2022 - The Traditional House in North Sumatera Against The Earthquake A Case Study of Karo and Toba

International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering Innovation
e-ISSN: 2682-8499 | Vol. 4, No. 1, 66-77, 2022

http://myjms.mohe.gov.my/index.php/ijarei
The Traditional House in North Sumatera Against the

Earthquake: A Case Study of Karo and Toba
Johannes Tarigan1*, Nursyamsi Nursyamsi1, Muthiah Putrilan Syamnah Harahap1,
Sheila Hani2
1
Civil Engineering Department, Universitas Sumatera Utara, Medan, 20155, North Sumatera, Indonesia
2
Civil Engineering, Universitas Pembinaan Masyarakat Indonesia, 20142, North Sumatera, Indonesia
*Corresponding Author: Johannes.tarigan@usu.ac.id
Accepted: 15 March 2022 | Published: 1 April 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.55057/ijarei.2022.4.1.6
___________________________________________________________________________
Abstract: Indonesia is one of the countries that are susceptible to earthquakes. The traditional
houses in Indonesia are generally able to resist the earthquake. They have a non-engineered
structural system that was handed down from ancient traditions. Most of the damaged or
collapsed houses were made of concrete. Meanwhile, the traditional house is made of wood or
bamboo tend to survive. Karo and Toba regency is one of the areas in Indonesia which is
known to be prone to earthquakes. Because it is located near Sibayak Mount and Sinabung
Mount which is an active status. But the traditional houses there are still withstanding now. In
this paper, we will analyze the traditional houses against the earthquake with the case study in
Karo and Toba. These structures will be analyzed by the MDOF method and using SAP2000
software. The results are the structural concept of the traditional houses is relatively the same,
only the type of the roof is significantly different. The traditional houses have symmetrical
structures. There is no horizontal irregularity, but vertical irregularity exists. Furthermore,
the earthquake performances show that the structures of the traditional houses in Karo and
Toba are safe in terms of the period, the base shear force, the friction force, and the story drifts.
Keywords: Earthquake, Karo, Toba, Traditional House

