Computers and Concrete

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Seismic risk investigation for reinforced concrete buildings in Antalya, Turkey

  • Kepenek, Engin (Department of Urban Planning, College of Architecture, Akdeniz University) ;
  • Korkmaz, Kasim A. (School of Visual and Built Environments, Eastern Michigan University) ;
  • Gencel, Ziya (Department of Urban Planning, College of Architecture, Akdeniz University)
  • Received : 2020.01.30
  • Accepted : 2020.07.10
  • Published : 2020.09.25
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Turkey is located in one of the most seismically active regions of in Europe. The majority of the population living in big cities are at high seismic risk due to insufficient structural resistance of the existing buildings. Such a seismic risk brings the need for a comprehensive seismic evaluation based on the risk analysis in Turkey. Determining the seismic resistance level of existing building stock against the earthquakes is the first step to reduce the damages in a possible earthquake. Recently in January 2020, the Elazig earthquake brought the importance of the issue again in the public. However, the excessive amount of building stock, labor, and resource problems made the implementation phase almost impossible and revealed the necessity to carry out alternative studies on this issue. This study aims for a detailed investigation of residential buildings in Antalya, Turkey. The approach proposed here can be considered an improved state of building survey methods previously identified in Turkey's Design Code. Antalya, Turkey's fifth most populous city, with a population over 2.5 Million, was investigated as divided into sub-regions to understand the vulnerability, and a threshold value found for the study area. In this study, 26,610 reinforced concrete buildings between 1 to 7 stories in Antalya were examined by using the rapid visual assessment method. A specific threshold value for the city of Antalya was determined with the second level examination and statistical methods carried out in the determined sub-region. With the micro zonation process, regions below the threshold value are defined as the priority areas that need to be examined in detail. The developed methodology can be easily calibrated for application in other cities and can be used to determine new threshold values for those cities.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

The research described in this paper was financially supported by the Suleyman Demirel University Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit, Project number: 3482‐D2‐13.

