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

net/publication/330103108

A Review on Indonesia School Building Guidelines and Recommendation to

Facilitate the Current Seismic Design Code SNI 1726:2012

Conference Paper · November 2018

CITATIONS READS

0 651

4 authors, including:

Laura Masmia Putri

7 PUBLICATIONS   5 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Laura Masmia Putri on 03 January 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Paper ID # ACEE0087 The 7th Asia Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 22-25 November 2018, Bangkok, Thailand

A Review on Indonesia School Building Guidelines

and Recommendation to Facilitate the Current
Seismic Design Code SNI 1726:2012

Laura Putri James Mwangi M. Lisbeth Blaisdell Collins

Design Engineer Professor, Architectural Engineering Director of Engineering
Build Change California Polytechnic State University Build Change
Padang, Indonesia California, USA Denver, Colorado, USA
lauramasmiaputri@gmail.com jmwangi@calpoly.edu lizzie@buildchange.org

Abstract—Indonesia is one of the most seismically active

countries in the world. In only the last two decades, three I. INDONESIA AND ITS VULNERABILITY TO EARTHQUAKES
major earthquakes (Mw > 8) hit Indonesia, resulting in more Indonesia is an archipelago country that consists of more
than 500,000 damaged buildings and more than 400,000 than 17,000 islands with a total population of more than 250
casualties. Indonesia’s Ministry of Education and Culture
million. More than a half of this population is concentrated in
(MEC) recorded that there are more than 300,000 school
Java and Sumatra Island. With the population growth of 4
buildings and almost 50 million students in Indonesia as of late
2017.
million each year [1], the number of people that are exposed
to natural disasters keeps increasing each year.
The Indonesia seismic design code has been updated with Indonesia is surrounded by many active faults; namely
the most current SNI 1726:2012 replacing the previous SNI 03- Eurasian, Indo-Australia and Philippine (see Fig. 1) among
1726-2002. This update includes some significant changes for others, making it one of the most seismically active countries
seismic design in determining the seismic zone, design response
with the highest number of earthquakes occurrence in the
spectrum, nominal base shear, etc. The most notable change
world [2]. The earthquakes of magnitude 5 and higher that
for educational facilities is the change in occupancy, resulting
in the importance factor for seismic design of school buildings
occurred in Indonesia since the 1800s arepresented in Fig. 2.
now being explicitly required to be 1.5 (the highest On average, every three years, an earthquake with magnitude
importance). of greater than 7.5 occurred in Southeast Asia since the
1800’s [3], where most of them happened in Indonesia (Java
There are many guidelines issued by different government Island, Sumatra Island, and New Guinea), as can be seen in
departments and agencies in Indonesia that are currently still Fig. 3. With the average movement of surrounding seismic
used in the construction, rehabilitation, reconstruction or plates of around 60mm (2.4 in.) every year (where in some
retrofitting of school buildings. These guidelines are years, the number reaches 100mm (3.9 in.) [3], many experts
distributed to school representatives, contractors and other expect greater earthquakes to strike this country in the future.
parties that are involved in the school building planning and
construction process. However, a review of these guidelines,
such as Technical guidelines for school buildings construction
with school-management system year 2018, or The guidelines for
new senior high school buildings 2017, etc., reveals that they are
not well-integrated or updated, and that the recommendations
and content of each are not fully in accordance with the new
SNI 1726:2012. In fact, some of the minimum requirements set
in the reviewed guidelines are significantly below the minimum
stated in SNI 1726:2012. These very low requirements need
updating and, if left as-is, would easily jeopardize the safety of
the school population.

This paper reports the detailed review made of the

guidelines issued by the government of Indonesia that are used
in school building (re)construction, focusing on the parts that
have significant impact on the structural strength of the
schools. Recommendations are proposed on the changes
necessary to help ensure that the minimum requirements of Fig. 1. Plate tectonic setting of Sumatra (McCaffrey 2009)
SNI 1726-2012 are met.

