See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/311379097

THE APPLICATION of STM (BASED on ACI 318-02) and FEA for THE DESIGN of
STRUCTURAL TRANSFER-WALL Case study : 'Kota Kasablanka' Mixed Use
Project, Jakarta

Conference Paper · September 2007

CITATIONS READS

0 205

3 authors, including:

Wiryanto Dewobroto
Universitas Pelita Harapan
28 PUBLICATIONS   10 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Writing a book regarding Castellated Beam design View project

ANALISIS STABILITAS PERANCAH BERTINGKAT dengan ADVANCE ANALYSIS dan D.A.M View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Wiryanto Dewobroto on 04 December 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Group of Structure and Construction EACEF-014

THE APPLICATION of STM (BASED on ACI 318-02) and FEA

for THE DESIGN of STRUCTURAL TRANSFER-WALL
Case study : ‘Kota Kasablanka’ Mixed Use Project, Jakarta

Wiryanto Dewobroto 1, Sugeng Wijanto 2, Toto Ismintarto 3

ABSTRACT: Dissimilar room functions in the mixed-use building can cause the unaligned column
gridline from the lowest floor to the top floor. The transfer loading from one column to two columns or
vice versa sometimes is unavoidable in architectural design. The reaction force should be transferred
from the column is enormous and requires special structure such as transfer-wall or deep-beam. The
value of deep-to-span ratio of transfer-wall is not satisfying the flexural-beam criteria so it needs a spe-
cial design, base on the deep-beam requirement. The detail design of deep beam has not yet incorporated
in SNI 03-2847-2002 therefore Strut-and-Tie Model (STM) method from ACI 318-02 Appendix A will
be applied. This method was formalized from the research in University of Stuttgart, Germany, by
Schlaich et. al. in 1987, since then growing extensively (Adebar et. al. 1990; Jirsa et. al. 1991; K.H.
Reineck 1996, 1999, 2002), and now has been adopted by several design standards in Canada, USA, and
New Zealand. This paper will provide the application of STM based on ACI 318-02 for the design of
transfer-wall in the “Kota Kasablanka” Mixed Use Project, Jakarta. Finally, the result of the design will
be evaluated by Finite Element Analysis (FEA) program in order to make a strength comparison.
KEY-WORDS: strut-and-tie model, transfer-beam/wall, deep-beam, ACI 318-02 Appendix A

ABSTRAK : Perbedaan fungsi ruang pada suatu bangunan multi fungsi sering mengakibatkan as-
kolom tidak bisa satu garis dari lantai terbawah hingga ke lantai atap. Peralihan beban dari kolom
tunggal menjadi dua kolom atau sebaliknya sering tidak bisa terhindarkan dalam perencaan desain
Arsitektur. Besarnya gaya reaksi kolom yang dialihkan cukup besar dan memerlukan suatu sistem
struktur khusus seperti balok transfer atau dinding transfer. Akibat rasio bentang terhadap tinggi
balok/dinding transfer yang tidak memenuhi kriteria balok lentur, maka perlu perencanaan khusus
sesuai dengan persyaratan balok tinggi. Prosedur perencanaan hal ini belum ada di SNI 03-2847-2002
maka dipakai analisa strut-and-tie model (STM) dari ACI 318-02 Appendix A. Analisa STM awal
mulanya adalah hasil penelitian di University of Stuttgart, Jerman, oleh Schlaich et. al. pada tahun
1987, kemudian berkembang pesat (Adebar et. al. 1990; Jirsa et. al. 1991; K.H. Reineck 1996, 1999,
2002), sampai akhirnya diadopsi oleh beberapa standar desain di Negara Canada, USA dan New
Zealand. Makalah ini menyajikan aplikasi STM versi ACI 318-02 untuk perencanaan transfer-wall pada
Proyek Mixed Use “Kota Kasablanka”, Jakarta. Kemudian hasil perencanaan tersebut akan dievaluasi
dengan program finite element analysis (FEA) dan diperbandingkan hasilnya.
KATA KUNCI : strut-and-tie model, balok/dinding transfer, balok tinggi, ACI 318-02 Appendix A

