Investigation on Earthquake Safety of Buildings Constructed for the Urban Transformation of Istanbul

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate the seismic performance of a specific type structural system that is utilized for almost all of the new residential buildings currently constructed as part of the Istanbul Urban Transformation Project. The structural system under consideration is comprised of lateral and gravity system elements, namely columns and shear walls, that are connected by ribbed slabs and shallow flat beams placed within the slabs. Firstly, a representative building of the new stock of buildings is selected, and the structural members are proportioned and detailed according to the current Turkish structural and seismic codes. Then, the seismic performance of the building is investigated. The results handled in this study reveal that these type of buildings cannot satisfy the earthquake safety requirements defined in actual Turkish Seismic Code

Keywords

• Urban Transformation Project, Earthquake Performance, Non-linear Analysis, Earthquake Resistant Buildings, Flat Slab Buildings

İstanbul’un Kentsel Dönüşümü için Üretilen Binaların Deprem Güvenliklerinin Araştırılması

Abstract

Bu çalışmada, İstanbul’da başlayan ve sürmekte olan kentsel dönüşüm projesi kapsamında inşa edilen konut türü binaların hemen hemen tümünde kullanılan taşıyıcı sistem modelinin deprem performansının araştırılması amaçlanmıştır. Bahsedilen taşıyıcı sistem modelinde, kolon ve perdelerden oluşan düşey ve yatay yük taşıyıcı elemanlar, dişli döşemeler ve bu döşemeler içinde teşkil edilen yassı kirişler ile birbirine bağlanmaktadır. Bu tür binaları temsil edecek şekilde seçilmiş orta yükseklikte bir betonarme bina güncel yönetmeliklere göre boyutlandırılmıştır. Daha sonra bu binanın deprem performansı araştırılmıştır. Bu çalışmadan elde edilen sonuçlar bu tür binaların yeterli deprem güvenliğini sağlamadığı yönündedir

Keywords

• Kentsel Dönüşüm Projesi, Deprem Performansı, Doğrusal Olmayan Hesap, Depreme Dayanıklı Binalar, Düz Döşemeli Binalar

References

1. Erdik, M., Aydinoglu, N., Fahjan, Y., Sesetyan, K., Demircioglu, M., Siyahi, B., Durukal, E., Ozbey, C., Biro, Y., Akman, H., Yuzugullu, O. 2003. Earthquake Risk Assessment for Istanbul Earthquake
2. Engineering Vibration, Cilt. 2, No. 1, s. 1-23.
3. Area, and Engineering
4. B, Özmen. 2000. 17 Ağustos 1999 İzmit Körfezi Depreminin Hasar Durumu
5. Türkiye Deprem Vakfı, Ankara, 132s.
6. Verilerle). [3] B, Özmen. 2000. 12 Kasım 1999 Düzce Depreminin Konut ve İşyeri Hasarları
7. Bayındırlık ve İskân Bakanlığı Afet İşleri Genel Müdürlüğü Deprem Araştırma Dairesi, Ankara, s. 155- 214.
8. Verilerle). [4] Özcebe, G., Yücemen, M.S., Aydogan, V., Yakut, A. 2003. ‘Preliminary seismic vulnerability assessment of existing RC buildings in Turkey–Part I’

9. Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, NATO Science Series, Cilt. 4, No. 29, s. 29-42.
10. and [5] Yakut, A., Aydogan, V., Özcebe, G., Yücemen, M.S. 2003. ‘Preliminary seismic vulnerability assessment of existing RC buildings in Turkey–Part II’
11. Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, NATO Science Series, Cilt. 4, No. 29, s. 43-58.
12. and [6] Ozcebe, G., Sucuoglu, H., Yucemen, M.S., Yakut, A., Kubin, J. 2006. Seismic Risk Assessment of Existing Building Stock in Istanbul a Pilot Application in Zeytinburnu District, 8th US National Conference on Earthquake Francisco, p.1737.
13. San [7] Ansal, A., Akinci, A., Cultrera, G., Erdik, M., Pessina, V., Tönük, G., Ameri, G. 2009. Loss Estimation in Istanbul Based On Deterministic Earthquake
14. Marmara Sea Region (Turkey), Soil Dynamics
15. Engineering, Cilt. 29, No. 4, s. 699- 709. of the and
16. Earthquake [8] Yakut, A., Sucuoğlu, H., Akkar, S. 2012. Seismic Risk Prioritization of Residential Buildings in Istanbul, Earthquake
17. Structural Dynamics, Cilt. 41, No. 11, s. 1533-1547.
18. and [9] Japan International Co–operation Agency and Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality. 2002. ‘The Study on a Disaster
19. Basic Plan in Istanbul Including Seismic Microzonation in the Republic of Turkey’ Final Report, Tokyo-İstanbul. [10] Metropolitan Municipality
20. of Istanbul Planning and Construction Directoriat Earthquake
21. and Investigation 2003.
22. Earthquake Fragility Analysis of Flat-Slab Structures, Engineering Structures, Cilt. 26, No. 7, s. 937-948.
23. Robertson, I.N., Kawai, T., Lee, J., Enomoto, B. 2002. Cyclic Testing of Slab-Column
24. Shear Reinforcement, ACI Structural Journal, Cilt. 99, No. 5, s. 605-613.
25. Brown, S., Dilger, W. 2004. Design of Slab-Column Connections to Resist Seismic Loading, 13th World Conference
26. Engineering, Vancouver, p.2832.
27. Coelho, E., Candeias, P., Anamateros, G., Zaharia, R., Taucer, F., Pinto, A.V. 2004. Assessment of the Seismic Behaviour of RC Flat Slab Building Structures, 13th World Conference on
28. Vancouver, 2004, p.2630.
29. Engineering, [15] Zekioglu, A., Willford, M., Jin, L., Melek, M. 2007. Case Study Using the Los Angeles Tall Buildings Structural
30. Guidelines: 40-Storey Concrete Core Wall Building, The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, Cilt. 16, No. 5, s. 583-597.
31. Council [16] Klemencic, R., Fry, J.A., Hooper, J.D., Morgen, B.G. 2007. Performance- Based Design of Ductile Concrete Core Wall Buildings—Issues to Consider Before Detailed Analysis, The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, Cilt. 16, No. 5, s. 599-614.
32. Rha, C., Kang, T.H.K., Shin, M., Yoon, J.B. 2014. Gravity and Lateral Load- Carrying Capacities of Reinforced Concrete Flat Plate Systems, ACI Structural Journal, Cilt. 111, No. 4, s. 753-764.
33. Gogus, A., Wallace, J.W. 2015. Fragility Assessment of Slab-Column Connections, Earthquake Spectra, Cilt. 31, No. 1, s. 159-177.
34. Lee, H.S., Hwang, K.R., Kim, Y.H. 2015. Seismic Performance of a 1:15-Scale 25-Story RC Flat-Plate Corewall Earthquake
35. Structural Dynamics, Cilt. 44, No. 6, s. 929-953.
36. Model, and [20] Sen, S., Singh, Y. 2015. "Seismic Performance of Flat Slab Buildings", in
37. Engineering, (Ed.) V. Matsagar, India: Springer India, s. 897-907.
38. Surumi, R.S., Jaya, K.P., Greeshma, S. 2015. Modelling and Assessment of Shear Wall–Flat Slab Joint Region in Tall Structures, Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Cilt. 40, No. 8, s. 2201-2217.
39. Siah, W.L., Stehle, J.S., Mendis, P., Goldsworthy, H. 2003. Interior Wide Beam Connections Subjected to Lateral
40. Engineering Structures, Cilt. 25, No. 3, s. 281-291.
