POLYNESIAN ROOF TRUSS DESIGN

FOR CULTURAL AND EDUCATIONAL DEVELOPMENT CENTER

Supervisor:
Ir. Purwanto, M.T., M.Eng

Compiler:
Circle Wiryadhartha
Fikri Amrullah Muryasani 21010115120092
Faela Sufah 21010115120097
Mhd. Rony Asshidiqie 21010115140196

UNIVERSITAS DIPONEGORO
SEMARANG
2018
 PREFACE

Thank to Almighty God who has given His bless to the compiler (Circle
Wiryadhartha) for finishing proposal entitled “........”. This proposal is used in
order to join International Roof Truss Design Competition 2018 that organized by
Universitas Gadjah Mada.

The compiler also wishes to express deep and sincere gratitude for those
have guided in completing this proposal:

1. Ir. Purwanto, M.T., M.Eng as the supervisor;

2. The lectures of Civil Engineering Department, Universitas Diponegoro;
3. Our family who always give supports and motivation;
4. Our beloved friends and all those who have helped that can’t mention one
by one.

This proposal contains the explanation of designing the polynesian truss for
cultural and educational development center. The structure analysis and the
advantages of the polynesian truss also completed.

Hopefully, this proposal can help the readers to expand their knowledge
especially about polynesian truss design.

Semarang, March 17th 2018

The Compiler,

Circle Wiryadhartha
 LIST OF CONTENT

TITLE .................................................................................................................. i
PREFACE .......................................................................................................... ii
LIST OF CONTENT ......................................................................................... iii
LIST OF FIGURE .............................................................................................. iv
LIST OF TABLE ............................................................................................... v
CHAPTER 1 PRELIMINARY .......................................................................... 1
1.1 Background .........................................................................................
1.2 Aim .....................................................................................................
1.3 Benefit/Advantage ..............................................................................
CHAPTER 2 THEORY .....................................................................................
2.1 Polynesian Truss .................................................................................
2.2 Dipterocarpus Kunstleri King .............................................................
2.3 Standard for Wood Construction ........................................................
CHAPTER 3 ROOF TRUSS DESIGN ..............................................................
3.1 Material Specification .........................................................................
3.2 Design of Polynesian Truss .................................................................
3.3 Design Load Analysis .........................................................................
3.4 Structural Failure Analysis .................................................................
3.5 Connection ..........................................................................................
CHAPTER 4 DRAWING ..................................................................................
REFERENCE .....................................................................................................
APENDIX A: The Details of Polynesian Truss Selection Process .....................
APENDIX B: The Details of Calculation and Analysis of Polynesian Truss with
Loading .....kg .............................................................................
LIST OF FIGURE
LIST OF TABLE
 CHAPTER 1
PRELIMINARY

1.1 Background
Cultural and educational is one of important thing in social life. The Culture
and educational issues are about many aspects of life, written in many print
media, interview, dialogue, and talk show in electronic media. The increments of
these cultural and educational issues automatically increase the amount of life
style especially in construction design. In other side, Indonesian is one the world’s
most diverse countries, diversity is a central feature of Indonesian culture. It has
more than 300 ethnic groups, 700 languages and dialects that different each other.
It means, many construction design is affected from Indonesian culture such as
Polynesian truss.
Polynesian truss is one of the technologies in construction fields that have
been widely used since the royal period in Java. The truss is inspired of Joglo
houses, a traditional architectural building from Central Java. Polynesian truss has
two pitches, a lower pitch on the bottom part of roof and a steeper pitch on the top
part of the roof. The truss design is applied the structure of building but not too
widely used. However, the truss should not underestimated because they have
unique structure characteristic beside the aesthetical view. So, it is one of good
alternative to make truss for the building.

1.2 Aim
The aim of this proposal is to study how to design the polynesian truss for
cultural and educational development center that has strength, light structure
weight, economic, workable and also has high aesthetic. Our analysis focuses on
polynesian truss with main material timber or wood and connection of truss is
bold. The span of polynesian truss is 1.5 meter.