Keywords— Schools, seismic design code, guidelines, retrofit,

recommendations

XXX-X-XXXX-XXXX-X/XX/$XX.00 ©20XX 7ACEE

Paper ID # ACEE0087 The 7th Asia Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 22-25 November 2018, Bangkok, Thailand
Fig. 2. Active faults and historical seismicity in the Southeast Asia region.
(Shen-Tu 2016)
Fig. 3. Frequency of earthquakes with magnitude of more than 7 in ASEAN
countries (Shen-Tu 2016)
Major previous earthquakes in Indonesia have caused
hundreds and thousands of human losses and trillions of
Indonesian Rupiahs (IDR) in financial loss. The 2004
Sumatra Andaman earthquake, for instance, caused more
than 220,000 casualties, while the 2006 Java earthquake and
the 2009 Sumatra earthquakes created a death toll of 5,000
and more than 1,000 people, respectively. Despite the
relatively low number of casualties, the 2009 Sumatra
Andaman earthquake is the second largest earthquake in the
world since the 1900 [4].
Similar to other developing countries, most of the
buildings in Indonesia do not meet the minimum
earthquake-resistant buildings standards. This is in part
caused by the lack of improvements and/or updates for the
necessary changes in related regulations by policy makers.
This, is exacerbated by weak enforcement, allowing
uncertified engineers and untrained workers to be involved in
construction process, and for poor quality materials to be
used. Some building designs are not supported by structural
calculations and the resulting poor designs are then executed
by contractors and workers who are not well-supervised.
With its high seismicity, high population, high population
density, high population growth, and poor quality of
buildings, Indonesia is vulnerable to damage or total collapse
of buildings, heavy casualties and huge financial losses due
to natural disaster, especially earthquakes.
II. INDONESIA SEISMIC DESIGN CODE
The seismic design code was only introduced in
Indonesia in 1970 as Peraturan Pembebanan Indonesia
(PMI) or Indonesia Loading Acts to facilitate the first
high-rise building design. In this code, the seismic hazard
maps were divided into three seismic zones as can be seen in
Fig. 4.
Fig. 4. Seismic zonation in Indonesia Loading Acts 1970
Earthquakes with a return period of 200 years were
considered. The Indonesian engineers at the time expected an
easily applied seismic design code, so that the complex
concept of ductility and plasticity was omitted [5].
In 1981, based on the cooperation between the
governments of Indonesia and New Zealand, a New Zealand
Engineering Consultant – Beca, Carter, Hollings and Ferner
Ltd. was appointed to evaluate and review Indonesia seismic
code [5]. The seismic zones were then updated based on
more integrated earthquake records and seiscmotectonics of
Indonesia, and were divided into six seismic zones as shown
in Fig. 5.
Some new concepts that were introduced included: (a)
ductility; (b) weak beam - strong columns concept;
(c) capacity design concept [5]. This developed code was
still in use two decades later and was renamed twice into
“Pedoman Perencanaan ketahanan Gempa untuk Rumah
dan Gedung SKBI.1.3.53.1987” [6] and “Tata Cara
Perencanaan Ketahanan Gempa untuk Gedung, SNI 03-
1726-1989” [7].
Fig. 5. Seismic zones in SKBI.1.3.53.1987 and SNI 03-1726-1989 [5]
It was only in 2002 when the seismic design code was
again reviewed and updated into SNI 03-1726-2002. The
seismic hazard maps in this code were developed by
combining and averaging inputs from four research centers
in Indonesia [8]. The seismic sources and area faults were
modeled using a two-dimensional (2D) model. The building
was designed to be in a state of near-collapse where constant
maximum displacement resulting from earthquake with the
probability of exceedance of 10% in 50 years (equal to a
return period of 475 years) must be considered [9].
The state of near-collapse buildings was determined
based on the deflection of its serviceability limit state. The
buildings should be designed in such a way that the response
of the buildings should be dominant in deflection, instead of
translation to minimize the damage of structure. The
Paper ID # ACEE0087 The 7th Asia Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 22-25 November 2018, Bangkok, Thailand
regularity of the buildings was determined based on the
height of the structure, layout, plan, stiffness, lateral load
resisting system, and floor slab (diaphragm). Some types of
soils, such as special soils, must be obtained from the seismic
wave propagation analysis [9].
A two-dimensional (2D) sources and faults modelling
had some limitations [10]. The records of major earthquakes
that were compiled for the SNI 03-1726-2002 were not well-
integrated, consisted of earthquakes with different
magnitudes and did not consider small magnitude
earthquakes. In addition, the occurrence of additional major
earthquakes after 2002 were the main reason of the update of
the seismic design code in 2012.
In SNI 2012 [11], the building should be designed to
avoid building collapse on maximum considered earthquake
(MCE), with 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years
(equals to return period of 2,500 years).
The changes in seismic hazard maps has led to the need
to conduct structural building evaluation and has resulted in
most areas in Indonesia needing to be designed for a
significantly higher lateral load. Padang city, for example,
was an area with the recommended PGA of 0.25g in the SNI-
1726-2002 (see Fig. 6), while in the SNI 1726:2012, the
value is increased to 0.6g (see Fig. 7). Similar significant
increases are encountered in most areas in Indonesia.
In the former seismic design code SNI 03-1726-2002
[12], the importance factor for school buildings was not
explicitly mentioned. However, referring to the laws No 28
year 2002 [13], education buildings were grouped into
“general buildings or office use”. Consequently, school
buildings in SNI 03-1726-2002 would have an important
factor of 1 (out of 1.6).
Fig. 6. The seismic zoning map and PGA recommended in SNI 03-1726-
2002
Fig. 7. Recommended PGA in SNI 1726:2012
III. SCHOOL BUILDINGS IN INDONESIA
There are around 302,000 school buildings in Indonesia
with almost 50 Million students as of late 2017 [14]. This
number, which does not include the number of university
students, is a fifth of the total population of Indonesia, which
means that those 50 Million students that occupy the
buildings during 07am - 5pm are at risk resulting from
building damage due to earthquakes. Following the plan of
Indonesia government to use school buildings as evacuation
sites during major disasters, the design, construction process
and building evaluation become critical aspects that need a
close attention. Thus, the inclusion of the current seismic
design code in any regulation is one key that will keep the
students safe in the future.
A. Government-owned School Buildings Construction
System in Indonesia
As regulated in Laws 1945, Indonesia Government
should allocate 20% of its budget for education [15]. This
means that from around IDR 1,800 trillion (US$ 125 billion)
of Indonesia state budget in 2018 [16], IDR 360 trillion (US$
25 billion) should be for education. From this fraction, the
funding is channeled for scholarships, rehabilitation and/or
reconstruction, and staff allowances/support.
