Study on the Application of Earthquake Resistant Standards

(SNI 1726: 2019) Against Building in Yogyakarta City

Muhammad Syarif

, Sri Astika

and Arkas Viddy

Enggineering, Politekinik Negeri Nunukan, Jl. Limau Sedadap, Nunukan, Indonesia

Department of Administration Business, Politeknik Negeri Nunukan, Jl. Limau Sedadap, Nunukan, Indonesia

Keywords: Earthquake Load, Internal Force, Seismic Bottom Shear Force, Return Period.

Abstract: The load-bearing structure is made from a Special Moment Bearer Frame Structure. The structure is planned

against earthquake loads in accordance with the Indonesian National Standard 1726: 2019 (Earthquake

Resistance Planning Standards for Building Structures), which is based on an earthquake plan with a return

period of 2,500 years. The earthquake load analysis uses the response spectrum method based on the

Earthquake Resistance Planning Procedure for Building and Non-Building Structures (Indonesian National

Standard- 726: 2012 and Indonesian National Standard 1726: 2019). This study aims are to make a comparison

between the two procedures in terms of changes in seismic bottom shear forces, and to examine of the

performance of the building structure in terms of the inter-level drift that occurs. The results of dynamic

analysis obtained using the ETABS v.19.0.0 program showed an increase in seismic bottom shear force by

133%, both in the X direction and in the Y direction. The result directions also compared by using the 2012

Indonesian National Standard. Judging from the terms of deviation between levels, the building structure does

not exceed the provisions, either according to the 2012 or 2019 Indonesian National Standard.

1 INTRODUCTION

Yogyakarta is an area prone to earthquakes. Failure

of building structures can be caused, among others,

by miscalculations in planning, inadequate planning

with the implementation of work in the field, changes

in building functions, natural disasters such as strong

earthquakes and others (Chock, 2016). Evaluation of

the performance of building structure can be done by

analyzing the performance of ultimate limits and the

performance of the service limits based on the

Indonesian National Standard, earthquake loads

based on the Indonesian National Standard (SNI)

1726: 2012 and the Indonesian National Standard

1726: 2019 which contains guidelines for earthquake

resistance planning procedures for building

structures. and non-building which is a revision of the

Indonesian National Standard 1726: 2012 (Nasional,

2012).

The Indonesian National Standard Guidelines

1726: 2019 have used the latest earthquake history

maps since 2017 so that buildings built before 2017

need a structural evaluation to determine the safety of

the structure according to the new standard.

Differences in building planning guidelines for

earthquake resistance The Indonesian National

Standard 1726: 2012 and the Indonesian National

Standard 1726: 2019, namely the design of the

earthquake spectral acceleration of the Indonesian

National Standard 1726: 2019 in several regions of

Indonesia experienced an increase in site class types

of medium soil and hard soil and a decrease in type of

soft ground site class (Indonesia, 2013). The building

that will be the object of research in this study is a

building that has 8 floors using a concrete structure.

The purpose of this study is to determine the

performance of the building with story drift /

deviation between levels and the story shear of the

building. The calculation of the structure is based on

the earthquake loading of the Indonesian National

Standard 1726: 2012 and the Indonesian National

Standard 1726: 2019. The building is located on

medium and hard ground areas.

148

Syarif, M., Astika, S. and Viddy, A.

Study on the Application of Earthquake Resistant Standards (SNI 1726: 2019) Against Building in Yogyakarta City.

DOI: 10.5220/0011729600003575

In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Applied Science and Technology on Engineering Science (iCAST-ES 2022), pages 148-153

ISBN: 978-989-758-619-4; ISSN: 2975-8246

2 LITERATUR REVIEW

2.1 Deviation Between Floor

2.1.1 Based on SNI 1726: 2012

Deviation between floors based on SNI 1726: 2012

article 7.8.6, is calculated as the deflection of the

center of mass at the top and bottom levels under

review. The deflection of the center of mass at the x

level must be determined by the equation (Farlianti,

2020).



(1)

Information:

Cd = deflection amplication factor.

= deflection at the required location determined by

elastic analysis.

