Farklı Depremler Altında Yığma Minarelerin Sismik Değerlendirmesi

Abstract

Minareler, camilerin önemli yapı elemanları olup ince ve uzun yapılardır. Tarihi minarelerin çoğu yığma malzeme (tuğla veya taş üniteler) ile inşa edilirken, modern minarelerde genellikle betonarme kullanır. Son depremler, bu yapıların çoğunluğunun, çatlaklardan tamamen göçmeye kadar çeşitli yapısal hasarlara yol açan sismik hareketlere karşı oldukça duyarlı olduğunu göstermiştir. Bu çalışmada, temsili bir yığma minarenin sismik davranışı, 1999 Kocaeli, 2003 Bingöl ve 2011 Van depremlerinin ivme kayıtları kullanılarak incelenmiştir. Kullanılan tüm ivme kayıtları minarenin konumuna göre ölçeklendirilmiştir. Bu amaçla Elazığ şehir merkezinde inşa edildiği düşünülen temsili bir yığma minare dikkate alınmıştır. Sismik analizin ardından minare üzerinde elde edilen deplasman ve gerilme değerleri elde edilmiştir. Minare yüksekliği boyunca yer değiştirmelerin arttığı görülmüştür. Ayrıca geçmiş depremlerdeki hasar bölgelerine benzer şekilde minarenin silindirik gövdesi ile geçiş bölümü arasında maksimum ve minimum gerilme değerleri elde edilmiştir.

Keywords

• Yığma minare
• sonlu elemanlar modeli
• sismik tepki.

Seismic Assessment of Masonry Minarets under Different Earthquakes

Abstract

Minarets are tall and slender structures and form important elements of mosques. Most historical minarets are constructed with masonry (brick or stone units), while modern minarets typically use reinforced concrete. Recent earthquakes have shown that the majority of these structures are highly susceptible to seismic excitation leading to a range of structural damage, from minor cracking to complete collapse. In this paper, the seismic response of a representative masonry minaret was investigated using acceleration records of the 1999 Kocaeli, 2003 Bingöl and 2011 Van earthquakes. All acceleration records were scaled according to the location of the minaret. For this purpose, a representative masonry minaret that is thought to have been built in the city's central part of Elazığ, Turkey was chosen. After the seismic analysis, displacement and stress values obtained on the minaret were presented. It was seen that the displacements were increased along the height of the minaret. Also, the maximum and minimum stress values were obtained between the cylindrical body and transition segment of the minaret in accordance with the damage zones in the past earthquakes.

Keywords

• Masonry minaret
• finite element modelling
• seismic response

References

1. Urey O. Transformation of minarets in contemporary Mosque architecture in Turkey. Int J of Sport Cult and Sci 2013; 1(4), 95–107.
2. Pekgökgöz RK, Gürel MA, Mammadov Z, Çili F. Dynamic analysis of vertically post-tensioned masonry minarets. J Earthq Eng 2013; 17(4), 560–589.
3. Bayraktar A, Sevim B, Altunişik AC, Türker T. Earthquake analysis of reinorced concrete minarets using ambient vibration test results. Struct Des Tall Special Build 2010; 19(3), 257–273.
4. Usta P. Assessment of seismic behaviour of historic masonry minarets in Antalya, Turkey. Case Stud Constr Mater 2021; 15, e00665.
5. Creswell KAC. The evolution of the minaret, with special reference to Egypt-I. The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs 1926; 134–140.
6. Saygili Ö. Investigation of The effect of slenderness ratio on the structural response of masonry minarets. Niğde Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi 2020; 9(1), 366–376.
7. McKenzie, D. Active tectonics of the Mediterranean region. Geophysical J Int 1972; 30(2), 109–185.
8. Doǧangün A. Performance of reinforced concrete buildings during the May 1, 2003 Bingöl Earthquake in Turkey. Eng Struct 2004; 26(6), 841–856.