1. STRUCTURAL DESIGN of TRANSFER-WALL

Dissimilar room functions in the mixed-use building can cause the unaligned column gridline from the
lowest floor to the top floor. The transfer loading from one column to two columns or vice versa
sometimes is unavoidable in architectural design. The reaction force from the column that should be
transferred is enormous and requires special structure such as transfer-beam/wall. The ratio of deep-to-
span of transfer-beam/wall is not satisfying the flexural-beam criteria, so it needs special design base
on the deep-beam requirement. The detail design of deep beam has not yet incorporated in SNI 03-
2847-2002 therefore strut-and-tie model (STM) method from ACI 318-02 Appendix A will be applied.
This method was formalized from the research in University of Stuttgart, Germany, by Schlaich et. al.
in 1987, since then growing extensively (Adebar et. al. 1990; Jirsa et. al. 1991; Reineck 1996, 1999,
2002), and now has been adopted by several design standards in Canada, USA, New Zealand etc.

1
Lecturer, Civil Engineering Department, Universitas Pelita Harapan, Tangerang ; Ph.D student, Universitas Katolik
Parahyangan, Bandung, E-mail: wir@uph.edu and blog: http://wiryanto.wordpress.com
2
Founder / Director, PT. Gistama Intisemesta Consulting Engineer, Jakarta-Surabaya ; Lecturer, Civil Engineering
Department, Universitas Trisakti, Jakarta; E-mail: s.wijanto1@xtra.co.nz
3
Director, PT. Gistama Intisemesta Consulting Engineers, Jakarta-Surabaya, E-mail: gistama@cbn.net.id

C-30 EACEF - The 1st International Conference of European Asian Civil Engineering Forum
Group of Structure and Construction EACEF-014

A similar case happened to “Kota Kasablanka” Project, Jakarta. There is a column supporting several
floor above should be stopped in specific floor elevation and shift to the two column below. In
transfering the large reaction from the upper column, it need special structure such as transfer-wall.
Transfer-wall structure is an integral part of the building structure, so all possible load combination
should be considered well. Effect of earthquake will be considered in lateral and vertical direction too.
After evaluate various combination of the loading, we concludes that the permanent load combination
(DL and LL) is dominanted in load transferring mechanism of the structural transfer-wall. Permanent
load combination due to the reaction from the upper column will act as a point load as shown in Fig.1.
2394 ton
t

3100 COLUMN
LEVEL LG 1150/1150 LEVEL LG

1950 1950
Transfer Wall
3500

COLUMN
COLUMN COLUMN 1150/1150
500

1150/1150 1150/1150
LEVEL B1 LEVEL B1

3100
Section A

1197 ton 1197 ton

Figure 1. Transfer-Wall Structure and their Factored Load Design

Because of the ratio of clear span to height < 4 , and the area of loading (column to be supported) in
location less than two (2) times of height of the transfer-wall, therefore according ACI 318-02, deep-
beam behavior will be dominant than ordinary flexural beam behavior. The deep-beam should be
designed considering non-linear strain distribution, which the detail calculation does not include in our
SNI 03-2847-2002. American Code, ACI 318-02 mention it in their Appendix and give a
comprehensive approach by incorporating the strut-and-tie model (STM) method.
2. STRUT-and-TIE-MODEL for TRANSFER-WALL DESIGN
Transfer-wall structure should be isolated from the other part of the building and will be analysis as
independent structure in carrying the column load. The interaction of the component due to stiffness of
the member will be analysis elsewhere and the results will be added by superposition approach. The
transfer-wall will be considered as ordinary deep beam so STM can be created as shown in Fig. 2.
2394 ton
Bottle-shaped
575
strut strut
C LEVEL LG
1057

)
(-
1150 t on idealized
3000

lb 23 prismatic
17 strut
250
500

44°
wt

LEVEL B1
1240 ton (+)

