Universitas Indonesia

Chapter 3
Research Methodology
3.1.

General View
In this research, the rotational stiffness of an exterior beam-column

connection is assessed. The connection which is wanted to be assessed is an

exterior joint in the second floor of a 6-storey rigid frame building, which is
designed in accordance to the Indonesian SNI 2847:2013 and SNI 2847:2002
about structural reinforced concrete for building. The lateral force of the structure
is then analyzed by referring to SNI 1726:2012 and SNI 1726:2002 about
earthquake and seismic design of structures.
The building which is used in this research is modeled by using ETABS
2013 software by CSi. ETABS is a finite element software which can be used to
model reinforced concrete buildings. This software is capable in doing both
structural analysis and structural design of the modeled building.
From the building modeled by ETABS software, an exterior beam-column
joint is taken into analysis. The detailing of the anchorage in this connection is
then designed according to SNI 2847:2013 and SNI 2847:2002. The beam-column
joint is then scaled into smaller specimen, so it can be tested in laboratory.
There are two sets of activities which have to be done in this research; the
laboratory-scale experiment of beam-column joint sample and the numerical
modeling by using Fiber Model Analysis. Both experimental and numerical model
are tested in cyclic loading, which end product is the moment-rotation
relationship. The result which is gained from both procedures are then compared
and analyzed.

65
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

START

Building Modelling

Assign Sample Connection

Constructing Sample

Sample modelling in Drain 2DX

Laboratory testing on sample

Running model

Experimental data processing

Numerical data processing

Comparing data from experiment and numerical calculation

Conclusion

FINISH
Chart 3. 1. Research planning flow chart

66
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

3.2.

Building Modeling
As stated in the previous sub-chapter, the sample which is used in this

research is taken from a modeled structure instead of an existing one. The planned
following researches using different Indonesian standards are going to use the
internal forces of the same building model in order to create their samples, so
comparison between this research and the following researches in the future is
possible.
3.2.1. Preliminary Design
The building which is used will have 6 stories which have a story height of
3.5 meters. The building itself will has a similar beam span of 6 meters. The
building has 8 rows of column along the y axis and 6 rows of column along the x
axis. This building is assumed to be built on deep foundation system, so the
supports of the building are assumed to be fixed supports. The skeletal plan and
the 3D skeletal view of the building model can be seen on the figure below.

Figure 3. 1. Skeletal plan and 3D skeletal view of the building model

(Source: Personal)

As a reinforced concrete structure, this building will contain both concrete

and steel reinforcement in it. The concrete which is used is fc 30MPa, which has
an unit weight of 24 kN/m3 and a modulus of elasticity of 25742.96 MPa. The
primary reinforcing steel is assigned as deformed rebar which is planned to be
BjTS40 rebar which has a yielding stress of 390MPa, while the stirrups
reinforcing steel is assigned as plain steel bar BjTP24 which have 235MPa of

67
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

yielding stress. Both primary rebar and stirrups will have a modulus of elasticity
of 200000 MPa.
In this building, all beams are assumed to share the same stiffness. This
also applies on the columns. In this building, the column is designed to be a
800mm 800mm rectangular column, while the beam is planned to be a 400mm
550mm beams.
3.2.2. Gravity Load Assignment
This building is planned to be an office building, which according to SNI
1727:2013 about minimum loading for structure has a distributed live load of 2.4
kN/m2. Office live load applies on all stories of the building except the roof,
which is planned to have a live load of 0.96 kN/m 2. The slab in this structure will
be assumed as load, which thickness is assumed to be 15cm for all stories, which
is usually used in common office building except for roof, which uses 12cm slab
thickness. This slabs weight, along with the self-weight of the skeletal elements
will be assumed as the dead load of the structure. Note that the slab along with its
live load will be modeled as shell, which will act as rigid diaphragm.
From the loading above, the forces acting on the beam of each floor can be
defined. The load itself is transferred to the beam through the slab, which
distribution will result in trapezoidal load (in this case, triangle load since width
and length of a slab section is similar).
Although the slab will be modeled as shell element, which will act as rigid
diaphragm, the gravity load transfer scheme to the beam should also be
determined, since it will be required in the probable moment calculation of the
beam.

68
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Figure 3. 2. Area load distribution to beam

(Source: Personal)

The shaded area on the figure above is the area of slab which weight and
load acting on it contribute to the corresponding beam. The peak of the triangle
load will be;
q peak (

kN
kN
)=6 (m) w ( 2 )
m
m

(3.1)

where w is the area load due to live load or dead load. Referring to equation 3.1,
the qpeak for live load is 14.4 kN/m for every story except roof, where the roof will
have a qpeak of 5.76 kN/m.
In order to assign the dead load acting on the structure, the weight of the
slab is assumed to behave the same way with the live load. In order to determine
the area load, the thickness of the slab (15 cm and 12 cm) has to be multiplied
with the unit weight of the slab, which is taken as concrete unit weigt (24 kN/m).
This will yield to an uniform area load of 3.6 kN/m 2 for intermediate stories and
2.88 kN/m2 for roof. By using equation (3.1), the q peak for dead load can be
determined as 21.6 kN/m for intermediate stories and 17.28 kN/m for roof.

69
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

3.2.3. Seismic Load Assignment

3.2.3.1.
Seismic Load Assignment in Accordance to SNI 1726:2012
For taking seismic forces into account, the seismic loading assignment in
ETABS can be done. Since the preferred code which is used is the Indonesian SNI
1726:2012, which has similar calculation logarithm to ASCE 7-10, the ASCE
code is used to determine the seismic loading of the structure by static equivalent
approach. Although both SNI 1726 and ASCE 7-10 share the same calculation
method, the input of the spectra needs adjustment. It is assumed that this building
is to be built on Padang on class D soil, which has a value of S s of 1.345g and S1
of 0.599g.
The spectra which is resulted from ETABS by ASCE 7-10 is similar with
the spectra published by PUSKIM and ITB for Padang Region, so the seismic
calculation by ASCE 7-10 can be used. The calculation itself is done
automatically by ETABS software through auto lateral load feature. Note that the
dead load and a quarter of the live load is taken as the seismic weight.

Figure 3. 3. Response spectra of Padang City by ETABS for C class soil

(By: Personal)

70
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Figure 3. 4. Response Spectra of Padang City published by PUSKIM and ITB

for C class soil
(Source: http://puskim.pu.go.id/)

3.2.3.2.
Seismic Load Assignment in Accordance to SNI 1726:2002
To construct the second sample, the seismic loading of the second sample
should be assessed in accordance to SNI 1726:2002. Although the SNI 1726:2002
calculation mechanism is similar with UBC1997, auto lateral load cannot be used,
since the short period used by UBC is 0.1 second, while the short period used by
SNI is 0.2 second. Therefore, the equivalent lateral load should be calculated
manually.
Different with SNI 1726:2012, in the older SNI 1726:2002, the period of
the building have to be limited to n, where is the ductility factor and n is the
story number of the building. In this case, = 0.16 for seismic region 5 (Padang),
and n is taken as 6. This yields the limiting building period as 0.96 seconds. The
open-frame system itself has a period of 0.944 second, which does imply with the
requirement. The spectrum for seismic region 5 is shown as below;

71
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Figure 3. 5. Response spectrum for seismic area 5

(Source: SNI 1726:2002)

From the spectrum above, for T=0.944 second, can be known that C value of
0.529 can be used.
To be able to calculate the lateral load, the seismic weight of the building
itself should be assessed. The seismic load is divided into lumped mass per story,
which includes the self-weight of the structure and its live load. The base shear
should be known first before. By using the ETABS software, the story weight
along with the corresponding lateral force can be seen as below;
Story

Story Weight
(DL+LL) (kN)

Wz
(kNM)

Story 6

12458,835

Story 5

19619,55

Story 4

19619,55

Story 3

19619,55

Story 2

19619,55

Story 1

19619,55

261635,
535
343342,
125
274673,
7
206005,
275
137336,
85
68668,4
25

Story
Shear
(kN)
1395,442
188
1831,227
116
1464,981
693
1098,736
27
732,4908
465
366,2454
232

72
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Sigma

110556,585

129166
1,91

6889,12
3537

Table 3. 1. Story Weight and Story Shear

From the story shear value above, the lateral load can be inputted into
ETABS software. 100% of the force goes along the y direction and 30% to the x
direction.