___________________________________________________________________________
1. Introduction
Indonesia is one of the countries that are susceptible to earthquakes. The traditional houses in
Indonesia are generally able to resist the earthquake. They have a non-engineered structural
system that was handed down from ancient traditions. The residents do it based on their
experience, without any calculations and planning by a professional. This is the knowledge of
building technology that was perfected by trial and error by the ancestors of the residents. Most
of the damaged or collapsed houses were made of concrete. Meanwhile, the traditional house
is made of wood or bamboo tend to survive. The house type has the flexibility against
earthquake vibrations [1]–[3]. It is also applied to the traditional houses in Karo and Toba
districts. The Karo and the Toba traditional houses are around Toba lake in North Sumatera,
Indonesia. The place is known as a region that is susceptible to earthquakes. Because it is
located near Sibayak Mount and Sinabung Mount which is an active status [4]. On January 16,
2017, BMKG reported that the earthquake was occurred with 5.6 magnitudes and gave the
impacts on the Karo regency. Although no casualties were recorded, there were 7 damaged
houses in the Karo regency [5]. But the traditional houses are still steady even though there
have been repeated earthquakes.
66
Copyright © 2022 ASIAN SCHOLARS NETWORK - All rights reserved
e-ISSN: 2682-8499 | Vol. 4, No. 1, 66-77, 2022
The studies of the traditional houses against the earthquake in Indonesia have been conducted
before. Sugeng Triyadi et al (2010) studied the vernacular house in Bengkulu in response to
the earthquake. To find out why that traditional house can be withstanding until now, they
analyzed with focusing on layout and building design, the structural system and construction,
the materials, and the connecting system of the house. The researches of the traditional houses
against the earthquake in Indonesia generally were analyzed by focusing on them [2], [3], [6]–
[8]. In further analysis, the structural analysis of the earthquake resisting traditional houses was
also carried out in [9]–[11]. B.S Hutabalian and Johannes Tarigan conducted it on ‘the Batak
Toba traditional house’ case by SDOF method in 2018. K Manhani and M. Fuzan designed and
analyzed the West Sumatera indigenous building structure against the durability of earthquakes
in 2019. The method used in both the researches is presented by calculating the natural
frequency, the fundamental period of the building, the base shear of the building, and the
displacement of the building because of the earthquake. The results were compared to the
relevant standardization regulations in Indonesia [12]. Not only the earthquake, but other loads
occurred in Karo and Toba district are wind, which significantly affects the shielding effects
of the mountain [13]. Wind also became a load need to be endured by the house [14]. Loads
are being an initial design of a house building, but the house building is also a cultural
expression of the district [15], topographic condition and local wisdom [16].
In this paper, we will analyze the traditional houses against the earthquake with the case study
in Karo and Toba districts, North Sumatera. This research aims to find out why the traditional
houses in Karo and Toba can survive the earthquake and what the supporting factors are. These
structures will be analyzed by the MDOF method and using SAP2000 software. The structural
concepts, the building irregularity, and the earthquake performance -like the fundamental
period, the base shear force, the friction force, and the story drift or the displacement- will be
calculated.
2. Research Methods
The locations of this research are at Karo district and Toba district, North Sumatera. In Karo
district, there are Siwaluh Jabu in Sukajulu village and Gerga Sepulu Dua Jabu in Lingga
village. While in Toba district, there are Rumah Bolon in Siallagan village and Silalahi village.
Figure 1: The Research Locations (Google Maps)
Interviews and measurements were conducted to obtain the information and the dimension of
the traditional houses. Then, the structures will be modeled for analysis. The analysis uses
SAP2000 software and is analyzed by response spectra. The MDOF method is used. The results
67
e-ISSN: 2682-8499 | Vol. 4, No. 1, 66-77, 2022
of this analysis will be compared and checked to the permit of each parameter and the research
previously.
The type of wood used is teak wood that has a higher strength. In the paper of Fanny Hidayati
and friends [17], the density of teak wood is equal to 0.55 gr/cm2 and Modulus of Elasticity,
E= 108000 kg/cm2 (10594.8 MPa). Based on [18] Table 4.2.1, this wood is categorized as E21
with the mechanical properties are the flexural strength 21.3 MPa, the compressive strength
15.6 MPa, the compressive strength of perpendicular fibers 5.0 MPa, the tensile strength 18.8
MPa, and the shear strength 2.5 MPa.
The structural loads used in the analysis are dead load, live load [19], and earthquake load [12].
In live load, the floor live distributed load is equal to 1.92 kN/m2 and the roof live distributed
load is equal to 0.96 kN/m2. The design data for the earthquake analysis is shown in Table 1
and the parameter of the response spectrum design is shown in Figure 3.
Tables and Figures

Tables usually show numerical value or textual information and are almost always
characterized by a row-column structure. Any type of illustration other than a table is referred
to as a figure. The title should be placed at the top of a table. For figure, the title should be
placed at the bottom of a figure.
Table 1: The Design Data for Earthquake Analysis

Data Descriptions [12]
Type of building House
Type of soil Hard soil
Type of structure Wooden frame
The risk category, KRB I
The earthquake factor, Ie 1,0
The acceleration earthquake
0,853 g
parameters for short period, Ss
The acceleration earthquake
0,440 g
parameters for 1,0 second, S1
Site Class C
The response modifying
7
coefficient, R
The system strong factors, Ω 2,5
The deflection factors, Cd 4,5
Figure 2: The Parameter of The Response Spectrum Design
68
e-ISSN: 2682-8499 | Vol. 4, No. 1, 66-77, 2022
3. Discussion and Conclusion
3.1 Structural Concepts