References

  1. Aochi, H. and Ulrich, T. (2015), "A probable earthquake scenario near Istanbul determined from dynamic simulations", Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 105(3), 1468-1475. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120140283.
  2. Boduroglu, H., Ozdemir, P., Ilki, A., Sirin, S., Demir, C. and Baysan, F. (2004), "Towards a modified rapid screening method for existing medium rise R/C buildings in Turkey", Proceedings of 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, Canada, August.
  3. Coburn, A. and Spence, R. (2002), Earthquake Protection, John Wiley & Sons, West Sussex, England.
  4. Dabbeek, J. and Silva, V. (2020), "Modeling the residential building stock in the Middle East for multi-hazard risk assessment", Nat. Hazard., 100, 781-810. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-019-03842-7.
  5. Danumah, J.H., Odai, S.N., Saley, B.M., Szarzynski, J., Thiel, M., Kwaku, A., Kouame, F.K. and Akpa, L.Y. (2016), "Flood risk assessment and mapping in Abidjan district using multi-criteria analysis (AHP) model and geoinformation techniques, (cote d'ivoire)", Geoenvironmental Disasters, 3, 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40677-016-0044-y.
  6. Feng, T., Hong, Z., Wu, H., Fu, Q., Wang, C., Jiang, C. and Tong, X. (2013), "Estimation of earthquake casualties using high-resolution remote sensing: a case study of Dujiangyan city in the May 2008 Wenchuan earthquake", Nat. Hazard., 69, 1577-1595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-013-0764-1.
  7. Gulkan, P. and Sozen, M.A. (1999), "Procedure for determining seismic vulnerability of building structures", ACI Struct. J., 96(3), 336-342.
  8. Hassan, A.F. and Sozen, M.A. (1997), "Seismic vulnerability assessment of low-rise buildings in regions with infrequent earthquakes", ACI Struct. J., 94(1), 31-39.
  9. IEMP (2003), Istanbul Earthquake Master Plan Report, Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality, Istanbul, Turkey.
  10. Kalayci, S. (2010), SPSS Applications for Statistical Problems in Multi Degree Cases, Ankara, Turkey. (in Turkish)
  11. Kepenek, E. (2016), "A structural risk classification model proposal for urban transformation", Ph.D. Dissertation, Suleyman Demirel University, Isparta, Turkey.
  12. Kepenek, E. and Gencel, Z. (2017), "A tool for comperative disaster risk analysIs and evaluation in urban areas (DRAES)", Proceedings of Al Azhar's 14th International Conference on: Engineering, Architecture & Technology, Cairo, Egypt, December.
  13. Korkmaz, K.A., Irfanoglu, A. and Kayhan, A.H. (2010), "Seismic risk assessment of buildings in Izmir, Turkey", Nat. Hazard., 54(1), 97-119. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-009-9455-3.
  14. Kumlu, K.B.Y. and Tudes, S. (2019), "Determination of earthquake-risky areas in Yalova city center (Marmara region, Turkey) using GIS-based multicriteria decision-making techniques (analytical hierarchy process and technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution)", Nat. Hazard., 96, 999-1018. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-246x.2000.00137.x.
  15. Mansouri, B., Ashtiany, M.G., Hosseini, K.A., Nourju, R. and Mousavi, M. (2010), "Building seismic loss model for Tehran", Earthq. Spectra, 26(1), 153-168. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.3280377.
  16. Maqsood, S.T. and Schwarz, J. (2011), "Estimation of human casualties from earthquakes in Pakistan", Seismol. Res. Lett., 82(1), 32-41. https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.82.1.32.
  17. Murty, C.V.R., Brzev, S., Faison, H., Comartin, C.D. and Irfanoglu, A. (2006), "At risk: The seismic performance of reinforced concrete frame buildings with masonry infill walls", Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, WHE-2006-03, 70.
  18. Nanda, R.P., Paul, N.K. and Chanu, N.M. (2019), "Seismic loss estimation tool as rapid survey for prioritizing buildings for disaster preparedness: case study to hospital buildings", Nat. Hazard., 95, 769-781. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-018-3518-2.
  19. Papaioannou, G., Vasiliades, L. and Loukas, A. (2015), "Multi-criteria analysis framework for potential flood prone areas mapping", Water Res. Manage., 29(2), 399-418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-014-0817-6.
  20. Parker, R.S. (2006), Hazards of Nature, Risks to Development: An IEG Evaluation of World Bank Assistance for Natural Disasters, World Bank, Washington, DC, USA.
  21. Pay, A.C. (2001), "New methodology for the seismic vulnerability assessment of existing buildings in Turkey", Master Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
  22. Ranjbar, H.R., Dehghani, H., Ardalan, A.R.A. and Seradjian, M.R. (2016), "A GIS-based approach for earthquake loss estimation based on the immediate extraction of damaged buildings", Geomat. Nat. Hazard. Risk, 8(2), 772-791. https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2016.1265013.
  23. Scarfone, R., Morigi, M. and Conti, R. (2020), "Assessment of dynamic soil-structure interaction effects for tall buildings: A 3D numerical approach", Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 128, 105864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.105864.
  24. SERU (2012), "Structural engineering research unit archives", Middle East Technical University Civil Engineering Department, Ankara, Turkey.
  25. Shiga, T., Shibata, A. and Takahashi, T. (1968), "Earthquake damage and wall index of reinforced concrete buildings", Proceedings of 12th Tohuku District Symposium, Architectural Institute of Japan, Sendai, Japan, November.
  26. Sindel, Z., Akbas, R. and Tezcan, S.S. (1996), "Drift control and damage in tall buildings", Eng. Struct., 18(12), 957-966. https://doi.org/10.1016/0141-0296(95)00215-4.
  27. Sonmezer, Y.B., Bas, S. and Akbas, S.O. (2018), "Seismic risk estimation of kirikkale province through street survey based rapid assessment method (SSRA)", Earthq. Struct., 14(6), 615-626. https://doi.org/10.12989/eas.2018.14.6.615.
  28. Sucuoglu, H., Yakut, A., Ozmen, A. and Kubin J. (2015), "Seismic risk prioritization and retrofit cost evaluation of code-deficient RC public buildings in Turkey", Earthq. Spectra, 31(1), 601-614. https://doi.org/10.1193/040513EQS092T
  29. Syifa, M., Kadavi, P.R. and Lee, C.W. (2019), "An artificial intelligence application for post-earthquake damage mapping in Palu, central Sulawesi, Indonesia", Sensor., 19(3), 542. https://doi.org/10.3390/s19030542.
  30. Turkish Design Code (2007), Regulation on Structures to be Made in Earthquake Zones, Ministry of Public Works and Settlement, Ankara, Turkey.
  31. Yakut, A. (2004), "Preliminary seismic performance assessment procedure for existing RC buildings", Eng. Struct., 26(10), 1447-1461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2004.05.011.
  32. Yakut, A., Gulkan, P., Bakir, B.S. and Yilmaz, M.T. (2005), "Re-examination of damage distribution in Adapazari: Structural considerations", Eng. Struct., 27(7), 990-1001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.02.001.
  33. Yakut, A., Ozcebe, G. and Yucemen, M.S. (2006), "Seismic vulnerability assessment using regional empirical data", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 35(10), 1187-1202. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.572.
  34. Yakut, A., Sucuoglu, H. and Akkar, S. (2012), "Seismic risk prioritization of residential buildings in Istanbul", Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 41(11), 1533-1547. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2215.