Ie = the earthquake priority factor, namely 1. To meet

the performance requirements the ultimate limit of

deviation between floors must not exceed 0.02 times

the level height

2.1.2 Based on SNI 1726: 2019

Deviation between floors based on SNI 1726: 2019

article 7.8.6, is calculated as the deflection of the

center of mass at the top and bottom levels under

review. The deflection of the center of mass at the x

level must be determined by the equation (Siswanto,

2018).



(2)

Information:

Cd = deflection amplication factor

= deflection at the required location determined

by elastic analysis.

Ie = the priority factor of the earthquake, namely 1.

To meet the performance requirements of the

ultimate limit of deviation between floors, it

must not exceed 0.02 times the level height.

3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

3.1 Response Spectrum of the 2012

Indonesian National Standard

Design for Earthquake

The design response spectrum (Sa) in the 2012

Indonesian National Earthquake Standard is taken as

shown in the figure below.

Figure 1: S1 and SS values based on the 1726: 2019

Indonesian National Standard earthquake map.

The results of the analysis from the PUSKIM

website obtained tables, graphical response spectra

and data of the design value of the acceleration

response spectra obtained, among others: Hard soil,

bedrock acceleration value 0.2 seconds (Ss) = 0.708

g, bedrock acceleration 1 second (S1) = 0.306 g, the

acceleration response spectrum in the short period

(SMS) = 0.873 g, the acceleration response spectrum

for the 1 second period (SM1) = 0.547 g, the design

spectral acceleration for the short period (SDS) =

0.582 g, the design spectral acceleration for the 1

second period ( SD1) = 0.365 g, Period (Ts) = 0.626

s and Period (To) = 0.125 s.

3.2 Response Spectrum for 2019

Earthquake SNI Design

The design response spectrum (Sa) in SNI for

Earthquake 2012 is taken as shown in the figure

below.

Figure 2: S1 and SS values based on the SNI 1726: 2019

earthquake map.

4 ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Structural Modeling

Initial modeling was carried out with the ETABS

program. The dimensions of the structure are then

estimated in determining the initial dimensions which

will later get the dimensions of the structure

according to the forces that are obtained. Column

with dimensions 800 x 800 mm, Beams with

dimensions 400 x 800 mm and plate 125 mm.

The following are plans and 3D images of the

designed building model.

Study on the Application of Earthquake Resistant Standards (SNI 1726: 2019) Against Building in Yogyakarta City

149

4.2 Dynamic Response Spectra

Earthquake Loading

The hard and medium soil spectral parameters of

Yogyakarta City based on the Indonesian Spectra

Design web are:

Table 1: Spectra Parameters.

PARAMETER SNI 2019 SNI 2012

Ss 1.209 1.304

S1 0.530 0.471

Fa 1.200 1.000

Fv 1.470 1.529

Sms 1.451 1.304

Sm1 0.779 0.720

Sds 0.967 0.869

Sd1 0.520 0.480

T0 0.107 0.110

Ts 0.537 0.552

TL 8 8

Figure 3: Comparison of Yogyakarta Regional Design

Spectrum Curves.

4.3 Relation of Static Earthquake

Load – Dynamic

Based on SNI 1726: 2012, the dynamic earthquake

load must not be less than 85% of the static

earthquake load, or in other words VDYNAMIC ≥

0.85VSTATIC, if these conditions are not met then

the dynamic earthquake load must be multiplied by a

scale factor of. While SNI 1726: 2019 dynamic

earthquake load must not be less than 100% static

earthquake load, or in other words VDYNAMIC /

VSTATIC, if these conditions are not met then the

dynamic earthquake load must be multiplied by a

scale factor of.

4.3.1 Sliding Force

Figure 4: Story Shear graphics on hard and medium soils.

Building Lateral Style

The lateral earthquake force of the design of each

floor is obtained from the shear force of each floor of

the design results of the previous analysis. The

earthquake force on a floor is the difference between

the shear forces between the floors, so that the

respective values can be seen in the table below.

Figure 5: Lateral Force.

