Evaluasi penggunaan persamaan empiris dalam menentukan potensi dan tekanan pengembangan pada tanah ekspansif karawang
Penerbit : FTSP - Usakti
Kota Terbit : Jakarta
Tahun Terbit : 2026
Pembimbing 1 : Christy Anandha Putri
Subyek : Swelling soils
Kata Kunci : Atterberg Limits, Expansive Soils, Empirical Equation, Oedometer Test, Swelling Potential, Swelling
Status Posting : Published
Status : Lengkap
| No. | Nama File | Hal. | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | 2026_SK_STS_051002100038_Halaman-Judul.pdf | 10 | |
| 2. | 2026_SK_STS_051002100038_Surat-Pernyataan-Revisi-Terakhir.pdf | 1 | |
| 3. | 2026_SK_STS_051002100038_Surat-Hasil-Similaritas.pdf | 1 | |
| 4. | 2026_SK_STS_051002100038_Halaman-Pernyataan-Persetujuan-Publikasi-Tugas-Akhir-untuk-Kepentingan-Akademis.pdf | 1 | |
| 5. | 2026_SK_STS_051002100038_Lembar-Pengesahan.pdf | 1 | |
| 6. | 2026_SK_STS_051002100038_Pernyataan-Orisinalitas.pdf | 1 | |
| 7. | 2026_SK_STS_051002100038_Formulir-Persetujuan-Publikasi-Karya-Ilmiah.pdf | 1 | |
| 8. | 2026_SK_STS_051002100038_Bab-1.pdf | 4 | |
| 9. | 2026_SK_STS_051002100038_Bab-2.pdf | 19 |
|
| 10. | 2026_SK_STS_051002100038_Bab-3.pdf | 7 |
|
| 11. | 2026_SK_STS_051002100038_Bab-4.pdf | 25 |
|
| 12. | 2026_SK_STS_051002100038_Bab-5.pdf | 3 | |
| 13. | 2026_SK_STS_051002100038_Daftar-Pustaka.pdf | 4 | |
| 14. | 2026_SK_STS_051002100038_Lampiran.pdf | 11 |
|
T Tanah ekspansif merupakan tanah ekspansif yang memiliki sifat kembang-susut akibat perubahan kadar air sehingga berpotensi menimbulkan kerusakan pada konstruksi. berbagai persamaan empiris telah dikembangkan untuk memperkirakan potensi pengembangan (%s) dan tekanan pengembangan (sp), namun keandalannya pada tanah lokal indonesia masih perlu dievaluasi. penelitian ini bertujuan menganalisis karakteristik pengembangan tanah ekspansif, membandingkan hasil perhitungan persamaan empiris dengan hasil pengujian laboratorium, serta mengevaluasi tingkat kesesuaiannya. penelitian dilakukan menggunakan sampel tanah tidak terganggu yang diambil dari empat titik di kabupaten karawang. pengujian laboratorium meliputi kadar air, berat jenis, berat isi, atterberg limits, dan uji oedemeter. hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa sebagian besar sampel tergolong tanah lempung plastisitas tinggi (ch), sedangkan satu sampel tergolong lanau plastisitas tinggi (mh). seluruh sampel memiliki indeks plastisitas di atas 40% yang menunjukkan nilai potensi pengembangan berkisar antara 0.01%-5.25% dan tekanan pengembangan berkisar antara 24.52 kpa-75.55 kpa, yang termasuk kategori pengembangan rendah hingga sedang. hasil perbandingan menunjukkan bahwa tidak terdapat persamaan empiris yang mampu mempresentasikan kondisi aktual secara konsisten pada seluruh titik pengujian. metode vijayvergiya dan ghazzaly (1973) menghasilkan nilai yang relative paling mendekati hasil laboratorium dibandingkan metode lainnya, meskipun masih meunjukkan deviasi pada beberapa titik pengujian.
E Expansive soils exhibit shrink-well behaviour due to changes in moisture content and may cause damage to engineering structures. various empirical equations have been developed to predict swell potential (%s) and swelling pressure (sp); however, their applicability to indonesian local soils requires further evaluation. this study aims to analyse the swelling characteristics of expansive soils, compare empirical predictions with laboratory results, and evaluate the suitability of selected empirical equations. undisturbed soil samples were collected from four locations in karawang regency, indonesia. laboratory testing included moisture content, specific gravity, unit weight, atterberg limits, and oedometer tests. the results showed that most samples were classified as high-plasticity clay (ch), while one sample was classified as high-plasticity silt (mh). all samples had plasticity index values greater than 40%, indicating very high plasticity. oedometer test results revealed swell potential values ranging from 0.01% to 5.25% and swelling pressure values ranging from 24.52 kpa to 75.55 kpa, corresponding to low to moderate swelling categories. comparison between laboratory and empirical results indicated that no empirical equation consistently represented the actual soil behaviour at all testing location. the vijayvergiya and ghazzaly (1973) method provided relatively closer predictions than the other methods, although noticeable deviations were still observed.