Optimalisasi Health Index pada Asesmen Peralatan di UPT Palembang untuk Mempercepat Penggantian Peralatan Gardu Induk
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70609/metrotech.v4i2.7077Kata Kunci:
Asesmen, MCDM, Health index, Peralatan gardu indukAbstrak
Saat ini metode perhitungan Health Index pada asesmen peralatan Gardu induk di PT PLN (Persero) Unit Pelaksana Transmisi Palembang (UPT Palembang) hanya menggunakan data kondisi teknis yang diperoleh dari evaluasi hasil pemeliharaan dalam bentuk skor asesmen, sehingga semakin banyaknya aset yang beroperasi serta umur peralatan yang terus bertambah dengan tingkat risiko yang berbeda, akan menyebabkan Health Index peralatan UPT Palembang menjadi tidak optimal, akibatnya proses justifikasi usulan penggantian peralatan menjadi terlambat dan tidak tepat sasaran. Untuk menyelesaikan permasalahan tersebut, Perhitungan Health Index dioptimalkan dengan menambahkan kriteria umur operasi dan kriteria tingkat risiko peralatan menggunakan metode Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) sehingga proses justifikasi usulan penggantian peralatan menjadi lebih cepat dan tepat.
Referensi
[1] PT PLN (Persero) UIP3B Sumatera, “Buku Asesmen Peralatan Gardu induk,” 2019, PT PLN (Persero) UIP3B Sumatera.
[2] PT PLN (Persero), “Keputusan Direksi No 149.K/DIR/2013 Tentang Kriteria Penggantian Peralatan Utama Gardu induk di Lingkungan PT PLN (Persero),” 2013, PT PLN (Persero).
[3] W. R. Tamma, R. A. Prasojo, and Suwarno, “Assessment of High Voltage Power Transformer Aging Condition Based on Health Index Value Considering Its Apparent and Actual Age,” in ICITEE 2020 - Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Information Technology and Electrical Engineering, 2020, pp. 292–296. doi: 10.1109/ICITEE49829.2020.9271778.
[4] C. Somboonchaiwong, T. Suwanasri, and C. Suwanasri, “Health index determination of aged high voltage substation in distribution system,” in Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Electrical Engineering/Electronics, Computer, Telecommunications and Information Technology, ECTI-CON 2019, 2019, pp. 274–277. doi: 10.1109/ECTI-CON47248.2019.8955223.
[5] A. Setiawan, W. Adiati, and R. A. Prasojo, “An approach of the analytic hierarchy process to acquire the weighting factor of high voltage circuit breaker health index,” in Proceeding - 2nd International Conference on Technology and Policy in Electric Power and Energy, ICT-PEP 2020, 2020, pp. 317–322. doi: 10.1109/ICT-PEP50916.2020.9249791.
[6] G. A. Santika and E. Yulianto, “Jurnal Energi dan Ketenagalistrikan Modifikasi Analytic Hierarchy Process dalam Penyusunan Model Indeks Kesehatan Peralatan Gardu induk Jurnal Energi dan Ketenagalistrikan,” vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 106–117, 2023.
[7] K. Witchawut, P. Fuangpian, and T. Suwanasri, “Condition Assessment of a Gas Insulated Substation,” 2018 Int. Electr. Eng. Congr., pp. 1–4, 2018.
[8] T. A. Aman, A. S. Mokhtar, and M. Aizamtalib, “Assessment The Overall Health Condition of Transformer Using Health Index and Critical Index Approach : TNB Grid Case Study,” pp. 235–239, 2020, doi: 10.1109/PECon48942.2020.9314483.
[9] S. Shaulagara, V. Fazlurrahman, and H. Riyandhini, Putri, “Risk-Based Prioritization Method for Rescheduling Delayed Preventive Maintenance of Electric Power Transmission Assets,” 2023 4th Int. Conf. High Volt. Eng. Power Syst., pp. 25–28, 2023, doi: 10.1109/ICHVEPS58902.2023.10257532.
[10] N. Mitsuhiro, T. Shigeyuki, N. Masao, and M. Kouji, “Approach to Asset Management of Substation Equipment in Japan,” pp. 4–7, 2020.
[11] A. Tryollinna, “Optimizing Stakeholder Management : Operational Decision Making for Transformer Replacement,” 2019 2nd Int. Conf. High Volt. Eng. Power Syst., pp. 67–71, 2019.
[12] A. Radevito, “Analisis Pengambilan Keputusan Multi Kriteria Dalam Penentuan Peringkat Sumber Energi Sektor Ketenagalistrikan di Indonesia Menuju Net Zero Emission,” Universitas Indonesia, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://lib.ui.ac.id/detail?id=20525797&lokasi=lokal
[13] K. Nurdianto, “Multi Criteria Decision Making Pada Pemeringkatan Dedieselisasi PLTD Berdasarkan Risiko,” Universitas Indonesia, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://lib.ui.ac.id/detail?id=9999920548640&lokasi=lokal
[14] PT PLN (Persero), “Peraturan Direksi Nomor 0071.P/DIR/2021 Tentang Pedoman Umum Manajemen Risiko Terintegrasi PT PLN (Persero),” 2021, PT PLN (Persero).
[15] W. H. Syaifudin and A. Choiruddin, Pengantar Teori Probabilitas dan Statistika. Elmarkazi, 2021.
[16] T. L. Saaty and L. G. Vargas, Models, Methods, Concepts & Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Second Edi., vol. 175. in International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol. 175. Boston, MA: Springer US, 2012. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4614-3597-6.
[17] R. Cornaleus, A. Diana, and D. Achadiani, “Penerapan Metode Analytical Hierarchy Process Dan Simple Additive Weighting Untuk Pendukung Keputusan Dalam Penentuan Supplier,” Ikraith-Informatika, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 132–140, 2022, doi: 10.37817/ikraith-informatika.v6i3.2217.
[18] Wawan Firgiawan, Sugiarto Cokrowibowo, and Nuralamsah Zulkarnaim, “Komparasi Algoritma SAW, AHP, dan TOPSIS dalam Penentuan Uang Kuliah Tunggal (UKT),” J. Comput. Inf. Syst. ( J-CIS ), vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 1–11, 2019, doi: 10.31605/jcis.v1i2.426.
[19] N. Vafaei, R. A. Ribeiro, and L. M. Camarinha-Matos, “Normalization Techniques for Multi-Criteria Decision Making : Analytical Hierarchy Process Case Study Normalization Techniques for Multi-Criteria Decision Making : Analytical Hierarchy Process Case Study,” no. April, 2016, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-31165-4_26.
Unduhan
Diterbitkan
Terbitan
Bagian
Lisensi
Hak Cipta (c) 2025 Novi Hendriansyah, Rinaldy Dalimi
Artikel ini berlisensi Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