4.3.2 Image Lateral Force

Service Limit Performance Analysis

Figure 6: Displacement.

iCAST-ES 2022 - International Conference on Applied Science and Technology on Engineering Science

150

4.4 Design Control

Structural design control is carried out on checking

the deviation limits between floors as regulated in

articles 7.8.6 and 7.12.1 as well as the stability due to

the P-Delta effect regulated in Indonesian article

7.8.7.

4.4.1 Deviation Between Floors of SNI 1726:

2019

Based on article 7.12.1 table 16 Deviation between

floors of SNI 1726: 2012 permit for types of

structures that fall into all other types of structures

and are in risk category II, the deviation limit between

the permit floors is 0.020 hsx. Meanwhile, SNI 1726:

2019 did not change the deviation limit between

levels from the previous SNI 2012. Based on the

results of the analysis of Etabs v.19.0.0 software, the

displacement and deviation between floors in the x

direction are obtained as shown in the table below.

Figure 7: Allowable deviation between levels.

The shear design of the beam is planned based on

the maximum flexural strength of the beam (Mpr) that

occurs in the plastic area of the beam, namely at the

critical section with a distance of 2h from the edge of

the beam. The factor shear force on the face of the

load is calculated as follows.

pr1

pr3

േ

Wu x ln

(3)

Where :

Ve = Shear force due to the plastic hinge at the ends

of the beam (kN).

Mpr = the possible bending strength of a structural

component (kNm).

Wu = Factored shear force

(kN). Ln = Length of clear span (m).

From the calculation results, the main

reinforcement is 4D19 for the upper reinforcement

and 2D19 for the lower reinforcement in the right

pedestal area, meanwhile in the left support area

4D19 is used for the top reinforcement and 2D19 for

the lower reinforcement, the middle span area uses

the 2D19 for the top and 4D19 for the lower

reinforcement. . Sengkang D10-100 mm for supports

and D10-150 for fields on beam dimensions 250 mm

x 450 mm. For details on reinforcement can be seen

in the following image.

Figure 8: Main beam reinforcement details.

SNI 2847-2013 article 23.4 explains that for

structural components in the calculation of the special

moment-bearing frame system (SRPMK), which

bears the force due to earthquake loads and receives

a factored axial load greater than 0.1., the components

of the structural elements must meet the following

requirements: first, the structural components bear a

factored axial compressive force of not less than

0.1.Ag.fc '. Second, the dimension of the shortest side

is not less than 300 mm. And third, the ratio of the

dimensions of the shortest section to the

perpendicular side is not less than 0.40. The column

is planned to be stronger than the beam (strong

column weak beam). Columns are viewed against the

wobbling or non-swaying portals, as well as for

wandering. The flexural strength of the column is

calculated based on the design of the strong column

weak beam capacity, which is as follows.

M

≥ 1,2 M

(4)

Where:

M

= Column nominal moment.

M

= Nominal moment of block.

SRPMK column shear strength occurs plastic

hinge joints at the ends of the beams that meet the

column. In column planning, the shear force is

obtained by adding the Mpr of the upper column with

the Mpr of the lower column divided by the net height

of the column. The shear force does not need to be

taken to be greater than the design shear force of the

beam-column connection strength based on the Mpr

of the beam, and cannot be less than the factored shear

force from the structural analysis. The column plan

shear force diagram can be seen in the following

Figure:

Study on the Application of Earthquake Resistant Standards (SNI 1726: 2019) Against Building in Yogyakarta City

151

Figure 9: Column Shift Style Diagram.

From the calculations, we get the main reinforcement

36D22 and stirrup 4D10-100 for the support area and

4D10-150 for the field area. Details of column

reinforcement can be seen in the following Image.

Figure 10: Column Reinforcement Details.

4.5 Beam-Column Relationships

The beam-column connection or beam-column joint

has a very important role in the planning of high-rise

building structures with the Special Moment Bearer

Frame System (SRPMK). This is because the joints

that connect the beam to the column will very often

receive the force generated by the beam and column

simultaneously. This can cause the joint that connects

the beam and column to become weak and collapse

quickly. Therefore, restraint reinforcement is needed

to be able to accept and distribute the forces generated

by beams and columns, so that the SRPMK concept

is fulfilled. We can see the freebody diagram of the

style in the following picture.

