Duvar ve temel arasındaki etkileşimin yığma yapılarında numerik incelenmesi

Öz

Yığma yapıların davranışı, yapı–temel etkileşiminden önemli ölçüde etkilenmektedir. Özellikle deprem etkisinin belirgin olduğu bölgelerde, üst yapı ile temel arasındaki etkileşimin dikkate alınması gerekmektedir. Literatürde yığma duvar davranışını inceleyen çok sayıda çalışma bulunmasına rağmen, yapı–temel arayüzünün yapısal performansa etkisini araştıran çalışmalar sınırlıdır. Bu çalışmada, söz konusu boşluğun giderilmesi amacıyla farklı temas koşulları ve ara katman çözümlerini temsil eden altı nümerik model oluşturulmuştur. Harçlı ve harçsız temasların yanı sıra ahşap, betonarme ve elastomer ara katmanların yığma yapı davranışına etkileri değerlendirilmiştir. Analizlerde, deneysel çalışmalarla doğrulanmış malzeme parametreleri kullanılmıştır. Sonuçlar, yapı–temel arayüz detayının yatay yük kapasitesi, rijitlik, deformasyon dağılımı ve hasar gelişimi üzerinde önemli bir etkiye sahip olduğunu göstermiştir. Betonarme hatıl en yüksek dayanımı sağlarken, elastomer ara katman duvardaki hasarı azaltmıştır. Elde edilen bulgular, yapı–temel arayüz tasarımının yığma yapı performansında önemli bir rol oynadığını ortaya koymaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yığma
• Hatıl
• Yapı-temel etkileşimi
• Düzlem için davranış

Numerical investigation of the interaction between structure and foundation in masonry structures

Öz

The behavior of masonry structures is significantly influenced by structure–foundation interaction. Considering the interaction between the superstructure and the foundation is particularly important in regions exposed to seismic hazards. Although many studies have investigated the behavior of masonry walls, research focusing on the influence of the structure–foundation interface on structural performance remains limited. To address this gap, six numerical models representing different contact conditions and interlayer solutions at the structure–foundation interface are modelled. The effects of contact with and without mortar, as well as wooden, reinforced concrete, and elastomeric tie beams, on the behavior of masonry structures are evaluated. Numerical analyses are conducted using material parameters validated through experimental studies. The results demonstrate that the structure–foundation interface detail has a significant influence on lateral load capacity, stiffness, deformation distribution, and damage development. The reinforced concrete tie beam provides the highest strength, whereas the elastomeric tie beam reduces damage within the wall. The findings highlight the important role of structure–foundation interface design in the overall performance of masonry structures.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• In-Plane Behavior
• Masonry
• Wall–Foundation Interaction
• Tie Beam

Kaynakça

1. J. Bothara and S. Brzev, A Tutorial: Improving the Seismic Performance of Stone Masonry Buildings, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI), Oakland, CA, USA, 2011, ISBN: 978-1-932884-48-7.
2. B. Khadka and M. Shakya, “Seismic characteristics of unreinforced mud masonry houses in Nepal: A miserable scenario before and after the 2015 Gorkha (Nepal) earthquake,” Eng. Fail. Anal., 124, 105308, Jun. 2021.http://www.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2021.105308
3. B. Erdil, F. Kıpçak, and M. Tapan, “Out-of-plane behavior of dry-stack brick masonry walls,” The Structural Design of Tall and Special Buildings, 33, 5, e2089, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1002/tal.2089.
4. F. Kıpçak and B. Erdil, “Effect of adobe wall shapes and openings on out-of-plane behavior,” Structures, 77, 109090, 2025. http://www.doi.org/10.1016/ J.ISTRUC.2025.109090
5. A. Erçolak, “Yığma yapıların duvarlarının kesme gerilme dayanımının deneysel olarak araştırılması,” Turkey, 2021.
6. G. Vlachakis, E. Vlachaki, and P. B. Lourenço, “Learning from failure: damage and failure of masonry structures after the 2017 Lesvos earthquake (Greece),” Eng. Fail. Anal., 117, 104803, Nov. 2020. http://www.doi.org/10.1016/J.ENGFAILANAL.2020.104803
7. Ö. Y. Karaman and M. T. Zeren, “Geleneksel Türk konutunda kullanılan ve kârgir sistemi destekleyen ahşap yapısal elemanların önemi ve bozulma nedenleri,” Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Fen ve Mühendislik Dergisi, 12 (2), 75–87, 2010. https://izlik.org/JA94SE57PD
8. B. Erdil, M. Tapan, İ. Akkaya, and F. Korkut, “Effects of structural parameters on seismic behaviour of historical masonry minarets,” Periodica Polytechnica Civil Engineering, 62(1), 148–161, 2018. http://www.doi.org/110.3311/PPci.10687