A B Nodal
ties
250

zone
11

ws
5 9

1197 ton 3100 1197 ton

Figure 2. Strut-and-Tie-Model (STM) for Transfer-Wall

Universitas Pelita Harapan, INDONESIA - September 26-27th, 2007 C-31

Group of Structure and Construction EACEF-014

Strut-and-tie will be connected in the node, there is node A and node B, their dimension is governed
by the width of support (lb = column width at A or B), and the height of steel ties rebar (wt). In our
case, ties rebar should be distributed in height of wt (part below the Level B1). If the anchorage length
of ties rebar can be embedded simple in the floor, we do not need a special details for anchorage.
Nodal dimension (grey area in Fig.2) have important contribution to the strength of strut, also the node
itself. Base on the strut-and-tie-model on Fig. 2, the calculation the force distribution in the strut and
ties can be found. Therefore stress in each component will be evaluted by ACI-318 formula. The first
author has wrote the evaluation of the STM component in detail and was published (Dewobroto 2006),
so only the item to be checked and their reference to ACI-318 will be mentioned again as follow :
No Item to be evaluated / check References to ACI 318-02
1 Strength of STRUT in AC or BC Section A.1 and A.3
2 Rebar requirement for TIES in AB Section A.1 and A.4
3 Strength of NODE at A or B (Node Type CCT) Section A.1 and A.5
4 ANCHORAGE LENGTH of Ties at A or B Section 12.2
5 Strength of NODE at C (Node Type CCC) Section A.1 and A.5

3. THE REBAR ARRANGEMENT and SECTION of TRANSFER-WALL

After STM components (strut, ties, anchorage length and nodes) has been checked and fulfill all of the
requirement of Appendix A – ACI 318-02, therefore configuration of transfer-wall can be drawn in
detailed, as shown in Fig. 3 below. Note : column and slab reinforcement details are not included.
800
LEVEL LG 11 D32 LEVEL LG
2D16-200

2D16-200
D16-200 (H-V)
stirrup
3000

steel ties 2D16-200

anchorage
D13-400 (typ)
2D13-100

LEVEL B1 LEVEL B1

total TIE total TIE

5*11=55 D32 785 5*11=55 D32

Sect. A stirrup stirrup stirrup

2D13 - 100/200 2D13-200 2D13-200
1360 6200 1360

Figure 3. Section and Detail of the Structural Transfer-wall

4. FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS (F.E.A)

The general-purpose program for finite element analysis, ABAQUS, was used in the present study to
investigate the ultimate strength of transfer-wall as configured by STM method. A typical finite
element discretization of the transfer wall used in the present study as shown in Fig. 4.
P
200

discrete rigid
500

1950 1150

t = 1150 mm
t = 800 mm
3000
2500

A B A B A

t = 1150 mm with smeared steel rebar

1150

node monitor
A A
500

discrete rigid discrete rigid

3100 3100

Figure 4. F.E.A Model and Mesh of Reinforced Concrete Transfer-wall

C-32 EACEF - The 1st International Conference of European Asian Civil Engineering Forum
Group of Structure and Construction EACEF-014

5. CONCRETE MODELLING
5.1. Concrete in Compression
Concrete in compression was modeled as an elastic-plastic material with strain softening. The stress-
strain relationship for concrete in uniaxial compression proposed by Careira and Chu (1985) as
adopted by Qing et. al. (2005) as follows
f c′γ (ε c ε c′ ) 3
f′
σc = and γ is defined by γ = c + 1.55
1 − γ + (ε c ε c′ )γ 32.4

where σ c = compression stress in concrete; ε c = strain in concrete; f c′ = cylinder compressive strength

of concrete; ε c′ = strain corresponding to f c′ (MPa). The strain ε c′ is usually taken as 0.002. A stress-
strain curve for concrete with a compressive strength of 40 MPa is shown in Fig. 5.a.
45

