REKAYASA PENULANGAN GESER BALOK BETON BERTULANG DENGAN MENGGUNAKAN SENGKANG VERTIKAL MODEL “ U “ UNTUK TUJUAN EFISIENSI BAHAN

Abstract

Reinforced concrete needs reinforcement steel for flexural reinforcement and shear force reinforcement. Flexural reinforcement is used to support flexural bending, and shear force reinforcement is used to support shear force load. Generally the part of shear force reinforcement in beam which support the shear force load is vertical part of that reinforment and the horizontal part is not supporting the shear force load. The vertical part of reinforcement is used to prevent the concrete beam broken caused of the shear force load. This research is carried out to analize about the existing of the horizontal part of reinforcement in concrete beam if it is used or not. This horizontal part of reinforcement now can be called as alternative reinforcement in shear force reinforcement in concrete beam. This research is carried out to know about ; maximum shear force load, capacity of shear force, and the differences about that two matters above between konvensional reinforcement and alternative reinforcement in shear force reinforcement in concrete beam. This research is carried out in 5 steps, they are : preparation materials and researh equipments, controlling quality of research materials, making test sampels, processing the test of stress capacity of concrete, strain capacity of steel, and shear force capacity of the reinforcement for the shear force in concrete beam, and the final step is analise and conclusion. This research is held in Material Laboratorium in Civil Engineering UMS. Sampels made in this research are totally in the sum of 18 sampels. Sampels are made in 6 various, they are in spacing 50 mm, 100 mm, 150 mm for konvensional and alternative reinforcement. Dimensions of concrete beam are wide section 15 cm, high section 20 cm, and length of beam is 100 cm. Based on the result of investigation, generally can be stated that conventional cross bar is much stronger then alternative cross bar model “U” cause it supported by 2 sample groups which give the difference value significantly. On the other side, the opposite result only supported by just 1 sample group, which the difference value smaller then the 2 sample groups, it is only 49,51% < 50%. From these result in above they show that the shear force capacity between conventional cross bar and alternative cross bar model”U” is not same and the capacity of alternative cross bar model”U” is lower then conventional cross bar. This matter causes that alternative cross bar model “U” can not give efficiency in material but can causes decreasing the capacity of shear force in it.