Seismic Load Analysis of a Laboratory Building Using the Equivalent Static Method

Bunyamin Bunyamin; Gusti Mistra; Azzaki Mubarak; Muhajjir Muhajjir

doi:10.70028/mssi.v1i1.96

Authors

Bunyamin Bunyamin Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Iskandar Muda, Banda Aceh, 23234, Indonesia Author
Gusti Mistra Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Iskandar Muda, Banda Aceh, 23234, Indonesia Author
Azzaki Mubarak Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Iskandar Muda, Banda Aceh, 23234, Indonesia Author https://orcid.org/0009-0005-3504-4884
Muhajjir Muhajjir Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Iskandar Muda, Banda Aceh, 23234, Indonesia Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.70028/mssi.v1i1.96

Keywords:

Equivalent Static, Displacement, Earthquake, Structural Performance, Seismic

Abstract

Earthquakes caused by tectonic activity are major hazards in Indonesia, requiring structures to be designed to resist seismic loads safely. This study evaluates the seismic performance of a laboratory building based on SNI 1726:2019 using real ground motion data from the 2016 Pidie Jaya earthquake. This study uses actual Pidie Jaya earthquake records to provide a more realistic seismic evaluation of existing buildings in Aceh. This study aims to evaluate the structural safety, stability, and serviceability under seismic loading using the equivalent static analysis method. The equivalent static method was used to analyze the earthquake load, where seismic forces are represented as equivalent horizontal static forces applied at each floor level. The results indicate that the fundamental period of the structure is 0.638 seconds, which remains within the allowable limit, while the base shear forces are 886.60 kN in the X-direction and 856.80 kN in the Y-direction. The difference in base shear between the X and Y directions is caused by slight asymmetries in the structure’s mass and stiffness distribution. The maximum roof displacements at an elevation of 12.60 m are 5.381 mm in the X-direction and 5.049 mm in the Y-direction, which are still below the allowable inter-story drift limits of 7.214 mm and 6.938 mm, respectively, and significantly below the overall drift limit of 84 mm. The drift limits of 7.214 mm and 6.938 mm were determined from the allowable inter-story drift ratio of 0.5% according to SNI 1726:2019 for Risk Category II structures.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

N. Lathifah, I. Idroes, M. Hady, B. Bunyamin, and H. Pramanda, “Seismic Performance Analysis of Buildings Strengthened with X-Bracing Systems under Dynamic Earthquake Loads,” Disaster Civ. Eng. Archit., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 159–172, 2025, doi: 10.70028/dcea.v2i2.64.

I. Wally, H. J. Wattimanela, and Y. A. Lesnussa, “Analysis of Earthquake Activity Level in Several Districts in The Province of Aceh with Using the Guttenberg-Richter Method Approach,” in AIP Conference Proceedings, 2023, vol. 2588, no. 1, p. 50017. doi: 10.1063/5.0112463.

H. J. Wattimanela, N. T. Puspito, and H. Batkunde, “Simeulue Earthquake Activity Analysis Using the MLE Method,” Indones. J. Geogr., vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 42–51, 2025, doi: 10.22146/ijg.91332.

N. A. Pambudi, “Geothermal power generation in Indonesia, a country within the ring of fire: Current status, future development and policy,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 81, pp. 2893–2901, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.06.096.

M. Masum and M. Ali Akbar, “The Pacific Ring of Fire is Working as a Home Country of Geothermal Resources in the World,” in IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 2019, vol. 249, no. 1, p. 12020. doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/249/1/012020.

B. Bunyamin, M. Silviana, and L. Lindawati, “Influence of precast concrete joints on the ductility of beam elements,” in Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2021, vol. 1882, no. 1, p. 12032. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1882/1/012032.

M. Hasan, T. Saidi, M. Afifuddin, and B. Setiawan, “The assessment and strengthening proposal of building structure after the Pidie Jaya earthquake in December 2016,” J. King Saud Univ. - Eng. Sci., vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 12–23, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.jksues.2021.02.007.

P. Zakian and A. Kaveh, “Seismic design optimization of engineering structures: a comprehensive review,” Acta Mech., vol. 234, no. 4, pp. 1305–1330, 2023, doi: 10.1007/s00707-022-03470-6.

R. Pang, B. Xu, Y. Zhou, and L. Song, “Seismic time-history response and system reliability analysis of slopes considering uncertainty of multi-parameters and earthquake excitations,” Comput. Geotech., vol. 136, p. 104245, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.compgeo.2021.104245.

T. S. Sprague, “Evaluating Structures: Understanding Strength, Stiffness, Suitability, and Stability,” in Design-Tech: Building Science for Architects, Routledge, 2025, pp. 204–231.

L. Aditya and G. Tamizharasi, “Probabilistic approach for correlating stiffness and strength irregularities in RC buildings under earthquake shaking,” in Structures, 2025, vol. 77, p. 109024. doi: 10.1016/j.istruc.2025.109024.

M. Hasan, T. Saidi, D. Sarana, and Bunyamin, “The strength of hollow concrete block walls, reinforced hollow concrete block beams, and columns,” J. King Saud Univ. - Eng. Sci., vol. 34, no. 8, pp. 523–535, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.jksues.2021.01.008.