9. B. Erdil, F. Korkut, M. Aydin, and N. Yaltay, “Structural performance of masonry buildings under harsh climate and seismic loads,” Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering, 46(6), 4031–4049, 2022. http://www.doi.org/10.1007/s40996-022-00877-y
10. F. Kıpçak and B. Erdil, “Yığma yapıların düzlem dışı davranışlarına yan duvarın ve yan duvar boşluğunun etkisi,” Niğde Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, 12 (3), 853–860, 2023. http://www.doi.org/10.28948/NGUMUH.1268912
11. R. A. Oyguç, “2011 Van depremlerinden sonra yığma yapılarda gözlemlenen hasarlar,” Balıkesir Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 19(2), 296–315, 2017. http://www.doi.org/10.25092/ baunfbed.348482
12. B. Borah, H. B. Kaushik, and V. Singhal, “Analysis and design of confined masonry structures: Review and future research directions,” Buildings, 13(5), 2023.http://www.doi.org/10.3390/buildings13051282
13. M. Schildkamp and Y. Araki, “School buildings in rubble stone masonry with cement mortar in seismic areas: literature review of seismic codes, technical norms and practical manuals,” Front. Built Environ., 5(2019), 2019.http://www.doi.org/ 10.3389/fbuil.2019.00013
14. S. Bakır, E. Canbay, A. Erberik, Z. Gülerce, A. Aldemir, and İ. O. Demirel, “8 Mart 2010 Bașyurt-Karakoçan (Elazığ) Depremi Ön İnceleme Raporu,” Ankara, 2010.
15. SBB Report, “2023 Kahramanmaraş ve Hatay Depremleri Raporu,” Strateji ve Bütçe Bakanlığı, https://www.sbb.gov.tr/wpcontent/uploads/2023/03/2023-Kahramanmaras-ve-Hatay-Depremleri Raporu.pdf.
16. M. Çavuşlu, “Assessing seismic crack performance of diyarbakır çüngüş masonry stone bridge considering 2023 Kahramanmaraş, Hatay, Malatya, Gaziantep Earthquakes,” Bitlis Eren Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 12(2), 544–556, 2023.https://www.doi.org/ 10.17798/bitlisfen.1263557
17. V. Akansel et al., “The 23 October 2011 Mw7.0 Van (Eastern Turkey) earthquake: Interpretations of recorded strong ground motions and post-earthquake conditions of nearby structures,” Earthquake Spectra, 30(2), 657–682, 2014. https://www.doi.org/10.1193/012912EQS020M
18. M. Schildkamp and Y. Araki, “Cost analysis of mountain schools in Nepal: comparison of earthquake resistant features in rubble stone masonry vs. concrete block masonry,” Front. Built Environ., 5-2019, 2019. https://www.doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2019.00055.
19. A. M. Halabian, L. Mirshahzadeh, R. Sadeghian, and M. Maleki, “Unraveling the structural deterioration of isfahan’s sio-se-pol historical bridge: a finite element analysis approach,” Case Studies in Construction Materials, 22, e04149, 2025. https://www.doi.org/ 10.1016/J.CSCM.2024.E04149
20. A. M. D’Altri, S. de Miranda, G. Castellazzi, and V. Sarhosis, “A 3D detailed micro-model for the in-plane and out-of-plane numerical analysis of masonry panels,” Comput. Struct., 206, 18–30, 2018. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPSTRUC.2018.06.007
21. M. Bolhassani, A. A. Hamid, and F. L. Moon, “Enhancement of lateral in-plane capacity of partially grouted concrete masonry shear walls,” Eng. Struct., 108, 59–76, 2016. https://www.doi.org/ 10.1016/J.ENGSTRUCT.2015.11.017
22. M. Schildkamp, R. Marques, Y. Araki, and S. Silvestri, “Preservation of stone masonry buildings: benchmarking of modelling approaches for seismic assessment and international call to action,” SÍSMICA 2024 – 13o Congresso Nacional de Sismologia e Engenharia Sísmica, Apr. 2024.
23. D. Rai, V. Singhal, B. R. Selvaraj, and L. Sagar, “Performance of Residential Buildings during the M 7.8 Gorkha (Nepal) Earthquake of 25 April 2015,” Curr. Sci., 109, 2126, 2015. https://www.doi.org/ 10.18520/v109/i11/2126-2136