Figure 11: Forces Acting on the Beam-Column

Relationship.

From the calculation results, the D10-150 count

was designed. Details of beam-column reinforcement

can be seen in Image 11 below.

Figure 12: Details of Beam-Column Relationships.

5 CONCLUSION

From the results of the review of the City Hall Tower

building structure, in terms of the effect of changes in

design earthquake loads (changes from SNI 1726:

2012 to SNI 1726: 2019), several conclusions can be

drawn as follows:

Statically equivalent, the seismic

bottom shear force has increased quite significantly,

namely 3,572,917 kN (SNI 2012) for the x and y

directions, to 4,050.72 kN (SNI 2019), or an increase

of 113,373% in the x and y. From the results of

dynamic analysis with the analysis method of the

2012 SNI response spectrum, the seismic base shear

force is 3,036.98 kN for both x and y directions, while

the results of SNI 2019 obtained a seismic base shear

force of 4,050,720 kN for the x and y. There was an

increase in the basic dynamic shear force of 133.38%

in the x and y directions. The results of the

examination of the deviation between floors, both

according to SNI 2012 and SNI 2019 regulations, the

structure of the Yogyakarta City Hall Tower building

still shows a safe level of performance. In the next

control analysis, namely checking Stability of the

building / P-Delta effect, the structure of the City Hall

Tower building is still in stable condition.

Acceleration of rocks in the short period in

Yogyakarta City has an acceleration decrease of

0.93g. While the acceleration of the rock in a period

of 1 second, there was an increase in the acceleration

of 1.12g. The design response spectrum between SNI

2012 and the 2017 Earthquake Map in the city of

Yogyakarta, there was an acceleration increase ratio

of 1.20g. While the acceleration in the period of 1

second, there is also an increase of 1.30g. This shows

iCAST-ES 2022 - International Conference on Applied Science and Technology on Engineering Science

152

that the earthquake load of SNI 1726: 2019 is more

influential than SNI 1726: 2012.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Alhamdulillah, all praises be to Allah that has given

all the pleasures. With the gifts and conveniences that

Allah gave, so researchers can be completed this

research. Thanks to master in Civil Engineering,

Faculty of Engineering Sultan Agung Islamic

University Semarang and all parties for the

participation and support.

REFERENCES

Chock, G. Y. (2016). Design for tsunami loads and effects

in the ASCE 7-16 standard. Journal of Structural

Engineering, 142(11), 04016093.

Nasional, B. S. (2012). Tata cara perencanaan ketahanan

gempa untuk struktur bangunan gedung dan non

gedung. Sni, 1726, 2012.

Nurjaman, H. N. Beban desain minimum dan kriteria terkait

untuk bangunan gedung dan struktur lain. BSN.

Indonesia, S. N. (2013). Persyaratan beton struktural untuk

bangunan gedung. SNI, 2847, 2013.

Siswanto, A. B. (2018). Kriteria dasar perencanaan struktur

bangunan tahan gempa. Jurnal Teknik Sipil, 11, 59-72.

Hastono, B., & Syamsudin, R. (2018). Perbandingan

Ketahanan Gempa SNI 03-1726-2002 & SNI 03-1726-

2012 Pada Perencanaan Bangunan Gedung Di Kota

Aceh. Ge-STRAM: Jurnal Perencanaan dan Rekayasa

Sipil, 1(1), 1-7.

Hardianto, W., Hanintyo, A. B., Indarto, H., & Nurhuda, I.

(2014). Perencanaan Struktur Gedung Kuliah di

Yogyakart. J. Karya Tek. Sipil, 3(1), 1056-1068.

Farlianti, S., & Sapta, S. (2020). Perhitungan Respon

Spektra Percepatan Gempa Kota Palembang

Berdasarkan SNI 1726; 2019 Sebagai Revisi Terhadap

SNI 1726; 2012. TEKNIKA: Jurnal Teknik, 6(2), 167-

177.

Study on the Application of Earthquake Resistant Standards (SNI 1726: 2019) Against Building in Yogyakarta City

153