1.3 Benefit
The advantage, this proposal can be reference to the readers to know about
how to design polynesian truss for cultural and educational development center
with Dipterocarpus Kunstleri King as the material.
 CHAPTER 2
THEORY

2.1 Polynesian Truss

The polynesian truss is similar to Joglo roof shape of Javanese traditional
houses. It commonly uses teakwood (Tectona grandis) as the primary
construction for both the structure and the ornaments (Prihatmaji, Yulianto P.;
Kitamori, Akihisa; 2013)

Figure 2.1 The Shape of Polynesian Truss (www.djjackson.ca)

2.2 Dipterocarpus Kunstleri King

Dipterocarpus Kunstleri King is found in Indonesia, Peninsular Malaysia,
Borneo and the Philipines. The genus Dipterocarpus produces timber that is
known collectively as keruing. Dipterocarpus kunstleri grows as a canopy tree up
to 40 meters (130 ft) tall, with a trunk diameter of up to 1 meter (3 ft 3 in). The
wood is included strong (strong class I-II) and durable (durable class III) (Seng,
1990). The moisture content is 10.35%, the specific grafity is 0.7-0.75 g/cm3, and
the density of air-dried is 0.73 g/cm3 (Kliwon, 1987). The wood has resin ducts
which occur singly or in short arcs as seen on end-grain surface. This condition
can make troublesome problems.
Sapwood and heartwood are moderately resistant to preservative treatments.
However, the wood should be treated with preservative when it is used in contact
with the ground (Forest Product Laboratory, 2010)

2.3 Standard of Wood Construction

The standard used in designing polynesian truss is based on American Wood
Council-National Design Specification for Wood Construction on Edition 2015
(AWC-NDS2015) which is Indonesian standard (SNI) referred to.
Tension design
Ft < Ft’ x Kf x Φt x λ

Compression design
Fc < Fc’x Kf x Φc x λ

Where:
Ft , Ft’ = reference and adjusted tension design value parallel to grain, MPa
Fc , Fc’ = reference and adjusted compression design value parallel to grain, MPa
Kf = format conversion factor
Φt,Φc = resistance factor
λ = time effect factor
 CHAPTER 3
ROOF TRUSS DESIGN

3.1 Material Specification

The material used to design timber polynesian truss include Dipterocarpus
Kunstleri King as the main material, plywood plate, and bolt. The following is
shown the specification of materials used in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1 Mataerial Specification

Dipterocarpus Kunstleri King

Specific gravity (G) 0.75 gr/cm3
Modulus of elasticity (E) 13081.660 MPa
Reference compression design value parallel to grain (Fc) 12.082 MPa
Reference tension design value parallel to grain (Ft) 28.245 MPa
Plywood Plate
Specific gravity (G) 0.75 gr/cm3
Thickness (t) 4 mm
Bolt
Specific gravity (G) 7.85 gr/cm3
Diameter (D) 6 mm
Length (l) 40 mm
Dowel bending yield strength of fastener (Fyb) 320 MPa

3.2 Design of Arch Roof Truss

To get the best design of polynesian truss, we do some selection processes.
The best design is expected to have a good structure efficiency and also workable.
The summary of the selection process is shown in Figure 3.2.
 1 Study the stability
model 1 model 2 model 3
of polynesian truss
in different bottom
frame.
model 1

2 From step 1, use the

model 1.1 model 1.2 model 1.3 model 1.4
best outer frame to
get the best web.
Study the influence
of configuration model 1.3

type of polynesian
truss.
3 Study the influence model model
model
of segement and 1.3.1 1.3.2 1.1.3
dimension of
polynesian truss.
model
1.3.2

Table 3.1 Selection Process

The explanation of selection process is detailed in APENDIX A: The Details

of Polynesian Truss Selection Process. The chosen design of polynesian truss is
shown in Figure 3.2.