The structural concept of the traditional houses in Karo and Toba is relatively the same. The
most significant difference between them is the shape of the structure roof. Based on the survey
result, those traditional houses are more than 160 years old, but the structure is still steady. The
structure material of the Karo traditional houses uses the harder type of wood, like teak or
harder. While the Toba traditional houses use wood (i.e hau resse, zior, pokki, suren wood),
palm fiber, and stone [11], [20].
(a)
(b)
Figure 3: (a) The Karo Traditional House in The Lingga Village [21], and (b) The Toba Traditional
House in The Silalahi Village [20]
The type of foundation used in Karo and Toba traditional houses is the local foundation
(umpak) that called a stone pedestal foundation using pins supported. There are two conditions
on this foundation. The first, the foundation without sloof serves to carry loads of the structural
elements and the live loads of the building (Figure 4a). This condition has a height from the
ground surface of about 10 cm. And the second, the foundation with sloof which has a height
of about 25-30 cm serves to carry the additional dead loads, i.e the walls and a small portion
of the roofs (Figure 4b) [22].
69
e-ISSN: 2682-8499 | Vol. 4, No. 1, 66-77, 2022
(a) (b)
Figure 4: The Conditions of The Stone Pedestal Foundation in Karo Village [21], (a) The Foundation
without Sloof, and (B) The Foundation with Sloof [21]
The column shape of these traditional houses is round. The columns are on the stone pedestal
foundation as base isolation because they aren’t in direct contact with the ground. So, both the
Karo and the Toba traditional houses experienced the movement when they received the lateral
load of the earthquake. Therefore, the bracings are applied to the columns. Even though the
columns aren`t tied to the foundation, but the friction strengthen them [23]. The beams are laid
on the columns using a wood cotter pin connection.
(a) (b)
Figure 5: The Columns in (a) Karo Village [21], and (b) Toba Village [20]
The numbers of columns without sloof and with sloof in Gerga Sepulu Dua Jabu, the Karo
traditional house in Lingga village, are 16 columns and 12 columns, respectively. The column’s
diameter without sloof is equal to 35 cm and the diameter of the column with sloof is equal to
25 cm. That value approach to the Toba’s column diameter 40 cm or more [20]. The column’s
height from the ground surface is equal to 1,85 m, while Rumah Bolon is 1,75 m [10], [20],
[22]. The floor plans of the traditional houses in Karo and Toba are simple and symmetrical,
which are shown in Figure 6
(a) (b)
Figure 6: The Floor Plans of (a) Karo “Gerga Sepulu Dua Jabu” [22]; and (b) Toba “Rumah Bolon” [20]
70
e-ISSN: 2682-8499 | Vol. 4, No. 1, 66-77, 2022
The walls of the Karo and the Toba traditional house are made of bamboo boards or webbing.
The walls are on the foundation with sloof. They consist of horizontal woods whose thickness
is equal to 20 cm and on the top of them are woods arranged vertically as thick as 2 cm [11],
[20], [22].
Figure 7: The Walls of Gerga Sepulu Dua Jabu [21]
The roofs in Karo and Toba village are made of bamboo or rattan where there are some palm
fibers arranged as thick as 20 cm. The roof is sloping with the highest peak in the center of the
house [10], [11], [22].
Figure 8: The Roofs of Gerga Sepulu Dua Jabu [21]
Based on the description above, we model the Karo traditional house “Gerga Sepulu Dua Jabu”
in Lingga village by SketchUp as in Figure 10 and the structural frame models of both
traditional houses are shown in Figure 11.
(a)
(b)
Figure 9: The Perspective of Gerga Sepulu Dua Jabu [21] (a) Cross-Section, and (b) Longitudinal-Section
71
e-ISSN: 2682-8499 | Vol. 4, No. 1, 66-77, 2022
(a)
(b)
(c)
Figure 10: The Structural Frame Models [21] (a) Gerga Sepulu Dua Jabu, (b) Siwaluh Jabu, and (c)
Rumah Bolon
3.2 The Irregularity
3.2.1 Horizontal Irregularity