Figure 3. 6. Lateral load input on ETABS

3.2.4. Load Combination

In this model, there will be three load combinations which will be
assessed; 1.2D+1.6L; 1.2D+L+E+0.2S; and 0.9D+E. D is the dead load acting on
the structure, L is the live load acting on the structure, and E is the earthquake
force acting on the structure, which is gained from equivalent lateral load
approach. These three combinations are taken because these three combinations
have the most possibility of giving the maximum internal forces of the structure.
Note that these combinations are extracted from SNI 1727:2013.
3.2.5. Analysis Result
By running the analysis on ETABS 2013 software, the internal forces of
the frame can be determined. In this case, only the internal forces acting on joint
F4 at story 1 will be assessed, since this joint is planned to be the sample of this
experiment.

73
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Figure 3. 7. Location of the joint assessed

The internal force of each load types and cases are shown on the table
following this paragraph. All the three load cases are evaluated, and the design
will based on the largest forces acting on the member.
Loading
Dead
Live
Seismic (2002)
Seismic (2012)

Axial Load (kN)

0
0
0
0

Shear (kN)
44,021
20,86
40,86
71,18

Moment (kNm)
-34,46
-17,12
-103,96
-178,75

Table 3. 2. Internal forces calculated on beam (Max)

Loading
Dead
Live
Seismic (2002)
Seismic (2012)

Axial Load (kN)

-986,7
-234,31
-239,488
-459,5

Shear (kN)
0
0
23,76
213,11

Moment (kNm)
0
0
75,14
747,29

Table 3. 3. Internal forces calculated on column (Max)

Table 3. 4,Load combination of the beam (2002 seismic load)

Loading

Axial Load

Shear (kN)

Moment

1.2D+1.6L
1.2D+1L+1E+

(kN)
0
0

86,2012
114,5452

(kNm)
-68,744
-162,432
74

Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

0.2S
0.9D+1E

80,4789

-134,974

Loading

Axial Load

Shear (kN)

Moment

1.2D+1.6L
1.2D+1L+1E+

(kN)
-1558,936
-1657,838

0
23,76

(kNm)
0
75,14

0.2S
0.9D+1E

-1127,518

23,76

75,14

Table 3. 5. Load combination of the column (2002 seismic load)

Loading
1.2D+1.6L
1.2D+1L+1E+
0.2S
0.9D+1E

Axial Load

Shear (kN)

Moment

(kN)
0

86,2012

(kNm)
-68,744

0
0

144,8652
110,7989

-237,222
-209,764

Table 3. 7. Load combination of the column (2012 seismic load)

Loading

Axial Load

Shear (kN)

Moment

(kN)
1.2D+1.6L
-1558,936
0
Table 3. 6. Load combination of the beam
1.2D+1L+1E+
-1877,85
213,11
(2012 seismic load)

(kNm)
0
747,29

0.2S
0.9D+1E

747,29

-1347,53

213,11

75
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

From the forces above, the beam-column joint can be designed. The design
forces of the beam column joint are shown as below;
Loading
Beam
Column

Axial Load
(kN)
0
-1657,84

Shear (kN)

Moment

114.55
23,76

(kNm)
-162.43
75,14

Table 3. 8. Ultimate internal forces of the members corresponding to the joint

(2002 Seismic load)

Loading
Beam
Column

Axial Load

Shear (kN)

Moment

(kN)
0
-1877,85

144,87
213,11

(kNm)
-237,22
747,29

Table 3. 9. Ultimate internal forces of the members corresponding to the joint

(2012 Seismic load)

3.3.
Specimen Design
3.3.1. SNI 2847:2013 Specimen Design
As soon as the connection sample has been assigned, the corresponding
members of it should be designed in the design; layout of the beam-column joint
to be designed and checked will be in two dimensional plane.
As stated before, the connection which is assessed is the exterior
connection of the second story of the building. This joint and its corresponding
members is designed by using SNI 2847:2013 as a beam-column joint of a special
moment resisting frame.
3.3.1.1.
Beam Design
The first member to be designed is the beam, along with its reinforcing
bars. In this beam design, the beam is expected to undergo plastic hinge at 2 times
of the beam depth from the column. In the preliminary design, the dimension of
the beam is taken as 550mm tall and 400 mm wide. The concrete cover which is
planed is 40mm, the stirrups is planned to be 12 bars, and the longitudinal bars
is planned to be D25 bars. This will give an effective depth value of 485.5mm.
This beam is expected to bear 237.22kNm of unfactored negative moment
on the column face. In order to simplify the design, the reinforcing bars
configuration will be designed according to the largest moment (negative moment

76
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

on column face) for both positive and negative moment design. This will result in
the same reinforcing bar for both upper and lower part of the beam. In bending
capacity calculation, =0.9 is used.
In order to design the reinforcement of the beam, the equation 2.44 is used
to calculate the minimum reinforcing bar needed on the section. The equation 2.44
itself can be rearranged into;

fy
'
c

1.7 f b

A2s (f y d ) A s + M n /=0

(3.2)

by arranging the equation into this form, the value of minimum reinforcement can
be calculated by solving the polynomial equation 3.2. After doing the calculation,
there are two values of As; 1963.495mm2 and 23,917.29mm2. From these two
values, the smaller value is taken, since it can be rationally accepted.
To fulfill the minimum reinforcement requirement, 4 D25 (1963.495mm2)
bars are needed. This configuration should also be checked due to SNI 2847:2013
point 21.5.2.1, which states that the maximum reinforcement area is 2.5% and the
minimum area of reinforcement is stated as below;
As =
min

1.4 b w d
fy

(3.3)

where bw is the width of the beam web, d is the effective depth of the beam, and f y
is the yielding strength of the rebar. The planned As (two times 1963.495mm 2)
covers 1.785% of the gross area of the section, and the minimum longitudinal
reinforcement required by SNI is 700 mm2. Note that the rebar area used complies
with both requirements, so it is fine to use this configuration.
Since the installed rebar area is more than the minimum rebar area, the
flexural strength of the beam should be calculated. By using equation 2.40, the
nominal moment capacity of the beam will be 343.03 kNm, while reduced
moment capacity is 308.73 kNm.
Other than flexural capacity, the shear capacity of the beam should also be
assessed based on the ultimate shear occurred on the beam. Note that the ultimate

77
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

shear force occurs on the beam is 144.86kN. In design of shear reinforcement in

joint of special moment resisting frame, according to SNI 2847:2013 point
21.5.4.2., the shear capacity contributed by concrete is neglected. This is done to
accommodate plastic hinge condition where the concrete will have negligible
shear capacity due to heavy cracking.
Besides of the ultimate shear gained from structural analysis, the
controlling shear force should also be determined by calculating the shear force
resulting from probable moment of the beam. This moment is gained from the
flexural capacity of the beam, calculated by using 1.25fy and no reduction factor
(=1.0). The value of shear force resulting in the beam due to the probable
moment is stated as;
A

V c=

M Pr M Pr q u l
+
l
2

(3.4)

Where Vc is the maximum shear force may act on the column face, M Apr is
the probable moment of beam at point A, M Bpr is the probable moment of beam at
point B, l is the beam span, and qu is the ultimate factored distributed load
(1.2qDL+1.0qLL) (SNI 2847:2013).