The advantages of the chosen design of polynesian truss include:

1. Stability
Based on SAP2000 software analysis,
 The outer of the design are formed into continuous section forms, it means
the load can transform to pedestal quickly.
2. Strength
The design has high ratio of load to structure weight (ratio F/w = 43,25). The
weight of structure itself is classified into the lightest than other structures
which are designed in selection process.
3. Structure efficiency
The segment number of the design is proportional, not excessive. There is no
member that has length more than 300 mm so that no need to give special
treatment in constructing (e.g.: if the member length used is more than 300
mm, committee required to use the joint).
4. Workability
All the sections of the design are composed by single bars. This eases when
drilling the bar and installing the truss, so that it will shorten the construction
time. In the design, there is no member configuration that intersects each
other which can complicate in constructing the truss.
5. Economic and Aesthetics
The structure needs about 6.11484 meters length of timber with section 20
mm x 30 mm. Even if it is economic but still has high aesthetics because it is
formed into arches.

3.2 Design Load Analysis

The structure of chosen analysis truss design is analyzed with SAP2000
software. All the members of the truss uses single bar with section 30 mm x 40
mm with loading 250 kg that is put on the top joint at the middle of span. The load
cases are dead and live with load combination 1D+1L. The load factor uses 1
because the loads can be calculated exactly and to get the accuracy to the actual
loading test.
Figure 3.5 Compression and Tension Analysis of Loading 250 kg
(gambar sap)
Design load required can’t be less than 200 kg and not more than 300 kg.
According to the analysis, the design load is determined 50 kg. The value of
deflection when it reaches 250 kg load is 1.27 mm. The following is shown the
compression and tension analysis in Table 3.2.

Table 3.2 Table Compression and Tension Analysis of Loading 250 kg

Normal Force (N) Design (N) Checking
Member
Compression Tension P' T' P' T'
1 - 4167,03 14029,417 - OK
2 - 4167,03 14029,417 - OK
3 - 4156,08 14029,417 - OK
4 - 4156,08 14029,417 - OK
5 - 4156,08 14029,417 - OK
6 - 4156,08 14029,417 - OK
7 - 4167,03 14029,417 - OK
8 - 4167,03 14029,417 - OK
9 4350,83 - 9031,664 OK -
10 4344,73 - 9031,664 OK -
11 1427,22 - 9031,664 OK -
12 1427,22 - 9031,664 OK -
13 4344,73 - 9031,664 OK -
14 4350,83 - 9031,664 OK -
15 - 2,32 14029,417 - OK
16 7,15 - 9031,664 OK -
17 - 8,63 14029,417 - OK
18 - 2,98 14029,417 - OK
19 1083,01 - 9031,664 OK -
20 2417,4 - 9031,664 OK -
21 266,28 - 9031,664 OK -
22 - 1120,5 14029,417 - OK
23 2417,4 - 9031,664 OK -
24 1083,01 - 9031,664 OK -
25 - 2,98 14029,417 - OK
26 - 8,63 14029,417 - OK
27 7,15 - 9031,664 OK -
28 - 2,32 14029,417 - OK

Details of the calculation and analysis of polynesian truss with loading 250 kg is
explained in Appendix B: The Details of Calculation and Analysis of Polynesian
Truss with Loading 250 kg.
3.4 Structural Failure Analysis
The structural failure occurs on the member of arch roof truss when it is loaded up
to 525 kg. The failed members are included into compression bar.
Figure The Failed Compression Member of Arch Roof Truss
Gambar sap member yang fail

