Comparative Dynamic Seismic Analyses of RC Minarets Strengthened with FRP and Buttresses

Öz

In recent earthquakes occurred in Turkey, an unexpected number of reinforced concrete (RC) minarets were heavily damaged or collapsed causing loss of lives and economic damages. These structures can be counted as the most common constructed slender structures in Turkey. Therefore, the detailed behavior of these slender structures should be determined in order to strengthen the existing ones and construct safer and stronger RC minarets. In this study, the most common constructed types of RC minarets were analyzed under 17 August 1999 Mw 7.4 Kocaeli Earthquake for the determination of the effectiveness of strengthening techniques namely fiber reinforced polymers (FRP) and buttresses. Also, soil-structure interaction (SSI) is included in the dynamic seismic analyses of the minarets as proposed by Burman et al. (2012). At the end of the analyses performed, it was determined that FRP strengthening is more effective in enhancing the seismic response of RC minarets as the height of the minaret increases when compared with the buttress strengthening. Also, the stress demand locations predicted from the dynamic seismic analyses of the representative minarets were found to be consistent with the damages observed in recent earthquakes.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Reinforced Concrete,Minaret,Seismic,Soil-structure Interaction,Viscous Boundary,Dynamic

Payanda ve FRP ile Güçlendirilmiş Betonarme Minarelerin Karşılaştırmalı Sismik Analizi

Öz

Türkiye'de son zamanlarda meydana gelen depremlerde, beklenmeyen sayıda betonarme minare, can ve ekonomi kaybına neden olarak ağır hasar görmüş veya tamamen yıkılmıştır. Bu yapılar, Türkiye'deki en yaygın inşa edilmiş narin yapılar olarak sayılabilir. Bu nedenle, bu narin yapıların ayrıntılı davranışı, mevcut yapıların güçlendirilmesi ve daha güvenli ve güçlü betonarme minarelerin inşa edilmesi için belirlenmelidir. Bu çalışmada, en yaygın inşa edilmiş betonarme minare tipleri, 17 Ağustos 1999 M_w 7.4 Kocaeli Depremi etkisi altında, güçlendirme tekniklerinin, yani lifli polimerlerin (LP) ve payandaların etkinliğinin tespiti için analiz edilmiştir. Ayrıca, Burman vd. (2012) tarafından önerilen zemin-yapı etkileşimi, minarelerin dinamik sismik analizlerine dahil edilmiştir. Yapılan analizlerin sonunda, LP güçlendirmesinin, yükseklik artışı oldukça payanda takviyesiyle güçlendirmeye kıyasla betonarme minarelerin sismik davranışında daha etkili olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca, temsili minarelerin dinamik sismik analizlerinden tahmin edilen gerilme talep bölgelerinin son depremlerde gözlemlenen hasarlarla tutarlı olduğu tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Betonarme,Minare,Sismik,Zemin-yapı Etkileşimi,Viskoz Sınır,Dinamik

Kaynakça

1. Acar R., Livaoğlu R., Doğangün A., Sezen H., (2007), The Effects of Subsoils on the Seismic Response of Reinforced Concrete Cylindrical Minarets, 5th International Conference on Seismology and Earthquake Engineering, May 13-16, Tehran, Iran.
2. Altunişik A.C. (2011), Dynamic response of masonry minarets strengthened with Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) composites. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 11(7), 2011-2019.
3. Altunişik A. C. (2013), Comparison of earthquake behavior of reinforced concrete minarets using fiber‐reinforced polymer composite, The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buldings, 22(9), 749-758.
4. Al-Tamimia A., Abed F.H. and Al-Rahmani A., (2014), Effects of harsh environmental exposures on the bond capacity between concrete and GFRP reinforcing bars, Advances in concrete construction, 2(1), 1-11.
5. Basaran H., Demir A., Ercan E., Nohutcu H., Hokelekli E., Kozanoglu C., (2016), Investigation of seismic safety of a masonry minaret using its dynamic characteristics, Earthquakes and Structures, 10(3), 523-538.
6. Burman A., Nayak P., Agrawal P., Maity D., (2012), Coupled gravity dam–foundation analysis using a simplified direct method of soil–structure interaction, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 34(1), 62-68.
7. Clemente P., Saitta F., Buffarini G., Platania L., (2015), Stability and seismic analyses of leaning towers: the case of the minaret in Jam, The Structural Design of Talland Special Buldings, 24(1), 40-58.
8. Doğangün A., Tuluk Ö.İ., Livaoğlu R., Acar R. (2006a), Traditional Turkish Minarets on the Basis of Architectural and Engineering Concepts, Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Restoration of Heritage Masonry Structures, April 24-27, Cairo, Egypt.