In the law No 28 year 2002, regarding the
government-owned buildings [13], in article 1 and 2, it is
stated that any building must be designed based on its
designed occupancy. Periodic rehabilitation/maintenance to a
building are obliged to done by the Ministry of Education
and Culture (MEC) during its life-span. People who are
involved in the construction process must be certified and
qualified. Buildings are permitted to be demolished and/or
rehabilitated when they are considered not safe (article 39),
which means that the evaluation, assessment and retrofitting
of existing school buildings are fully supported by current
laws.
New school building construction in Indonesia is initiated
by the request of the community or by the recommendation
of MEC. The request made by either party is then evaluated
based on the availability of state budget for new buildings. If
the budget is available, the City’s MEC will evaluate the
feasible location. When the location is confirmed, the permit
for new school building construction is issued. For
rehabilitation, reconstruction and retrofitting, the permit is
not necessary in some cities, yet the approval from the
Ministry of Public or Works is required [17].
The school building construction system must be in
accordance with the following regulations:
a. The MEC regulations No. 8 year 2018, regarding the
operational guideline of Special Allocation Fund for
School [18]
b. The law No. 20 year 2003 regarding national education
system [19]
c. The law 28 year 2002 regarding buildings in general [13]
d. The government regulation No 36 year 2005 regarding
the implementation of law No 28 year 2002 [20]
e. The MEC regulation No. 24 year 2007 regarding school
facilities and infrastructure standards [21]
f. The Ministry of Public Works regulation No.
45/PRT/M/2007 regarding the technical guidelines on
government-owned buildings construction [22]
Paper ID # ACEE0087 The 7th Asia Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 22-25 November 2018, Bangkok, Thailand
g. Directorate General of Human Settlements No.
11/KPTS/CK/1993 regarding the guidelines of
earthquake-resistant buildings. [23]
According to the MEC regulations No. 8 year 2018
appendix 1, the construction process of new school buildings
and the rehabilitation/retrofitting of the existing ones must be
managed independently by schools’ representatives
(headmasters). However, the MEC are obliged to provide a
detailed design and technical support. This includes
providing facilitators (contractors) that will help headmasters
closely in technical matters, such as conducting structural
analysis, providing design drawings, estimating the
construction cost, etc. The City’s MEC are obliged to
channel the fund to schools and are responsible for the
overall final quality of the buildings.
On the other hand, the Directorate General of Elementary
and High Schools are responsible in providing the
operational and construction implementation guidelines,
supervising the construction process, and providing reports
to MEC. During the construction, the process is directly
supervised by schools’ headmasters and/or other staff while
remotely controlled by MEC. This requires schools’
headmasters to update the construction progress daily to the
MEC. The school committee is also encouraged to provide
support to the school headmaster during the construction
process. This is an effort of the government to create
transparency in school building construction.
B. Typical School Buildings in Indonesia
The geometry of school buildings in Indonesia is
regulated by the following:
a. The MEC regulations No. 8 year 2018, regarding the
operational guideline of Special Allocation Fund for
School Buildings [18]
b. The MEC regulation No. 24 year 2007 regarding school
facilities and infrastructure standards [21]
c. The MEC regulations No. 61 year 2012 regarding the
changes on MEC regulations No. 56 year 2011 regarding
the technical guidelines for construction using the special
allocated fund for education facilities and infrastructure
for elementary schools [24]
In the aforementioned standards, a single classroom
should have the size of 8m x 7m. The height of school
buildings is limited by the floor area ratio of 20 [25]. The
elevation of the ceiling is limited to be no less than 3.5 m. A
terrace and/or balcony must be at least 2m wide with roof
overhang of 1m. A minimum opening of 20% of the
classroom total area must be provided for doors and
windows and 10% for ventilation [24]. However, in most
common practices, the openings take around 50% of wall
panel area and are not well-confined as shown in Fig. 8.
Fig. 8. Typical opening layout of school buildings in Indonesia
School buildings in Indonesia usually consist of one to
eight adjacent classrooms in I, L or U-shaped plan (see Fig.
9). Most schools are one to three-stories tall. The roof is
usually hipped or two-sloped, with the gable made of heavy
materials such as bricks. In most cases, the gable’s reinforced
concrete frame lacks seismic detailing, if not absent. The
roof truss is of wood or light gauge steel. The connection
between the roof truss and ring beams is typically of
protruding longitudinal reinforcing rebar from the column
(see Fig. 10). The exposed rebar is usually not
coated/galvanized, making it vulnerable to rust. The roof
cover is of light Corrugated Galvanized Iron (CGI), clay
tiles, or concrete slab.
Fig. 9. Typical school building layout in Indonesia
Fig. 10. The most common ring beam – roof truss connection, which is made
of protruding columns’ longitudinal reinforcing rebar
Clay brick masonry is the most common wall material
with the brick size ranging from 5cmx9cmx19cm to
5.5cmx10cm x21cm. In Sumatra, the wall thickness is
around 13cm to 15cm. The compressive strength of common
bricks are usually below the minimum requirement set in the
SNI 15-2094-2000 [26], which is 5 MPa.
Columns of reinforced concrete frames are provided
every 3-4 m. Despite being regulated by the MEC
regulations No. 8 year 2018 that the columns must be of
20cmx20cm, for one-story buildings, the size of columns and
ring beams are varied from 13cmx13cm to 20cmx20cm.
Assessment and evaluation of existing school buildings
showed a varied concrete compressive strength. Despite
being regulated in SNI-2847-2013 that concrete structure
must have a compressive strength of no less than 17 MPa,
most school buildings do not meet this requirement. One
school building in Padang city, Sumatra Island, had very
poor reinforced concrete that was easily dismantled using
bare hands (see Fig. 11). A three-story school building in this
city also had concrete with a compressive strength of only 16
MPa [27] [28]. While for buildings of two stories or more,
the design concrete compressive strength is usually
significantly higher than the minimum value specified in the
SNI 2487-2013 as the consequence of high base shear
demand. Some studies on the structural design of two-story
school buildings showed that the recommended compressive
strength should be no less than 25 MPa [29] [30].
Paper ID # ACEE0087 The 7th Asia Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 22-25 November 2018, Bangkok, Thailand
not adequately restrained by a diaphragm system at the top,
out-of-plane collapse (see Fig. 16) was a common failure.
The wall openings also led to captive column failure
mechanism as depicted in Fig. 17.

