The New Method in Calculating Columns and Beams Dimensions That Meets Requirements of The Strong Column-Weak Beam and Non-Soft Story

*Livian Teddy scopus  -  Department of Architecture, Universitas Sriwijaya, Indonesia
Gagoek Hardiman  -  Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Diponegoro, Indonesia
N. Nuroji  -  Department of Civil Engineering, Universitas Diponegoro, Indonesia
Sri Tudjono  -  Department of Civil Engineering, Universitas Diponegoro, Indonesia
Received: 15 Mar 2019; Revised: 22 Mar 2019; Accepted: 26 Mar 2019; Published: 27 Mar 2019; Available online: 27 Mar 2019.
Open Access Copyright 2019 Journal of Architectural Design and Urbanism

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

Citation Format:
Article Info
Section: Articles
Language: EN
Full Text:
Statistics: 127 122

Abstract

Situated at an earthquake prone area, buildings planning in Indonesia must implement earthquake resistant building principles. One of these principles is determining dimensions of columns and beams in the process of architectural designing.This act eventually affects the behaviour of the strong column-weak beam and the probability of bending failure due to soft story. At present time, there are no simple rules architects can use in calculating the dimensions of beams and columns that meet the criteria for strong column-weak beam and non-soft story. This paper is an effort to provide an input to the architects in designing the dimensions of the columns and beams. This research is a review result of three theories namely: 1). The theory of columns and beams preliminary design, 2). The theory of the strong column-weak beam concept, and 3). The theory of soft story and column slenderness. Those theories were then synthesized into a spreadsheet. To meet the criteria for strong column-weak beam and non-soft story, the following procedures must be done : 1). Determine the columns’ dimensions according to 0.15% of the columns’ cumulative tributary area, 2). Determine the beams’ dimensions according to 1/12 of the beams’ span and the beams’ plastic modulus, 3). Determine the columns’ dimensions and the columns’plastic modulus, 4). Determine the columns’ height based on the column slenderness criteria, and 5). Compare the columns plastic modulus and the beams plastic modulus and check whether they meet the criteria “the columns’plastic modulus ≥ 1.2 * the beams’ plastic modulus”.

Keywords
strong column-weak beam, soft story, column slenderness

Article Metrics:

  1. Alwashali, H., & Maeda, M. (2012). Study of Seismic Evaluation Methods Of RC Buildings With Masonry Infill Walls ; A Case Study of Building in Jordan. In Japan Association for Earthquake Engineering (JAEE) (Ed.), International Symposium on Earthquake Engineering, JAEE, Vol.1 (pp. 497–506). Tokyo: JAEE.
  2. Arnold, C. (2001). Architectural Considerations. In F. Naeim (Ed.), The Seismic Design Handbook. Boston, MA: Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1693-4
  3. Bisch, P., Carvalho, E., Degee, H., Fajfar, P., Fardis, M., Franchin, P., … Tsionis, G. (2012). Eurocode 8: Seismic Design of Buildings Worked examples. Luxembourg: https://doi.org/10.2788/91658
  4. Boen, T. (2006). The Yogya Earthquake 27 May 2006, Structural Damage Report.
  5. Boen, T. (2007a). Bengkulu & West Sumatra Earthquakes, September 12, 2007, Structural Damage Report.
  6. Boen, T. (2007b). West Sumatra Earthquake, 6 March 2007, Structural Damage Report. In HAKI (Ed.), Konstruksi Tahan Gempa Indonesia (pp. 1–30). Jakarta: HAKI.
  7. BSN. (2013). Persyaratan Beton Struktural Untuk Bangunan Gedung-SNI 2847 : 2013. Jakarta: Badan Standar Nasional.
  8. Ersoy, U. (2013). A Simple Approach for Preliminary Design of Reinforced Concrete Structures to be Built in Seismic Regions. Teknik Dergi, 24(4), 6559–6574.
  9. FEMA. (2007). NEHRP Recommended Provisions for New Buildings and Other Structures: Training and Instructional Materials-FEMA 451B. Washington DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
  10. Mezzi, M. (2006). Enhancing the Seismic Performance of Existing “Pilotis” Configurations. In IABSE Symposium Report (Vol. 92, pp. 10–17).
  11. Okada, T., Murakami, M., Kabeyasawa, T., Katsumata, H., & Nakano, Y. (Eds.). (2005). Guidelines for Seismic Retrofit of Existing Reinforced Concrete Buildings. Tokyo: The Japan Building Disaster Prevention Association (JBDPA).
  12. Seki, M. (2015). A Proposal on the Simplified Structural Evaluation Method for Existing Reinforced Concrete Buildings Based on the Japanese Seismic Evaluation Standard vis-a-vis the International Seismic Code. Journal of Earthquake Science and Engineering, 2(1), 14–24.