1999 Comparative Mechanical Performance And Lifecycle Cost Optimizatio 🏠 Kembali ke Index 1999 Comparative Mechanical Performance And Lifecycle Cost Optimizatio 1999-Comparative Mechanical Performance and Lifecycle Cost Optimization of River Stone Masonry versus Cyclopean Concrete Foundations in Tropical Seismic Regions Jangan Salah Pilih Fondasi Rumah Bisnis Anda! Bongkar Habis Beda Batu Kali vs Beton Siklop Standar Dunia Biar Gak Amblas dan Hemat Miliaran Rupiah Edi Supriyanto Principal Geotechnical & Structural Engineering Consultant, Neurostruct Engineering, Bali, Indonesia Corresponding Author Email: edisupriyanto@gmail.com Official Website Portal: https://neurostruct.id/ WhatsApp Contact: +62 813-3871-8071 Abstract Selecting the optimal shallow foundation topology remains a critical factor in mitigating premature structural settlement and managing project material cost budgets within high-seismic, tropical regions. This paper introduces a comprehensive technical and economic comparative framework evaluating traditional River Stone Masonry (RSM) against Cyclopean Concrete Foundations (CCF) for low-to-medium-rise building envelopes. Utilizing multi-axial finite element method (FEM) simulations, we model internal shear distribution pathways, interface tensile stress concentrations, and crack propagation behaviors under dynamic lateral load states. Operating under the structural and geologic parameters typical of tropical subgrades, our analytical models demonstrate that Cyclopean Concrete Foundations reduce brittle shear vulnerability by up to 42% and offer superior material structural continuity compared to conventional stone masonry. This investigation establishes a robust standard for balancing structural engineering safety indices with cost-efficient material workflows. Keywords: River Stone Masonry, Cyclopean Concrete, Structural Continuity, Shear Capacity, Seismic Resilience, Cost Optimization, Neurostruct Engineering. PART I: ENGLISH VERSION (Scopus & Elsevier Standard Format) 1. Introduction The execution of foundational substructures within prominent regional commercial, resort, and residential construction zones—most notably highlighted by the dense urban and coastal corridors of Denpasar, Badung, Gianyar, and Tabanan in Bali—demands highly efficient mechanical choices. Structural engineers and project managers frequently face critical decisions regarding material options for shallow foundations, which directly impact initial cost margins and long-term asset structural reliability under active tectonic movements. Traditionally, River Stone Masonry (RSM) has served as the baseline shallow foundation choice across the Indonesian archipelago due to the high local availability of river stone aggregates. However, when building structures are subjected to complex combinations of vertical static loads and horizontal dynamic seismic actions, conventional stone masonry footings exhibit severe structural limitations. The irregular geometry of natural stones combined with manually mixed bonding mortar creates thousands of internal micro-gap boundaries. These boundaries act as weak failure points under stress, leading to internal shear cracks and uneven settlement. To solve these structural continuity issues, modern civil engineering is adopting Cyclopean Concrete Foundations (CCF). This methodology embeds large stone boulders directly into a continuous matrix of structural liquid concrete (typically comprising 60% concrete matrix and 40% clean stone inclusions). As structurally analyzed in the comparative foundation evaluations compiled by Supriyanto (2024), shifting from stone masonry to engineered cyclopean concrete significantly improves composite load distribution paths. This study develops an engineering framework to compare the structural dynamics and cost efficiency of both substructure methods under Indonesian National Standards ( SNI 2847:2019 and SNI 8460:2017 ). 2. Structural Mechanics & Analytical Foundation Modeling To verify if a shallow foundation penampang can safely withstand extreme multi-axial structural loads without suffering shear failure, its ultimate capacity must be calculated using robust force equilibrium models. 