Fig. 11. Poor quality concrete in one school building in Padang

The longitudinal rebar for reinforced concrete frames is

usually smooth with the diameter varied from 4mm to 12mm
(see Fig. 12) and usually with inadequate seismic detailing
Fig. 15. Cracks of walls around openings
(see Fig. 13).

Fig. 16. Wall out-of-plane collapse due to lack of wall-frame connection

Fig. 12. Smooth 4mm (left) and 10mm (right) rebar was used for concrete (left) and long wall span (right) [40]
reinforcement on one school building in Padang

Fig. 13. Reinforced concrete frames with inadequate seismic detailing in

school building in Padang

C. School Building Damage in Indonesia During Major

Fig. 17. Sample of failure of captive column due to masonry walls
Earthquakes
School building damage in Indonesia due to major
earthquakes was extensive. After the 2004 Sumatra
Andaman earthquake, it was estimated that around 1,000
[31] [32] to 2,000 [33] school buildings were affected.
During the 2006 Yogyakarta earthquake, it was reported that
at least 60 (25 heavy, 35 light) [34] to 450 [35] school
buildings were damaged. From the 2007 Sumatra
earthquakes, the education sector suffered financial loss of
IDR 1 billion [1]. The 2009 Sumatra earthquake, had a huge
impact on 4,748 education facilities [36] [32]. The most Fig. 18. Cracks on and out-of-plane collapse of heavy gable of school
recent earthquake in Lombok on 30 July 2018, caused at buildings in Indonesia
least 7 damaged school buildings [37](see Fig. 14).
The lack of seismic detailing around joints caused the
reinforced concrete columns to buckle and the separation of
columns and beams that in most cases lead to building
collapse (see Fig. 19).

Fig. 14. Damaged school building Java Island due to earthquake in 2017
[38] (left) and Lombok earthquake in 2018 [39]

From the damaged cases, some similar patterns are

observed. Since most of the wide wall openings are not well-
confined, diagonal wall cracks around openings (see Fig. 15)
were a common occurrence. Also, because most walls are
(a)
Paper ID # ACEE0087 The 7th Asia Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 22-25 November 2018, Bangkok, Thailand
(b)
Fig. 19. Inadequate reinforcement and seismic detailing causing (a) column
buckling [40] and (b) structural elements separation [41]
An assessment conducted by Parmo, et al [42] on 431
existing government-owned school buildings (2,500
classrooms) in Madiun city, Java Islands showed that around
25% of school buildings were heavily damaged and 36%
lightly damaged. For other building structures such as
teacher’s office and library, 23% and 24% were heavily
damaged, respectively. Madiun is only one of 415 cities in
Indonesia, yet the result gives significant insight to the
condition of school buildings in Indonesia, especially those
that are exposed to similar levels of seismicity. A look at the
map of the seismicity of this region as shown in Fig. 20
shows that around 50% of Indonesia has an equal or higher
design response acceleration.
Fig. 20. Maximum GPA considered in SNI 1726:2012 (Madiun city is
marked in circle).
If the result of this study is generalized, then it is
estimated that 60% of school buildings in Indonesia are not
safe for students and only around 40,000 school buildings
are. This means that almost 43 million students are at risk
from collapse or damage of buildings due to earthquakes
during school hours. This alarming number shows how
critical and urgent it is to do an assessment to school
buildings and related regulations/guidelines.
IV. INDONESIA SCHOOL BUILDING GUIDELINES
The poor quality of most school buildings in Indonesia is
mainly caused by the drawbacks of current
laws/acts/guidelines that regulate the building design, and
lack of enforcement mechanisms, such as construction
supervision. Thus, evaluating all regulations related to school
building construction in Indonesia is critical. The cases of
past earthquakes around the world showed that even new
buildings that meet the minimum seismic design
requirements are still vulnerable to unpredictable future
earthquakes. This stresses the importance to update the
laws/acts/guidelines to accommodate the seismic design code
in each building regulations, especially school buildings.
Based on the MEC regulation No. 8 year 2018, school
building construction process (including new buildings,
rehabilitation, renovation and retrofitting) should be
managed independently by schools’ representatives
(headmasters and staff) to support a school-based
management system. Since school representatives are non-
engineers, guidelines must be provided by MEC. The content
of guidelines developed are designed to be easily understood
by non-engineers, with the content limited only to the most
significant aspects that affect the quality of buildings.
However, even this limited technical content is not in
accordance with the related standards. The provision of
guidelines is an effort by MEC to control the allocated
budget and to ensure that the quality of buildings meet any
related building standards. The guidelines are distributed to
school representatives/ contractors/facilitators as the main
reference for the construction process.
There are many school building construction guidelines
developed by the MEC in Indonesia. However, in this paper,
the guidelines reviewed are limited to some representative
ones, as below:
a. Technical guidelines for school buildings construction
with school-management system year 2018 [43]
b. The guidelines for new senior high school buildings 2017
[44]
c. The Implementation guidelines for new senior high
school buildings year 2018 [45]
d. The Implementation guidelines for rehabilitation of
senior high school buildings year 2017 [46]
e. The Implementation guidelines for renovations of senior
high school buildings year 2017 [47]
f. Technical guidance for renovations of elementary school
building [48].
g. Technical guidance for revitalization of elementary
school building, year 2015 [49]
h. Technical guidance for new elementary school building,
year 2015 [50].
i. Implementation of disaster-safe schools year 2012 [11].
The failure of a school’s responsible representative to
ensure conformance with the aforementioned guidelines will
affect the allocated construction budget or oblige a refund of
the budget received to MEC. Mainly, these guidelines
reference other laws/acts/regulations for detailed
requirements. Those referenced laws/acts/regulations that are
strongly related to building structure are:
a. The Law No 20/2003 about the National Education
System [19],
b. Government regulations No 36/2005 about buildings
[20]
c. The MEC regulations No 24/2007 about the standard of
facilities and infrastructure of schools.
d. Regulations of Ministry of Public of Work No
45/PRT/M/2007 about the technical guidelines for
government-owned buildings.
e. Decree of Direktur Jenderal Cipta Karya No
111/KPTS/CK/1993 about the Guidelines of earthquake
resistant buildings [51].
The main content of the guidelines covers parts such as:
the layout of buildings, the specification of materials used,
the introduction of building components, the explanation of
preparatory works, the minimum requirement of foundation,
plinth beams, columns, beams, walls, openings, roof truss,
Paper ID # ACEE0087 The 7th Asia Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 22-25 November 2018, Bangkok, Thailand
floor, painting, electrical/plumbing, sanitation, site
development and finishing works.