9. Calayır Y, Sayın E, Yön B. Performance of structures in the rural area during the March 8, 2010 Elazığ-Kovancılar earthquake. Natural Hazards 2012; 61(2), 703–717.
10. Sayın E, Yön B, Calayır Y, Karaton M. Failures of masonry and adobe buildings during the June 23, 2011 Maden-(Elazığ) earthquake in Turkey. Eng Fail Anal 2013; 34, 779–791.
11. Sayın E, Karaton M, Calayır Y. Nonlinear seismic analyses of historical Topuzlu Dam under different seismic loads. Građevinar 2016; 68(11.), 919–925.
12. Valente M, Milani G. Seismic response and damage patterns of masonry churches: seven case studies in Ferrara, Italy. Eng Struct 2018; 177, 809–835.
13. Karalar M, Yesil M. Effect of near-fault earthquakes on a historical masonry arch bridge (Konjic Bridge). Earthq Struct 2021; 21(2), 125–136.
14. Sayın E, Yön B, Onat O, Gör M, Öncü ME, Tuğrul Tunç, E, … Calayır, Y. 24 January 2020 Sivrice-Elazığ, Turkey earthquake: geotechnical evaluation and performance of structures. Bull Earthq Eng 2021; 19(2), 657–684.
15. Calayır Y, Yetkin M, Erkek H. Finite element model updating of masonry minarets by using operational modal analysis method. Structures 2021; 34, 3501–3507.
16. Arslan MH, Korkmaz HH. What is to be learned from damage and failure of reinforced concrete structures during recent earthquakes in Turkey? Eng Fail Anal 2007; 14(1), 1–22.
17. Muvafik M. Field investigation and seismic analysis of a historical brick masonry minaret damaged during the Van Earthquakes in 2011. Earthq Struct 2014; 6(5).
18. Köküm M. 24 Ocak 2020 Sivrice depreminin (Doğu Anadolu Fayı) tetiklediği heyelan ve yanal yayılmalar. Gümüshane Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi 2021; 11(3).
19. Sezen H, Acar R, Dogangun A, Livaoglu R. Dynamic analysis and seismic performance of reinforced concrete minarets. Eng Struct 2008; 30(8), 2253–2264.
20. Erkek H, Calayır Y, Sayın E. Karaton M. Seismic behaviour of historic Malatya Grand Mosque. 2. Turkey Earthq, Eng. Seismol. Conf. Earthq. Eng. Assoc. Turkey, 2013; 25–27.
21. Altunişik AC. Dynamic response of masonry minarets strengthened with Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) composites. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 2011; 11(7), 2011–2019.
22. Cosgun C, Turk, AM. Seismic behaviour and retrofit of historic masonry minaret. Građevinar 2012; 64(1), 39-45.
23. Hejazi M, Moayedian SM, Daei M. Structural analysis of Persian historical brick masonry minarets. J Perform Constr Facil 2016; 30(2), 04015009.
24. Nohutcu H, Hokelekli E, Ercan E, Demir A, Altintas G. Collapse mechanism estimation of a historical slender minaret. Struct Eng and Mech 2017; 64(5), 653–660.
25. Ercan E, Arisoy B, Hökelekli E, Nuhoğlu A. Estimation of seismic damage propagation in a historical masonry minaret. Sigma J Eng Natural Sci 2017; 35(4), 647–666.
26. Döven M, Serhatoğlu C, Kaplan O, Livaoğlu R. Dynamic behaviour change of Kütahya Yeşil Minaret with covered and open balcony architecture. Eskişehir Technical University J of Sci and Technology B-Theoretical Sciences 2018; 6.
27. Hökelekli E, Al‐Helwani, A. Effect of soil properties on the seismic damage assessment of historical masonry minaret–soil interaction systems. Struct Des Tall Special Build 2020; 29(2), e1694.
28. Türkeli E. Dynamic seismic and wind response of masonry minarets. Period Polytech Civil Eng 2020; 64(2), 353–369.
29. Yurdakul M, Yılmaz F, Artar M, Can Ö, Öner E, Daloğlu AT. Investigation of time-history response of a historical masonry minaret under seismic loads. In Structures 2021; 30, 265–276.
30. Günaydin M, Ertürk E, Genç A, Okur F, Altunişik A, Tavşan C. Fe Model updating and seismic performance evaluation of a historical masonry clock tower. Earthq Struct 2022; 22(1).
31. Scamardo M, Zucca M, Crespi P, Longarini N, Cattaneo S. Seismic vulnerability evaluation of a historical masonry tower: Comparison between different approaches. Applied Sciences 2022; 12(21), 11254.
32. Doğangün A, Tuluk Öİ, Livaoğlu R, Acar R. (2006). Traditional Turkish minarets on the basis of architectural and engineering concepts. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Restoration of Heritage Masonry Structures 2006; April, 24, p. 27.
33. Dogangun A, Acar R, Sezen H, Livaoglu R. Investigation of dynamic response of masonry minaret structures. Bull Earthq Eng 2008; 6, 505–517.
34. Turk AM. Seismic response analysis of masonry minaret and possible strengthening by fiber reinforced cementitious matrix (FRCM) materials. Adv Mater Sci Eng 2013; https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/952497.
35. Lourenco P. Computational Strategy for Masonry Structures (Ph.D. Thesis,). Delft Technical University of Technology, The Netherlands, 1996.
36. Carpinteri A, Invernizzi S, Lacidogna G. In situ damage assessment and nonlinear modelling of a historical masonry tower. Eng Struct 2005; 27(3), 387–395.
37. Zampieri P, Zanini MA, Modena C. Simplified seismic assessment of multi-span masonry arch bridges. Bull Earthq Eng 2015; 13(9), 2629–2646.
38. Sayin E. Nonlinear seismic response of a masonry arch bridge. Earthq Struct 2016; 10(2), 483–494.
39. Kocaturk T, Erdogan YS. Earthquake behaviour of M1 minaret of historical sultan Ahmed Mosque (blue mosque). Struct Eng Mech, An Int’l J 2016; 59(3), 539–558.
40. Bernardeschi K, Padovani C, Pasquinelli G. Numerical modelling of the structural behaviour of Buti’s bell tower. J Cult Herit 2004; 5(4), 371–378.
41. ANSYS. Finite Element Software. Houston, TX, USA: Swanson Analysis System. Inc., 2015.
42. Doğangün A, Ural A, Livaoğlu R. Seismic performance of masonry buildings during recent earthquakes in Turkey. In The 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering October (pp. 12-17), 2008.
43. Oguzmert M. Dynamic behaviour of masonry minarets (M.Sc.Thesis). Istanbul Technical University, İstanbul, 2002.
44. Özmen A, Sayın E. Seismic assessment of a historical masonry arch bridge. J Struct Eng Appl Mech 2018; 1(2), 95–104.
45. Özmen A, Sayin E. Different soil-structure interaction modelling strategies for seismic analysis of a masonry church. Int J Architect Herit, 2024; 1–22.
46. Seismosoft Ltd. "Seismomatch (2018)" [online] Available at: https://seismosoft.com/product/seismomatch/
47. TBEC. Turkish Building Earthquake Code 2018, Disaster and Emergency Management Agency (AFAD), 2018.