Tasarım ve Malzeme Parametrelerinin Betonarme Sargılama Performansına Etkisi: Sayısal Bir Yaklaşım

Öz

Depremlerin betonarme yapılar üzerinde oluşturduğu hasar ve yıkımlar, mevcut yapı stokunun deprem performanslarının öngörülen düzeyde olmadığını göstermektedir. Mevcut yapı stoku için alınabilecek önlemlerden biri de yapıların güçlendirilmesidir. Deprem performansı yetersiz betonarme yapıların hedeflenen sismik performans düzeyine çıkarılması amacıyla farklı güçlendirme yöntemleri kullanılabilmektedir. Betonarme sargılama, yetersiz taşıma gücüne veya sünekliğe sahip betonarme elemanların güçlendirilmesinde tercih edilen yöntemlerden biridir. Ancak sargılama uygulamasının etkinliği, mevcut ve yeni beton tabakaları arasındaki bileşik davranışı kontrol eden çeşitli tasarım ve malzeme parametrelerine önemli ölçüde bağlıdır. Bu çalışmada, sargılama sistemlerinin yapısal performansı üzerindeki temel parametrelerin; sargı kalınlığı, beton dayanım sınıfı ve enine donatı aralığı etkilerini değerlendirmek amacıyla ayrıntılı bir sayısal inceleme gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışma, bu parametrelerin özellikle betonarme kolonların kesme kuvveti kapasitelerine etkisini ortaya koymaya odaklanmıştır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda, kolonlarda farklı düzeylerde hasarlara neden olan en kritik iki faktör olan düşük dayanımlı beton ve yetersiz enine donatı aralığı dikkate alınarak üç katlı bir referans bina modeli oluşturulmuştur. Herhangi bir düzensizlik içermeyen orta yükseklikteki bu yapı için statik itme analizi kullanılmıştır. Referans yapı modeli için kesme kuvveti kapasitesi aşılan kolonlar dikkate alınarak betonarme sargılama uygulanmış ve yapısal analizler yeniden gerçekleştirilmiştir. Her bir parametre için farklı değişkenler dikkate alınarak elde edilen sonuçlar, betonarme sargılamada bu parametrelerin kritik bir rol oynadığını ortaya koymaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Beton dayanımı
• betonarme
• enine donatı
• kesme kuvveti
• sargılama

Effect of Design and Material Parameters on the Performance of Reinforced Concrete Jacketing: A Numerical Approach

Öz

The damage and collapse observed in reinforced concrete (RC) structures during earthquakes have shown that the seismic performance of the existing building stock is below expectations. One of the most effective measures for the existing building stock is structural strengthening. Various retrofitting methods can be employed to enhance the seismic performance of RC buildings that do not meet the targeted performance levels. Among these methods, RC jacketing is commonly used for strengthening structural members with insufficient load-carrying capacity or ductility. However, the effectiveness of jacketing applications largely depends on several design and material parameters that govern the composite behavior between the existing and newly added concrete layers. In this study, a detailed numerical investigation was carried out to evaluate the effects of key parameters, such as jacket thickness, concrete strength class, and transverse reinforcement spacing, on the structural performance of jacketing systems. The study specifically focused on the influence of these parameters on the shear capacity of RC columns. For this purpose, a three-story reference building model was developed considering two critical factors that often cause severe damage in columns: low-strength concrete and insufficient transverse reinforcement spacing. A pushover analysis was conducted for this regular, mid-rise structure. RC jacketing was applied to the columns that exceeded their shear capacity in the reference model, and structural analyses were repeated. The results obtained for different parameter variations revealed that these parameters play a crucial role in the effectiveness of RC jacketing.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Concrete strength
• reinforced-concrete
• transverse reinforcement
• shear force
• jacketing

Kaynakça

1. A. Doǧangün, “Performance of reinforced concrete buildings during the May 1, 2003 Bingöl Earthquake in Turkey,“ Eng. Struct., 23, 841-856, 2004.