41. Loading, [23] Benavent-Climent, A. 2005. Shaking Table Tests of Reinforced Concrete Wide Beam–Column Connections, [24] Benavent-Climent, A. 2007. Seismic Behavior of RC Wide Beam-Column Connections
42. Loading, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, Cilt. 11, No. 4, s. 493- 511.
43. Dynamic [25] Benavent-Climent, A., Cahis, X., Zahran, R. 2009. Exterior Wide Beam Column Connections in Existing RC Frames Subjected to Lateral
44. Engineering Structures, Cilt. 31, No. 7, s. 1414-1424.
45. Loads, [26] Benavent-Climent, A., Cahis, X., Vico, J.M. 2010. Interior Wide Beam- Column Connections in Existing RC Frames
46. Earthquake Loading, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, Cilt. 8, No. 2, s. 401-420. to
47. Lateral [27] Li, B., Kulkarni, S.A. 2010. Seismic Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Exterior Wide Beam-Column Joints, Journal of Structural Engineering, Cilt. 136, No. 1, s. 26-36.
48. Luk, S.H., Kuang, J.S. 2012. Seismic Behaviour of RC Exterior Wide Beam-Column Joints, 15th World Conference
49. Engineering, Cilt XIV, Lisbon, s. 10987-10996.
50. Earthquake [29] Bayındırlık ve İskân Bakanlığı. 2007. Deprem Bölgelerinde Yapılacak Binalar
51. (DBYBHY-2007), Ankara.
52. Yönetmelik [30] Türk Standartları Enstitüsü. 2000. Betonarme Yapıların Tasarım ve Yapım Kuralları (TS-500), Ankara.
53. Sta Bilgisayar Mühendislik ve Müşavirlik Ltd. Şti., STA4-CAD v13.1, Betonarme ve Çelik Bina Tasarım Yazılımı, İstanbul.
54. Computers and Structures Inc., SAP2000 Analysis California.
55. Structural Berkeley, [33] Imbsen Software Systems, XTRACT v3.0.8, Cross Section Analysis Program for Structural Engineers, California.
56. Akyıldız, A.T. 2015. Mevcut Bir Betonarme
57. Belirtilen Doğrusal Elastik Olmayan Analiz Performans
58. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, 211s, İstanbul.
59. TDY’07’de Yöntemlerine
60. Göre Değerlendirmesi. [35] Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER) Strong Motion
61. Database. http://ngawest2.berkeley.edu/,
62. (Erişim Tarihi: 03.05.2015).
63. Center for Engineering Strong Motion Data (CESMD), Strong- Motion
64. http://www.strongmotioncenter.or
65. g/cgi-bin/CESMD/archive.pl,
66. (Erişim Tarihi: 03.05.2015).
67. Afet ve Acil Durum Yönetimi Başkanlığı (AFAD), Deprem Dairesi Başkanlığı.
68. http://kyhdata.deprem.gov.tr/2K/k yhdata_v4.php, 05.05.2015).
69. Tarihi: [38] Seismosoft Ltd.,
70. v2.1.0, An Application for Adjusting Earthquake Accelerograms, Pavia. [39] Leng, K., Chintanapakdee,
71. C., Hayashikawa, T. 2014. Seismic Shear Forces in Shear Walls of a Medium-Rise Building Designed By Response
72. Engineering Journal, Cilt. 18, No. 4, s. 73-95.
73. Analysis, [40] Munir, A., Warnitchai, P. 2012. The Cause of Unproportionately Large Higher Mode Contributions in the Inelastic Seismic Responses of High- Rise Core-Wall
74. Buildings, [41] Pugh, J.S., Lowes, L.N., Lehman, D.E. 2014. Seismic Design of Slender Concrete Walls, Proceedings of the 10th US National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Anchorage, Alaska, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, s. 3267-3277.
75. American Concrete Institute. 2011. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-11), Farmington Hills, MI.
76. American Society of Civil Engineers. 2007. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE/SEI 7-10), Reston, Virginia.
77. Rutenberg, A., Nsieri, E. 2006. The Seismic Shear Demand in Ductile Cantilever Wall Systems and the EC8
78. Earthquake Engineering, Cilt. 4, No. 1, s. 1-21. of [45] European Committee
79. for 2004. Standardization
80. Eurocode (EC) 8: ‘Design of Structures
81. Resistance – Part 1 General Rules, Seismic Actions and Rules for Buildings’ (EN 1998-1), Brussels.