Figure 3. 8. Loading cases for shear design of beams based on probable

moment of the beam.
(Source: SNI 2847:2013)

78
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

The probable moment of the beam being designed is taken as its flexural
capacity by using 1.25 fy as its yielding strength and not inducing any reduction
factor. In this case, its compression block may expand due to increased tensile
yielding strength of the rebar. Substituting fy with 1.25fy on equation 2.37 will
yield;
0.85 f 'c ba= A s 1.25 f y

a=

1.25 A s f y
'

0.85 f c b

a=1.47

As f y

(3.5)

f 'c b

From this increased compressive block, the moment capacity of the beam
can be determined from equation 2.32. Note that T of the column is now equals to
1.25fyAs, which alters the result of the initial equation.

( a2 )

M n=1.25 A s f y d

M n=1.25 A s f y d

M n=1.25 A s f y d

1.47

As f y
f 'c b
2

As f y
1.36 f 'c b

(3.6)

Inserting As as 1963.495mm2, fy as 390 MPa, d as 485.5mm, f c as 30 MPa, and b

as 400mm, will result in Mn of 419,808,767.7 Nmm or 419.81 KNm.
The value of (qul) is basically is the value of the shear force due to the
factored gravity load in the end of the beams. To determine the value of q u, the qLL
is taken as 14.4/2 kN/m or 7.2 kN/m and the q DL as 21.6/2 kN/m + (0.4m 0.55m
24 kN/m3) or 16.08 kN. Note that the triangle loads on q DL and qLL have to be
79
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

multiplied by to make it equivalent with distributed load. The value of qu

according to [18] is then 1.07.2 + 16.081.2 kN/m or 26.496 kN/m. The value of
(qul) is then 79.488 kN.
By using the equation 3.4 and taking MApr and MBpr as 419.81 KNm, l as 6
meters, and (qul) as 79.488 kN, the Vc is 219.425 kN. Therefore, the design of
stirrups of the beam should be done based on this shear force value.
In order to calculate the shear capacity of the beam, equation 2.52 is used.
If there are four shear reinforcement bars are planned, where each bar is a 12
bar which has a yielding strength of 235 MPa, depth of the beam is 485.5mm, and
for shear is taken as 0.75, equation 2.52 will give a maximum spacing of
176.42mm. According to SNI 2847:2013 point 21.5.3.2., the minimum spacing of
stirrups must not exceed one-fourth of the effective depth of the beam, six times
the diameter of longitudinal reinforcement, or 150mm. In this case, it will be the
smallest of 121.375mm and 150mm. therefore, the maximum stirrups spacing
allowed is 121.375mm. 120mm of stirrups spacing is taken to simplify
implementation.

Figure 3. 9. Beam reinforcement configuration

(Source: Personal)

3.3.1.2. Column Design

In the column design, the design axial load is 1877.85kN. According to
SNI 2847:2013 point 21.6.1, the factored axial load should be less than 0.1AgFc.

80
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Therefore, an 800 x 800mm (Ag = 640,000mm2) column with 16 D25 rebar is

taken. The design moment according to SNI 2847:2013 point 21.6.22 is taken as
1.2 of the unfactored nominal moment capacity of the beams connected to the
column, which is 1.2 times 3 beams times 343.03 kNm or 1224 kNm. The design
shear of the column itself is based on the maximum force may occur on the
column. This design shear force can be designed based on the shear caused by the
probable moment as much as the moment capacity of the column with the
corresponding axial force, with no reduction factor and fy = 1.25 fys. The
maximum shear also comes from dividing the over-strengthened moment capacity
of the beam by the half-span of the beam. The shear calculated by this method is
then compared to the shear acquired from the structural analysis.

Figure 3. 10. Options of calculating column shear

(Source: Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete Special Moment Frames: A
Guide for Practicing Engineers, Jack P. Moehle et al., 2008)

Figure 3. 11. Interaction diagram of column (excluding reduction factor and

increased fy)
(Source: Personal)

81
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

From the interaction diagram above, it is known that moment capacity of

the column with no reduction factor and increased fy for 1877.85kN of
compressive force is 1504.5 kNm. By multiplying it by two and dividing it by its
clear length (2.95m), the maximum shear force caused by these moments is
1020kN. If the probable moment from the beam is assessed, by using Mpr =
419.81 KNm (gained from subchapter 3.3.1.1), the shear force resulted from this
moment can be determined by subtracting the longitudinal bar force with the
upper column shear (refer section 2.4.2). The beam probable moment will cause
rebar force to be 864.7 kN. The columns shear gained from the structural analysis
is 213.11 kN. Since the value generated from the columns probable moment is
larger than the value generated from the structural analysis and the beams
probable moment, 1020kN is taken as the design shear.
To design the longitudinal reinforcing bar of the column, the rebar
configuration has to be stated in the first place. A moment-axial load interaction
diagram is then made by using ETABS 2013 software.
According to SNI 2847:2013, the area of longitudinal reinforcement must
not be less of 1% Ag and more than 6% Ag and the minimal number of reinforcing
bar is 6 bars. In that case, 16 D25 bars is taken as the longitudinal reinforcement.
The reinforcing bars make up 1.23.% of the cross-sectional area of the column.
The confinement rebar (stirrups) is taken as 12 bars, and the concrete cover
taken is 40mm.
From the configuration above, an interaction diagram of axial force and
bending moment of the column can be made. By using ETABS 2013, the
interaction diagram (factored) of the column configuration above is shown as
below.

82
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Figure 3. 12. Interaction diagram of column (factored)

(Source: Personal)

From the interaction diagram shown, it is known that the axial load
(1877.85 kN) and the bending moment (1224 kNm) are inside the interaction
envelope. Therefore, the proposed longitudinal bar configuration can be used.
To design the transverse reinforcement (confinement stirrups), several
perimeters should be assessed. To find the minimum transverse reinforcement
needed, the spacing of it should be assessed before determining the number of the
stirrups needed.
The spacing should also be checked in accordance to SNI 2847:2013. Two
spacing should be considered, the spacing nearby the connection with the length
of lo, and the spacing outside the lo length. In this case, both spacing are taken as
the same. The regulation requires the maximum stirrups spacing to be the least of
one fourth of minimum structural component dimension, six times of the
longitudinal rebar diameter, or less than the formula stated below;
s o=100+

( 350h
)
3
x

(3.7)

where hx is the distance between stirrups in millimeters, where So may not exceed
150mm and it is not necessary to take So less than 100mm. From these three
criteria, the maximum stirrups spacing due to dimension, rebar diameter, and
equation 3.7 respectively are 200mm, 192mm, and 161.333mm. However, to
provide proper confinement, the spacing of stirrups is taken as 110mm.

83
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

To determine the required area of the transverse reinforcement of the

column, SNI 2847:2013 point 21.6.4.4 requires the confinement reinforcement
area to be more than the larger of
s bc f 'c
A sh=0.3
f yt

(( ) )
Ag
1
A ch

(3.8)

or
s bc f 'c
A sh=0.09
f yt

(3.9)

where Ash is the minimum confinement reinforcement area, s is the spacing

between stirrups, bc is the width of the column area which is bounded with the
stirrups, fc is the concrete compressive strength, fyt is the stirrups steel yielding
strength, Ag is the gross area of the column, and Ach is the area bounded by the
outer part of the confinement stirrups. By using s = 100mm, fc = 30 MPa, fyt =
235 MPa, bc = 708mm, Ag = 640,000mm2 and Ach = 518,400mm2, the minimum
reinforcement gained from equation 3.8 and 3.9 respectively are 699.63mm2 and
894.79mm2. To fulfill the transverse reinforcement requirement, eight 12 bars
(Ash = 904.78mm2) should be used. Note that confinement bars are applied on
both sides.
According

to

the

reinforcement

configuration,

the

transverse

reinforcement will consist of eight 12 bars a segment. Therefore, Av = Ash will

be 904.78mm2. By using equation 2.52 and assuming that no shear strength
contributed by concrete, the maximum spacing gained for 1020 kN of shear force
is 153.32 mm. Since the maximum spacing is more than the spacing used in the
column, the design is considered safe.