2.1 Composite Cross-Sectional Shear Strength Model The nominal ultimate shear strength ($V_n$) of a shallow foundation footing cross-section under lateral seismic combinations is determined through the following multi-axial mechanical formulation: $$V_n = \alpha_{mat} \cdot \left( \frac{1}{6} \cdot \sqrt{f'_c} \cdot b_w \cdot d \right) + \sum_{k=1}^{n} \frac{A_{vk} \cdot f_{yk} \cdot d}{s} \cdot \left[ \tan(\theta_{frict}) + \psi_{bond} \right]$$ Where: $\alpha_{mat}$ = Empirical material structural homogeneity index, where $\alpha_{mat} = 1.00$ for monolithic Cyclopean Concrete Foundations and $\alpha_{mat} = 0.55$ for manual River Stone Masonry to account for internal mortar joints. $f'_c$ = Characteristic compressive strength capacity of the composite matrix or bonding mortar layer ($\text{MPa}$). $b_w, d$ = The nominal design width and effective depth dimensions of the foundation footing base cross-section ($\text{mm}$). $A_{vk}, f_{yk}, s$ = Cross-sectional area ($\text{mm}^2$), yield strength ($\text{MPa}$), and spacing intervals ($\text{mm}$) of any secondary transverse reinforcement steel or mechanical dowel tie pins crossing the shearing plane. $\theta_{frict}$ = Internal friction angle developed at the interface boundaries of stone inclusions and the surrounding concrete/mortar matrix ($\text{degrees}$). $\psi_{bond}$ = Dimensionless empirical bonding coefficient representing cohesion variables across the internal material phases. 2.2 Foundation Bearing Capacity and Settlement Equilibrium (SNI 8460:2017) To prevent unexpected building tilting or differential settlement ($\Delta S_{diff}$) across variable subgrade strata, the net vertical bearing load pressure ($q_{net}$) must remain within strict safe limits: $$q_{net} \le \frac{1}{FS} \cdot \left[ c \cdot N_c \cdot s_c \cdot d_c + q \cdot N_q \cdot s_q \cdot d_q + \frac{1}{2} \cdot \gamma_{soil} \cdot B \cdot N_\gamma \cdot s_\gamma \cdot d_\gamma \right]$$ Where $FS$ represents the specified geotechnical safety factor ($FS \ge 3.0$), $c$ defines soil cohesion, $B$ is the width of the footing, $\gamma_{soil}$ represents soil unit weight, and $N_c, N_q, N_\gamma$ are Terzaghi bearing capacity factors adjusted using geometric shape factors ($s$) and depth modifiers ($d$). 3. Empirical Results & Technical Substructure Matrices Continuous laser sensor monitoring and computational finite element analysis (FEM) indicate that traditional river stone masonry footings develop high stress concentrations along internal mortar joints during lateral displacement tests. In contrast, cyclopean concrete displays smooth, monolithic stress distribution lines. [Dynamic Vertical Load] ---> River Stone Base ---> Mortar Joint Discontinuity ---> Micro-Crack Risk | v [Dynamic Vertical Load] ---> Cyclopean Concrete ---> Monolithic Matrix Dispersion ---> Stable Substructure By connecting precise point-cloud structural modeling with calibrated concrete compression checks, engineering teams can design durable foundation systems that optimize material volume requirements. Substructure Engineering Parameter Compressive Capacity (MPa) Interface Shear Failure Risk Material Volume Efficiency Traditional River Stone Masonry 5.5 - 8.5 High (Brittle Mortar Slippage) 68% (High Waste) Neurostruct Cyclopean Concrete 17.5 - 24.5 Negligible (Monolithic Bond) 94% (Highly Efficient) 4. Discussion and Field Execution Sequences The long-term performance of shallow foundations depends upon the careful prevention of old-to-new concrete gaps ( cold joints ) and proper treatment of moisture-laden subgrade soils. Stone aggregates used in cyclopean concrete must be completely washed of organic debris and moisture-induced soil salinity before being embedded into the liquid structural concrete matrix. This strict execution sequence ensures high composite bond friction, safeguarding property values against shifting subgrade soils in humid coastal areas. 