The location of the center of mass and stiffness in Gerga Sepulu Dua Jabu, Karo traditional
house in Lingga village, is shown in Table 2. The location between the centre of mass and the
center of stiffness is the same coordinates. It means that there is no eccentricity (e = 0) and no
torsion that occurs in the structure. So, the structure is symmetrical.
Table 2: The Location of The Center of Mass and Stiffness in Karo, Lingga Village
The Center The Center of
Mass
Floor of Mass (m) Stiffness (m)
(ton)
x y x y
ALL 60.18 6.65 8.18 6.65 8.18
1 23.24 6.65 8.18 6.65 8.18
2 36.94 6.65 8.18 6.65 8.18
Furthermore, there was no discontinuity, neither the diaphragm nor the lateral force trajectory
in the structure. The columns and the walls are positioned continuously. And the vertical lateral
force-resisting element is parallel to the orthogonal axis of the earthquake force bearing system.
So that, there is no horizontal irregularity in the structure of Gerga Sepulu Dua Jabu.
72
e-ISSN: 2682-8499 | Vol. 4, No. 1, 66-77, 2022
Table 3: The Analysis Results in The Horizontal Irregularity of Karo Traditional House in
Lingga Village
Types of Analysis
Descriptions
Categories Results
1a Not
Torsional irregularity
Exist
1b Not
Over torsional irregularity
Exist
2 Not
Inner angel irregularity
Exist
3 Not
Diaphragm discontinuity
Exist
4 The transverse movement to Not
the area Exist
5 Non-parallel system Not
irregularity Exist
3.2.2 Vertical Irregularity

From Table 2, the ratio of mass on the 1st floor and the 2nd floor is 158.95% (> 150%). It
means that Gerga Sepulu Dua Jabu has mass irregularity. Then, Table 4 shows the lateral
stiffness in x and y directions.
Table 4: The Stiffness on Each Floor of Karo Traditional House in Lingga Village
Floor Kx (EI/m3) Ky (EI/m3)
1st 95.75 35.98
2nd 19.54 19.54
Ratio 1 floor and 2nd floor
st
490.02 184.14
(%)
Based on [12], the stiffness of the 1st floor in the x-direction is greater than 70% (soft level
stiffness) and 60% (over soft level stiffness) than the stiffness of the 2nd floor. So, there is no
stiffness irregularity.
In the vertical geometry, there are the resisting lateral load element and the change in
dimensions of the wall. It means that the structure has a vertical geometric irregularity.
Then, the Gerga Sepulu Dua Jabu has the unsymmetrical centered vertical load to the vertical
load resisting element. The movement of the lateral load resisting element is greater than its
height or there is a reduced stiffness on the bottom floor. So, there is a discontinuity in the
lateral load resisting the vertical element.
And the last, because the stiffness of the 1st floor is greater than the 2nd floor (> 100%), the
structure is a regularity building in the level lateral load and the over level lateral load category.
Table 5: The Analysis Results in The Vertical Irregularity of Karo Traditional House in Lingga Village
Types of Analysis
Descriptions
Categories Results
1a The soft level stiffness irregularity Not Exist
1b The over soft level stiffness irregularity Not Exist
2 The weight (mass) irregularity Exist
3 The vertical geometric discontinuity Exist
4 The area discontinuity in lateral load resisting element Exist
5a The weak level irregularity in discontinuity of the level lateral load Not Exist
5b The over weak level irregularity in discontinuity of the level lateral load Not Exist
73
e-ISSN: 2682-8499 | Vol. 4, No. 1, 66-77, 2022
3.3 The Earthquake Performances
3.3.1 The Structural Period, T