84
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Figure 3. 13. Column reinforcement layout

(Source: Personal)

3.3.1.3.

Joint Strength Check and Panel Zone Detailing

Both the column and the joint will then connected in a beam-column joint.

This area is critical and needed to be detailed well, since poor detailing may result
in connection failure occurring before the formation of plastic hinge on the beam.
Several important notes which have to be done in this case; the joint
confinement and the beam rebar anchorage. The joint confinement has been
secured due to the close spacing of column stirrups, while longitudinal rebar
anchorage of the beam longitudinal section has to be considered more carefully
here.
To prevent connection failure, adequate bond force should be added into
the longitudinal bar. Since the bond force depends heavily on the development
and anchorage of the rebar, this length should be assessed. According to SNI

85
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

2847:2013 point 12.2.1, for D25 rebar, the minimum development length l d is 300
mm or stated as below;

ld =

f y t e
1.7 f c
'

db

(3.10)

where fy is the yielding strength of the longitudinal bars,

and

is

factors regarding the bar configuration, fc is the compressive strength of the

concrete, is the reduction factor for lightweight concrete, and db is the rebar
diameter. By taking fy as 390 MPa,

as 1.0,

as 1.0, fc as 30MPa, as

1.0 and db as 25mm, the minimum development length from this formula is
1047.12mm, which means that the longitudinal tension bars should not be
discontinued along this length. Since this value greatly exceeds the width of the
column, bend is required to be formed.
To determine the horizontal length of beam rebar anchorage required in the
column, the formula ldh is used. This requirement is based on SNI 2847:2013 point
21.7.5.1, where the minimum value of ldh is the largest of 8db, 150mm, and;

l dh=

f y db
5.4 f 'c

(3.11)

from these three values, the minimum ldh are 200mm, 150mm, and 329.65mm.
Therefore, the minimum horizontal length of the anchorage is taken as 350mm.
The anchorage is taken as ldh = 700mm for the upper steel and 650 mm for the
lower steel because the rebar should be anchored near the end of the column side.
Since these numbers exceeds 350mm, the horizontal development length is fine.

86
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Figure 3. 14. Minimum anchorage length of hooks and bends

(Source: SNI 2847:2013)

from the figure above, it is stated that the minimum length of the vertical rebar
after the bend is 12 db. In this case, it corresponds with 300mm. the vertical
length of the anchorage is (300mm + 4db) =400mm.
To check the shear of the beam-column joint, SNI 2847:2013 section
21.7.4. The effective area of the joint Aj is h = 800mm multiplied by b+2200 =
800. Multiplying both will result in Aj = 640000mm2. This will give a value of

'
c

Aj

as 3505.42 kN. Since this value is much larger than the shear acting on

the joint, the joint is considered safe.

3.3.2. SNI 2847:2002 Specimen Design

The second sample constructed in accordance to SNI 2847:2002 should
also be assessed as comparison to the newer SNI 2847:2002. This second
specimen will be designed based on the earthquake loading calculated by SNI
1726:2002.
3.3.2.1.
Beam Design
If it is compared with the sample designed in accordance to SNI
2847:2013, smaller internal forces occur on the beam due to smaller seismic load.

87
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

In this case, the beam is only required to withstand 114.55 kNm of negative
moment. By using equation 3.2, with similar parameter with the beam designed
by using SNI 2847:2013, the required reinforcement is only As=690.97mm2.
However, similar with SNI 2847:2013, SNI 2847:2002 requires special moment
resisting frame to have a minimum reinforcement which follows equation 3.3.
According to this equation, the minimum reinforcement of the beam is 700mm 2.
To fulfill this requirement, two D25 reinforcement (As=981.75mm2) is used for
both upper and lower part of the beam. This configuration will be able to carry
178.7 kNm of factored moment.
To design the shear reinforcement, the design shear force should be the
larger of the one caused by probable moment of the beam and the one gained from
the structural analysis. The structural analysis done earlier gives a design shear
value of 114.55 kN. By calculating the shear caused by the probable moment
according to equation 3.4. By calculating the over-strengthened moment capacity
of the beam using equation 3.6, a value of 221.13 kNm is gained.
Since the value of (qul) is the same with the previous sample (79.488
kN), the value of shear force due to the probable moment can be calculated. By
using equation 3.4, using

A
M Pr

and

M BPr

as 221.13 kNm, l as 6 meters, and

(qul) as 79.488 kN, the shear caused by probable shear is V c = 153.2 kN. Since
this value is larger than the one gained from structural analysis, this value is taken
as the design shear force.
To determine whether the concrete will contribute to the shear strength of
the beam, SNI 2847:2002 section 23.3.4.2 is checked. According to the section,
concrete contributes to the shear strength if the factored axial load acting on the
beam is less than Agfc/20 and the shear contributed by the seismic load is less
than the half of the total shear force. The factored axial load acting on the beam
itself is 7.24 kN, which is less than Agfc/20=330 kN. The shear contributed by
seismic force is 40.86 kN, which is less than a half of the shear calculated by
structural analysis (114.55 kN). Therefore, the concrete is able to contribute to the
shear strength. The concrete contribution to the shear strength itself is calculated
by using equation 2.48, which results in a value of 180.83 kN. This value is larger

88
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

than the design shear, so the stirrup spacing is determined by the limiting
regulation instead of strength consideration.
A pair of 12 bars is used as the stirrup of the beam. To determine the
spacing required. SNI 2847:2002 sections 23.3.3.2 requires that the maximum
spacing of stirrup is a quarter of the beams effective depth, eight times of the
longitudinal bar diameter, 24 times of the diameter of the stirrup bar, and 300mm.
These requirements will limit the beam spacing to121.875mm (a quarter of the
beams effective depth). Therefore, a spacing of 120mm is taken.

Figure 3. 15. Beam section designed in accordance to SNI 2847:2002

(Source: Personal)

3.3.2.2.
Column Design
There are no major change between the SNI 2847:2002 and SNI
2847:2013 regarding the column regulation of special moment resisting frame.
This also apply for the confinement regulation, which requires the column to be
heavily confined. To accommodate transverse rebar, small longitudinal rebar
cannot be used. In this case, 16 D25 rebar is used as longitudinal reinforcement
and 12 rebar is used for confinement reinforcement, which is exactly similar
with the previous sample.
The column is expected to hold against an axial load of 1657.84 kN and a
moment of 75.14 kNm. According to the SNI 2847:2002 section

89
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

23.4.2.2, the flexural strength of the column must be more than

1.2 the flexural strength of the beams connected to it. This will
result in a design moment of 3 times 178.7kNm times 1.2, which
is equal to 643.32 kNm.

Figure 3. 16. Factored interaction diagram of the column designed based on

2002 standards
(Source: Personal)

By using the interaction diagram shown on the figure

above, it is known that for an axial force of 1657.84 kN, the
moment of 643.32 kNm is still within the envelope. The current
longitudinal reinforcement of 16 D25 rebar also covers just
1.23% of the total cross section, which is more than 1% and less
than 6%. Therefore, this longitudinal reinforcement configuration
will be used.
Besides of bending moment, the beam is also expected to
bear shear. According to SNI 2847:2002 point 23.4.5, design
shear is calculated by calculating the shear caused by probable
moment of both the beam and the column. This is similar with
the one done in the previous sample.