2. B. Taşkın, A. Sezen, U. M. Tuğsal, A. Erken, “The aftermath of 2011 Van earthquakes: evaluation of strong motion, geotechnical and structural issues,“ Bull. Earthq. Eng., 11, 285-312, 2013.
3. O. F. Nemutlu, B. Balun, A. Sarı, “Damage assessment of buildings after 24 January 2020 Elazığ-Sivrice earthquake,“ Earthq. Struct., 20(3), 325-335, 2021.
4. A. C. Altunışık, B. Atmaca, M. E. Kartal, M. Günaydın, S. Demir, and A. Uluşan, “Assessment of structural damage following the October 30, 2020 Aegean Sea,“ J. Earthq. Tsunami, 15(6), 2150029, 2021.
5. M. H. Arslan and H. H Korkmaz, “What is to be learned from damage and failure of reinforced concrete structures during recent earthquakes in Turkey?, “ Eng. Fail. Anal., 14(1), 1–22, 2007.
6. A. Bayraktar et al., “Structural performance evaluation of 90 RC buildings collapsed during the 2011 Van, Turkey, earthquakes,“ J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 29(6), 04014177, 2015.
7. M. Tapan, M. Comert, C. Demir, Y. Sayan, K. Orakcal, and A. Ilki, “Failures of structures during the October 23, 2011, Tabanlı (Van) and November 9, 2011 Edremit (Van) earthquakes in Turkey,“ Eng. Fail. Anal., 34, 606–628, 2013.
8. E. Işık, F. Avcil, E. Arkan, and R. İzol, “Investigation of the damages due to heavy earthen roofs on masonry buildings during the Kahramanmaraş earthquakes,” Muş Alparslan Univ. J. Sci., 11(2), 45–54, 2023.

9. E. Işık, M. Hadzima-Nyarko, D. Radu, and B. Bulajić, “Study on effectiveness of regional risk prioritisation in reinforced concrete structures after earthquakes,“ Appl. Sci., 14(16), 6992, 2024.
10. E. Işık et al., “Failures in reinforced-concrete columns and proposals for reinforcement solutions: ınsights from the 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquakes,“ Buildings, 15(9), 1535, 2025.
11. F. Ü. Peker, J. Yuzbasi, E. Işık, E., A. Büyüksaraç, and F. Avcil, “Damage assessment, regional ground motion record evaluation, and seismic performance analysis of a high-rise 14-story dual system building after the 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquakes,“ Structures, 80, 109897, 2025.
12. H. Bilgin, M. Hadzima-Nyarko, E. Isik, H. B. Ozmen, and E. Harirchian, “A comparative study on the seismic provisions of different codes for RC buildings,“ Struct. Eng. Mech. An Int. J., 83(2), 195–206, 2022.
13. J. Yuzbasi, “Post-earthquake damage assessment: field observations and recent developments with recommendations from the Kahramanmaraş earthquakes in Türkiye on February 6th, 2023 (Pazarcık M7. 8 and Elbistan M7. 6),“ J. Earthq. Eng., pp. 1-26, 2024.
14. E. Işık, F. Avcil, A. Büyüksaraç, E. Arkan, and E. Harirchian, “Impact of local soil conditions on the seismic performance of reinforced concrete structures: in the context of the 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquakes,“ Appl. Sci., 15(5), 2389, 2025.
15. F. Aras, T. P. Doğan, M. Öztürk, M. Tün, E. Işık, and M. H. Arslan, “Assessment of the damage caused by the 6 February 2023 earthquakes on old and new dated reinforced concrete buildings in Elbistan, Turkey,“ Adv. Struct. Eng., 1-28, 2025.
16. E. Işık and M. Hamamcıoğlu, “Risk prioritization of rc buildings in Bitlis (Türkiye) in the light of the 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquakes,“ Buildings, 15(19), 3552, 2025.
17. Ö. Yıldız and C. Kına, “Geotechnical and structural investigations in Malatya province after Kahramanmaraş earthquake on February 6, 2023,” Bitlis Eren Univ. J. Sci., 12(3), 686–703, 2023.