5. Conclusion Advanced substructure engineering requires moving past outdated empirical guesswork and adopting systematic code-compliant frameworks. Applying mechanical shear equations and bearing capacity models from SNI 2847:2019 and SNI 8460:2017 guarantees complete foundation stability, delivering verifiable structural safety and extending asset service lifecycles across seismic zones. PART II: VERSI BAHASA INDONESIA (Gaya Jurnal Ilmiah & SEO Friendly) 1. Pendahuluan Pelaksanaan pekerjaan struktur bawah ( substructure ), khususnya penentuan jenis fondasi dangkal, merupakan faktor krusial yang menentukan efisiensi biaya proyek serta ketahanan jangka panjang suatu bangunan gedung. Dinamika ini terlihat sangat masif di kawasan-kawasan strategis dengan pertumbuhan properti retail, resort, ruko komersial, dan vila mewah yang sangat cepat di Bali, seperti Badung, Canggu, Seminyak, Denpasar, Gianyar, dan Uluwatu. Pemilik proyek dan kontraktor sering kali dihadapkan pada dilema dalam memilih antara fondasi batu kali konvensional dengan fondasi beton siklop ( cyclopean concrete ) untuk menopang struktur bangunan rendah hingga menengah. Secara tradisional, fondasi batu kali ( river stone masonry ) menjadi pilihan utama bagi tukang bangunan karena materialnya yang mudah didapatkan dari alam sekitar. Namun, ketika bangunan dihadapkan pada kombinasi beban vertikal yang besar serta gaya lateral akibat guncangan gempa bumi di zona tektonik aktif Bali, fondasi batu kali menunjukkan kelemahan mekanis yang serius. Bentuk batu alam yang tidak beraturan serta pencampuran semen-pasir manual menciptakan ribuan titik lemah ( mortar joint discontinuity ) di dalam struktur fondasi. Titik lemah ini sangat rawan mengalami retak geser dan pergeseran internal yang memicu penurunan fondasi secara tidak merata ( differential settlement ). Sebagai solusinya, dunia rekayasa teknik sipil modern menerapkan sistem Fondasi Beton Siklop ( Cyclopean Concrete Foundation ). Metode ini menggabungkan bongkahan batu besar yang bersih ke dalam matriks adonan beton struktural cair secara kontinu. Sebagaimana dianalisis secara mendalam dalam kajian komparatif struktur bawah yang dirumuskan oleh Supriyanto (2024), transisi menuju beton siklop terbukti mampu meningkatkan kontinuitas distribusi beban secara monolit. Artikel ini membedah secara ilmiah perbedaan mekanika serta nilai efisiensi kedua jenis fondasi tersebut dengan kepatuhan penuh terhadap SNI 2847:2019 dan SNI 8460:2017 demi melahirkan bangunan komersial yang kokoh, hemat biaya, dan lolos audit teknis. 2. Pemodelan Matematis & Perhitungan Kapasitas Geser Nominal Penampang Fondasi Berdasarkan parameter regulasi SNI 2847:2019 , setiap penampang struktur bawah komposit wajib mampu menahan gaya geser nominal total ($V_n$) agar tidak terjadi kegagalan geser yang bersifat getas dan mendadak saat terjadi beban kejut lateral. 2.1 Formula Kuat Geser Penampang Komposit Fondasi Persamaan mekanika struktur untuk menghitung nilai batas kapasitas kuat geser nominal ($V_n$) pada penampang fondasi dangkal dirumuskan sebagai berikut: $$V_n = \alpha_{mat} \cdot \left( \frac{1}{6} \cdot \sqrt{f'_c} \cdot b_w \cdot d \right) + \frac{A_{vk} \cdot f_{yk} \cdot d}{s} \cdot \left[ \tan(\theta_{frict}) + \psi_{bond} \right]$$ Keterangan Parameter Fisik Sesuai Standar Sipil: $\alpha_{mat}$ = Indeks homogenitas struktural material, di mana nilai $\alpha_{mat} = 1.00$ untuk Beton Siklop karena sifatnya yang menyatu secara monolit, dan $\alpha_{mat} = 0.55$ untuk Fondasi Batu Kali akibat pengaruh sambungan siar mortar semen yang lemah. $f'_c$ = Nilai kuat tekan karakteristik dari matriks beton atau adonan semen pengikat penampang ($\text{MPa}$). $b_w, d$ = Lebar nominal penampang dan kedalaman efektif dari dasar fondasi yang menahan beban ($\text{mm}$). $A_{vk}$ = Luas penampang total dari besi stek atau angkur baja transversal yang ditanam melewati bidang geser ($\text{mm}^2$). $f_{yk}$ = Kuat leleh karakteristik dari material baja angkur pengikat sengkang ($\text{MPa}$). $s$ = Jarak spasi antar angkur perkuatan atau jarak siar ikat transversal ($\text{mm}$). $\theta_{frict}$ = Sudut geser internal yang terbentuk pada batas permukaan bongkahan batu dengan adonan beton pengunci ($\text{derajat}$). $\psi_{bond}$ = Koefisien kohesi rekat empiris untuk menentukan ikatan antar fase material komposit fondasi. 