90
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Figure 3. 17. Interaction diagram of column designed on 2002 standards

(overstrengthened)
(Source: Personal)

From the over-strengthened interaction diagram above, it is known with a

compressive strength of 1657.84 kN, the flexural capacity of the column is 1549
kNm. This value is then taken as the probable moment of the column. By
multiplying it by 2 and deviding it by its clear span (2.95m), shear force of
1050.17 kN is gained. Since this value is much larger from the shear calculated
through structural analysis, this value is taken as the design shear.
The configuration of the stirrups is regulated by the SNI 2847:2002 section
23.4.4. This regulation requires the stirrup spacing to be less than the least of a
quarter of the smallest member width, six times the diameter of longitudinal bars,
or the value gained from equation 3.7. These require the maximum stirrup spacing
to be smaller than 200mm, 150mm, and 161.333mm. However, to provide proper
confinement, the spacing of stirrups is taken as 110mm.
Similar with the newer SNI, transverse reinforcement configuration should
also follow SNI 2847:2002 section 23.4.4.1, where the minimum area of
reinforcement should be more than the value gained from equation 3.8 and 3.9. By
using s = 110mm, fc = 30 MPa, fyt = 235 MPa, bc = 720mm, Ag = 640,000mm2
and Ach = 518,400mm2, the minimum reinforcement gained from equation 3.8 and
3.9 respectively are 699.63mm2 and 894.79mm2. To fulfill the transverse
reinforcement requirement, eight 12 bars (Ash = 904.78mm2) should be used.
This configuration is similar with the one designed by using SNI 2847:2013. If

91
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

this configuration is used to accommodate the shear force, the spacing required is
182.43mm, which is more than 110mm. Therefore, 110mm spacing is used.

Figure 3. 18. Column reinforcement layout designed by 2002 standards

(Source: Personal)

3.3.2.3.
Joint Strength Check and Panel Zone Detailing
After designing the beam and column, the connection between both are
checked. Note that the older and newer standards have the same requirement for
beam anchorage. But since the beam uses smaller rebar, the development length
should be recalculated by using equation 3.10. By taking fy as 390 MPa,
1.0,

as

as 1.0, fc as 30MPa, as 1.0 and db as 22mm, the minimum

development length from this formula is 921.47mm. This value exceeds the width
of the column, so bend should be made to provide adequate anchorage.
The bend requirement itself is similar with the one from SNI 2847:2013.
Smaller rebar means that smaller anchorage length is required. However, the
requirement for special moment resisting frame is that the bend should be made so
the vertical part of the bar is close to the column end. Therefore, the same

92
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

anchorage is used, as ldh for the upper steel is taken as 700mm and the lower steel
as 650mm. For the vertical part of the rebar, 12 d b of length is required, which is
equal to 300mm for D25 bars. The bend radius itself is equal to 4d b, which is
equal to 100mm. adding both will result in vertical development of 400mm.
taking the similar length with the previous model; the vertical development of the
rebar is taken as 400mm.
To check the shear of the beam-column joint, SNI 2847:2002 section has
similar requirement with SNI 2847:2013. The effective area of the joint A j is h =
800mm multiplied by b+2200 = 800. Multiplying both will result in Aj =
640000mm2. This will give a value of

'
c

Aj

as 3505.42 kN. Since this value

is much larger than the shear acting on the joint, the joint is considered safe.
3.3.3. Full-Scale Sample Configuration
After doing the design of the joint elements, the samples which are used to
do this experiment can be designed. For doing the test, half of the beam span will
be taken. If the span measured from the column centre is 6000mm, half of it will
be taken. The beam length is now 3000mm measured from the middle of the
column. Since 400mm of the beam is in the column, the clear span of the beam
sample is 2600mm. Both samples have the same dimension.
Similar with the beam sample assignment, the column sample height is
taken as the half of the story height of the column. Since there will be two
columns connected in the joint, the overall height of the sample can be taken as
the story height of the building, which is 3500mm.

93
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Figure 3. 19. Full-Scale sample with reinforcement

(Source: Personal)

3.4.

Laboratory Scale Experiment

As one of the way of measuring the semirigid behavior of the connection,

laboratory scale experiment is done. In general, there will be two main parts of the
experiment, sample construction and preparation, and the sample testing itself.
3.4.1. Preparation and Sample Construction
In this research, a sample is made in the laboratory. The sample itself will
has a scale factor of 0.4. In this scaled sample, the entire dimension is reduced by
half of the initial dimension, without compromising the quality of the material.
For example, D13 BjTS40 rebar is used instead of D32 BjTS40 rebar, and 320mm
320mm column is built using fc 30MPa concrete instead of 800mm 800mm

94
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

column using fc 30MPa concrete. For the longitudinal rebar of the column made
by SNI 2847:2002, D25 BjTS40 is replaced with D10 BjTS40.
The rebar being used in the full-scale sample is then reduced to the half of
the initial size. The beam, which has been reduced into a 220mm x 160mm, will
has D10 and 5 rebar to substitute the D25 and 12 for the sample designed by
SNI 2847:2013 and D10 and 5 rebar to substitute D25 and 12 rebar initially
installed. Note that 5 steel is not available in SNI standard, so the steel found in
the market should be tested in the laboratory.

Figure 3. 20. Scaled specimen

(Source: Personal)

95
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Figure 3. 21. Scaled beam specimen (2013 standards design)

(Source: Personal)

Figure 3. 22. Scaled Column Specimen (2013 standards design)

(Source: Personal)

96
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Figure 3. 23. Scaled beam specimen (2002 standards design)

(Source: Personal)

Figure 3. 24. Scaled Column Specimen (2002 standards design)

(Source: Personal)

Dry-mix concrete is used in the making of the sample. This is used due to
its simplicity and accuracy, since making a mix design personally is rather
inaccurate and risky. The dry-mixed concrete which is used will first be tested in

97
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

the laboratory first before being used in the sample. Fc30 MPa dry-mixed
concrete will be used in this experiment.
In order to detect the presence of plastic hinge, strain gauges should be
installed on the reinforcing bars. These strain gauges should be installed in the
areas where rebar yielding is expected to occur. In this case, strain gauges will be
placed on the flexural bar, not more than 50mm from the column face. This gauge
placement is done because this reinforcing bar is expected to experience the
highest stress, since that area will has the largest bending moment during the test.
The other strain gauge will be located on the development of the beams
rebar inside the column. Only the top will be installed with strain gauge, since that
part will undergo major tension, which may cause bond slippage. The lower rebar
development of the beam is not equipped with strain gauge because the
compressive stress is not as high as the top rebar due to the existence of concrete
compressive strength.
As shear force may become dominant as soon as the occurrence of plastic
hinge on the beam, strain gauges should also be installed on the beam stirrups.
The stirrup which is equipped with strain gauge is the first beam stirrup from the
column face. The strain gauge installation plan is shown on the figure below;

Figure 3. 25. Proposed strain gauge installation locations

(Source: Personal)

Curing process is done by using fiber sags which has been saturated with
water. The curing process itself is impossible to be done in the curing tub due to
98
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

the large dimension of the sample. The sags humidity should always be
controlled, since dry sag may cause the heat caused from the hydration process is
not absorbed and causes cracking on the sample. Therefore, the sag should be kept
wet by showering it twice a day; at 11AM in the morning and at 6PM in the
evening and stored indoor.
The sample which has been cured for 28 days is then fitted into the loading
frame to be loaded. The sample itself will be loaded in semi-cyclic sequence,
which load is increased for each loading. The loading itself is done on the end of
the beam by hydraulic jack. The deformation of the beam and column is assessed
by using displacement dials. The experiment layout is shown as below;

Figure 3. 26. Experimental setup

(Source: Personal)