The structural fundamental period is determined by SAP2000 based on [12]. Both Karo and
Toba traditional houses, the period coefficient (Cu ) is equal to 1.4 (section 7.8.2 [12]). By
using the type of structure “all other structural systems”, the values of coefficient Ct and x are
equal to 0.0488 and 0.75, respectively.
Ta = Ct hnx (1)
The value of the fundamental period, Ta in Sukajulu village is equal to 0.293 seconds. While
Ta in other villages has been accomplished previously [11], [20], [22].
Table 6: The Period and The Natural Frequency in Sukajulu Village

Period, T Natural Frequency, ω
Mode
(s) (rad/s)
1 0.253 24.814
2 0.243 25.818
3 0.179 35.201
4 0.138 45.541
5 0.125 50.417
6 0.121 51.910
7 0.114 55.329
8 0.113 55.651
9 0.109 57.749
10 0.099 63.795
The limit 0.293
Table 6 shows that the value of the period is smaller than the permit period of the structures.
So that, the house is safe. Aside from that, the period in Karo is smaller than the period in Toba.
But, the natural frequency in Toba is smaller than the natural frequency in Karo.
3.3.2 The Base Shear Force Nominal, V

The results of the dynamic shear force analysis must not be less than 85% of the static shear
force obtained [12]. The base shear force of the structures is analyzed by SAP2000. The result
is presented in Table 7. That shows that the traditional house structures in Karo and Toba
villages are safe.
Table 7: The Base Shear Force of The Karo Traditional Houses

The Maximum Shear Force,
The Base Shear
F (kN) Checked
Location Force, V
Static Dynamic RS > 0,85 EQ
(kN)
(EQ) (RS)
Sukajulu village 25.086 66.210 21.323 OKE
Lingga village [22] 94.884 87.766 80.651 OKE
Siallagan village [11] 28.871 52.821 24.540 OKE
3.3.3 The Friction Force, F

The shear force (F) will be held by the static friction (fs) between rocks and wooden poles. The
static friction depends on the normal force (N) and the static coefficient of friction (µs) [12].
The friction force of the structures is analyzed. Table 8 shows that the traditional houses in
74
e-ISSN: 2682-8499 | Vol. 4, No. 1, 66-77, 2022
Karo and Toba do not experience a movement. Because the value of the maximum static shear
force (F) is smaller than the static friction force (fs).
Table 8: The Friction Force of The Karo Traditional Houses

The Static Coefficient The Normal
The Static
Shear of Friction, Force, Checked,
Location Friction Force, fs
Force, F µs N (kN) F < fs
(kN)
(kN)
Sukajulu village 25.09 0.60 83.62 50.17 OKE
Lingga village [22] 94.88 0.60 966.39 579.83 OKE
3.3.4 The Story Drift, Δ

The story drifts (Δ) are the intersection between floors, the difference of the elastic relationship
between one floor and the floor nearby. The permit story drift, Δa is determined in [12] Table
20 based on the type of structure. These traditional houses in Karo and Toba are categorized as
simple structures with two-story structures [20], [22].
Table 9: The Story Drift of The Karo Traditional Houses