18. J. Yüzbaşı, F. Avcil, A. Büyüksaraç, M. S. Keskin, E. Işık, and E. Arkan, “Yerel zemin koşullarının ve deprem ivmelerinin betonarme yüksek katlı binaların performansına etkisi,“ Dicle Univ. Müh. Fak. Müh. Derg., 16(3), 777–788, 2025.
19. J. Yüzbaşı and H. R. Yerli, “Betonarme yapıların deprem etkisi altında performans analizlerinin yapılması ve güçlendirilmesi,“ Çukurova Univ. Müh.-Mim. Fak. Derg., 33(2), 273–286, 2018.
20. E. Işik, “Parameters in the rapid evaluation method in reinforced-concrete structures in the light of the 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquakes,“ Earthq. Struct., 29(4), 269–283, 2025.
21. M. Ozturk, M.H. Arslan, and H. H. Korkmaz, “Effect on RC buildings of 6 February 2023 Turkey earthquake doublets and new doctrines for seismic design, “ Eng. Fail. Anal., 153, 107521, 2023.
22. O. Hansu and A. Oğuz, “Seismic risk, structural vulnerabilities, and retrofitting solutions: Lessons from the 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquake,” Osmaniye Korkut Ata Univ. J. Inst. Sci. Technol., 8(3), 1427–1452, 2025.
23. I. O. Dedeoglu, M. Yetkin, G. Tunc, and O. E. Ozbulut, “Evaluating earthquake-induced damage in Dogansehir, Malatya after 2023 Kahramanmaras earthquake sequence: Geotechnical and structural perspectives,“ J. Build. Eng., 112266, 2025.
24. M. Yetkin, and I.Ö. Dedeoğlu, “February 6, 2023, Kahramanmaraş twin earthquakes: Evaluation of ground motions and seismic performance of buildings for Elazığ, southeast of Türkiye,“ Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 181, 108678, 2024.
25. M. Atar, O. İnce, Ö. F. Taş, A. Özmen, and E. Sayın, “6 Şubat 2023 Kahramanmaraş depremleri sonrası Malatya ilinde bulunan betonarme binaların ve çelik yapıların hasar durumlarının incelenmesi,” TDAD, 6(1), 60–80, 2024.
26. B. Yön, İ.Ö. Dedeoğlu, M. Yetkin, H. Erkek, and Y. Calayır, “Evaluation of the seismic response of reinforced concrete buildings in the light of lessons learned from the February 6, 2023, Kahramanmaraş, Türkiye earthquake sequences,“ Nat. Hazards, 121(1), 873-909, 2025.
27. İ. Ö. Dedeoglu, “Evaluating earthquake-induced damage in Hatay Following the 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquake sequence: Tectonic, geotechnical, and structural engineering insights,“ Appl. Sci., 15(17), 9704, 2025.
28. İ. B. Karasin, “Comparative analysis of the 2023 Pazarcık and Elbistan Earthquakes in Diyarbakır,“ Buildings, 13(10), 2474, 2023.
29. E. Işık and M. Kutanis, “Determination of local site-specific spectra using probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for Bitlis Province, Turkey,“ Earth Sci. Research J., 19(2), 129-134, 2015.
30. S. Avğın, M. M. Köse, and A. Özbek, “Damage assessment of structural and geotechnical damages in Kahramanmaraş during the February 6, 2023 earthquakes,“ Eng. Sci. Techn. Int. J., 57, 101811, 2024.
31. A. I. Turan, A. Celik, A. Kumbasaroglu, and H. Yalciner, Assessment of reinforced concrete building damages following the Kahramanmaraş earthquakes in Malatya, Türkiye (February 6, 2023),“ Eng. Sci. Techn., Int. J., 54, 101718, 2024.
32. E. Işık, M. Kutanis, and I. E. Bal, “Displacement of the buildings according to site-specific earthquake spectra,“ Period. Polytech. Civ. Eng., 60(1), 37-43, 2016.
