Sismik yalıtımlı çelik çerçevelerde giren enerji ve yapı tepkilerinin karşılaştırılması

Öz

Depremler, yapıları bilinmeyen bir büyüklükte ve yönde etkileyen doğal afetlerdir. Deprem kaynağında oluşan büyük enerji, etki bölgesindeki yapılara ulaşarak hasara neden olmaktadır. Bu hasarların azaltılabilmesi için yapılara giren deprem enerjilerinin en aza indirilmesi gerekmektedir. Yapıları taban katına yerleştirilen sismik izolasyon sistemleri ile yalıtmak giren enerjiyi büyük ölçüde azaltmaktadır. Bu çalışmada 3, 6 ve 9 katlı sismik yalıtımlı çelik çerçevelerin farklı sismik izolatör parametrelerine göre yapıya giren enerji değişimleri araştırılmıştır. Sismik izolasyon sistemi kurşun çekirdekli kauçuk izolatör seçilmiştir. Sismik izolasyon tasarımında izolasyon periyodu ve karakteristik dayanım kullanılarak 100 farklı izolasyon sistemi üretilmiştir. Üretilen sismik izolasyon sistemleri farklı katlara sahip örnek modellere uygulanarak 7 farklı ivme kaydı ile toplam 2100 zaman tanım alanında analiz yapılmıştır. Yapısal analizlerin yapıldığı SAP2000 programı tekrarlı çalıştırmak için Matlab yazılımında bir program geliştirilmiştir. Yapılan analizler sonucunda farklı izolatör parametrelerinin yapıya giren enerji ve yapı tepkilerinin değişimi karşılaştırılmıştır. İzolasyon deplasmanı ile yapıya giren enerjinin ters orantılı, ivme ile doğru orantılı değiştiği belirlenmiştir. Yapıya deprem kaynaklı giren enerjinin azalması göz önüne alınarak enerji esaslı sismik yalıtım modellemeleri yapılabileceği ortaya konulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Giren Enerji
• Sismik İzolasyon
• Yapı Tepkileri
• Çelik Yapı

Kaynakça

1. 1. Buckle İ.G., Mayes R.L., Seismic isolation: history, application, and performance-a world view, Earthquake Spectra, 6 (2), 161–201, 1990.
2. 2. Mayes R.L., Naeim F., Design of Structures with Seismic Isolation, The Seismic Design Handbook, Naeim F., Springer, Boston, 723–755, 2001.
3. 3. Robinson W.H., Lead‐rubber hysteretic bearings suitable for protecting structures during earthquakes, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 10 (4), 593–604, 1982.
4. 4. Kelly J.M., Aseismic base isolation: review and bibliography, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 5 (4), 202–216, 1986.
5. 5. Liu W., Xu H., He W., Yang W., Static test and seismic dynamic response of an innovative 3D seismic isolation system, Journal of Structural Engineering, 144 (12), 04018211, 2018.
6. 6. Wu D., Xiong Y., Yang Z., Numerical and experimental study of mechanical behaviors of the steel-confined rubber bearing, Construction and Building Materials, 352, 128900, 2022.
7. 7. Hwang J.S., Chiou J.M., An equivalent linear model of lead-rubber seismic isolation bearings, Engineering Structures, 18 (7), 528–536, 1996.
8. 8. Liu T., Zordan T., Briseghella B., Zhang Q., An improved equivalent linear model of seismic isolation system with bilinear behavior, Engineering Structures, 61, 113–126, 2014.