A. Indonesia Seismic Design Code in School Building

Construction Guidelines
Generally, the seismic design code is explicitly stated as
the main reference for detail requirements that are not
mentioned in school building construction guidelines issued
by the MEC. However, in the guidelines issued by MEC
themselves, some minimum requirements set are not in
accordance with the most updated version of seismic design
code SNI 1726:2012. Fig. 21. The comparison of total base shear based on SNI 03-1726-2002 and
SNI 1726:2012 for the same structure of different location in Indonesia [55]
B. Comparison of Structural Buildings Analysis Using SNI
03-1726-1989, SNI 03-1726-2002 and SN I 1726:2012
Since the most current seismic code SNI 1726:2012
stipulates a significant increase in the design spectral
acceleration for most areas in Indonesia, compared to the
SNI 03-1726-2002, it is estimated that many existing school
buildings, especially but not limited to those that were built
before 2012, will not be able to resist the design earthquake
load. This is evident from the comparison of structural
analysis results conducted on buildings using the SNI 03-
1726-1989, SNI 03-1726-2002 and SN I 1726:2012 as
described in the following.
Hastono, et al. did a comparison of a three-story building Fig. 22. The comparison of a building’s story drift when analyzed based on
dormitory after the 2004 Sumatra-Andaman earthquake [52]. SNI 03-1726-2002 and SNI 1726:2012 of different cities in Indonesia [55]
This 12m-in-height building was designed based on SNI 03-
1726-2002, with reinforced concrete as the main force C. Drawbacks in Indonesia School Building Construction
resisting structure. The compressive strength of the existing Guidelines
reinforced concrete was estimated to be 25 MPa, with the
yield strength of the rebar was measured to be 420 MPa. A The government has made various efforts in reducing the
comparison of structural analysis based on SNI 1726:2012 disaster risk, yet implementation of the disaster management
revealed that the size of beams, columns and foundations plan is slow. A research by Lembaga Ilmu Pengetahuan
needed to be improved by 13%, 11% and 17% respectively. Indonesia (LIPI) in 2006 showed that the preparedness in
school community was lower compared to other sectors [56].
Rinaldi [53] evaluated the performance of a building that And this is evident in the school building construction
was designed based on SNI 03-1726-1989 using the SNI 03- guidelines.
1726-2002. The results showed that the designed lateral load
due to earthquakes increased by around 7%, causing the The prototype for school buildings is provided in most
estimated floor drift of existing building to increase by 57%. laws/codes/regulations issued by MEC (Fig. 23). In the MEC
regulations No. 8 year 2018, for example, it is explicitly
Hambali [54] conducted an analysis on an eleven-story stated that the prototype is not mandatory and that school
reinforced concrete framed apartment building in Malioboro representatives need to refer to a more detailed technical
district, Yogyakarta, Indonesia. The building was originally standard, (e.g. structural calculations, materials, seismic
designed to withstand earthquake load stipulated in SNI 03- detailing) and to other SNIs. However, the prototype itself
1726-2002. The performance of beams and columns was does not match related SNIs. For example, on the appendix 1
again evaluated with the design lateral load based on SNI page 8, it is mentioned that concrete columns must be
1726:2012. The result showed there was an increase of 15% reinforced by four smooth longitudinal rebar with diameter
of the design lateral load. Consequently, beam longitudinal of 12mm with stirrup space of no more than 20cm and the
reinforcement needed an increment of 15% for near-joint concrete cover of no less than 2.5cm. In appendix 2, page 17,
sections and 22% for other parts. For columns, the transverse the structural concrete compressive strength is limited to be
reinforcement needed to be increased by 17.5% for near-joint no less than K-175 (equals to 14.5 MPa) for one-story
sections and 14% for others. buildings and K-200 (equals to 16.6 MPa) for two-story
buildings. However, in SNI 1726:2012, it is stated that
Cornelis et al. [55], compared the structural response of a
reinforced concrete (both for prestressed or non-prestressed)
building that was designed based on the SNI 03-1726-2002 must meet the minimum requirements stipulated in SNI
using the SNI 1726:2012, if it was located in six different
2847:2013 (regarding the requirement of structural concrete
cities. The result showed that in most cities, except for
for buildings). In SNI 2847:2013, article 3.5.1, it is
Kupang, buildings that were designed using the SNI 03- mentioned that the longitudinal rebar of reinforced concrete
1726-2002 were not sufficient for the new design lateral load
must be deformed and the cover of structural concrete must
stipulated in SNI 2012, because the base shear demand and
be no less than 4cm. Smooth rebars are only allowed for
the story drift were significantly higher (see Fig. 21 and Fig.
spiral reinforced and prestressed concrete. The concrete
22).
compressive strength for structure is set to be no less than 17
Paper ID # ACEE0087 The 7th Asia Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 22-25 November 2018, Bangkok, Thailand
MPa. Furthermore, in SNI 1726:2012 article 7.14.2,
minimum transverse steel of no less than Ø8mm must be
provided every 150mm.
The outdated laws/acts/regulations and the minimum
requirement discrepancies between school building
guidelines with other standards (SNIs) indicate the lack of
communication and coordination between policy makers.
The requirements that do not meet the seismic design code
reveal the absence of structural/earthquake engineers’
involvement in policy making process.
School building construction guidelines for different
school levels (i.e. elementary, junior high, senior high
school) are developed by different MEC bodies (e.g.
provincial, city) as a consequence of decentralized
government system. Each province/city will redevelop its
own guidelines based on MEC regulations No. 8 year 2018,
which already has deficiencies in regulating its minimum
standards. This process then creates a complex and tangled
addition of deficiencies, especially in determining the
minimum requirements for the design of earthquake-resistant
buildings.