The Height of The Permit The Maximum
Checked,
Location Structure, hsx Story Drift, Δa Story Drift, Δ
(mm) (mm) Δa < Δ
(mm)
Sukajulu village 8000 160.0 38.0 OKE
Siallagan village [11] 5000 100.0 40.1 OKE
Silalahi village [20] 8220 164.4 51.4 OKE
Error! Reference source not found. shows that the story drift’s values in the Karo and Toba
traditional houses do not exceed the maximum limit story drift for each location. So, it can be
concluded that both Karo and Toba traditional houses are safe against earthquake loads.
3.4. Conclusion
The conclusions obtained in this paper are that the structural concept of both Karo and Toba
traditional houses is relatively the same, only the type of roof is different. Both traditional
houses have symmetrical structures. There is no horizontal irregularity but the vertical
irregularity exists. Furthermore, the earthquake performances show that the structures of the
traditional houses are safe in terms of the period, the base shear force, the friction force, and
the story drifts. For further research, it is necessary to carry out further analysis about the
materials of structure, especially the types and properties of the wood used, and notches in
beam-to-column joints to obtain more accurate results later.
References
Hermansah and A. Nararya, “Bangunan Adat Indonesia Tahan Gempa,” Lembaga Ilmu
Pengetahuan Indonesia (LIPI), 2017. http://lipi.go.id/lipimedia/bangunan-adat-
indonesia-tahan-gempa/17406 (accessed Apr. 11, 2021).
E. A. Nurdiah, “Studi Struktur Dan Konstruksi Rumah Tradisional Suku Batak Toba,
Minangkabau Dan Toraja,” Surabaya, 2011.
S. Triyadi, I. Sudradjat, and A. Harapan, “Kearifan Lokal pada Bangunan Rumah Vernakular
di Bengkulu dalam Merespon Gempa, Studi Kasus: Rumah Vernakular di Desa Duku
Ulu,” Local Wisdom, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1–7, 2010.
75
e-ISSN: 2682-8499 | Vol. 4, No. 1, 66-77, 2022
F. Erdansyah, “Simbol dan Pemaknaan Gerga Pada Rumah Adat Batak Karo di Sumatera
Utara,” Dewa Ruci J. Pengkaj. dan Pencipta. Seni, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 115–139, 2011.
B. M. K. dan G. (BMKG), “Gempa Bumi Signifikan dan Merusak 1821-2018,” 2019.
Z. Rinaldi, A. W. Purwantiasning, and R. D. Nur’aini, “Analisa Konstruksi Tahan Gempa
Rumah Tradisional Suku Basemah di Kota Pagaralam Sumatera Utara,” in Seminar
Nasional Sains dan Teknologi, 2015, no. November, pp. 1–10.
Z. Zain, C. J. Milenia, and N. I. Aulia, “Identifikasi Arsitektur Rumah Tradisional Melayu Di
Pulau Sumatera (Studi Perbandingan Komponen Pembentuk Arsitektur),” Arsir, vol. 4,
no. 2, pp. 92–104, 2020, doi: 10.32502/arsir.v4i2.2880.
S. R. Kamurahan, “Struktur Dan Konstruksi Rumah Panggung Masyarakat Kampung Jawa
Tondano (Jaton) Ditinjau Dari Prinsip-Prinsip Bangunan Tahan Gempa,” Media
Matrasain, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 1–8, 2018.
K. Manthani and M. Fauzan, “Desain dan Analisis Struktur Bangunan Adat Sumatera Barat
Terhadap Ketahanan Gempa,” J. Tek. Sipil dan Lingkung., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 25–36, 2019,
doi: 10.29244/jsil.4.1.25-36.
B. S. Hutabalian, “Studi Struktur Rumah Adat Tradisional Batak Toba terhadap Gaya Gempa,”
Universitas Sumatera Utara, 2018.
B. S. Hutabalian and J. Tarigan, “Studi Struktur Rumah Adat Tradisional Batak Toba Terhadap
Gaya Gempa,” 2019.
Badan Standardisasi Nasional, SNI 1726 2019 Tata Cara Perencanaan Ketahanan Gempa
Untuk Struktur Bangunan Gedung dan Non Gedung. Indonesia, 2019.
Z. Mingjin, Y. Jisheng, Z. Jingyu, W. Lianhuo, and L. Yongle, “Study on the wind-field
characteristics over a bridge site due to the shielding effects of mountains in a deep gorge
via numerical simulation,” Adv. Struct. Eng., vol. 22, no. 14, pp. 3055–3065, 2019, doi:
10.1177/1369433219857859.
S. Chakraborty, S. K. Dalui, and A. K. Ahuja, “Wind load on irregular plan shaped tall building
- A case study,” Wind Struct. An Int. J., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 59–73, 2014, doi:
10.12989/was.2014.19.1.059.
Y. A. M. Al-Haroun, “Designing a Sustainable House in Kuwait,” Civ. Eng. Archit., vol. 9, no.
4, pp. 1012–1025, 2021, doi: 10.13189/cea.2021.090405.
M. Rahim, M. Ibrahim, and F. Marasabessy, “Construction System and Environment
Adaptation of Traditional Architecture in Moluccas Island,” vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 1530–
1545, 2021, doi: 10.13189/cea.2021.090524.
F. Hidayati, I. T. Fajrin, M. R. Ridho, W. D. Nugroho, S. N. Marsoem, and M. Na’iem, “Sifat
Fisika dan Mekanika Kayu Jati Unggul ‘Mega’ dan Kayu Jati Konvensional yang di
Tanam di Hutan Pendidikan, Wanagama, Gunungkidul, Yogyakarta,” J. Ilmu Kehutan.,
vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 98–107, 2016, doi: 10.22146/jik.16510.
Badan Standardisasi Nasional, SNI 7973 2013 Spesifikasi desain untuk konstruksi kayu.
Indonesia, 2013.
Badan Standardisasi Nasional, SNI 1727 2020 Beban desain minimum dan Kriteria terkait
untuk bangunan gedung dan struktur lain. Indonesia, 2020.
J. Tarigan, N. Nursyamsi, and S. Hani, “Numerical Analysis of Bolon as Traditional Batak
Toba House during An Earthquake: A Study in Village of Siallagan and Silalahi North
Sumatera,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1529, no. 5, pp. 0–13, 2020, doi: 10.1088/1742-
6596/1529/5/052006.
F. H. Simanihuruk and J. Tarigan, “Kajian Struktur Rumah Adat Batak Karo Terhadap
Gempa,” Universitas Sumatera Utara, 2020.
F. H. Simanihuruk and J. Tarigan, “Kajian Struktur Rumah Adat Batak Karo Terhadap
Gempa,” Universitas Sumatera Utara, 2020.
76
e-ISSN: 2682-8499 | Vol. 4, No. 1, 66-77, 2022
H. Zhou, S. N. Luo, and D. Sun, “The bending analysis of a beam on elastic foundation with
large deflection including the effects of horizontal friction,” Gongcheng
Lixue/Engineering Mech., vol. 28, no. 1, 2011.
77

