why does the current code require · pdf file2 isems, 7-8 november 2013 current indonesian...

1

ISEMS, 7-8 November 2013

Davy Sukamta, Davy Sukamta, Davy Sukamta, Davy Sukamta, Principal, DS&P

STATESTATESTATESTATE----OFOFOFOF----PRACTICE OFPRACTICE OFPRACTICE OFPRACTICE OFSEISMIC DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION IN SEISMIC DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION IN SEISMIC DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION IN SEISMIC DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION IN

INDONESIAINDONESIAINDONESIAINDONESIA



Why does the current code require improvements ?Why does the current code require improvements ?Why does the current code require improvements ?Why does the current code require improvements ?

1. To considers recent great earthquakes in Indonesia

USGS

Aceh Earthquake Mw=9.1 (December, 2004)

Yogya Earthquake Mw=6.3 (May, 2006)

Tasik Earthquake Mw=7.4 (Sept, 2009)

Padang Earthquake Mw=7.6 (Sept, 2009)

Jambi EarthquakeMw=6.6 (Oct, 2009)

Nias Earthquake Mw=8.6(March, 2005)


2


� Current Indonesian Seismic Code and Design Practice

� Updating the Seismic Code (SNI 03-1726-2012)

� Performance-Based Seismic Design in Indonesia

� Base Isolation System in Jakarta

� Summary


1970 : Indonesian Loading Code – N.I-18

1983 : Seismic Resistant Design for Buildings, Code of Practice

2002 : Code on Seismic Resistant Design for Buildings, SNI 03-1726-2002

2012: New Seismic Resistant Design Code

ISEMS, 7-8 November 2013 ISEMS, 7-8 November 2013

TWR

ICV 1=

TWR

ICV 1=

3


Dengan mekanisme sendi plastic, struktur bangunan h arus dapat berotasi dan tidak gagal getas

HAL – HAL YANG PERLU DIPERHATIKAN DALAM CAPACITY DES IGN :

1a. Mekanisme yang diinginkan 1b. Mekanisme yang tid ak diinginkan

�� pembatasan jarak sengkang, luasan

tulangan, confinement dan konfigurasi

sengkang

�� Strong column weak beam


Sti

Stirrup ConfigurationConfinement


4


Force Reduction Factor R


TABEL NILAI Force Reduction Factor R


Mean NLRHA Demand

3 x DBE Demand

2 x DBE Demand

Higher Mode Effects

5


Kelemahan dalam STRENGTH-BASED S.D.

1. Penampang beton mempunyai kekakuan effektif tertentu,

tidak tergantung tingkat pembebanan

2. Hubungan Force-Deformation suatu penampang tertentu

dengan tulangan berbeda mempunyai constant stifness, da n

nilai ultimate yield rotation berbeda

3. Nilai R diambil dari tabel, tanpa melihat geometri dan

redundancy

4. Analisis elastik dilakukan pada seluruh komponen

5. Tidak ada definisi tentang Service Level EQ

6. Tidak ada acceptance criteria yang eksplisit


IBC 2011

ASCE 7-05ASCE 7-10

UPDATING THE CODE

3 maps for 500-yr EQ and 3 for 2500-yr EQa.PGAb.Spectra at 0.2 secc.Spectra at 1.0 sec


( Irsyam et al,2010)

6




5. Toru

6. Angkola

8. Sumpur

1.Seulimeum

13. Dikit

14. Ketaun

11. Suliti 15. Musi

16. Manna

17. Kumering

18.Semangko

19.Sunda

9. Sianok

7. Barumun

4. Renun

2. Aceh

3. Tripa

10. Sumani

12. Siulak

Jawa-Sumba

Subduction

Philippine Subduction

Irian

Subduction

N. Sulawesi

Subduction

E. Molucca Subduction

Banda Sea

Collision

W. Molucca

Subduction

Timor Subduction

S. Sumatra

Subduction

N. Sumatra

Subduction56. Sulu thrust

50. Palu-Koro

53. Poso

58. Lawanopo

57. Gorontalo

52. Walanae 55. Tolo thrust

51. Matano

54. Batui thrust

73. Sorong-Maluku

72. Sula-Sorong

71. Tarera-Aidun

70. Yapen

75. Ransiki74. Sorong

79 Highland thrust belt

77. Manokwari trench

76. Membrano

thrust tbelt

78. Lowland34. Wetar back arc

36. Flores back arc

33. Semarang

34. Jogja30. Bumiayu

32. Cimandiri

31. Baribis

Well Identified Faults in Indonesia



Many provisions of ASCE 7-10 has been included in the SNI 03-1726-2012

7


New Provisions

Vertical Irregularities

Horizontal Irregularities

Seismic Design Categories

Redundancy Factors

Generating Design Response Spectrum


Mega Column + Outriggers

Belt Truss &Mega Diagonal


PERFORMANCE-BASED SEISMIC DESIGN

Seismic Design of High-rise Buildings


8


SEAOC Vision 2000Earthquake Performance Level

Fully Operational Operationnal Life SafeNear

Collapse

Ear

thqu

ake

Des

ign

Leve

l

Frequent(43 years)