24. R. Carabbio, L. Pieraccini, S. Silvestri, and M. Schildkamp, “How can vernacular construction techniques sustain earthquakes: the case of the bhatar buildings,” Front. Built Environ., 4(2018), 2018. https://www.doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2018.00018
25. H. Ferhi, N. Attari, S. Amziane, and M. Saidani, “Performance of limestone masonry walls under diagonal compression using innovative hybrid fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) reinforcement techniques,” Structures, 82, 110743, 2025.https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.istruc.2025.110743.
26. K. E. Heydari, A. Baghbanan, and H. Hashemolhosseini, “Advanced continuous drilling for depth-dependent mechanical properties mapping in graded rocks,” Results in Engineering, 29, 109614, 2026, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.rineng.2026.109614.
27. F. Kıpçak, “Numerical study of the out-of-plane response of dry-stack double-wythe brick walls with header bricks,” Buildings, 15(23), 2025. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15234342
28. F. Kıpçak, B. Erdil, M. Tapan, and A. Karaşin, “The Effect of Voids on Flexural Capacity of Reinforced Concrete Slabs,” Periodica Polytechnica Civil Engineering, 67(4), 2023. https://doi.org/ 10.3311/PPci.21988
29. M. Khelifa, N. Vila Loperena, L. Bleron, and A. Khennane, “Analysis of CFRP-strengthened timber beams,” J. Adhes. Sci. Technol., 28(1), 1–14, 2014. https://doi.org/110.1080/01694243.2013.815096
30. S. Navaratnam, D. W. Small, M. Corradi, P. Gatheeshgar, K. Poologanathan, and C. Higgins, “Numerical modelling of timber beams with gfrp pultruded reinforcement,” Buildings, 12(11), 2022.https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12111992
31. L. P. Zhang, Q. F. Xie, B. Z. Zhang, L. Wang, and J. T. Yao, “Three-dimensional elastic-plastic damage constitutive model of wood,” Holzforschung, 75(6), 526–544, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1515/hf-2019-0247
32. F. Kıpçak, M. Tapan, and B. Erdil, “Investigation of out-of-plane earthquake-induced failure modes in hinged dowel connections,” Beton Prefabrikasyon, 39(155),13–30, 2025.
33. T. Zhou, Y. F. Wu, and A. Q. Li, “Numerical study on the ultimate behavior of elastomeric bearings under combined compression and shear,” KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 22(9), 2018.https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s12205-018-0949-y
34. F. Kıpçak, B. Erdil, and M. Tapan, “Experimental and numerical investigation of out-of-plane behavior of masonry brick walls with low-strength mortar: effects of slenderness, shape and openings,” International Journal of Architectural Heritage, 1–42, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1080/15583058.2025.2584098.
35. TBDY-2018, Türkiye Bina Deprem Yönetmeliği (Turkey Building Earthquake Regulation). Ankara, Turkey: Republic of Turkey Ministry of Environment and Urbanization, 2018.
36. K. F. Abdulla, L. S. Cunningham, and M. Gillie, “Simulating masonry wall behaviour using a simplified micro-model approach,” Eng. Struct., 151, 349–365, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.engstruct.2017.08.021
37. K. F. Abdulla, L. S. Cunningham, and M. Gillie, “Non-Linear FE modelling of plain and cfrp strengthened masonry panels under out-of-plane loads,” Masonry International, 30(3), 61–70, 2018.
38. A. Abasi, R. Hassanli, T. Vincent, and A. Manalo, “Influence of prism geometry on the compressive strength of concrete masonry,” Constr. Build. Mater., 264, 120182, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.conbuildmat.2020.120182
39. Simulia, ABAQUS 6.14 user’s manuals. Dassault Systems Simulia Corporation, 2016.