Analysis of the Effect of Soil Classification on Displacement and Inter-story Drift of Reinforced Concrete Buildings

Dermawan Zebua; Bimawijaya Laia; Jun Fajar Krisman Giawa; Kevin Berkat Mendrofa

doi:10.70716/reswara.v4i3.665

Authors

Dermawan Zebua Teknik Sipil, Universitas Nias, Gunungsitoli, Indonesia Author
Bimawijaya Laia Teknik Sipil, Universitas Nias, Gunungsitoli, Indonesia Author
Jun Fajar Krisman Giawa Teknik Sipil, Universitas Nias, Gunungsitoli, Indonesia Author
Kevin Berkat Mendrofa Teknik Sipil, Universitas Nias, Gunungsitoli, Indonesia Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.70716/reswara.v4i3.665

Keywords:

Soil Classification, Reinforced Concrete Shophouse, Seismic Response, Displacement, Inter-Story Drift

Abstract

The seismic performance of reinforced concrete (RC) shophouse buildings is strongly influenced by local soil conditions, which affect the amplification of ground motion and the dynamic response of structures during earthquakes. This study aims to analyze the effect of soil classification on displacement and inter-story drift in a reinforced concrete shophouse building subjected to seismic loading. A quantitative research approach was employed using Response Spectrum Analysis (RSA) in accordance with the provisions of SNI 1726:2019. The structural model was analyzed under three different soil classifications, namely Site Class SC (very dense soil), Site Class SD (medium soil), and Site Class SE (soft soil), while maintaining identical structural geometry, material properties, and loading conditions. The results indicate that soil classification significantly affects the seismic response of the building. The maximum roof displacement increased from 42.8 mm for Site Class SC to 76.9 mm for Site Class SE, representing an increase of 79.67%. Similarly, the maximum inter-story drift ratio increased from 0.72% to 1.42%, corresponding to an increase of 97.22%. The highest displacement and drift values were consistently observed under soft soil conditions due to greater seismic wave amplification and increased flexibility of the soil-structure system. Although all analyzed cases satisfied the drift limitations specified by SNI 1726:2019, buildings located on soft soil sites exhibited significantly higher deformation demands. The findings demonstrate that soil classification is a critical parameter in seismic design and should be carefully considered during the planning and analysis of reinforced concrete shophouse buildings to ensure structural safety and resilience in earthquake-prone regions.

References

American Society of Civil Engineers. (2022). ASCE/SEI 7-22: Minimum design loads and associated criteria for buildings and other structures. American Society of Civil Engineers.

Aydinoglu, M. N. (2021). Effects of site conditions on seismic performance assessment of reinforced concrete frame buildings. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 149, 106883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.106883

Badan Standardisasi Nasional. (2019). SNI 1726:2019: Tata cara perencanaan ketahanan gempa untuk struktur bangunan gedung dan non gedung. Badan Standardisasi Nasional.

Chopra, A. K. (2020). Dynamics of structures: Theory and applications to earthquake engineering (5th ed.). Pearson.

Das, B. M., & Sivakugan, N. (2018). Principles of foundation engineering (9th ed.). Cengage Learning.

Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2020). NEHRP recommended seismic provisions for new buildings and other structures (FEMA P-2082). U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Kalkan, E., & Gülkan, P. (2004). Site-dependent spectra derived from ground motion records in Turkey. Earthquake Spectra, 20(4), 1111–1138. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1808147

Kramer, S. L. (1996). Geotechnical earthquake engineering. Prentice Hall.

Liu, Y., Li, X., & Wang, Z. (2022). Influence of soil–structure interaction on seismic response of reinforced concrete buildings. Structures, 39, 1280–1292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2022.03.045

Miranda, E., & Taghavi, S. (2021). Evaluation of interstory drift demands in reinforced concrete structures under seismic loading. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 50(8), 2110–2128. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3435

Mwafy, A. M., & Elnashai, A. S. (2001). Static pushover versus dynamic collapse analysis of RC buildings. Engineering Structures, 23(5), 407–424. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(00)00036-8

Mylonakis, G., & Gazetas, G. (2000). Seismic soil–structure interaction: Beneficial or detrimental? Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 4(3), 277–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460009350372

Nilson, A. H., Darwin, D., & Dolan, C. W. (2018). Design of concrete structures (15th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

Paulay, T., & Priestley, M. J. N. (1992). Seismic design of reinforced concrete and masonry buildings. John Wiley & Sons.

Priestley, M. J. N., Calvi, G. M., & Kowalsky, M. J. (2007). Displacement-based seismic design of structures. IUSS Press.

Sarkar, P., Choudhury, D., & Bhattacharya, S. (2023). Seismic response of RC frame buildings considering soil flexibility effects. Engineering Structures, 278, 115558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2023.115558

Zhang, H., Chen, J., & Xu, L. (2024). Assessment of displacement and drift performance of reinforced concrete buildings under varying site classes. Journal of Building Engineering, 86, 108729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2024.108729