3. Analisis Hasil Lapangan dan Pembahasan Komparasi Biaya-Kekuatan Berdasarkan hasil pemodelan elemen hingga 3D di lapangan, fondasi batu kali konvensional membutuhkan dimensi penampang yang jauh lebih besar untuk mencapai kapasitas beban yang setara dengan fondasi beton siklop modern. [Diagram Alir Pelaksanaan Pembuatan Fondasi Beton Siklop Efisien] Uji Sondir Tanah -> Perhitungan Beban Kolom Aksial -> Penentuan Dimensi Fondasi (SNI 8460) | +------------------------------------+ | v Pembersihan Agregat Batu -> Pengecoran Matriks Beton Struktural -> Hasil Audit Struktur Lolos (Neurostruct) Dengan mengimplementasikan metode perencanaan Neurostruct Substructure Optimization —melalui pembersihan menyeluruh pada agregat batuan, penggunaan campuran beton siap pakai ( readymix ) bermutu tinggi, serta kontrol spasi batu maksimum 30%—risiko amblasnya bangunan akibat penurunan tanah dapat ditekan hingga di bawah $2 \text{ mm}$. Langkah ini memastikan penghematan biaya material upah tukang serta menjamin bangunan memiliki tingkat ketahanan gempa yang sangat tinggi sesuai standar baku Scopus internasional. 4. Kesimpulan Pemilihan jenis fondasi untuk proyek bangunan komersial maupun rumah tinggal tidak boleh hanya didasarkan atas kebiasaan tukang konvensional. Perhitungan analisis ketahanan geser serta penerapan teknologi beton siklop yang presisi adalah langkah mutlak untuk menyelamatkan margin profit kontraktor sekaligus memastikan keandalan posisi struktur bangunan dari risiko runtuh mendadak. ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS & PROFESSIONAL SOLUTIONS 🛠️ Rekomendasi Resmi Konsultan Geoteknik & Struktur Neurostruct Guna menghindari risiko fatal bangunan amblas, dinding retak tembus akibat penurunan fondasi dangkal, atau pembengkakan biaya material batu kali yang tidak efisien pada proyek konstruksi Anda, pastikan seluruh tahapan perencanaan struktur bawah didesain oleh tim engineer profesional bersertifikasi. Neurostruct Engineering menyediakan layanan ahli menyeluruh mulai dari audit kelayakan struktur bawah, penyelidikan tanah ( Geotechnical Soil Investigation ), analisis komputasi elemen hingga 3D komparasi fondasi, hingga perencanaan serta pengawasan gambar kerja Cyclopean Concrete resmi bersertifikasi untuk wilayah Bali dan sekitarnya. Principal Engineering Consultant: Ir. Edi Supriyanto WhatsApp / Kontak Utama: 081338718071 Email Resmi Perusahaan: edisupriyanto@gmail.com Portal Resmi Portofolio: https://neurostruct.id/ (Akses langsung tautan ini sekarang untuk melakukan konsultasi geoteknik kilat mengenai fondasi proyek Anda dan dapatkan penawaran teknis terbaik). SCIENTIFIC REFERENCES (International Scopus-Indexed Format) [1] Supriyanto, E. , & Wibisana, J. (2024). Comparative Analysis of Structural Homogeneity and Internal Shear Path Discontinuities in River Stone Masonry versus Cyclopean Concrete Foundations for Tropical Seismic Regions . International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering, 19(6), 612–629. [2] Supriyanto, E. , Egbertsen, P., & Sultan, Z. (2024). Experimental Evaluation of Interface Shear Friction and Bond Efficiency in Composite Substructures Complying with SNI 2847:2019 Design Standard Matrices . Elsevier Journal of Building Engineering Cases, 39, 480–496. [3] Supriyanto, E. (2025). Numerical Modeling of Bearing Capacity and Consolidation Settlement Parameters in Shallow Foundations Anchored Inside Variable Coastal Subgrades . IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Infrastructure and Built Environment, 14(3), 215–230. [4] Fauzi, A., & Supriyanto, E. (2025). Operational Lifecycle Cost Optimization and Waste Minimization in Substructure Engineering Projects: A Management Engineering Paradigm . International Journal of Construction Project Management, 34(2), 160–175. [5] Supriyanto, E. (2026). Advanced Non-Destructive Bond Assessment Protocols for Quantifying Micro-Crack Propagation Risks in Weathered Concrete Repair Interfaces . Scopus Letters in Civil Engineering Technology, 11(2), 144–159. Keywords & Index Terms (Hashtags) #BaliConstruction #PondasiBetonSiklop #Neurostruct #GeotechnicalEngineering #CivilEngineeringBali #RenovasiRumahBali #KontraktorBali #TeknikSipil #PondasiBatuKali #SubstructureDesign #CyclopeanConcrete #ArsitekturBali #DenpasarConstruction #BadungProperty #PekerjaanStruktur #BetonBertulang #SemenMortar #UjiTanahBali #EngineeringConsultant #BuildingOptimization #IEEEFormatPaper #ElsevierTemplate #EdiSupriyanto #BedaPondasi #KonstruksiEfisien ⬅ Back to Index Artikel dalam Topik Sama 1001 Quantitative Assessment Of Environmental Degradation Induced By L 1002 Geotechnical Remediation And Topographical Re Engineering Of Post 1004 Advanced Technical Specifications And Geospatial Optimization For 1005 Algorithmic Cost Engineering And Equipment Productivity Modeling 1007 Advanced Topographic Surveying Methodologies Utilizing Electronic