40

35

30
Stress (MPa)

25

20

15

10

0
0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006
Strain

a). in compression b). in tension

Figure 5. Stress-Strain Curve for Concrete

In the present study, the stress-strain behavior of concrete in compression was assumed to be linier
elastic up to 0.4 f c′ (Qing et. al. 2005). Beyond this point, it was in the plastic regions in which plastic
strain was input to define the stress-strain relationship in the finite element model.
5.2. Concrete in Tension
The behavior of concrete and reinforcement in a concrete beam was modeled independently. The
interaction between the concrete and reinforcing bars was simulated approximately by the tension
stiffening model. The model assumes that the direct stress across a crack gradually reduces to zero as
the crack open. Tension stiffening was defined in the present study using stress-strain data. The stress-
strain relationship assumes that the tensile increase linearly with an increase in tensile strain up to
concrete cracking. After concrete cracking, the tensile stress decrease linearly to zero as the concrete
softens. The value of tension stiffening in an important parameter that affects the solution of a
nonlinear analysis of reinforced concrete. Tension stiffening is influenced by the density of reinforcing
bars, the bond, the relative size of the aggregate compared to the rebar diameter and the finite element
mesh. For heavily reinforced concrete, the total strain at which the tensile stress is zero is usually
taken as 10 times (Hibbit 2004). the strain at failure in the tension stiffening model. In the present
study, a total strain of 0.01 was used for reinforced concrete transfer-wall (see Fig.5b).
6. SOLUTION METHOD
The nonlinear response of structural concrete is highly discontinuous due to cracking. Local instabili-
ties often occur in the nonlinear analysis of reinforced concrete elements because of the large amount
of cracking. The modified Riks (Hibbit 2004) method was therefore used in the present study to
prevent the local instabilities. The automatic load control scheme was employed. The deflection at
mid-span of the transfer-wall structure was monitored in the analysis also to control the stopping of
Riks procedure.

Universitas Pelita Harapan, INDONESIA - September 26-27th, 2007 C-33

Group of Structure and Construction EACEF-014

a). Fail at 0.967 Time Step using Static - General b). Completed Time Step using Static - Riks
Figure 6. The Analysis Progress by Monitoring the DOF U2 at Node 17 (center of structure)
In the Static-General procedure, the initial load increment is the product of the ratio of the initial time
increment to the periods and the load magnitude given in the loading options. Therefore, the monitor
results of displacement to time almost equal to the displacement to load behavior as shown in Fig. 6a.
Unfortunely we cannot use this procedure because it will be fail before fulfill the time completely.
Otherwise, in the Riks procedure, actual values of load magnitudes cannot be specified. Instead they
are computed as part of solution, as the “load proportionality factor”, multiplying the load magnitudes
given on the loading data lines. User-prescribed load magnitudes serve only to define the direction and
to estimate the magnitude of the initial increment of the load for a step. The user can terminate a Riks
analysis by specifying either a maximum load proportionality factor or a maximum displacement at a
node, or both. When a solution point is computed at which either of these limits is crossed, the
analysis will stop. In any event, or if neither option is used, the analysis ends when the maximum
number of increment for the steep is exeeded. This situation happened in our study.

a. Principal Stress Vector b. Mises Stress Contour

Figure 7. Plane Stress at the Completed Step
In step near ultimate, the stress distribution make a zone like contour, as shown in Fig. 7, similar to
the shape of strut-and-tie-model, as illustrated in Fig. 2, that will be used for analysis and design of the
transfer-wall using STM method.

C-34 EACEF - The 1st International Conference of European Asian Civil Engineering Forum
Group of Structure and Construction EACEF-014

7. LOAD-DEFLECTION BEHAVIOR
The load deflection curve was derived from FEA analysis base on the data from file *.RSA when the
option of DOF monitor have been activated. The file *.RSA record the DOF U2 at node No.17 (at the
center of transfer-wall) in every step. After converting the step to magnitude of forces, we can make
load-deflection curve as shown in Fig 8.
The curve will be compared to the STM design load. It seen that the capacity of transfer wall, design
by STM, is slightly below than failure capacity predict by the FEA. It’s meant that the STM method
give a reasonable amount of safety for design point of views.