To ensure sample quality before testing, UPV (Ultrasonic Pulse Test) is

done. This is done to make sure that the sample is perfectily fit to be tested,

99
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

without any major cracking or flaw which may alter the experiment result. The
sample is considered good if the pulse velocity of the UPV test exceeds 3.5 km/s.
[19]
The sample lifting should be carefully done, since improper handling of
the sample may cause cracking and alter the experiment result. Therefore, the
lifting point of the sample will be properly arranged. Two lifting points are
assigned to lift the sample and fit it on the testing frame. The first point is right
below the column, while the second point is on the midspan of the beam. No
major collision is allowed to occur during the lifting and fitting process to prevent
damage on the sample.
3.4.2. Sample Testing
Loading is done on the end of the beam element, which is done by using
hydraulic jack. The sample is planned to be loaded by semicyclic loading schame,
which scheme is similar with the loading pattern being used in [10]. The loading
scheme itself is a deflection based scheme. In the first 3 cycles, loading is given as
0.25 y. For the 4th to the 6th cycle, the load is raised to 0.5 y. For the 7th to 9th
cycle, the load is raised to 0.75 y. For the 10 th to 12th cycle, the load is raised to
y. For the 13th to the 17th cycle, the load is taken as (n-11) y, where n is the
number of cycle and y is the yielding displacement of the beam section. The
yielding displacement itself should be determined by referring the loaddisplacement relationship of the beam, park [20] proposes several definitions of
yield displacement as below;

100
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Figure 3. 27. Several approaches to determine yield displacement

(Source: Evaluation of Ductility of Structures and Structural Assemblages
from Laboratory Testing, R. Park, 1988)

8
6
Displacement (y)

4
2
0
0

10

12

14

16

Cycle

Figure 3. 28. Proposed Loading Scheme

For each cycle, the cracking occurred on the sample is assessed and
marked, so the cracking development of the sample can be known better. After
each loading sequence, vibration test is done in order to assess the stiffness of the
overall structure. According to a research conducted by Q.-B. Bui [21], the
stiffness degradation will cause a decrease of natural frequency of the beamcolumn sample. The vibration test itself is done by excite the sample with a free

101
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

vibration from the tip of the beam. To know the placement of accelerometer, the
mode shape of the sample should be assessed first. By using SAP2000 software,
the first three modes shape of the sample is shown as below;

Figure 3. 29. Mode 1 of the sample

(Source: Personal)

Figure 3. 30. Mode 2 of the sample

(Source: Personal)

102
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Figure 3. 31. Mode 3 of the sample

(Source: Personal)

103
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Figure 3. 32. Accelerometer Placement

(Source: Personal)

The mode shape from the first three modes indicates great deflection on
the half-end of the beam. Therefore, three accelerometers will be installed along
the half-end of the beam. Another accelerometer will also be installed in the joint
of the column and two more accelerometers are installed on the mid-span of each
upper and lower part of the column.
In order to trigger the excitation, two methods are proposed. The first
method is by hitting the end of the beam with a rubber hammer. The second
method uses a vibration generating device to pull the end of the beam and release
it to create free vibration. This device consists of a cable hoop which is joined to a
single steel bar (rod). This rod which has a loop / hole is attached to a bearing bar.
To initiate vibration, the cable hoop is placed around the tip of the sample. The
hydraulic jack deflects the beam tip so the rod can be attached to the bearing bar.
The hydraulic jack is then lifted, and the bearing bar is pulled fast, releasing the
rod and causing the beam to vibrate freely.

104
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Figure 3. 33. Schematic view of the vibration generator

(Source: Personal)

3.5.

Numerical Analysis
The numerical analysis in this experiment is done by using fiber model

analysis through Drain-2DX software. This is done by splitting the model into
layers of fiber to be analyzed numerically.
The Structure will be simplified as a beam and columns with two pinned
support. The beam-column joint panel is taken as the rigid zone. The beam which
is analyzed is the scaled beam, so the span of the beam is 840mm. This beam is
going to be discretized into 2 elements. The two columns which have a single
height of 690mm. The column itself is modeled as one element for each column
parts. In total, there are 4 elements and 5 nodes, where the load is placed on Node
4.

105
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Figure 3. 34. Structure modeling for numerical analysis

(Source: Personal)

The beam will consist of two elements; Element 3 which has a length of
760mm and Element 4 which has a length of 80mm. Element 3 is discretized into
7 sections which has a length of 108.57mm for each section, while element 4 will
not be discretized. Element 3 will start at Node 2, Element 3 and Element 4 will
be connected with Node 4, while Element 4 will end at Node 5

Figure 3. 35. Beam modeling for numerical analysis

(Source: Personal)

Each column part will be discretized into 5 parts; each part will have a
thickness of 138mm. Element 1 (lower column) will start at Node 1 and end at
Node 2, while Element 2 (upper column) will start at Node 3 and end at Node 2.
Note that both Node 1 and Node 3 will be restrained for translations.

106
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Figure 3. 36. Column modeling for numerical analysis

(Source: Personal)

In this analysis, both the beam and the column are analyzed through fiber
model analysis. The beam cross section of the sample is split into 10 parts of
concrete fibers; 2 parts will consist of fully unconfined concrete and 8 parts will
consist of combination of confined and unconfined concrete. 2 layers of steel will
also be added into the analysis. The two unconfined layers will have a thickness of
20.8mm for each of the layers, and the rest of the concrete fibers will have a
thickness of 22.25mm.
The column will be divided into layers. 8 layers of concrete and 5 layers of
steel are assigned. The thickness of intermediate layer is 46.4mm and the
thickness of unconfined outer layer is 20.8mm.
Fiber

Center

(mm)
99.5

3360

Type
Unconfine

2
3

85.6
77.875

314.16
934.5

d
Steel
Unconfine

2625.5
934.5

d
Confined
Unconfine

4
5

77.875
55.625

of

Gravity Area

Fiber

107
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

6
7

55.625
33.375

2625.5
934.5

Confined
Unconfine

8
9

33.375
11.125

2625.5
934.5

d
Confined
Unconfine

10
11
12

11.125
-11.125
-11.125

2625.5
2625.5
934.5

d
Confined
Confined
Unconfine

2625.5
934.5

d
Confined
Unconfine

13
14

-33.375
-33.375

15
16

-55.625
-55.625

2625.5
934.5

d
Confined
Unconfine

17
18

-77.875
-77.875

2625.5
934.5

d
Confined
Unconfine

314.16
3360

d
Steel
Unconfine

19
20

-85.6
-99.5

d
Table 3. 10. Fiber determination of beam cross section (2013 Sample)
(Source: Personal)

Figure 3. 37. Beam section modeling by layer approach (2013 Sample)

(Source: Personal)

Fiber

Center
(mm)

of

Gravity Area

Fiber
Type

108
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

1
2
3

99.5
85.6
77.875

3360

Unconfine

157.08
934.5

d
Steel
Unconfine

4
5

77.875
55.625

2625.5
934.5

d
Confined
Unconfine

6
7

55.625
33.375

2625.5
934.5

d
Confined
Unconfine

2625.5
934.5

d
Confined
Unconfine

8
9

33.375
11.125

10
11
12

11.125
-11.125
-11.125

2625.5
2625.5
934.5

d
Confined
Confined
Unconfine

13
14

-33.375
-33.375

2625.5
934.5

d
Confined
Unconfine

2625.5
934.5

d
Confined
Unconfine

2625.5
934.5

d
Confined
Unconfine

157.08
3360

d
Steel
Unconfine

15
16
17
18
19
20

-55.625
-55.625
-77.875
-77.875
-85.6
-99.5

d
Table 3. 11. Fiber determination of beam cross section (2002 Sample)
(Source: Personal)

109
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Figure 3. 38. Beam section modeling by layer approach (2002 Sample)

(Source: Personal)