9. Doğangün A., Acar R., Livaoğlu R., Tuluk Ö.İ., (2006b), Performance of Masonry Minar ets Against Earthquakes and Winds in Turkey, Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Restoration of Heritage Masonry Structures, April 24-27, Cairo, Egypt.
10. Doğangün A., Sezen H., Tuluk Ö. İ., Livaoğlu R., Acar R., (2007a), Traditional Turkish masonry monumental structures and their earthquake response, International Journal of Architectural Heritage, 1(3), 251-271.
11. Doğangün A., Acar R., Livaoğlu R., Sezen H., (2007b), Comparison of Structural Response of Traditional and Strengthened Reinforced Concrete Minarets, 5th International Conference on Seismology and Earthquake Engineering, May 13-16, Tehran, Iran.
12. Doğangün A., Acar R., Sezen H., Livaoğlu R., (2008), Investigation of dynamic response of masonry minaret structures, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 6(3), 505-517.
13. Doğangün A., Sezen H., (2012), Seismic vulnerability and preservation of historical masonry monumental structures, Earthquake and Structures, 3(1), 83-95.
14. Erdik M., Biro Y.A., Onur T., Sesetyan K., Birgoren G., (1999), Assessment of earthquake hazard in Turkey and neighboring, Annals of Geophysics, 42(6), 1125-1138.
15. Erdoğan Y.S., Kocatürk T., Demir C., (2019), Investigation of the seismic behavior of a historical masonry minaret considering the interaction with surrounding structures, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 23(1), 112-140.
16. Ersoy Ş., Gürüm T. (2011), 23 October 2011 Geological and Geomorphological Preliminary Evaluation Report on Van Earthquake (Mw 7.2), Boğaziçi University, Department of Earthquake Engineering, İstanbul, Turkey.
17. Ganesan N., Indira P.V., Santhakumar A., (2013), Engineering properties of steel fibre in forced geo polymer concrete, Advances in Concrete Construction, 1(4), 305-318.
18. Gülkan P., Kalkan E., (2002), Attenuation modeling of recent earthquakes in Turkey, Journal of Seismology, 6(3), 397-409.
19. Güllü H., Pala M., (2014), On the resonance effect by dynamic soil–structure interaction: a revelation study, Natural Hazards, 72(2), 827-847.
20. Hosseinpour F., Abbasnia R., (2014), Experimental investigation of the stress-strain behavior of FRP confined concrete prisms, Advances in Concrete Construction, 2(3), 177-192.
21. Hosseinpour F., Abdelnaby A.E., (2015), Statistical evaluation of the monotonic models for FRP confined concrete prisms, Advances in Concrete Construction, 3(3), 161-185.
22. Karaca Z., Türkeli E., Günaydın M., Adanur S., (2015), Dynamic responses of industrial reinforced concrete chimneys strengthened with fiber‐reinforced polymers, The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 24(3), 228-241.
23. Livaoğlu R., Doğangün A., (2007), Effect of foundation embedment on seismic behavior of elevated tanks considering fluid–structure-soil interaction, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 27(9), 855-863.
24. Mortezaei A., Kheyroddin A., Ronagh H.R., (2012), Finite element analysis and seismic rehabilitation of a 1000‐year‐old heritage listed tall masonry mosque, The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 21(5), 334-353.
25. Mylonakis G., Gazetas G., (2000), Seismic soil-structure interaction: beneficial or detrimental?, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 4(3), 277-301.
26. Oliveira C.S., Çaktı E., Stengel D., Branco M., (2012)., Minaret behavior under earthquake loading: The case of historical Istanbul, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 41(1), 19-39.