Table 3.2 Table Compression and Tension Analysis of Loading 525 kg

Normal Force (N) Design Checking
Member
Compression Tension P’ T’ P’ T’
1 - 8661,74 14029,42 - OK
2 - 8661,74 14029,42 - OK
3 - 8650,8 14029,42 - OK
4 - 8650,8 14029,42 - OK
5 - 8650,8 14029,42 - OK
6 - 8650,8 14029,42 - OK
7 - 8661,74 14029,42 - OK
8 - 8661,74 14029,42 - OK
9 9043,45 - 9031,664 FAIL -
10 9037,35 - 9031,664 FAIL -
11 2983,72 - 9031,664 OK -
12 2983,72 - 9031,664 OK -
13 9037,35 - 9031,664 FAIL -
14 9043,45 - 9031,664 FAIL -
15 - 2,32 14029,42 - OK
16 7,15 - 9031,664 OK -
17 - 8,63 14029,42 - OK
18 - 2,98 14029,42 - OK
19 2245,06 - 9031,664 OK -
20 5029,39 - 9031,664 OK -
21 571,65 - 9031,664 OK -
22 - 2316,23 14029,42 - OK
23 5029,39 - 9031,664 OK -
24 2245,06 - 9031,664 OK -
25 - 2,98 14029,42 - OK
26 - 8,63 14029,42 - OK
27 7,15 - 9031,664 OK -
28 - 2,32 14029,42 - OK
3.5 Connection
The connection is designed using bolt and plywood plate. The diameter of bolt
used is 6 mm with Fyb = 320 MPa. The thickness of the plywood plate is 4 mm.
The following is shown the number of bolt needed.
Table 3.4 The Number of Bolt Needed
APPENDIX A : The Details of Polynesian Truss Selection Process
1. Selection to get the best outer frame

Figure A-1 Model 1

Figure A-2 Model 2

Figure A-3 Model 3

5.29
5.38
Model 3
10586.83
7511.45

11,03
5.56
Model 2
15696.25
12333.48

3.57
6.04
Model 1
8648.6
6066.94

Deflection (mm) Weight (kg) Max Compression (N) Max Tension (N)

Figure A-4 Scoring Model 1, Model 2, dan Model 3

The phase of this selection process is to study the stability of polynesian truss in
different bottom frame. There are 3 alternatives of bottom frame that are given by
committe. The design are analyzed with simulation load on joint in the middle of
polynesian truss. Simulation load is 250 kg to every selection process.

2. Selection to get the best web (inner) frame

Figure A-4 Model 1.1

Figure A-5 Model 1.2

Figure A-6 Model 1.3

 Figure A-7 Model 1.4

2.22
Model 1.4 5.74
5771.25
5633.6

2.24
Model 1.3 5.18
5758.62
5621.27

3.57
Model 1.2 6.04
8648.6
6066.94

2.27
Model 1.1 5,68
5769.84
5632.22

Deflection (mm) Weight (kg) Mas Compression (N) Mas Tension (N)

Figure A-4 Scoring Model 1.1, Model 1.2, Model 1.3, dan Model 1.4

3. Selection to get the best web segment and dimension of polynesian truss

Figure A-8 Model 1.3.1

Figure A-8 Model 1.3.2

 Figure A-8 Model 1.3.3

3.68
4.84
Model 1.3.3
7126.77
7015.55

1.32
5.42
Model 1.3.2
4350.83
4167.03

1.28
5.7
Model 1.3.1
4355.78
4171.77

Deflection (mm) Weight (kg) Max Compression (N) Max Tension (N)

Figure A-4 Scoring Model 1.3.1, Model 1.3. 2, dan Model 1.3.3
APPENDIX B: The Details of Calculation and Analysis of Polynesian Truss
with Loading 250 kg

Table B-1 Join Names of polynesian truss

Figure B-2. Member names of polynesian truss

Figure B-3. The dimension of polynesian truss

Figure B-4. T Polynesian Truss with Loading 250 kg

Member Length Unit

1,4,5,8 250 mm
2,3,6,7 125 mm
9,10,13,14,20,23 261 mm
11,12 391 mm
19,24 291,5 mm
21,22 225 mm
15,28 75 mm
18,25 150 mm
16,27 145,8 mm
17,26 195,3 mm
Total 6013.20 mm
a. Tension Design Calculation
1. Data:
Tension force (Tu) = 4167.030 N
Specific gravity (G) = 0.75 gr/cm3
E = 16000xG0,7
= 13081,660 MPa
Ft = 12.082 MPa