Bunyamin, “Comparison of deflection of hollow block concrete blocks with normal reinforced concrete beam,” in AIP Conference Proceedings, 2019, vol. 2059, no. 1, p. 20039. doi: 10.1063/1.5085982.

A. K. H. Kwan, J. C. M. Ho, and H. J. Pam, “Flexural strength and ductility of reinforced concrete beams,” Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Struct. Build., vol. 152, no. 4, pp. 361–369, 2002, doi: 10.1680/stbu.2002.152.4.361.

N. Attarchian, R. Aghamohammadi, and K. Nasrollahzadeh, “Reliability-Based Calibration of Strength-Reduction Factors for Flexural Design of FRP-RC Beams Under Various Load Combinations,” J. Compos. Sci., vol. 9, no. 4, p. 154, 2025, doi: 10.3390/jcs9040154.

A. A. Mansor, A. S. Mohammed, and W. D. Salman, “Effect of longitudinal steel reinforcement ratio on deflection and ductility in reinforced concrete beams,” in IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 2020, vol. 888, no. 1, p. 12008. doi: 10.1088/1757-899X/888/1/012008.

M. G. Guler and K. Guler, “The Effect of Story Drifts in Determining the Earthquake Performance of High-Rise Buildings,” Buildings, vol. 14, no. 12, p. 3830, 2024, doi: 10.3390/buildings14123830.

J. Shan, Y. Zhang, and H. Zhang, “Interstory drift estimation by fusing acceleration and computer vision measurements with experiment validation,” Mech. Syst. Signal Process., vol. 223, p. 111891, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.ymssp.2024.111891.

D. P. N. Kontoni and A. A. Farghaly, “Enhancing the earthquake resistance of RC and steel high-rise buildings by bracings, shear walls and TMDs considering SSI,” Asian J. Civ. Eng., vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 2595–2608, 2023, doi: 10.1007/s42107-023-00666-6.

Y. C. Assidiq and I. Bali, “Study of Base Shear and Inter-Story Drift due to Earthquake Forces on a Ten-Story Building Structure in Surakarta,” Presunive Civ. Eng. J., vol. 3, no. 1, p. 1, 2025, doi: 10.33021/pcej.v3i1.5627.

C. Hickey, R. Kannan, D. Grant, S. Hendry, and K. Hiçyılmaz, “Solving the Conundrum of Recovering Sufficient Participating Mass for Complex Structures,” World Conf. Earthq. Eng. Proc., vol. 2024, 2024.

N. Eka Saputra and Y. A. Priastiwi, “Comparative Study Of Dynamic Earthquake Analysis With Spectral Design And Time History Methods,” J. Indones. Sos. Teknol., vol. 4, no. 8, pp. 1223–1234, 2023, doi: 10.59141/jist.v4i8.700.

M. Chennit, A. Ahmed-Chaouch, M. Saidani, and A. Bourzam, “Periods and Mode Shapes for Uniform Shear Wall Buildings: Importance of Selecting the Appropriate Dynamic Behavior,” Int. J. Struct. Stab. Dyn., vol. 22, no. 11, p. 2250114, 2022, doi: 10.1142/S0219455422501140.

F. Valenzuela-Beltrán et al., “Effect of the Distribution of Mass and Structural Member Discretization on the Seismic Response of Steel Buildings,” Appl. Sci., vol. 12, no. 1, p. 433, 2022, doi: 10.3390/app12010433.

K. Fujii, “Seismic response of reinforced concrete moment-resisting frame with steel damper columns under earthquake sequences: evaluation using extended critical pseudo-multi impulse analysis,” Front. Built Environ., vol. 11, p. 1561534, 2025, doi: 10.3389/fbuil.2025.1561534.

A. Souhaibou and L. zhi Li, “A comparative study on the lateral displacement of a multi-story RC building under wind and earthquake load actions using base shear method and ETABS software,” Mater. Today Proc., 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.matpr.2023.04.287.

Z. Tonyali, A. Kiral, M. Ergun, and R. Garcia, “Seismic resilience of existing RC dual-system buildings during the 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquakes: a case study,” J. Asian Archit. Build. Eng., pp. 1–26, 2025, doi: 10.1080/13467581.2025.2564110.

A. Chatzidaki, D. Vamvatsikos, and E. Hernández-Montes, “Performance-based versus conventional seismic design: comparative assessment on a 4-story RC moment frame,” Bull. Earthq. Eng., vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 3031–3053, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s10518-024-01871-7.

C. Xie, X. Wang, G. Vasdravellis, and W. Liang, “Displacement profile for direct-displacement based seismic design of dual frame-wall resilient system,” J. Constr. Steel Res., vol. 214, p. 108495, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2024.108495.

C. Dönmez et al., “Lessons From The 2023 SE Türkiye EQS: A Study On Damaged RC Buildings Considering The Hassan Index LESSONS FROM THE 2023 SOUTHEAST TÜRKIYE EARTHQUAKES: A STUDY ON DAMAGED RC BUILDINGS CONSIDERING THE HASSAN INDEX,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/380606550

S. P. Akshara, M. A. Akbar, T. M. M. Pillai, R. Pasunuti, and R. Sabhadiya, “Using an appropriate rotation-based criterion to account for torsional irregularity in reinforced concrete buildings,” Earthq. Struct., vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 349–361, 2024, doi: 10.12989/eas.2024.26.5.349.