Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Earthquake Analysis of A School Project With Tbdy 2018: December 2019
Earthquake Analysis of A School Project With Tbdy 2018: December 2019
net/publication/338117377
CITATIONS READS
0 1,932
3 authors, including:
All content following this page was uploaded by Adem Atmaca on 23 December 2019.
Key words: 2018 Turkish earthquake code, SAP 2000, Base shear forces, 2007
regulation on buildings in earthquake zones
INTRODUCTION
TDY 2007 earthquake regulation consists of four earthquake zones. N the other hand,
earthquake zone areas aren’t defined in the new earthquake regulation TBDY 2018.
The new regulation focused on the specific site of earthquake risk and ground
behaviour. Therefore the related results can be obtained with locational earthquake
datas. There are some other revisions in TBDY 2018.
The main purpose of this study is to show the differences between the TDY 2007 and
TBDY 2018 earthquake regulation of the Turkey and their structural analysis results.
A school project with different structural design configurations analysed for this
purpose. The linear calculation method is carried on by equivalent seismic load
method according to the TDY 2007 and TBDY 2018 earthquake regulations for frames
with shear walls and reinforcement concrete columns models with SAP2000 software.
UEMK 2019 Proceedings Book 1295
24/25 October 2019 Gaziantep University, TURKEY
In Turkey, the first earthquake regulations are taken with some revisions from Italy in
1940. This revised regulation was modified as a result of severe earthquakes, changing
material and structural techniques and technological developments. In order to fulfil
the requirements of the earthquake regulations, the labour of the buildings must also
comply with the project. Earthquake performance was found to be incompatible with
the regulations or significant design deficiencies at the time of construction of many
buildings. For example, when a project designed and constructed in 1987 is examined,
it does not comply with the 1975 ABYYHY rules in terms of design. It is seen that the
structure was designed according to the rules of 1968 ABYYHY or it contains big
deficiencies according to 1975 ABYYHY. (Ellul F et al., 2003)
The structural models of the study are designed with linear and non-linear methods
according to the TDY 2007 and TBDY 2018 earthquake regulations. Linear earthquake
calculation used as equivalent earthquake load method. There are many differences in
the parameters used in model designs. Information on these parameters are shown
below (Figures 1 and 2).
UEMK 2019 Proceedings Book 1296
24/25 October 2019 Gaziantep University, TURKEY
Figure 1.Frames with Shear Walls and Reinforcement Concrete Columns Side View
Figure 2. Frames with Shear Walls and Reinforcement Concrete Columns 3D View
There are many differences between the two regulations. While earthquake zones exist
in the previous earthquake regulation, the new regulation examines the site specific
earthquake risk and ground behaviour. There are also changes related to earthquake
ground motion. In the 2007 earthquake regulation, the acceleration coefficient was
taken as the only value according to the region where the structure is located. The new
regulation takes different values for the short and long period coefficients. There are
differences in definitions of ground classes. In the previous regulation the ground class
was divided into 4 classes (Z1, Z2, Z3, and Z4). In the new regulation the ground class
is divided into 5 classes. (ZA, ZB, ZC, ZD, ZE, ZF).There is also a change in the building
importance coefficient. The building importance coefficient used in the previous
earthquake regulation changed to 1.4 value 1.5. The new regulation includes criteria
for earthquake design classes and building height classes. One of the most important
changes in the new regulation is the use of the coefficient of behaviour and the
coefficient of strength (D).
UEMK 2019 Proceedings Book 1297
24/25 October 2019 Gaziantep University, TURKEY
In this study, project of a school building that is located in Gaziantep city was used.
The school is located in the 3rd earthquake zone according to the 2007 earthquake
regulation. The ground class was taken as Z2 from the ground survey report. Since the
structure is located in the 3rd earthquake zone, the effective ground acceleration
coefficient Ao= 0.2 is taken from Table 2.2 of the 2007 earthquake regulation. The
building significance coefficient is 1.4 for school building. The structural behaviour
coefficient is R=7 for the frames with shear walls and reinforcement concrete columns
system.
The results of the calculations according to TDY 2007 and TBDY 2018 earthquake
regulations are in Figures 3-6 as 4 different evaluations: structure displacement,
maximum force generated in the structure, base shear force and structure rotation
moment.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings of this study display many differences between TBDY 2018 earthquake
regulation and TDY 2007 earthquake regulation. The differences are mainly based on
the change in some coefficients such as building importance, structural behaviour,
acceleration coefficient and soil safety coefficients. Structural analysis results exhibit
that these parameters have a significant impact on the calculations of structural
systems. In conclusion;
UEMK 2019 Proceedings Book 1299
24/25 October 2019 Gaziantep University, TURKEY
The joint displacement in TBDY 2018 and TDY 2007 earthquake regulations are
0.44cm and 0.34cm in X direction respectively. The joint displacement in TBDY 2018
and TDY 2007 earthquake regulations are 0.88 cm and 0.78 cm in Y direction
respectively. The displacement results of the TBDY 2018 earthquake regulation are
higher than the 2007 earthquake regulation results.
TBDY 2018 Shear force results provides higher than TDY 2007 earthquake
regulations. The 2007 earthquake results are 20.2 t in the X direction and 21.24 t in Y
direction. TBDY 2018 earthquake regulation shear force results are 25.91 t in X direction
and 24.93 t in Y direction.
The base reaction values of TDY 2007 earthquake regulations are 408, 75 t in X
direction and 377.99 t in Y direction. The base reaction values of the TBDY 2018
regulations are 541.96 t in X direction and 425.95 t in the Y direction.
The overturning moment results both regulation results are very close to each
other as -0.17 rad in X direction and 0.12 rad in Y direction.
These findings provide us that TBDY 2018 earthquake regulations stay in more safer
side than the TDY 2007 earthquake regulations. Results provides that building design
with TBDY 2018 earthquake regulation is , the analysis of this building with 2007
earthquake regulation will be safer.
REFERENCES
Ellul, F., Dina, D., 2003. The Bingol, Turkey Earthquake of the 1st of May 2003,
University of Bath Architecture and Civil Engineering Department, England, pp. 10-
38.
Alyamaç, K. E. and Erdoğan, A. S. (2005) ‘Geçmişten Günümüze Afet Yönetmelikleri
ve Uygulamada Karşılaşılan Tasarım Hataları’, Deprem Sempozyumu, pp. 707–715.
Deprem, N. A. et al. (2018) ‘Resmî Gazete’, 30364(1).
Türkiye Deprem Yönetmeliği, Mart, (2007), Deprem Bölgelerinde Yapılacak Binalar
Hakkında Yönetmelik”, Bayındırlık ve Ġskan Bakanlığı, Ankara
Ge, B. and Hükümler, E. L. (2007) ‘Deprem bölgelerinde de yapilacak binalar hakkında
yönetmelik’.
Türkiye Bina Deprem Yönetmeliği, Mart, (2018), DEPREM ETKİSİ ALTINDA
BİNALARIN TASARIMI İÇİN ESASLAR.