2. Applicaility Adjustment Factors:

Ф (Resistance factor) = 0.8 (AWC-NDS2015 Table 2.3.6)
λ (Time effect factor) = 0.8 (AWC-NDS2015 App N.3.3
Kf (Format conversion factor) = 2.7 (AWC-NDS2015 Table 2.3.5)
CM (Wet service factor) = 1 (AWC-NDS2015 Table 4A)
Ct (Temperature factor) = 1 (AWC-NDS2015 Table 2.3.3)
CF (Size factor) = 1 (AWC-NDS2015 Table 4A)
Ci (Incising factor) = 0.8 (AWC-NDS2015 Table 4.3.8)

3. Section Dimension:
H (Height of section) = 40 mm
B (Width of section) = 30 mm
Ag (Area of gross section) = H*B = 40 mm*30 mm =1200 mm2

4. Step of Calculation:
An = Ag x 0.7
= 1200 x 0.7
= 840 mm2
Ft’ = Ft x CM x Ct x CF x Ci x Kf x Φt x λ (AWC-NDS2015 Table 4.3.1)
= 12,082 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 0.8 x 2.7 x 0.8 x 0.8
= 16.702 MPa
T’ = Ft’ x An
= 16.702 x 840
= 14029.417 N
 Checking
Tu ≤ T’
4167.030 N ≤ 14029.417 N (OK)

b. Compression Design Calculation

1. Data:
Compression Force (P’) = 4350.830 N
Specific gravity (G) = 0.75 gr/cm3
E = 13081.660 MPa
Emin (Appendix D; hlm 173) = E x (1-1,645 x COVB) x 1.3 / 1.66
= 13081.660 x (1-1,645 x 0.25) x 1.3 / 1.66
= 4778.845 MPa
Fc = 28.245 MPa
L (member length) = 261,010 mm

2. Applicabilityof Adjustment Factors:

Φc (Resistance factor) = 0.9 (AWC-NDS2015 Table 2.3.6)
λ (Time effect factor) = 0.6 (AWC-NDS2015 App N.3.3)
Kf (Format conversion factor) = 2.4 (AWC-NDS2015 Table 2.3.5)
CM (Wet service factor) = 0.8 (AWC-NDS2015 Table 4A)
Ct (Temperature factor) = 1 (AWC-NDS2015 Table 2.3.3)
CF (Size factor) = 1 (AWC-NDS2015 Table 4A)
Ci (Incising factor) = 0.8 (AWC-NDS2015 Table 4.3.8)

3. Section Dimension:
H (Height of section) = 40 mm
B (Width of section) = 30 mm
Ag (Area of gross section) = H*B
= 40*30 =1200 mm2
4. Steps of Calculation:
Fc’ = Fc . CM . Ct . Cf . Ci . Kf . Φc . λ
= 28.245 x 0.8 x 1 x 1 x 0.8 x 2.4 x 0.9 x 0.6
 = 23.427 MPa
Le = Ke .L
= 1 x 261.010
= 261.010 mm
𝐾𝑀+𝐿𝑒
CT =1+ 𝐾𝑇 𝑥 𝐸
0.437 𝑋+261.010
= 1 + 0.589 𝑋 13081,660

= 1.015
Emin’ = Emin x Ct x Ci x CT x 1.76 x 0.8
= 4778.845 x 1 x 1 x 1.015 x 1.76 x 0.8
= 6828.262 MPa
0.822 𝑥 𝐸 𝑚𝑖𝑛′
FcE = 𝑙𝑒
( )2
𝑑

0.822 𝑥 6828.262
= 261.010 2
( )
10

= 8.239 MPa

𝐹𝑐𝐸 𝐹𝑐𝐸
1+ 𝐹𝑐′
− √( 2 𝑥𝐹𝑐′
1+𝐹𝑐𝐸 /𝐹𝑐′
Cp = )2− 𝐶
2𝑥𝐶 𝐶

0.352
1+0.352 1+0.352
= 2 𝑥 0.8 − √( 2 𝑥 0.8 )2− 0.8

= 0.321
FC* = Fc x CM x Ct x Cf x Ci x Kf x CP x Φc . λ
= 28.245 x 0.8 x 1 x 1 x 0.8 x 2.4 x 0.321 x 0.9 x 0.6
= 7.526 MPa
P’ = Fc’ . Ag
= 7.526 x 1200
= 9031.664 N

