment from IHS COPYRIGHT PROTECTED DOCUMENT,” vol. 2016, 2016, [Online]. Available: www.iso.org
[22] S. K. Pathak, V. Sharma, S. S. Chougule, and V. Goel, “Prioritization of barriers to the development of renewable energy technologies in India using integrated Modified Delphi and AHP method,” Sustain. Energy Technol. Assessments, vol. 50, no. May 2021, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.seta.2021.101818.
[23] S. Philadelphia and W. Pennsylvania, “A Scaling Method for Priorities in Hierarchial Structures,” vol. 281, pp. 234–281, 1977.
[24] T.-Y. L. and C.-L. H. Young-Jou Lai, “Theory and Methodology TOPSIS for M O D M,” vol. 76, pp. 486–500, 1994.
[25] A. Abdi, F. R. Astaraei, and N. Rajabi, “GIS-AHP-GAMS based analysis of wind and solar energy integration for addressing energy shortage in industries: A case study,” Renew. Energy, vol. 225, no. February, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2024.120295.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Sofwat Sanjaya, Mar’atus Sholihah
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
