Perbandingan Efektivitas Antara Sambungan Lewatan Dan Sambungan Mekanis Tipe Coupler Pada Balok Beton Bertulang: Comparison of Effectivity Between Lap Splice and Mechanical Splice (Threaded Coupler Type) in RC Beams

Rizky Wahyu Nugraha; Jafar

doi:10.25299/saintis.2024.vol24(01).14615

Authors

Rizky Wahyu Nugraha Universitas Islam Indonesia
Jafar Universitas Islam Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.25299/saintis.2024.vol24(01).14615

Keywords:

Beton bertulang, Sambungan lewatan, Sambungan mekanis, Coupler

Abstract

[ID] Di dalam SNI 2052:2017, dijelaskan bahwa panjang dari tulangan beton ditetapkan dengan panjang maksimal 12 m. Ukuran standar panjang maksimal baja tulangan ini ditetapkan dengan tujuan kemudahan transportasi dan penyimpanannya. Dengan adanya ketetapan batas panjang baja tulangan, membuat kebutuhan akan panjang baja tulangan yang tepat di proyek-proyek konstruksi terkadang tidak tercukupi. Dalam mengatasi masalah ini, diperlukan sambungan tulangan dengan jenis penyambungan yang efektif serta dengan panjang penyambungan yang bisa menyalurkan beban atau tegangan yang dialami oleh satu tulangan ke tulangan yang lain. Berdasarkan permasalahan yang ada, penulis tertarik untuk meneliti perbandingan di antara dua jenis sambungan yang tersedia saat ini, yaitu jenis sambungan lewatan dan jenis sambungan mekanis. Dalam penelitian ini, perhitungan nilai panjang total penyaluran sambungan tulangan lewatan menggunakan SNI 2847:2019 sebagai acuannya. Sementara itu, desain sambungan mekanis yang dipakai merupakan jenis threaded coupler. Penelitian ini membandingkan performa kedua sambungan tersebut dalam aspek momen nominal pengujian kuat lentur dan lendutan maksimumnya. Penelitian ini menghasilkan nilai momen nominal kuat lentur sambungan lewatan dan sambungan mekanis coupler berturut-turut sebesar 33,546 kNm dan 24,246 kNm, nilai lendutan maksimum sambungan lewatan dan sambungan mekanis coupler berturut-turut sebesar 69,37 mm dan 8,689 mm. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian, ditarik kesimpulan bahwa performa sambungan lewatan lebih baik dibandingkan dengan sambungan coupler, baik dalam aspek nominal pengujian kuat lenturnya dan lendutan maksimumnya.

[EN] In SNI 2052:2017, it is explained that the length of concrete reinforcement is set at a maximum length of 12 m. The standard size of the maximum length of reinforcing bar is determined with the aim of ease of transportation and storage. With the determination of the length limit of reinforcing bar, the need for the proper length of reinforcing bar in construction projects is sometimes not fulfilled. In overcoming this problem, it is necessary to splice the rebars with an effective mechanism to successfully transmit the load or stress from one rebar to another. Based on the existing problems, the author is interested in examining the comparison between the two types of splice currently available, namely the lap splice and mechanical splice coupler type. In this study, the estimation of the the total lapped length followed SNI 2847:2019 as a reference. This study compares the performance of the two splicing method in terms of the nominal moment aspects of their flexural strength testing, their maximum deflection, and the costs that need to be incurred in their use. This research showed the nominal bending moment values of lap splice and mechanical splice were 33,546 kNm and 24,246 kNm, respectively; the maximum deflection measured were 69,37 mm and 8,689 mm respectively. Based on the results of the study, it can be concluded that the performance of the lap splice is better than the mechanical splice coupler type, both in the nominal aspect of the flexural strength test and the maximum deflection. The reason is the section area of rebar was deducted subjected to the splicing process.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Badan Standardisasi Nasional, “Persyaratan Beton Struktural untuk Bangunan Gedung dan Penjelasan (SNI 2847:2019),” Persyaratan Bet. Strukt. untuk Bangunan Gedung, no. 8, p. 695, 2019.

Badan Standarisasi Nasional, “SNI 2052-2017 Baja tulangan beton,” Sni 2052-2017, p. 15, 2017.