Basic Objective Unacceptable Unacceptable Unacceptable

Occasional(72 years)

Essential/Hazardous Objective

Basic Objective Unacceptable Unacceptable

Rare(475 Years)

Safety Critical Objective

Essential/Hazardous objective

Basic Objective Unacceptable

Very Rare(2500 years) MCE

Not FeasibleSafety Critical

ObjectiveEssential/Hazardous objective

Basic Objective


ISEMS, 7-8 November 2013DAVY SUKAMTA & PARTNERS, Structural Engineers ISEMS, 7-8 November 2013

No. Of Floors : 50 storiesTotal Height : 250 mLateral Resisting System : RC core wall and outriggerGravity Resisting System: Flat slab with drop panelBasement : 3 levelsFoundation system : Bored-pileStructural Engineer : Davy Sukamta & PartnersFoundation Engineer : Davy Sukamta & Partners

9


PAKUBUWONO SIGNATURE

Floor-to-floor 3.85mRC Core wall and Outriggers, 25-55 MpaWall thickness 650 mmOutrigger Beam 3-story deepExpected inelastic action at coupling beams, base of core wall, both ends of outrigger columns


3-D Nonlinear Model

core wall

hinge zones

Basement structure is includedModel is fixed at the mat foundation level

SSI is not included


• Analysis procedures and

acceptance criteria: follow the

PEER TBI Guidelines

• For this case study, we use

three suites of ground motions

and take the maximum value

• Selection and modification of

GM : Follow PEER GMSM

• The three GM represent

subduction, benioff and

background earthquake


COUPLING BEAM

Diagonally Reinforced Composite Steel Plate

10


Event Characteristic Magnitude,Mw

Distance (km) ScaleFactor

PGA (g) Source

Chi Chi (1999) Megathrust zone 7.62 117 5.3 0.18 PEER

Chi Chi (1999) Benioff zone 7.62 118 5.7 0.26 PEER

Imperial

Valley(1994)

Shallow crustal 6.50 25 1.0 0.42 PEER

Selected Ground Motion


CHICHI RECORD

3-D VIEW Y-AXIS X-AXIS


IMPERIAL VALLEY RECORD

3-D VIEW Y-AXIS X-AXIS


11



12


Fundamental principle of base isolation: modify the response of the building so that the ground can mov e below the buildings without transmitting these moti on into the building.



� Loma Prieta 1989 – $7 Billion

� $450 Million per Second

� Northridge 1994 - $30 Billion

� $2 billion per second!

� Kobe 1995 - $150 - $200 Billion

� $7.5 billion per second!!

Earthquakes can be Catastrophic and Very Expensive


Design Objectives of Base Isolation

13

Copyright © 2012 Bridgestone Corporation


No structural damage in seismically isolated building

Inside of a seismically isolated fire station

Inside of a seismically isolated apartment

Base-isolated apartment in Sendai City

Fixed-base office building in Sendai City

Shear cracks on the wall

No damage or turn over of furniture inside room

Structural damage in fixed-base building

Fixed-base apartment in Sendai City

Heavy damage inside room

4. Performance of Seismically Isolated Buildings in Tohoku Area

49


General Philosophy of Building Code Provision


Types of Seismic Isolation Bearings

14


Elastomeric bearing Hysteresis Loops


Out of phase

Elastic materialvs

Viscoelastic material


Harmonic behavior of Elastomeric Bearing


Modellingthe Bearing

Total Force

15



16


Each bearing is tested in the manufacturer’s lab

Detail of RBS

Detail of Column ConnectionWith Full Penetration Weld

17

Swing Recorder

Examples of good detailing practice

18

PURI MATAHARI DJARUM HEAD OFFICE

Coming Soon

http://www.davysukamta.com

TERIMA KASIHTERIMA KASIHTERIMA KASIHTERIMA KASIH

News / Articles / State of practice

why does the current code require · pdf file2 isems, 7-8 november 2013 current indonesian...

Documents