82. New Zealand Standards Association. 1995. NZS 3101 Code of Practice for the Design of Concrete Structures (Parts 1 & 2), Wellington.
83. Kazaz, İ., Gülkan, P. 2013. Perde- Çerçeve Sistemlerde Kesme Kuvveti Dinamik Büyütme Katsayısı, 2. Türkiye Deprem Mühendisliği ve Sismoloji Konferansı, Hatay, p.128.
84. Salonikios, T.N., Kappos, A.J., Tegos, I.A., Penelis, G.G. 2000. Cyclic Load Behavior
85. Reinforced Concrete Walls: Failure Modes, Strength and Deformation Analysis, and Design Implications, ACI Structural Journal, Cilt. 97, No. 1, s. 132-142.
86. Sedgh, R.E., Dhakal, R.P., Carr, A.J. 2015. State of the Art: Challenges in Analytical Modelling of Multi-Storey Shear Wall Buildings, New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering Annual Conference (NZSEE2015), Rotorua, New Zealand, p.O-15.
87. Kazaz, İ., Gülkan, P., Yakut, A. 2012. Performance Limits for Structural Walls: An Analytical Perspective, Engineering Structures, Cilt. 43, No. 1, s. 105-119.
88. Constantin, R., Beyer, K. 2016. Behaviour of U-shaped RC Walls under Quasi-Static Cyclic Diagonal Loading, Engineering Structures, Cilt. 106, No. 1, s. 36-52.
89. Beyer, K., Dazio, A., Priestley, M.J.N. 2011. Shear Deformations of Slender Reinforced Concrete Walls under
90. Structural Journal, Cilt. 108, No. 2, s. 167-177.
91. ACI [53] Kalkan, E., Kunnath, S.K. 2007. Assessment of Current Nonlinear Static Procedures for Seismic Evaluation of Buildings, Engineering Structures, Cilt. 29, No. 3, s. 305-316. [54] Krawinkler, H., Seneviratna, G.D.P.K. 1998. Pros and Cons of a Pushover Analysis of Seismic Performance Evaluation, Engineering Structures, Cilt. 20, No. 4-6, s. 452-464.
92. Penelis, G.G., Kappos, A.J. 2002. 3D Pushover Analysis: The Issue of Torsion, 12th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, London, p.015. [56] Aydınoğlu, M.N.
93. Incremental Response Spectrum Analysis Procedure Based on Inelastic Spectral Displacements for Multi-Mode Seismic Performance Evaluation, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, Cilt. 1, No. 1, s. 3-36.
94. Chopra, A.K., Goel, R.K. 2004. A Modal Pushover Analysis Procedure to Estimate Seismic Demands for Unsymmetric-Plan Earthquake
95. Structural Dynamics, Cilt. 33, No. 8, s. 903-927.
96. Buildings, Engineering
97. and [58] Fajfar, P., Marusic, D., Perus, I. 2005. Torsional Effects in the Pushover- Based Seismic Analysis of Buildings, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, Cilt. 9, No. 6, s. 831-854.
98. Baros, D.K., Anagnostopoulos, SA. 2008. An Overview of Pushover Procedures for the Analysis of Buildings Susceptible to Torsional Behavior, Conference
99. Engineering, Beijing, p.01-0195.
100. Earthquake Steel-Braced
101. Frame [62] Aka, İ. 2015. Kentsel Dönüşüm ve Asmolen Döşeme, İMO İstanbul Bülten, Sayı 132, s. 12-14.
102. Dönmez, C. 2013. Türkiye’deki Asmolen
103. Yeterliliği Konusunda Bir İrdeleme, 2. Türkiye Deprem Mühendisliği ve Sismoloji Konferansı, Hatay, p.013. [64] Apostolska, R.P.,
104. Cvetanovska, G.S., Cvetanovska, J.P., Mircic,
105. Performance of Flat-Slab Building Structural Systems, The 14th World Conference
106. Engineering, Beijing, p.01-0435.
107. Lelekakis, G.E., Birda, A.T., Mitoulis, S.A., Chrysanidis, T.A., Tegos, I.A. 2008. Applications of Flat Slab R/C Structures in Seismic Regions, Fifth European Workshop on the Seismic Behaviour of Irregular and Complex Structures, Catania, s. 99-113.
108. Değer, Z.T., Yang, T.Y., Wallace, J.W., Moehle,
109. Performance of Reinforced Concrete Core Wall Buildings With and Without Moment Resisting Frames, The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, Cilt. 24, No. 7, s. 477-490. Seismic