2022 - The Traditional House in North Sumatera Against The Earthquake A Case Study of Karo and Toba

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2022 - The Traditional House in North Sumatera Against The Earthquake A Case Study of Karo and Toba

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering Innovation

e-ISSN: 2682-8499 | Vol. 4, No. 1, 66-77, 2022

The Traditional House in North Sumatera Against the

*Corresponding Author: Johannes.tarigan@usu.ac.id

Accepted: 15 March 2022 | Published: 1 April 2022

Keywords: Earthquake, Karo, Toba, Traditional House

Figure 1: The Research Locations (Google Maps)

Tables and Figures

Table 1: The Design Data for Earthquake Analysis

Figure 2: The Parameter of The Response Spectrum Design

3. Discussion and Conclusion

3.1 Structural Concepts

Figure 7: The Walls of Gerga Sepulu Dua Jabu [21]

Figure 8: The Roofs of Gerga Sepulu Dua Jabu [21]

3.2 The Irregularity

3.2.1 Horizontal Irregularity

3.2.2 Vertical Irregularity

3.3 The Earthquake Performances

3.3.1 The Structural Period, T

Table 6: The Period and The Natural Frequency in Sukajulu Village

3.3.2 The Base Shear Force Nominal, V

Table 7: The Base Shear Force of The Karo Traditional Houses

3.3.3 The Friction Force, F

Table 8: The Friction Force of The Karo Traditional Houses

3.3.4 The Story Drift, Δ

Table 9: The Story Drift of The Karo Traditional Houses

You might also like