9. 9. Zhang C., Ali A., The advancement of seismic isolation and energy dissipation mechanisms based on friction, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 146, 106746, 2021.
10. 10. Choudhury S., Performance-Based Seismic Design of Structures, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2024.
11. 11. Börekçi M., Günümüz tasarım yöntemlerinin betonarme binaların deprem performansına etkisinin park-ang hasar indeksi ile belirlenmesi, Uludağ University Journal of The Faculty of Engineering, 25 (1), 325-340, 2020.
12. 12. TBEC, Turkish Building Earthquake Code, AFAD, Ankara, 2018.
13. 13. FEMA P440A, Effects of strength and stiffness degradation on seismic response, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington D.C., 2009.
14. 14. Fajfar P., Equivalent ductility factors, taking into account low‐cycle fatigue, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 21 (10), 837–848, 1992.
15. 15. Ghosh S., Collins K.R., Merging energy-based design criteria and reliability-based methods: Exploring a new concept, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 35 (13), 1677–1698, 2006.
16. 16. Ghosh S., Datta D., Katakdhond A.A., Estimation of the park-ang damage index for planar multi-storey frames using equivalent single-degree systems, Engineering Structures, 33 (9), 2509–2524, 2011.
17. 17. Shen J., Akbas B., Seismic energy demand in steel moment frames, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 3 (4), 519-559, 1999.
18. 18. Enderami S.A., Beheshti-Aval, S.B., Saadeghvaziri M.A., New energy based approach to predict seismic demands of steel moment resisting frames subjected to near-fault ground motions, Engineering Structures, 72, 182-192, 2014.
19. 19. Wang F., Zhang N., Huang Z., Estimation of earthquake induced story hysteretic energy of multi-story buildings, Earthquake and Structures, 11 (1), 165-182, 2016.
20. 20. Doğru S., Akbaş B., Seismic energy demands of steel special moment frames, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 35 (3), 1111-1128, 2020.
21. 21. Mu Y., Qu J., Shu Y., Tan Y., Simplified estimation method of plastic energy dissipation for MDOF systems using force analogy method, Buildings, 13 (5), 1330, 2023.
22. 22. Zhang H., Zhao Y.G., Ge F.W., Fang Y., Ochiai T., Estimation of input energy spectrum from pseudo-velocity response spectrum incorporating the influences of magnitude, distance, and site conditions, Engineering Structures, 274, 115165, 2023.
23. 23. Alıcı F.S., Sucuoğlu H., Elastic and inelastic near-fault input energy spectra, Earthquake Spectra, 34 (2), 611-637, 2018.
24. 24. Güllü A., Yüksel E., Yalçın C., Dindar A.A., Özkaynak H., Büyüköztürk, O., An improved input energy spectrum verified by the shake table tests, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 48 (1), 27-45, 2019.
25. 25. Cheng Y., Wang J., Zhang Y., Mollaioli F., Empirical correlations between the spectral input energy and spectral acceleration, Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 27 (6), 1514-1533, 2023.
26. 26. Dedeoğlu İ.Ö., Calayır Y., A study on elastic input energy based on earthquakes in Turkey, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 39 (3), 1439-1454, 2024.
27. 27. Akbas B., Shen J., Temiz H., Identifying the hysteretic energy demand and distribution in regular steel frames, Steel and Composite Structures, 6 (6), 479-493, 2006.
28. 28. Akiyama H., Earthquake-Resistant Limit-State Design for Buildings, University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo, 1985.
29. 29. Nakashima M., Saburi H., Tsuji B., Energy input and dissipation behaviour of structures with hysteretic dampers, Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 25 (5), 483-496, 1996.
30. 30. Ye L., Cheng G., Qu Z., Study on energy-based seismic design method and application on steel braced frame structures, Sixth International Conference on Urban Earthquake Engineering Tokyo-Japan 417-428, 2009.
31. 31. Uang C.M., Bertero V.V., Evaluation of seismic energy in structures, Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, 19 (1), 77-90, 1990.
32. 32. Değer Z., Taşkın Kaya G., Sütcü F., Investigation of the energy dissipation capacity of RC shear walls using meta-modeling methods, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 38 (4), 2311-2324, 2023.
33. 33. Guo W., Du Q., Huang Z., Gou H., Xie X., Li, Y., An improved equivalent energy-based design procedure for seismic isolation system of simply supported bridge in China’s high-speed railway, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 134, 106161, 2020.
34. 34. Zhao Z., Wang Y., Chen Q., Qiang H., Hong, N., Enhanced seismic isolation and energy dissipation approach for the aboveground negative-stiffness-based isolated structure with an underground structure, Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 134, 105019, 2023.
35. 35. Deringöl A.H., Güneyisi E.M., Effect of friction pendulum bearing properties on behaviour of buildings subjected to seismic loads, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 125, 105746, 2019.
36. 36. EN 1993-1-1, Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures: General rules and rules for buildings, European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, 2015.
37. 37. Standard B, Hot rolled products of structural steels, EN, 10025, 2004.
38. 38. Housner G.W., Limit design of structures to resist earthquakes, Proceedings of the First World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Berkeley, CA, 1–5, 1956.
39. 39. Çavdar E., Özdemir G., Change in maximum isolator displacements due to change in orientation of scaled near field ground motion records, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 33 (2), 585–698, 2018.
40. 40. PEER, Ground motion database, shallow crustal earthquakes in active tectonic regimes, NGA-West2, http://ngawest2.berkeley.edu/. Yayın tarihi 2013. Erişim tarihi Nisan 7, 2024.
41. 41. SeismoMatch, Earthquake software for response spectrum matching, Seismosoft, Italy, 2024.
42. 42. Naeim F., Kelly J., Design of seismic isolated structures: from theory to practice, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1999.
43. 43. Ryan K.L., Chopra A.K., Estimation of seismic demands on isolators based on nonlinear analysis, Journal of Structural Engineering, 130 (3), 392–402, 2004.
44. 44. Özdemir G., Constantinou M.C., Evaluation of equivalent lateral force procedure in estimating seismic isolator displacements, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 30 (10), 1036–1042, 2010.
45. 45. SAP2000, Static and dynamic finite element analysis of structures, computers and structures inc., Berkeley, CA, 2019.
46. 46. Matlab, The language of technical computing, The MathWorks Inc., Natick, MA, 2024.
47. 47. Niğdeli S.M., Bekdaş G., Alhan C., Optimization of seismic isolation systems via harmony search, Engineering Optimization, 46 (11), 1553–1569, 2014.
48. 48. Çerçevik A.E., Avşar Ö., Optimization of linear seismic isolation parameters via crow search algorithm, Pamukkale University Journal of Engineering Sciences, 26 (3), 440–447, 2020.