V. RECOMMENDATIONS
An evaluation conducted on some school building
guidelines showed that they have not accommodated the
current seismic code SNI 1726:2012 well. Some even stated
the minimum standard that is below those stipulated in
SNI 1726:2012. Since there are many school building
guidelines that are developed and distributed, an evaluation
in this paper is only conducted on some. However, similar
failure in accommodating the SNI 1726:2102 and other
standards is evident across most guidelines. Pointing out the
deficiency one-by-one and providing a recommendation for
each deficiency is considered to be inefficient in this case, as
Fig. 23. Prototype of new senior high school buildings provided in the each guideline has different issues. However, because similar
guidelines for new senior high school buildings 2017 [44] trends are found, the recommendation provided in this paper
The prototype buildings provided in many school is aimed at improving the school building construction
building construction guidelines issued by MEC are guidelines in general.
considered to be insufficient to resist the design earthquake Considering that different ministries developed
loads based on the SNI 1726:2012 [57] [28] [58]. The guidelines with different content, assessing, evaluating and
seismic detailing for reinforced concrete structures is briefly controlling the required updates becomes a huge task. Thus,
discussed in the guidelines, yet SNI 1726:2012 [59] is not a centralized system needs to be adopted in developing a
mentioned as the main reference, which indicates that the school building guideline. This, then will come with the
seismic design standards is not the main concern for school consequence, where the guidelines must be able to
building construction guidelines. accommodate designs that are applicable in all areas in
Some standards that are referred to in school buildings Indonesia, for different types of school buildings with varied
regulations are also outdated. Some outdated standards that number of classrooms and geometries. To ensure that the
are still used in some school building guidelines are provided guidelines meet all the minimum requirements for seismic
in Table 1. and structural adequacy, an evaluation and update to school
buildings must be conducted by a committee/agency/
department that consists of professionals specialized in
TABLE 1: OUTDATED STANDARDS USED IN SOME EXISTING SCHOOL various subjects, especially earthquake engineering and
BUILDING CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES
building structures.
Outdated Referral Updated Version
Standards Manuals or guidelines are usually issued for simple
PKKI 1961 SNI 7973-2013 Design specification for buildings. School buildings, which usually have large floor
wood construction area, with long wall spans and have the highest importance
SNI 03-1729-2002 SNI 1729-2015 Specifications for steel factor, do not fall into a simple structure. There are too many
structures detailed requirements and procedures that require
SNI 03-1726-2003 SNI 1726:2012 Design procedures for
earthquake resistant-buildings
professionals’ involvement. Prototypes can be developed;
SNI 03-1727-1989 SNI 1727-2013 Minimum loads for however, these should follow the current SNI 1726:2012 and
buildings and structures need to be adapted to specific sites by qualified professionals
PUIL SNI 04-0225-2000 PUIL SNI 04-0225-2011 General in each case. The self-managing construction system that is
requirements for electrical installation currently used is considered to be unsuitable for school
SNI 03-6481-2000 SNI 03-7065-2005 Design procedures for buildings. It is recommended to change this system so that
plumbing system design
qualified and certified engineers that are responsible in
Paper ID # ACEE0087 The 7th Asia Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 22-25 November 2018, Bangkok, Thailand
managing/controlling school buildings construction process,
instead of only the schools’ headmasters/staff. As the school
headmaster and staff are typically at the school site everyday,
their presence can still be leveraged to support the
monitoring of construction; however, they should be
properly trained and supported by qualified engineers in this.
This is also in accordance with the Government regulations
No 36/2005 about “buildings” [20]. However, if for some
reason this solution is difficult to be implemented, the
current guidelines need to be extensively updated, especially
for the content that will affect the strength of building
structures, such as:
a. The prototype drawings should be provided in detail,
especially the minimum seismic detailing.
b. The minimum specifications of all materials used in the
construction process need to be provided.
c. The prototype must be strictly followed, or adapted with
the input of a qualified engineer and approved by the
MEC engineers
d. The minimum qualification must be stipulated for each
person involved in the planning, design, and construction
processes.
e. The enforcement for the guidelines implementation
should be stronger.
f. The allocated fund for any school construction process
needs to be evaluated and updated to ensure that it is
sufficient to produce the desired quality construction.
Considering that one school usually accommodates
hundreds to thousands of students, the ignorance on the
school building guidelines will jeopardize the lives of most
Indonesia population. This, at the same time, means that by
reviewing and updating the school building guidelines, from
planning and design through construction quality assurance,
