Design and Cost Comparison of Reinforced Concrete Structures Modeled according to TBDY 2018 in terms of Earthquake Soil Motion

Abstract

Our country is located in an active seismic zone and has therefore been subjected to large-scale earthquakes with a long historical record. Significant past earthquakes have resulted in fatalities and structural damage. For instance, events such as the 1939 Erzincan Earthquake, the 1943 Samsun Earthquake, and the 1999 Kocaeli Earthquake have deeply affected the country. However, the two earthquakes on February 6, 2023, have been recorded as the largest earthquakes in the last century. These earthquakes occurred on the East Anatolian Fault and directly affected 11 cities. In terms of loss of life and property, they caused three times more damage than the 1999 Marmara Earthquake. Reinforced concrete structures in our country are constructed according to specific standards. The construction criteria for buildings in seismic zones are determined by regulations. The regulation that came into effect in 2018 includes classifications based on earthquake levels. These classifications range from Earthquake Soil Motion Level-1 (DD-1) to Earthquake Soil Motion Level-4 (DD-4). In the design of reinforced concrete structures, the DD-2 Soil motion, which has a 10% probability of occurrence in 50 years, is considered as the minimum criterion. However, in this study, a reinforced concrete structure to be built in the Sakarya province will be modeled according to both DD-1 and DD-2 levels. The differences between these two approaches will be examined, and the losses and additional costs that would arise if DD-1 is considered in the design will be evaluated. The results will be analyzed and interpreted comprehensively. This study aims to shed light on the decision-making process in the design of structures in earthquake-prone regions.

Keywords

• Earthquake
• IdeCAD
• Numerical Analysis
• Reinforced Concrete Structure
• Cost Estimation

Design and Cost Comparison of Reinforced Concrete Structures Modeled According to TBDY 2018 in Terms of Earthquake Soil Motion

Abstract

Keywords

• Earthquake
• IdeCAD
• Numerical Analysis
• Reinforced Concrete Structure
• Cost Estimation

References

1. Boğaziçi University, “Kandilli Observatory and Earthquake Research Institute Regional Earthquake-Tsunami Monitoring Center.” [Online]. Available: http://www.koeri.boun.edu.tr/sismo/2/tr/. [Accessed: Jun. 29, 2025].
2. Presidency of Strategy and Budget of Türkiye, “2023 Kahramanmaraş and Hatay Earthquakes Report,” Presidency of the Republic of Türkiye, pp. 1–140, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.sbb.gov.tr/2023-kahramanmaras-ve-hatay-depremleri-raporu/. [Accessed: Jun. 29, 2025].
3. E. Hussain, S. Kalaycıoğlu, C. W. D. Milliner, and Z. Çakir, “Preconditioning the 2023 Kahramanmaraş (Türkiye) earthquake disaster,” Nature Reviews Earth & Environment, vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 287–289, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.1038/s43017-023-00411-2.
4. M. Ozturk, M. H. Arslan, and H. H. Korkmaz, “Effect on RC buildings of 6 February 2023 Turkiye earthquake doublets and new doctrines for seismic design,” Engineering Failure Analysis, vol. 153, p. 107521, Nov. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2023.107521.
5. AFAD, “Regarding 06 February Pazarcık (Kahramanmaraş) MW7.7 and Elbistan (Kahramanmaraş) MW7.6 Earthquakes Preliminary Assessment Report,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://deprem.afad.gov.tr/. [Accessed: Jun. 29, 2025].
6. X. Jiang et al., “Moment magnitudes of two large Turkish earthquakes on February 6, 2023 from long-period coda,” Earthquake Science, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 169–174, Feb. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.eqs.2023.02.008.
7. Z. Yang, T. Xu, and J. Liang, “Towards fast focal mechanism inversion of shallow crustal earthquakes in the Chinese mainland,” Earthquake Research Advances, vol. 4, no. 2, p. 100273, 2024.
8. TBDY, Türkiye Building Earthquake Regulation, Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency (AFAD), Ankara, 2018.

9. G. Ural, “Cost calculation according to regulations in frame and curtain wall system reinforced concrete buildings,” Unpublished manuscript, 2013.
10. M. E. Coşkun, Ş. Gürsoy, and Z. Ş. Garip, “Comparison of strengthening principles in the reinforced concrete a school building according to 2007 and 2019 Turkish earthquake regulations,” Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 127–144, 2023.
11. A. Şamandar and A. H. Polat, “Comparison of construction costs for steel and reinforced concrete prefabricated factory buildings,” presented at the 3rd Int. Symp. on Innovative Technologies in Engineering and Science (ISITES2015), Universidad Politecnica de Valencia, Jun. 2015, pp. 3–5.
12. A. Kuşu and K. Beyen, “Comparison of 12-storey steel and reinforced concrete structures under the same conditions according to the principles of TBDY 2018,” Kocaeli Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 64–73, 2019.
13. M. Türkmen, H. Tekeli, and A. Kuyucular, “Construction costs of multi storey RC buildings for different soil classes and structural irregularities,” Selçuk Üniversitesi Mühendislik, Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 57–66, 2006.
14. S. Ü. Dikmen and S. Özek, “Effects of soil group on the cost of industrial structures,” Teknik Dergi, vol. 22, no. 108, pp. 5543–5558, 2011.
15. S. Naimi and S. Kaya, “Reinforcement of reinforced concrete structures with steel cross members,” AURUM Journal of Engineering Systems and Architecture, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 191–204, 2020.
16. Turkish Standards Institute, TS 500: Design and Construction Rules for Reinforced Concrete Structures, Ankara, Türkiye, 2000.
17. Turkish Standards Institute, TS EN 1991: Effects on Structures, Ankara, Türkiye, 2007.
18. Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, 2024 Construction and Plant Unit Prices, Ankara, Türkiye, 2024.
19. Republic of Turkey Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change, Communication on the 2024 Structural Approximate Unit Costs to be Used in Calculating Architecture and Engineering Service Fees, Official Gazette No. 32466, Ankara, Türkiye, 2024.