33. M. L. Ivanov, W. K. Chow, “Structural damage observed in reinforced concrete buildings in Adiyaman during the 2023 Türkiye Kahramanmaras Earthquakes,“ Structures, 58, 105578, 2023.
34. Ö. Yıldız and C. Kına, “Geotechnical and structural investigations in Malatya province after Kahramanmaraş Earthquake on February 6, 2023,“ Bitlis Eren Univ. J. Sci., 12(3), 686–703, 2023.
35. A. Özmen, O. İnce, Ö. F. Taş, M. Atar, O. E. Ozbulut, and E. Sayın, “Seismic performance assessment of structures in Malatya Province after 6 February 2023 Türkiye earthquake sequences,“ Nat. Hazards, 1-34, 2024.
36. H. Ulutaş, “Investigation of the causes of soft-storey and weak-storey formations in low-and mid-rise RC buildings in Türkiye,“ Buildings, 14(5), 1308, 2024.
37. A. Büyüksaraç, E. Işık, Ö. Bektaş, and F. Avcil, “Achieving intensity distributions of 6 February 2023 Kahramanmaraş (Türkiye) earthquakes from peak ground acceleration records,“ Sustainability, 16(2), 599, 2024.
38. M. C. Aydın, E. Işık, A. Büyüksaraç, A. E. Ulu , and F. Avcil, “Technical and socio-economic perspective on the disaster of the century (6 February 2023 Earthquake) in Türkiye on the second anniversar,“ Geol. J., 1-18, 2025.
39. Y. Erbaş Ö. Mercimek, Ö. Anıl, A. Çelik, S. T. Akkaya, İ. Kocaman, and M. Gürbüz, “Design deficiencies, failure modes and recommendations for strengthening in reinforced concrete structures exposed to the February 6, 2023 Kahramanmaraş Earthquakes (Mw 7.7 and Mw 7.6),“ Nat. Hazards, 121, 3153-3194, 2025.
40. F. Avcil, H. Bilgin, E. Arkan, and E. Işık, “Numerical analysis of structural behavior and damage mechanisms in shear-deficient reinforced concrete columns retrofitted with rc jacketing,“ Türk Doğa ve Fen Dergisi, 14(2), 150-161, 2025.
41. C. Aksoylu, Y. Uysal, B. Başaran, Y. O. Özkılıç, and M. H. Arslan, “Effect of stirrup spacing on strengthening beams with insufficient shear capacity using innovative mechanical steel stitches,“ Struct. Concr., 1-21, 2025.
42. E. Işık, M. Hadzima-Nyarko, B. A. Tayeh, Z. R. Harrat, F. Avcil, and E. Arkan, “Comparison of reinforcement methods with advanced materials for r/c columns,“ Adv. Eng. Lett., 4(1), 1-13, 2025.
43. S. F. Breña and S. M. Alcocer, “Seismic performance evaluation of rehabilitated reinforced concrete columns through jacketing,“ In Improving the Seismic Performance of Existing Buildings and Other Structures, 572-583, 2009.
44. E. Işık, “A study on strengthening rc structural elements with fibers based polymers,“ Bitlis Eren Univ. J. Sci., 14(2), 1269-1286, 2025.
45. A. Habib, U. Yildirim, and O. Eren, “Column repair and strengthening using RC jacketing: a brief state-of-the-art review,“ Innov. Infrastruct. Solut., 5(3), 75, 2020.
46. C. Lubin, H. Guerrero, S. M. Alcocer, and O. Lopez Batiz, “Experimental behavior of confined masonry walls rehabilitated with reinforced mortar jacketing subjected to cyclic loading,“ Buildings, 13(5), 1314, 2023.
47. S. Pampanin and U. Akguzel, “Performance-based seismic retrofit of existing reinforced concrete frame buildings using fibre-reinforced polymers: challenges and solutions,“ Struct. Eng. Int., 21(3), 260-270, 2011.