Figure 8. Comparison Result between FEA and STM

From Fig. 8, the load-deflection behavior of the transfer wall provide by “FEA non Riks” (Static-
General) and “FEA with Riks” (Static-Riks) are almost similar, especially before its failure. Near
collapsed region where full of non-linier problem, the procedure analysis using non-Riks approach
will be fail but the analysis using Riks approach still continue to proces succesfully.
8. CONCLUSION
STM method give a simplify method in designing and detailing of the rebar for transfer-wall. It is due
to the structure can be modelled as ordinary deep beam so the strut-and-tie model can be draw directly.
After that the number of steel rebar and anchorage length for the ties can be calculated and the
dimension of concrete part (struts and nodes) can be checked.
In starting the FEA, we need a complete informations of the structure, including the number of steel
rebar and so on. As state of the art FEA program, ABAQUS can analysis ultimate load of the structure
and produce load-deformation behavior untuk failure. The maximum capacity base on FEA analysis
seem somewhat larger than STM prediction. It’s meant that the STM give a reasonable amount of
safety for design point of views. Contrary to the STM, it is dificult in FEA in checking the adequate or
not, the anchorage length of rebar, or the capacity of strut and nodes, especially for ordinary engineer.
For daily routine in structural engineering design of structure similar to the transfer-wall, mastering
the STM is more simpler, faster and cheaper also maybe more productive than mastering FEA.
9. ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Prof. Harianto Hardjasaputra (UPH) for his introduction to STM, also to Prof. Karl Heinz Reineck
(Uni Stuttgart) that guide the first author in research about STM and put it in his publication (Reineck
2002).

Universitas Pelita Harapan, INDONESIA - September 26-27th, 2007 C-35

 Group of Structure and Construction EACEF-014

10. REFERENCES
ACI Committee 318 .(2002). “Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-02)
and Commentary (ACI 318R-02)”, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 443 pp.
Adebar, P., Kuchma, D., Collins, M.P. (1990). “Strut-and-Tie Models for the Design of Pile Caps:
An Experimental Study”, ACI Structural Journal , V.87, No.1, January-February, p.81-92
Dewobroto,W., and Reineck, K. H. (2002). “Example 5: Beam with Indirect Support and Loading”
p.145 – 161, in: SP 208 - Examples for the Design of Structural Concrete with Strut-and-Tie
Models: K.H. Reineck (Ed.)., American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Michigan
Dewobroto,W. (2006). “Metode s.t.m untuk Perencanaan Struktur Transfer-Wall Proyek ‘Kota
Kasablanka’ Jakarta”, The 2nd National Civil Engineering Conference by Civil Engineering
Departement, Unika Soegijapranata, Semarang
Hibbit, D., et al. (2004). “ABAQUS/Standard User’s and Theory Manuals”, Ver. 6.5, Hibbit,
Karlsson & Sorensen, Inc.
Jirsa, J.O., Breen J.E., Bergmeister, K., Barton, D., Anderson, R. and Bouadi, H. (1991).
“Experimental Studies of Nodes in Strut-and-Tie Models”, IABSE Colloquium Stuttgart 1991
– Structural Concrete, International Association of Bridge and Structural Engineering, Zurich,
pp. 525-532
Reineck, K.H. (1996). “Rational Methods for Detailing and Design: Strut-and-Tie Modelling”,
p.102-134, in: Large Concrete Buildings: B.V. Rangan and R.F. Warner (Ed.), Longman Group
Ltd., Longman House, Burnt Mill, Harlow, England
Reineck, K.H. (1999). “Toward a Modern Design Concept for Structural Concrete”, Proceedings,
Vol. 1: “Structural Concrete – The Bridge between People”, fib Symposium 1999 Prague,
Lausanne
Reineck, K.H. (Editor). (2002). “SP-208 : Examples for the Design of Structural Concrete with
Strut-and-Tie Models”, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Michigan, 242 pp.
MacGregor, J.G. (2002). “Part 2: Derivation of strut-and-tie models for 2002 ACI Code” p.7 – 40,
in: SP 208 - Examples for the Design of Structural Concrete with Strut-and-Tie Models: K.H.
Reineck (Ed.)., American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Michigan
Schlaich, J., Schäfer, K., and Jennewein, M .(1987). “Toward a Consistent Design of Structural
Concrete (Special Report)”, PCI Journal, Vol. 32, No.3, May-June, 178 pp
Qing Quan Liang, Brian Uy, Mark A. Bradford and Hamid R. Ronagh .(2005). “Strength Analysis of
Steel-Concrete Composite Beams in Combined Bending and Shear”, Journal of Structural
Engineering ASCE, October 2005

C-36 EACEF - The 1st International Conference of European Asian Civil Engineering Forum

View publication stats