safer buildings used by a fifth of the Indonesian population
will be provided.
REFERENCES
[1] Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional, "Laporan penilaian
kerusakan dan kerugian pasca bencana gempabumi di wilayah Provinsi
Bengkulu dan Provinsi Sumatra Barat, 12 September 2007," Badan
Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional, 2007.
[2] USGS, "Which country has the most earthquakes?," [Online]. Available:
Which country has the most earthquakes?.
[3] B. Shen-Tu, "http://www.air-worldwide.com," 23 May 2016. [Online].
Available: http://www.air-worldwide.com/Publications/AIR- [28] Fauzan, F. A. Ismail, L. M. Putri and D. Viviyana, "Analisa kerusakan
Currents/2016/Java-Subduction-Zone-Earthquake--The-Worst-Is-Yet-to-
Come-/. [Accessed 4 August 2018].
[4] Mitsui Sumito Insurance Group, "Earthquake Risk in Indonesia," Mitsui [29] C. V. Saruni, S. O. Dapas and H. Manalip, "Evaluasi dan analisis
Sumito Insurance Group, 2009.
[5] I. A. Fraser, "A new draft code for seismic design of buildings in
Indonesia," Bulletin of The New Zealand Society for Earthquake
Engineering, pp. 247-253, 1983.
[6] Departemen Pekerjaan Umum, Pedoman perencanaan pembebaban [31] Detik News Journalist, "2.745 Rumah Ibadah dan 1.151 Sekolah di Aceh
untuk rumah dan gedung, SKBI - 1.3.53.1987, Yayasan Badan Penerbit
PU, 1987.
[7] Badan Standardisasi Nasional, Tata cara perencanaan ketahanan gempa
untuk gedung SNI 03-1726-1989, Badan Standardisasi Nasional, 1989.
[8] Asrufifak, M. Irsyam, B. Budiono, W. Triyoso and Hendriyawan ,
"Development of Spectral Hazard Map for Indonesia with a Return
Period of 2500 Years using Probabilistic Method," Civil Engineering
Dimension , vol. 12, no. March 2010, pp. 52-56, 2010.
[9] W. Wangsadinata, "Seismic resistant design standard for building
structures SNI-1726-2002," Indonesia National Standardization Agency, [34] D.
Ministry of Public Work , 2002.
[10] M. Irsyam, D. T. Dangkua, Hendriyawan , D. Hoedajanto , B. H.
Hutapera, E. K. Kertapat , T. Boen and M. D. Petersen, "Proposed
seismic hazard maps og Sumatra and Java Islands and microzonation
study of Jakarta City, Indonesia," J. Earth Syst. Sci, pp. 865-874, 2008.
[11] Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana, Pedoman Penerapan
Sekolah/Madrasah Aman dari Bencana, Jakarta: Badan Nasional
Penanggulangan Bencana, 2012.
[12] Departemen Permukiman dan Prasarana Wilayah, Standar perencanaan
ketahanan gempa untuk struktur bangunan gedung, Bandung:
Departemen Permukiman dan Prasarana Wilayah, 2002.
[13] The President of Republic Indonesia, Undang-undang Republik
Indonesia nomor 28 tahun 2002, Jakarta, 2002.
[14] Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan , "Ikhtisar data pendidikan
tahun 2016/2017," Kementrian Pendidikan dan Keudayaan, 2016.
[15] Hambali, "Pembangunan gedung sekolah dan ruang kelas baru di
Kabupaten Seluma pasca pemekaran," Manajemen Pendidikan, pp. 20-
28, 2016.
[16] Kementrian Keuangan Republik Indonesia, "APBN 2018," 2018.
[Online]. Available: https://www.kemenkeu.go.id/apbn2018.
[17] Major of Padang City , Peraturan daerah Kota Padang nomor 7 tahun
2015 tentang bangunan gedung, Padang, 2015.
[18] Menteri Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Republik Indonesia, Peraturan
Menteri Pendidikan dan Kebuadayaan No. 8 tahun 2018, Menteri
Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Republik Indonesia, 2018.
[19] President Republik Indonesia, Undang-undang Republik Indonesia
nomor 20 tahun 2003 tentang sisten pendidikan nasional, 2003.
[20] Presiden Repulbik Indonesia, Peraturan pemerintah Republik Indonesia
nomor 36 tahun 2005, 2005.
[21] Menteri Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia, Peraturan Menteri
Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia Nomor 24 Tahun 2007,
Jakarta: Menteri Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia, 2007.
[22] Menteri Pekerjaan Umum Indonesia, Peraturan Menteri Pekerjaan
Umum Nomor 45/PRT/M/2007, Jakarta: Menteri Pekerjaan Umum
Indonesia, 2007.
[23] Direktur Jenderal Cipta Karya, Surat Keputusan Jenderal Cipta Karya
No 111/KPTS/CK/1993, Jakarta: Direktur Jenderal Cipta Karya, 1993.
[24] Menteri Pendidikan dan Kebudayan , Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan dan
Kebudayaan nomor 61 Tahun 2012 tentang Perubahan atas Peraturan
Menteri Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Nomor 56 Tahun 2011 tentang
Petunjuk Teknis Penggunaan Dana Alokasi Khusus Bidang Pendidikan
Tangun Anggaran 2012, Jakarta: Menteri Pendidikan dan Kebudayan ,
2012.
[25] President of Republic Indonesia, Decree of President of Republic
Indonesia No 67 Year 2005 regarding the involvement of private sector
in government-owned infrastructure, Jakarta, 2005.
[26] Badan Standardisasi Nasional (BSN), Bata merah pejal untuk pasangan
bata, Jakarta: Badan Standardisasi Nasional (BSN), 2000.
[27] L. M. Putri, "Analisa kerusakan struktur gedung A SMAN 10 Padang
akibat gempa 30 September 2009," Universitas Andalas, Padang, 2010.
struktur bangunan gedung A SMAN 10 Padang akibat gempa 30
Spetember 2009," Jurnal Rekayasan Sipil , pp. 31-40, 2010.
perkuatan bangunan yang bertambah jumlah tingkatnya," Jurnal Sipil
Statik, pp. 591-602, 2017.
[30] T. Wahyuni, Perencanaan struktur gedung sekolah 2 lantai, Surakarta:
Universitas Sebelas Maret, 2011.
Rusak Berat," 04 January 2005. [Online]. Available:
https://news.detik.com/berita/266969/2745-rumah-ibadah-dan-1151-
sekolah-di-aceh-rusak-berat. [Accessed 7 August 2018].
[32] International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies,