48. S. Pampanin, “Alternative performance-based retrofit strategies and solutions for existing RC buildings,“ in Seismic Risk Assessment and Retrofitting: With Special Emphasis on Existing Low Rise Structures, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer, 67–295, 2009.
49. H. Sezen, and A. S. Whittaker, “Seismic performance of industrial facilities affected by the 1999 Turkey earthquake,“ J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 20(1), 28-36, 2006.
50. İ. Kalkan et al., “Use of waste steel fibers from CNC scraps in shear-deficient reinforced concrete beams,“ Steel Compos. Struct., 49(2), 245-255, 2023.
51. A. M. ElSouri and M. H. Harajli, “Seismic repair and strengthening of lap splices in RC columns: Carbon fiber–reinforced polymer versus steel confinement,“ J. Compos. Constr., 15(5), 721-731, 2011.
52. S. Altin, Ö. Anil, Y. Kopraman, and M. E. Kara, “Hysteretic behavior of RC shear walls strengthened with CFRP strips,“ Compos. Part B: Eng., 44(1), 321-329, 2013.
53. S. Foroughi, R. Jamal, and B. Yüksel, “Sargı donatısı ve eksenel yük seviyesinin betonarme kolonların eğrilik süneklik ile etkin kesit rijitliğe etkisi,“ El-Cezeri, 7(3), 1309-1319, 2020.
54. O. Özcan, B. Binici, and G. Özcebe, “Yetersiz betonarme kolonlar için lifli polimer güçlendirme tasarım kurallarının irdelenmesi,“ Teknik Dergi, 21(104), 5219-5239, 2010.
55. M. B. Navdar and N. Çağlar, “Betonarme manto ile güçlendirilmiş betonarme kolonların davranışının sayısal olarak incelenmesi,“ in Proc. 3rd Int. Symp. Natural Hazards and Disaster Management, Van, Turkey, 2019.
56. Ö. Keleşoğlu, H. Çakar, and A. Polat, “Mevcut betonarme bir yapının 2007 deprem yönetmeliğine göre performansının belirlenmesi ve güçlendirme önerisi,“ Int. J. Pure Appl. Sci., 3(2), 58–67, 2017.
57. M. Maras, “Betonarme yapıların güçlendirilmesinde kullanılan FRP kompozitin yapısal performansa etkisi,“ Eur. J. Sci. Technol., 23, 108–119, 2021.
58. S. Raza, M. K. Khan, S. J. Menegon, H. H. Tsang, and J. L. Wilson, “Strengthening and repair of reinforced concrete columns by jacketing: State-of-the-art review,“ Sustainability, 11(11), 3208, 2019.
59. E. Choi, J. Park, T. H. Nam, and S. J. Yoon, “A new steel jacketing method for RC columns,“ Mag. Concr. Res.., 61(10), 787–796, 2009.
60. S. A. Dadvar, D. Mostofinejad, and H. Bahmani, “Strengthening of RC columns by ultra-high performance fiber reinforced concrete (UHPFRC) jacketing,“ Constr. Build. Mater., 235, 117485, 2020.
61. B. A. Tayeh, M. A. Naja, S. Shihada, and M. Arafa, “Repairing and strengthening of damaged RC columns using thin concrete jacketing,“ Adv. Civ. Eng., 2019(1), 2987412, 2019.
62. Y. H. Hwang, K. H. Yang, J. H., Mun, and S. J. Kwon, “Axial performance of RC columns strengthened with different jacketing methods,“ Eng. Struct., 206, 110179, 2020.
63. G. Minafò, “A practical approach for the strength evaluation of RC columns reinforced with RC jackets,“ Eng. Struct., 85, 162-169, 2015.
64. G. Minafò, F. Di Trapani, and G. Amato, “Strength and ductility of RC jacketed columns: A simplified analytical method,“ Eng. Struct., 122, 184-195, 2016.
65. K. G. Vandoros and S. E. Dritsos, “Concrete jacket construction detail effectiveness when strengthening RC columns,“ Constr. Build. Mater., 22(3), 264-276, 2008.