A. M. Tarabia, Z. I. Mahmoud, M. S. Shoukry, and A. A. Abudina, “Performance of R.C. slabs with lap splices using headed bars,” Alexandria Eng. J., vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 2729–2740, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.aej.2016.05.018.

R. T. S. Mabrouk and A. Mounir, “Behavior of RC beams with tension lap splices confined with transverse reinforcement using different types of concrete under pure bending,” Alexandria Eng. J., vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 1727–1740, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.aej.2017.05.001.

Sulastri, “Perbandingan perilaku balok tanpa sambungan lewatan dan balok dengan sambungan lewatan,” J. Kalibr. - Karya Lintas Ilmu Bid. Rekayasa Arsitektur, Sipil, Ind., pp. 81–87, 2020.

M. F. Musyaffa and J. Jafar, “Perbandingan Kinerja Lentur Balok Beton Bertulang Dengan Sambungan Lewatan Dan Sambungan Mekanis (Clamp),” TAPAK (Teknologi Apl. Konstr. J. Progr. Stud. Tek. Sipil, vol. 12, no. 1, p. 101, 2022, doi: 10.24127/tp.v12i1.2327.

H. Dabiri, A. Kheyroddin, and A. Dall’Asta, “Splice methods used for reinforcement steel bars: A state-of-the-art review,” Constr. Build. Mater., vol. 320, no. January, p. 126198, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.126198.

D. Tarquini, J. P. de Almeida, and K. Beyer, “Experimental investigation on the deformation capacity of lap splices under cyclic loading,” Bull. Earthq. Eng., vol. 17, no. 12, pp. 6645–6670, 2019, doi: 10.1007/s10518-019-00692-3.

ACI 439.3R-91, “Mechanical Connections of Reinforcing Bars, Standard by American Concrete Institute,” Concr. Int., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 24–35, 1999.

Z. Ambarwati and Jafar, “Perbandingan Kinerja Lentur Balok Beton Bertulang Dengan Sambungan Lewatan Dan Sambungan Mekanis Tipe Threaded Coupler ( The Comparison of Flexural Performance of Reinforced Concrete Beam With Lap Splice and Threaded Coupler-Type Mechanical Splices ) Beto,” Reka Buana J. Ilm. Tek. Sipil dan Tek. Kim., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 114–128, 2022.

H. Al-Quraishi, M. Al-Farttoosi, and R. AbdulKhudhur, “Tension Lap Splice Length of Reinforcing Bars Embedded in Reactive Powder Concrete (RPC),” Structures, vol. 19, no. January, pp. 362–368, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.istruc.2018.12.011.

C. Goksu, H. Yilmaz, S. R. Chowdhury, K. Orakcal, and A. Ilki, “The Effect of Lap Splice Length on the Cyclic Lateral Load Behavior of RC Members with Low-Strength Concrete and Plain Bars,” Adv. Struct. Eng., vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 639–658, May 2014, doi: 10.1260/1369-4332.17.5.639.

P. K. Dahal and M. Tazarv, “Mechanical bar splices for incorporation in plastic hinge regions of RC members,” Constr. Build. Mater., vol. 258, p. 120308, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.120308.

S. W. Shin, H. Kang, J. M. Ahn, and D. W. Kim, “Flexural capacity of singly reinforced beam with 150 MPa ultra high-strength concrete,” Indian J. Eng. Mater. Sci., vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 414–426, 2010.

A. Kheyroddin and H. Dabiri, “Cyclic performance of RC beam-column joints with mechanical or forging (GPW) splices; an experimental study,” Structures, vol. 28, no. November, pp. 2562–2571, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.istruc.2020.10.071.

M. Mahalingam, R. P. N. Rao, and S. Kannan, “Ductility behavior fiber reinforced concrete beams strengthened with externally bonded glass fiber reinforced polymer laminates,” Am. J. Appl. Sci., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 107–111, 2013, doi: 10.3844/ajassp.2013.107.111.

F. J. Asmara, S. Suhendra, and A. Dwiretnani, “Analisis Perbandingan Kuat Tekan dan Kuat Tarik Beton Yang Menggunakan Pasir Sungai Batang Asai Dan Pasir Sungai Batanghari,” J. Talent. Sipil, vol. 4, no. 1, p. 1, 2021, doi: 10.33087/talentasipil.v4i1.42.