STRUCTURAL SYSTEM IN DESIGN

T U R K E Y E A R T H Q U A K E 2 0 20
CASE STUDY

SUBMITTED BY- AKINALI H AYEMI|210BARCH061

 LOCATION-ELAZIĞ PROVINCE,
EASTERN TÜRKIYE.
MAGNITUDE-6.8
SIGNIFICANT DAMAGE AND
CASUALTIES WERE REPORTED, WITH
41 DEATHS AND AT LEAST 1607
INJURIES.
BUILDING DAMAGE ASSESSMENT
STUDIES- 263 COLLAPSED, 7698
SEVERELY DAMAGED, 1540
MODERATELY DAMAGED, 15,671 LESS
DAMAGED, AND 25,851 UNDAMAGED
BUILDINGS WERE DETERMINED AND
558 BUILDINGS IN THE AREA WERE
LISTED AS “URGENTLY DEMOLISH”.

INTRODUCTION
CONCRETE QUALITY

Concrete strength requirements increased over time in Türkiye earthquake codes

(TECs).
Concrete strength classes ranged from C6 to C12 in examined buildings, falling short
of standards. Fig.1.Non-granulometry aggregate, insufficient dosage
and poor-quality concrete samples in columns.
Majority of concrete samples showed poor strength, indicating subpar concrete
quality.
Construction involved manual pouring using conventional techniques, resulting in
subpar concrete.
Negative factors observed in concrete included poor granulometry of aggregates,
insufficient cement dosage, and heterogeneous mixture.
Presence of wooden waste materials and large river aggregate in concrete further
compromised quality.
Cement dosage kept very low, leading to inadequate mixing and poor concrete
composition.
Fig.2.Crusher-run aggregate and wood waste materials
Fractures occurred at the cement-aggregate interface due to improper mixing. detected in columns.
Concrete settlements in beams and slab elements were incorrect, leading to exposed
and corroded reinforcements.
Segregation observed in bearing elements due to poor concrete mixture, mold work,
and lack of vibration during placement.
Segregation compromised structural integrity and contributed to the failure of
bearing elements in many structures.

Fig.3.Examples of beams produced with poor-quality

concrete which exposed to moisture and corroded.
THE USE OF STIRRUP
In Elazığ, Sivrice, and Malatya-Pütürge, many buildings lacked proper stirrup
arrangement.
Absence of stirrup tightening at column ends and in column-beam joints was
noted.
Stirrups were often positioned in horizontally angled figures, deviating from
code requirements.

Fig.5.Stirrup application errors and damages.

Fig.4.TBEC2018 Special earthquake stirrups and crossties
REINFORCEMENT ARRANGEMENTS
1. Issues with Reinforcement Applications:
"Hooked clamping method" used for longitudinal reinforcement clamping at
the lower end of ground floor columns.
Risk of reinforcement buckling and concrete cover layer breakage associated
with hook placement.
Mild steel reinforcement is commonly used in structures, with compression
reinforcement utilizing hooks.
2. Insufficient Starter Bar Length:
Inadequate length of starter bars left at lower ends of columns.
Fig.6.Application errors in compression reinforcement.
Column stirrups not continued in the column-beam connection area,
compromising structural integrity.
3. Reinforcement Corrosion:
Corrosion was observed due to a lack of concrete cover during casting and
exposure to weather conditions.
Corrosion further exacerbated structural vulnerabilities.
4. Other Damages Observed:
Shear damage, longitudinal reinforcement buckling, and separation in
concrete cover were observed.
The spacing distance of the stirrup higher than the values specified in
Earthquake Code led to plastic joint formation at element ends.
Fig.7.Structural damage due to insufficient stirrup
applications.
THE EFFECT OF WEAK STOREY, SOFT STOREY AND SHORT COLUMN

When the collapsed and heavily damaged buildings in the

region were examined, it was determined that the columns
received greater shear forces than the values predicted in the
design because of some reasons such as the use of lower
floors as shops, the use of large heavy cantilevers, and the
intensive use of band windows on the ground floor. Shear Fig.8.Malatya Doğanyol band window and short column damages.
failures occurred in the columns under the effect of these
forces and caused the structures to collapse completely. (Fig.
16). Moreover, in the investigations, it was seen that heavy
cantilevers caused great damage to the buildings and such
planning should be avoided in earthquake zones.
It was determined that there were 70 flats in Mavi Göl
Apartments consisting of A and B blocks in Gezin town of Fig.10.Mavi Göl Apartment in
Fig.9. City Center of Elazığ, heavy cantilever damage. Gezin/Maden.
Elazığ-Maden district and there were 7 shops under the
building. When the building before the earthquake was
examined, it was seen that there was a weak and soft storey
formation because of the shops and there were heavy
cantilevers in the buildings. (Fig. 18). Moreover, it was observed
in many buildings that in addition to structural damage, the
plumbing pipes were laid unconsciously by giving harm to the
structural elements.

Fig.11.Passing the plumbing pipes from the structural elements.

 STRUCTURAL FAILURES OF THE MASONRY STRUCTURES

Fig.12.An example of a heavily damaged Fig.13.An example of a stone masonry Fig.14.Heavy earthen roof masonry Fig.15.Adobe building debris.
masonry building with stone walls, a part structure whose roof was destroyed and damage.
of whose walls on the same plane walls were damaged.
collapsed.

Fig.17..The debris of a building built with Fig.18.Damages of masonry structures built with blend bricks.
Fig.16.Damage of a masonry structure with
a wooden seating roof. masonry bricks and blend bricks.
Fig.19.Masonry structure damage built with Fig.20.Masonry wooden structure debris.
briquette.
TABLE 1-OBSERVED STRUCTURAL FAILURES AND FAILURE REASONS IN BUILDINGS.
DESI RABLE FEAT URE S
THAT PR OTECTED TH E
BUI LDI NGS D UR I N G TH AT
EARTHQUAKE
DESI RABLE FEAT URE S
THAT PR OTECTED TH E
BUI LDI NGS D UR I N G TH AT
EARTHQUAKE
DESI RABLE FEAT URE S
THAT PR OTECTED TH E
BUI LDI NGS D UR I N G TH AT
EARTHQUAKE
SOURCE
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214
509523000657
KAARWAN INDIA