27. Örmecioğlu H.T., Aslı E.R., Beeson S.T., Özmen C., (2011), Structural analysis and seismic behavior of Yivli Minaret, Süleyman Demirel University International Journal of Technical Sciences, 3(3), 52-61.
28. Pak R.Y.S., Guzina B.B., (1999), Seismic soil –structure interaction analysis by direct boundary element methods, International Journal of Solids and Structures, 36(31-32), 4743-4766.
29. Pekgökgöz R.K., Gürel M.A., Mammadov Z., Çili F., (2013), Dynamic analysis of vertically post-tensioned masonry minarets, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 17(4), 560-589.
30. Razavi S.V., Jumaat M.Z., El-Shafie A.H., Ronagh H.R., (2015), Load-deflection analysis prediction of CFRP strengthened RC slab using RNN, Advances in Concrete Construction, 3(2), 91-102.
31. Sezen H., Fırat G.Y., Sözen M.A., (2003), Investigation of the Performance of Monumental Structures during the 1999 Kocaeli and Düzce Earthquakes, 5th National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, May 26-30, İstanbul, Turkey.
32. Sezen H., Acar R., Dogangun A., Livaoglu R., (2008), Dynamic analysis and seismic performance of reinforced concrete minarets, Engineering Structures, 30(8), 2253-2264.
33. Sezen H., Doğangün A. (2012), Seismic performance of historical and monumental structures (Chapter 7), Earthquake Engineering, In Tech Open, pp.181-202.
34. Şanlı A., Utkucu, M., Yalçın, H., (2017), A Finite Fault Model of the March 13, 1992 Erzincan (Mw=6.8) From the Inversion of Teleseismic P and SH Waveforms, 4th International Conference On Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, October 11-13, Eskişehir, Turkey.
35. Tan O., Tapirdamaz M.C., Yörük A., (2008), The earthquake catalogues for Turkey, Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences, 17(2), 405-418.
36. Tabatabaiefar H.R., Massumi A., (2010), A simplified method to determine seismic responses of reinforced concrete moment resisting building frames under influence of soil–structure interaction, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 30(11), 1259-1267.
37. Türk A.M., Cosgun C., (2012), Seismic behavior and retrofit of historic masonry minaret, Građevinar, 64(1), 39-45.
38. Türk A.M., (2013), Seismic response analysis of masonry minaret and possible strengthening by fiber reinforced cementitious matrix (FRCM) materials, Advances in Materials Science and Engineering, 2013, 1-14.
39. Türkeli E., (2014), Determination and comparison of wind and earthquake responses of reinforced concrete minarets, Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, 39(5), 3665-3680.
40. Türkeli E., Livaoğlu R., Doğangün A., (2015), Dynamic response of traditional and buttressed reinforced concrete minarets, Engineering Failure Analysis, 49, 31-48.
41. Ural A., (2013), 19th May 2011 Simav (Kütahya) earthquake and response of masonry Halil Aga Mosque, Earthquakes and Structures, 4(6), 671-683.
42. Ural A., Doğangün A., Meraki S., (2013), Response evaluation of historical crooked minaret under wind and earthquake loadings, Wind and Structures, 17(3), 345-359.
43. Ural A., Firat F.K., (2015), Evaluation of masonry minarets collapsed by a strong wind under uncertainty, Natural Hazards, 76(2), 999-1018.
44. URL-1, (2017), http://kyhdata.deprem.gov.tr/2K/kyhdata_v4.php, [Accessed 16 August 2018].
45. Wilson E.L., (2000), Sap 2000: Integrated Finite Element Analysis and Design of Structures, Computers & Structures: Berkeley, CA.
46. Yazdchi M., Khalili N., Valliappan S., (1999), Dynamic soil–structure interaction analysis via coupled finite-element–boundary-element method, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 18(7), 499-517.