Fiber

Center

(mm)
149.6

2
3
4
5
6
7
8

134.2
116
116
67.1
69.6
69.6
23.2

of

Gravity Area

Fiber

6656

Type
Unconfine

392.7
1948.8

d
Steel
Unconfine

12899.2
1948.8

d
Confined
Unconfine

12899.2
157.08
1948.8

d
Confined
Steel
Unconfine

9
10
11
12

23.2
0
-23.2
-23.2

12899.2
157.08
12899.2
1948.8

d
Confined
Steel
Confined
Unconfine

13
14
15

-67.1
-69.6
-69.6

157.08
12899.2
1948.8

d
Steel
Confined
Unconfine

12899.2
1948.8

d
Confined
Unconfine

392.7

d
Steel

16
17
18

-116
-116
-134.2

110
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

19

-149.6

6656

Unconfine
d

Table 3. 12. Fiber determination of column cross section (2013 Sample)

(Source: Personal)

Figure 3. 39. Column section modeling by layer approach (2013 Sample)

(Source: Personal)

111
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Fiber

Center

(mm)
149.6

2
3

134.2
116

of

Gravity Area

Fiber

6656

Type
Unconfine

392.7
1948.8

d
Steel
Unconfine

4
5

116
67.1

12899.2
1948.8

d
Confined
Unconfine

6
7
8

69.6
69.6
23.2

12899.2
157.08
1948.8

d
Confined
Steel
Unconfine

12899.2
157.08
12899.2
1948.8

d
Confined
Steel
Confined
Unconfine

157.08
12899.2
1948.8

d
Steel
Confined
Unconfine

9
10
11
12
13
14
15

23.2
0
-23.2
-23.2
-67.1
-69.6
-69.6

16
17

-116
-116

12899.2
1948.8

d
Confined
Unconfine

18
19

-134.2
-149.6

392.7
6656

d
Steel
Unconfine
d

Table 3. 13. Fiber determination of column cross section (2002 Sample)

(Source: Personal)

112
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Figure 3. 40. Column section modeling by layer approach (2002 Sample)

(Source: Personal)

After defining the layers of the beam and column, the material properties
and stress-strain relationship should be stated. Four properties should be stated;
confined concrete, unconfined concrete, longitudinal reinforcement steel and
transverse reinforcement stirrups steel.
The concrete property which is inputted into Drain-2DX program includes
the maximum compressive strength of the concrete, the modulus of elasticity of
the concrete, and ultimate strain of the concrete for both confined and unconfined
concrete. The stress-strain relationship itself will be expressed by using KentParks curve for unconfined concrete and Manders stress-strain curve for
confined concrete. By using these curves, there are five curves which are required
to be calculated; unconfined concrete, confined concrete for the beam and column
of the 2002 and 2013 samples respectively.
For the unconfined concrete, the relationship for the stress and strain can
be found by using
f c =30,000 0 +7,500,000 02

(3.12)

while the declining part of the stress-strain relationship for the unconfined
concrete is stated as
f c =50.110,050 0

(3.13)

In order to input the stress-strain relationship above to Drain-2DX, the

properties of the unconfined concrete itself is inputted as on the tables below;

113
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Property
Compressive Strength
Strain at Ultimate Stress
Spalling Strain

Value
30 MPa
0.002
0.0044

Table 3. 14. Material properties of concrete being used

(Source: Personal)

Stress
12,158
27,590
29,53125
30
0

Strain
0,0005
0,0015
0,00175
0,002
0,0044

Table 3. 15. Stress and strain point to be inputted for unconfined concrete
property
(Source: Personal)

After determining the property of the unconfined concrete, the stress-strain

of confined concrete should be determined. Since reinforcement configuration
will result in different confinement behavior, each factor which influences the
stress-strain relationship is shown for each sample.
Property
Unconfined Compressive Strength
Ineffective Confinement Area
Center-center Stirrup Spacing
Clear Stirrup Spacing
Effective Confinement Area
ke
x
y
f lx
f ly
Confined Compressive Strength
Strain at Confined Compressive Strength
Maximum Strain (First Hoop Fracture)

Value
30 MPa
9335.335 mm2
50 mm
40 mm
8602.058 mm2
0.4115
0.0044
0.0133
0.429 MPa
1.268 MPa
33 MPa
0.003
0.0393

Table 3. 16. 2013 beam properties which influences stress-strain relationship

(Source: Personal)

The Manders stress-strain curve will result in an equation of

114
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

19207.32 0

f c=

0.74612+

1.74612

3.944 105

(3.14)
which will result in a graph below;

Stress-Strain relationship of Concrete (2013 Beam)

40.000
30.000
Stress (MPa)

Confined

20.000

Unconfined

10.000
0.000
0

0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05

Strain

Figure 3. 41. Stress and strain curve of the concrete used for 2013 beam
(Source: Personal)

From the figures above, the input values for confined concrete can be
inputted.
Stress
12,158
27,590
31,010
33
8,382

Strain
0,0005
0,0015
0,002
0,003
0,0393

Table 3. 17. Stress and strain point to be inputted for confined concrete
property of 2013 beam
(Source: Personal)

115
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

With similar manner, stress-strain relationship of the confined concrete of

the column sample designed by using 2013 standard can also be determined.
Property
Unconfined Compressive Strength
Ineffective Confinement Area
Center-center Stirrup Spacing
Clear Stirrup Spacing
Effective Confinement Area
ke
x
y
f lx
f ly
Confined Compressive Strength
Strain at Confined Compressive Strength
Maximum Strain (First Hoop Fracture)

Value
30 MPa
2494.0833 mm2
40 mm
30 mm
66936.8013 mm2
0.866
0.0141
0.0141
2.869 MPa
2.869 MPa
45.9 MPa
0.0073
0.0444

Table 3. 18. 2013 column properties which influences stress-strain

relationship
(Source: Personal)

From the figures above, the stress-strain graph, equation, and input values will be
stated respectively as;

Stress-Strain relationship of Concrete (2013 Column)

50.000
40.000
Confined

30.000

Unconfined

20.000
10.000
0.000
0 0.010.010.020.020.030.030.040.040.050.05

Figure 3. 42. Stress and strain curve of the concrete used for 2013 column
(Source: Personal)

f c=

8319.847 0

1.3232

0
0.3232+
0.0014885

(3.15)

116
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Stress
12,158
27,590
33,049
45,9
32,911

Strain
0,0005
0,0015
0,002
0,0073
0,0444

Table 3. 19. Stress and strain point to be inputted for confined concrete
property of 2013 column
(Source: Personal)

The confined concrete stress-strain relationship of the beam sample

designed in accordance to the 2002 standard can be calculated by using similar
manner;
Property
Unconfined Compressive Strength
Ineffective Confinement Area
Center-center Stirrup Spacing
Clear Stirrup Spacing
Effective Confinement Area
ke
x
y
f lx
f ly
Confined Compressive Strength
Strain at Confined Compressive Strength
Maximum Strain (First Hoop Fracture)

Value
30 MPa
11866.667 mm2
50 mm
40 mm
6737.977 mm2
0.323
0.0044
0.00666
0.334 MPa
0.5055 MPa
31.3 MPa
0.00243
0.02725

Table 3. 20. 2002 beam properties which influences stress-strain relationship

(Source: Personal)

The stress-strain equation, stress-strain curve, and the input value for
Drain-2DX are shown below;

f c=

25779.7 0
2.00143

0
1.00143+
0.000058544

(3.16)

117
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Stress-Strain relationship of Concrete (2002 Beam)

40.000
30.000
Stress (MPa)

Confined

20.000

Unconfined

10.000
0.000
0

0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03

Strain

Figure 3. 43. Stress and strain curve of the concrete used for 2002 beam
(Source: Personal)

Stress
12,158
27,590
30,715
31,300
5,523

Strain
0,0005
0,0015
0,002
0,00243
0,02725

Table 3. 21. Stress and strain point to be inputted for confined concrete
property of 2002 beam
(Source: Personal)

With similar manner, stress-strain relationship of the confined concrete of

the column sample designed by using 2002 standard can also be determined.

