Optimizing Building Maintenance Strategies Using Visual Evaluation and Life Cycle Cost Analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55927/mudima.v5i11.687Keywords:
Rapid Visual Screening, Life Cycle Cost, Building MaintenanceAbstract
This study focuses on optimizing maintenance strategies for the Civil Engineering Department lecture building at Manado State Polytechnic by integrating Rapid Visual Screening (RVS) and Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA). The research was conducted through field inspections using RVS FEMA P-154 guidelines, supported by non-destructive tests such as Schmidt Hammer and Total Station measurements to evaluate material strength, verticality, and horizontality. Data on maintenance costs were collected from repair budgets in 2023–2024 and categorized into five preventive packages: ceiling safety, façade/canopy anchorage, glass/ventilation reinforcement, protective finishing, and electrical/evacuation improvements. Three alternative strategies were simulated: S0 (reactive), S1 (preventive), and S2 (minor retrofit). Results show that although the building is structurally sound, several non-structural elements such as canopies, façades, and ceilings present significant risks if not properly maintained. The LCCA revealed that the minor retrofit strategy (S2) provided the lowest net present value (NPV = Rp. 215,241,942.92 over 15 years) while significantly reducing expected annual risk compared to reactive and preventive approaches. The study concludes that implementing S2 as the baseline strategy ensures optimal safety, cost efficiency, and sustainability for educational building maintenance.
References
Basu, A., & Aydin, A. (2004). A method for normalization of Schmidt hammer rebound values. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 41(7), 1211–1214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2004.05.001
by the Applied Technology Council for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, P. (n.d.). Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings for Potential Seismic Hazards: A Handbook Third Edition. www.ATCouncil.org
Fairullazi Ayob, M., Yusri Mohamed Yunus, M., Syakirin Has-Yun Bin Hashim, K., Razak Sapian, A., & Tarmizi Haron, A. (2025). LIFE CYCLE COST (LCC) OF UNIVERSITY BUILDING MAINTENANCE: A SYSTEMATISED REVIEW. In Journal of the Malaysian Institute of Planners VOLUME (Vol. 23).
International Standard. (2017). ISO 15686 5 2017 _ Buildings and Constructed Assets - Service Life Planning: Vol. Second Edition.
Jedidi, M. (2020). Evaluation of the Quality of Concrete Structures by the Rebound Hammer Method. Current Trends in Civil & Structural Engineering, 5(5). https://doi.org/10.33552/ctcse.2020.05.000621
Karakul, H. (2020). Investigation of the effect of impact direction on Schmidt rebound values by multivariate regression and neuro-fuzzy model. SN Applied Sciences, 2(11). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-03600-6
Nasional, B. S. (2012). Tata cara perencanaan ketahanan gempa untuk struktur bangunan gedung dan non gedung. www.bsn.go.id
Wbull, J. (n.d.). Life Cycle Costing for Construction.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Geertje Efraty Kandiyoh, Sandri Linna Sengkey, Reiner Tampi, Nixon Mantiri

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
