"Indonesia: West Sumatra earthquakes," International Federation of Red
Cross and Red Crescent Societies, 2010.
[33] S. Ichsan, "Republika.co.id," 30 September 2015. [Online]. Available:
https://www.republika.co.id/berita/koran/didaktika/15/09/30/nvh7c745-
amankan-sekolah-dari-bencana. [Accessed 07 August 2018].
Theo, "www.gudeg.net," 2006. [Online]. Available:
https://gudeg.net/read/4148/gempa-jogja-data-kerusakan-fasilitas-
umum-empat-kabupaten-belum-tersedia.html. [Accessed 07 Ausgut
Paper ID # ACEE0087 The 7th Asia Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 22-25 November 2018, Bangkok, Thailand
2018]. [48] Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan , Peraturan Kuasa Penggunaan
[35] Tempo.co, "Tempo.co," 31 Mei 2006. [Online]. Available: Anggaran Satuan Direktorat Pembinaan Sekolah Dasar Nomor
https://nasional.tempo.co/read/78216/ratusan-gedung-sekolah-rusak- 04634/KPA/SK/RENOVASI/II/2017, Jakarta: Kementrian Pendidikan
akibat-gempa. [Accessed 07 August 2018]. dan Kebudayaan , 2017.
[36] S. Maarif, S. Pranoto, Fauzan and S. Karimi, "Lesson learned from the [49] Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan , Petunjuk Teknis Pelaksanaan
2009 Sumatra earthquake housing reconstruction," in 15 WCEE, Lisboa, Bantuan Revitalisasi Sekolah Dasar Tahun 2015, Jakarta: Kementrian
2012. Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan , 2015.
[37] D. Seftiawan, "www.pikiran-rakyat.com," 30 July 2018. [Online]. [50] Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan , Petunjuk Teknis Bantuan
Available: http://www.pikiran- Pembangunan Ruang Kelas Baru SD Tahun 2015, Jakarta: Kementrian
rakyat.com/pendidikan/2018/07/30/banyak-sekolah-rusak-akibat-gempa- Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan , 2015.
lombok-pembelajaran-dilangsungkan-di-tenda. [Accessed 07 August [51] Menteri Pekerjaan Umum Republik Indonesia, Peraturan menteri
2018]. pekerjaan umum nomor 45/PRT/M/2007, 2007.
[38] E. Widiagiri, "The Wall Street Journal," 16 December 2017. [Online]. [52] K. B. Hastono and R. Syamsudin, "Perbandingan ketahanan gempa SNI
Available: https://www.wsj.com/articles/powerful-earthquake-strikes- 03-1726-2002 dan SNI 03-1726-2012 pada perencanaan bangunan
indonesias-java-island-1513401077. [Accessed 20 August 2018]. gedung di Kota Aceh," GeSTRAM (Jurnal Perencanaan dan Rekayasa
[39] A. Raharjo, "Lombok Island earthquakes - aftermach," 11 August 2018. Sipil , pp. 1-7, 2018.
[Online]. Available: https://www.gettyimages.com/license/1014867868. [53] Rinaldi, Evaluasi ketahanan gempa bangunan eksisting tingkat rendah
[Accessed 20 August 2018]. (SNI 03-1726-1989 dengan SNI 03-1726-2002), Jakarta: The
[40] Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI), "Padang erthquake University of Indonesia, 2006.
clearinghouse," 18 October 2009. [Online]. Available: [54] A. Hambali, "Perbandingan perencanaan struktur tahan gempa
http://eqclearinghouse.org/co/20090930-padang/category/structural- berdasarkan SNI 03-1726-2002 dan SNI 03-1726-2012," The
observations. [Accessed 20 August 2018]. University of Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta, Yogyakarta, 2016.
[41] K. S. Pribadi, D. Kusumastuti and Ridolva, "Learning from recent [55] R. Cornelis, W. Bunganaen and B. H. U. Tay, "Analisis perbandingan
Indonesia earthquakes: an overview to improve structural performance," gaya geser tingkat, gaya geser dasar, perpindahan tingkat dan
in The 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering , Beijing, simpangan antar tingkat akibat beban gempa bersadarkan SNI 03-1726-
China, 2008. 2002 dan SNI 03-1726-2012," Jurnal Teknik Sipil, pp. 205-216, 2014.
[42] Parmo, M. H. Sucipto and Sumarkan, "Penilaian kondisi bangunan [56] Consortium for Disaster Education Indonesia, "A framework of school-
gedung sekolah dasar negeri studi kasus di sekolah dasar negeri se- based disaster preparedness," Consortium for Disaster Education
Kabupaten Madium," EMARA Indonesia Journal of Architecture, pp. Indonesia, Jakarta, 2011.
42-52, 2016. [57] L. M. Putri, "Analisa kerusakan struktur bangunan gedung A SMAN 10
[43] Direktorat Jenderal Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah, Panduan teknis Padang akibat gempa 30 September 2009," Universitas Andalas,
pembangunan gedung sekolah dengan mekanisme pastisipasi Padang, 2010.
masyarakat, Jakarta: Direktorat Jenderal Pendidikan Dasar dan [58] J. Mwangi, L. M. Putri and L. Collins, "Mitigating natural events to
Menengah, 2018. avoid disaster in public school buildings: seismic retrofitting of SND
[44] Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan , Pedoman pelaksanaan 42 Korong Gadang," 2018.
bantuan pemerintah (ruang kelas baru SMA 2017), Jakarta: Kementrian [59] Badan Standardisasi Nasional, SNI 1726:2012 Tata cara perencanaan
Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan , 2017. ketahanan gempa untuk struktur bangunan gedung dan non gedung,
[45] Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan, Pedoman pelaksanaan bantuan Jakarta: Badan Standardisasi Nasional, 2012.
pemerintah (unit sekolah baru SMA 2018), Jakarta: Kementrian
Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan, 2018.
[46] Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan , Pedoman pelaksanaan
bantuan pemerintah – rehabilitasi ruang belajar SMA 2017, Jakarta:
Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan , 2017.
[47] Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan , Pedoman pelaksanaan
bantuan pemerintah – renovasi ruang belajar SMA 2017, Jakarta:
Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan , 2017.

View publication stats