118
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Property
Unconfined Compressive Strength
Ineffective Confinement Area
Center-center Stirrup Spacing
Clear Stirrup Spacing
Effective Confinement Area
ke
x
y
f lx
f ly
Confined Compressive Strength
Strain at Confined Compressive Strength
Maximum Strain (First Hoop Fracture)

Value
30 MPa
2945.333 mm2
40 mm
30 mm
66532.934 mm2
0.858
0.0141
0.0141
2.8425 MPa
2.8425 MPa
45.6 MPa
0.0072
0.0447

Table 3. 22. 2002 column properties which influences stress-strain

relationship
(Source: Personal)

The stress-strain equation, stress-strain curve, and the input value for
Drain-2DX are shown below;
f c=

8399.891 0
1.3263

0
0.3263+
0.0014394

(3.17)

Stress-Strain relationship of Concrete (2002 Column)

50.000
40.000
30.000

Confined

Stress (MPa) 20.000

Unconfined

10.000
0.000
0

0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05

Strain

Figure 3. 44. Stress and strain curve of the concrete used for 2002 column
(Source: Personal)

cc

Strain

119
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

12,158
27,590
32,994
45,600
32,394

0,0005
0,0015
0,002
0,0072
0,0447

Table 3. 23. Stress and strain point to be inputted for confined concrete
property of 2002 column
(Source: Personal)

Beside of the compressive stress-strain relationship is assessed, the tensile

stress-strain relationship should also be checked. By using equation 2.6 and taking
fc as 30 MPa, the modulus of rupture of the concrete being used is 2.74 MPa.
From zero stress to the ultimate stress, the modulus of elasticity of 25,742.96 MPa
is taken, while after the ultimate stress has been reached, the crushing strain shall
be 20 times the strain at the ultimate stress. The crushing stress of the concrete is
usually taken as 0.001 MPa.
Tensile Stress-Strain relationship of Concrete
3
2.5
2
Stress (MPa)

1.5
1
0.5
0
0

Strain

Figure 3. 45. Concrete tensile stress-strain relationship

(Source: Personal)

Stress
2.74
0.001

Strain
0,00010645
0,00213

Table 3. 24. Stress and strain point to be inputted for concrete in tension
(Source: Personal)

120
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

For the steel property, the yield stress and ultimate stress of the steel
should be inputted, along with their corresponding strain. The stress-strain
diagram of the longitudinal rebar, along with its properties to be inputted into
Drain-2DX is shown as below;

Stress-Strain of Longitudinal Rebar

600
500
400
Stress (MPa)

300
200
100
0
0

0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16

Strain

Figure 3. 46. Stress-strain relationship of steel used for longitudinal rebar

(Source: Personal)

Property
Yielding Stress
Ultimate Stress
Pre-Yield Modulus of Elasticity
Yielding Strain
Ultimate Strain

Value
390 MPa
560 MPa
200,000 MPa
0.00195
0.16

Table 3. 25. Material properties of steel being used as longitudinal rebar

(Source: Personal)

Stress
390 MPa
560 MPa

Strain
0.00195
0.16

Table 3. 26. Stress and strain point to be inputted for longitudinal rebar
property
(Source: Personal)

The material property of the stirrups along with its stress-strain diagram
should also be shown in the same manner.

121
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

Stress-Strain of Transverse Rebar

400
300
Stress (MPa)

200
100
0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2
Strain

Figure 3. 47. Stress-strain relationship of steel used for transverse rebar

(Source: Personal)

Property
Yielding Stress
Ultimate Stress
Pre-Yield Modulus of Elasticity
Yielding Strain
Ultimate Strain

Value
235 MPa
380 MPa
200,000 MPa
0.001175
0.2

Table 3. 27. Material properties of steel being used as transverse rebar

(Source: Personal)

Stress
235 MPa
380 MPa

Strain
0.001175
0.2

Table 3. 28. Stress and strain point to be inputted for transverse rebar
property
(Source: Personal)

3.6.

Result Processing and Comparison

After both moment-rotation graphs are gained, the function for both

graphs should be determined. These functions are then compared to each other, so
that the difference between rotational stiffness gained from experimental and
numerical approach can be gained.

122
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

REFERENCES
[1] MacGregor, Wight. 2005. Reinforced Concrete Mechanics and Design 4 th SI
Edition. Singapore: Pearson.
[2] ASTM C 39. 2015. Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of
Cylindrical

Concrete

Specimen,

West

Conshohocken:

ASTM

International.
[3] Hibbler, R.C. 2011. Structural Analysis 8th Edition. Singapore: Pearson
[4] Setareh M. 2007. Concrete Structures. New Jersey: Pearson
[5] Portland Cement Association. 2005. Notes on ACI 318-05 Building Code
Requirements for Structural Concrete. Skokie: Portland Cement
Association
[6a] Badan Standarisasi Nasional. 2013. SNI 2847:2013. Persyaratan Beton
Struktural Untuk Bangunan Gedung. Jakarta: Badan Standarisasi
Nasional.
[6b] Badan Standarisasi Nasional. 2002. SNI 2847:2002. Persyaratan Beton
Struktural Untuk Bangunan Gedung. Jakarta: Badan Standarisasi
Nasional.
[7] Courses.cit.cornell.edu. Accessed April 2015
[8] Sharma A. 2011. Nonlinear Seismic Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Framed
Structures Considering Joint Distortion. Delhi: Atomic Energy Comisson
of India.
[9] Chidambaram S. 2012. Comparative Study on Behavior of Reinforced BeamColumn Joints with Reference to Anchorage Detailing. Journal of Civil
Engineering Research 2012, 2(4): 12-17
[10] Purnomo H, Tjahjono E, Ashadi HW. 2004. Effect of Mechanical Properties
in Numerical Analysis of Exterior Beam-Column Joint With Beam Stubs.
Construction and Structural Engineering Studies Center Journal, 2(1).

123
Christopher Kevinly

Universitas Indonesia

[11] Shafei, et al. 2013. Effects of Joint Flexibility on Lateral Response of

Reinforced Concrete Frames. Engineering Structures Journal 2013.
[12] Faella c, et al. 2000. Structural Steel Semirigid Connections: Theory, Design
and Software. New York: CRC Press
[13] Alva, Debs. 2013. Momentrotation relationship of RC beam-column
connections: Experimental tests and analytical model. Engineering
Structures Journal.
[14] Kataoka MN, Gerreira MA, Debs. A study on the behavior of beam-column
connections in precast concrete structures: experimental analysis.
http://www.scielo.br/. Accessed April 2015
[15] Prakash, Powell, Campbell. 1994. Drain-2DX Base Program Description and
User Guide. Berkeley: University of California
[16] Powell, GH. 1993. Drain-2DX Element Desctiption and User Guide for
Element TYPE01, TYPE02, TYPE04, TYPE06, TYPE09, and TYPE15.
Berkeley: University of California
[17] Kheyroddin A. 2007. Plastic Hinge Rotation Capacity of Reinforced
Concrete Beams.
[18] Naeim F. 2000. Seismic Design Handbook 2nd Edition. Los Angles: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
[19] theconstructor.org. accessed 9th June 2015.
[20] Park, K. 1988. Evaluation of Ductility of Structures and Structural
Assemblages from Laboratory Testing. Buletin of The New Zealand
National Society of Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 22 No. 3.
[21] Bui, Momessin, Perrotin. 2014. Assessing local-scale damage in reinforced
concrete frame structures using dynamic measurements. Engineering
Structures Journal.

124
Christopher Kevinly