Checking
Pu ≤ P’
4350.830 N ≤ 9031.664 N (OK)
c. Connection Calculation
1. Data:
Zu = 4356.49 N
D (Diameter of bolt) = 6 mm
l (Length of bolt) = 40 mm
tm = 20 mm
ts = 20 mm
Fyb (Yield strength ) = 320 MPa

2. Applicabilityof Adjustment Factors:

CM (Wet service factor) = 1 (AWC-NDS2015)
Ct (Temperature factor) = 1 (AWC-NDS2015)
CG (Group action factor) = 1 (AWC-NDS2015)
Cd (Penetration depth factor) = 1 (AWC-NDS2015)
Ceg (End grain factor) = 1 (AWC-NDS2015)
Cdi (Diaphragm factor) = 1 (AWC-NDS2015)
Ctn (Toe-nail factor) = 1 (AWC-NDS2015)
Kf (Format conversion factor) = 3.32 (AWC-NDS2015 Table 2.3.5)
Φz (Resistance factor) = 0.65 (AWC-NDS2015)
λ (Time effect factor) = 0.6 (AWC-NDS2015 App N.3.3)

3. Step of Calculation
a) Side bearing strength (Fes)
Fes = 70 x G
= 70 x 0.75
= 56 MPa
b) Main bearing strength (Fem)
185 𝑥 𝐺 1.45
Fem =
√𝐷
185 𝑥 0.751.45
=
√6

= 49.766 MPa
𝐹𝑒𝑚
c) Re = 𝐹𝑒𝑠
 49.766
= 56

= 0.948
𝑡𝑚
d) Rt = 𝑡𝑠
20
= 20

=1
e) Reduction term (Rd)
According to AWC-NDS 2015, for bolt with D= 6 mm, the reduction
term is 2.2 mm.
f) Lateral design values (Z)
0.83 𝑥 𝐷 𝑥 𝑡𝑚 𝑥 𝐹𝑒𝑚
ZIm = 𝑅𝑑
0.83 𝑥 6 𝑥 20 𝑥 20
= 2.2

= 2253.054 MPa
1.66 𝑥 𝐷 𝑥 𝐹𝑒𝑠
ZIs = 𝑅𝑑
1.66 𝑥 6 𝑥 20 𝑥 𝐹𝑒𝑠
= 2.2

= 4753.636 MPa
2(1+𝑅𝑒) 𝐹𝑦𝑏 (2+𝑅𝑒)𝐷 2
K3 = (-1)+√ +
𝑅𝑒 3𝑥𝐹𝑒𝑚 𝑥𝑡𝑠2

2(1+0.948) 320 (2+0.948)𝐷 2

= (-1)+√ +
0.948 3𝑥49.766𝑥202

= 1.137
2.08 𝑥 𝐷 2 2𝐹𝑒𝑚 𝑥 𝐹𝑦𝑏
Zlv = 𝑅𝑑
√ 3(1+𝑅𝑒)

2.08 𝑥 62 2𝑥49.766 𝑥 320

= 2.2
√ 3(1+0.948)

= 2512.774
g) Adjusted lateral design values (Z’)
Z’ = Z x Cm x Ct x CG x Ceg x Cdi x Ctn x Φz x Kf
= 25125.774 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 0.65 x 3.32
= 3253.54 N
h) Number of bolt
Zu  n x Z’
 4356.49 N  n x 3253.54
n  1.339  2

d. Bolted Connection Geometry (AWC-NDS2015 Table 12.5.1D and Table

12.5.1E)
Diameter of bolt (D) = 6 mm
Length of fastener in wood member (l) = 20 mm
Table B-2 Edge Distance and Spacing Requirement

Minimum Edge
Direction of Loading Value
Distance/Spacing
Parallel to grain 1.5 D 9 mm
Perpendicular to grain (5l + 10D)/8 20 mm
Spacing 4D 24 mm