66. M. Tan, Ö. Avşar, F. Yıldızhan, and N. Atmaca, “Effect of infill walls on the seismic performance of a severely damaged substandard RC building during the February 6, 2023, Kahramanmaras earthquake sequence,“ Eng. Fail. Anal., 109117, 2024.
67. T. P. Doğan, H. Kalkan, Ö. Aldemir, M. Ayhan, M. Böcek, and Ö. Anıl, “Investigation of RC structure damages after February 6, 2023, Kahramanmaraş earthquake in the Hatay region,“ Bull. Earthq. Eng., 22(10), 5201-5229, 2024.
68. İ. Kazaz, Ö. Avşar, and A. Dilsiz, “Importance of building inspection on the seismic response of a severely damaged RC structure during the February 6, 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquake sequence,“ Eng. Fail. Anal., 162, 108410, 2024.
69. E. Işık, F. Avcil, A. Büyüksaraç, and E. Arkan, “Comparative analysis of target displacements in RC Buildings for 2023 Türkiye earthquakes,“ Appl. Sci., 15(7), 4014, 2025.
70. S. Varolgüneş, “A bibliometric analysis of the 2023 Kahramanmaraş Earthquakes: trends, gaps, and policy implications,“ Nat. Hazards, 1-25, 2025.
71. M. Utkucu et al., “On the earthquake-related damages of civil engineering structures within the areas impacted by Kahramanmaraş earthquakes,“ J. Struct. Eng. Appl. Mech., 6(2), 98-116, 2023.
72. G. Doğan, A. Özkiş, and M. H Arslan, “A new methodology based on artificial intelligence for estimating the compressive strength of concrete from surface images,“ Ingeniería e Investigación, 44(1), 4, 2024.
73. E. Işık, M. Hadzima-Nyarko, F. Avcil, A. Büyüksaraç, E. Arkan, H. Alkan, H., and E. Harirchian, “Comparison of seismic and structural parameters of settlements in the east Anatolian fault zone in light of the 6 February Kahramanmaraş earthquakes,“ Infrastructures, 9(12), 219, 2024.
74. B. Zengin and F. Aydin, “The effect of material quality on buildings moderately and heavily damaged by the Kahramanmaraş earthquakes,“ Appl. Sci., 13(19), 10668, 2023.
75. S. Antoniou and R. Pinho, SeismoStruct—Seismic Analysis Program by Seismosoft: Technical User Manual. Pavia, Italy: Seismosoft, 2003.
76. H. Bilgin and B. Plaku, “Influence of confined concrete models on the seismic response of rc frames,“ Struct. Durab. Health Monit., 18(3), 1–26, 2024.
77. H. Krawinkler and G. D. P. K. Seneviratna, "Pros and cons of a pushover analysis of seismic performance evaluation," Eng. Struct., 20(4), 452–464, 1998.
78. M. R. Shendkar, D. P. N. Kontoni, E. Işık, S. Mandal, P. R. Maiti, and E. Harirchian, “Influence of masonry ınfill on seismic design factors of reinforced‐concrete buildings,“ Shock Vibr., 2022(1), 5521162, 2022.
79. A. K. Chopra and R. K. Goel, “A modal pushover analysis procedure for estimating seismic demands for buildings,“ Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 31(3), 561-582, 2002.
80. A. S. Elnashai “Advanced inelastic static (pushover) analysis for earthquake applications, “ Struct. Eng. Mech., 12(1), 51-69, 2001.
81. V. K. Papanikolaou, A. S. Elnashai, and J. F. Pareja, "Evaluation of conventional and adaptive pushover analysis II: comparative results," J. Earthq. Eng., 10(1), 127–151, 2006.
82. Seismosoft, SeismoStruct 2025—A computer program for static and dynamic nonlinear analysis of framed structures, 2025. [Online]. Available: http://www.seismosoft.com. Accessed: Dec. 5, 2025.