The damage assessment of masonry structures and engineering seismology studies (19–22 November 2021 Köprüköy earthquakes (Mw 5.1 and Mw 4.7) in Erzurum, Turkey)
Tóm tắt
The main purpose of this paper is to present the damage features of masonry structures and engineering seismology studies after the 19–22 November 2021 Köprüköy earthquakes (Mw 5.1 and Mw 4.7). The masonry structures damaged near the epicenter have been examined. Damages have been detected that such as vertical cracks in the walls of the masonry structures, out-of-plane bending of the walls, splits in the joints of the walls, and separation of the floors from the elements such as walls and roofs. The fact that the structures in the region do not receive an engineering service and that they are constructed without complying with the relevant earthquake regulations are thought to cause such damage. The damage in Topçu village of Köprüköy district in Erzurum is more than in other settlements. Microtremor measurements have been applied in Topçu Village to investigate dynamic soil features. The soil amplification factor and soil predominant period have been obtained ~ 6.8 and ~ 1.3 s for the first measurement and ~ 9.4 and ~ 1.3 s for second location, respectively. Also, Vs30, bedrock depth, vulnerability index, and shear strain parameters have been calculated using some empirical relations. High bedrock depth and low Vs30 values are obtained for both measurements. The vulnerability index and shear strain values also indicate that the vulnerability of the soil is high. In order to remain in the safe zone for structures in a possible future earthquake, it has been suggested that it should comply with the earthquake-soil-structure relationship and should be designed in accordance with the earthquake regulation standard.
Tài liệu tham khảo
AFAD Earthquake Report (2018) 30 October 1983 Şenkaya/Erzurum-Sarıkamış/Kars earthquake. Available: https://deprem.afad.gov.tr/tarihteBuAy?id=40. Accessed 2 July 2019
AFAD (2021) 19 November 2021 Köprüköy (Erzurum) Earthquake Mw 5.1 Preliminary Evaluation Report. Ankara https://deprem.afad.gov.tr/depremdokumanlari/2077. Accessed 23 Nov 2021
AFAD (2022) https://deprem.afad.gov.tr/sondepremler. Accessed 23 Nov 2021
Atmaca B, Demir S, Günaydın M, Altunişik AC, Hüsem M, Ateş Ş, Adanur S, Angin S (2020) Field investigation on the performance of mosques and minarets during the Elazig-Sivrice Earthquake. Am Soc Civil Eng 34(6):1–10
Aydın AC, Budak A, Uysal H (2003) Seismic behavior of rural buildings. J Fac Agric 35:209–219
Bayrak E, Özer Ç, Perk ÇŞ (2020) Stress tensor and Coulomb analysis for Erzurum and its surroundings (in Turkish with English abstract). Turk J Earthq Res 2(1):101–114
Bayraktar A, Coşkun N, Yalçın A (2007) Performance of masonry stone buildings during the March 25 and 28, 2004 Aşkale Erzurum Earthquakes in Turkey. J Perform Constr Facil 21(6):432–440
Bayülke N (1978) Behavior of brick masonry structures in earthquake. Earthq Res Inst Bull 22:26–42
Beyen K (2008) Structural identification for post-earthquake safety analysis of the Fatih mosque after the 17 August 1999 Kocaeli earthquake. Eng Struct 30:2165–2184
Beyen K, Tanırcan G (2015) Strong ground motion characteristics of the 2011 Van Earthquake of Turkey: implications of seismological aspects on engineering parameters. Earthq Struct 8(6):1363–1386
Birgoren G, Ozel O, Siyahi B (2009) Bedrock depth mapping of the coast south of Istanbul: comparison of analytical and experimental analyses. Turk J Earth Sci 18(2):315–329
Bozkurt E (2001) Neotectonics of Turkey–a synthesis. Geodin Acta 14(1–3):3–30
Çelebi O (2018) The effect of infill walls and damping systems on behaviors of reinforced concrete buildings against earthquake. J Disaster Risk 1(1):9–25
Celep Z (2018) Introduction to earthquake engineering and earthquake resistant structural design. Beta Press Release Distribution Istanbul, Turkey
Chopra A (1995) Dynamics of structures: theory and applications to earthquake engineering. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs
Doğangün A (2004) Performance of reinforced concrete buildings during the May 1, 2003 Bingöl earthquake in Turkey. Eng Struct 26(6):841–856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2004.02.005
Duman TY, Emre Ö (2013) The East Anatolian Fault: geometry, segmentation and jog characteristics. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, pp 495–529
Emre O, Duman TY, Ozalp S, Elmacı H, Olgun S, Saroglu F (2013) 1/1.250.000 scaled Turkey active fault map. General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration special publication. Available: http://www.mta.gov.tr/. Accessed 2 July 2019
Emre O, Duman TY, Ozalp S, Saroglu S, Olgun S, Elmacı H (2018) Active fault database of Turkey. Bull Earthq Eng 16:3229–3275
Erdik M, Kamer Y, Demircioğlu M, Şeşetyan K (2012) 23 October 2011 Van (Turkey) earthquake. Nat Hazards 64:651–665
Ghofrani H, Atkinson GM (2014) Site condition evaluation using horizontal-to-vertical response spectral ratios of earthquakes in the NGA-West 2 and Japanese databases. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 67:30–43
Gülkan P, Sucuoğlu H (1988) Determination of earthquake damages in rural structures. Earthq Res Bull 15(62):5–44
Hassani B, Atkinson GM (2016) Applicability of the site fundamental frequency as a Vs30 proxy for central and eastern North America. Seismol Soc Am Bull 106(2):653–664
Hubert-Ferrari A, Armijo R, King G (2002) Morphology, displacement, and slip rates along the North Anatolian Fault, Turkey. Geophys Res 107:22–35. https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JB000393
Ishihara K (1996) Soil behaviour in earthquake geotechnics. Oxford Engineering Science Series. Clarendon Press
İyisan R, Haşal M (2011) The basin edge effect on dynamic response: dinar basin model. J Tech 22:1499–1518
Kabeyasawa T, Shiohara H, Kudo K, Fujita K, Kusu K, Suzuki N, Kitayama K, Takahashi I, Kanata K, Kimura H, Kanno T, Okada H, Masuda Y, Tanaka H, Kono S, Kobayashi K, Kikuchi K, Kobayashi J, Arai H, Kuroki M, Yoshimura K, Nagao T, Watanabe H, Altay G, Kilic S, Erdik M, Yuzugullu O, Özel O, Karadogan F, Boduroglu H, Gulkan P (2000) Progress report on damage investigation after Kocaeli earthquake by Architectural Institute of Japan. Int J Hous Sci Appl 24:97–126
Koçyiğit A (1985) Karayazı fault. Bull Turk Geol Inst 28:67–72
Koçyiğit A, Canoğlu MC (2017) Neotectonics and seismicity of Erzurum pull-apart basin East Turkey. Russ Geol Geophys 58:99–122
Lekkas E, Vassilakis E (1999) Adana earthquake; peculiar damage distribution and seismotectonic characteristics. Trans Built Environ 38
Lermo L, Chávez-García FJ (1994) Are microtremors useful in site response evaluation. Bull Seismol Soc Am 84(5):1350–1364
MathWorks (2018) MATLAB Technical Documentation. http://www.mathworks.com/access/helpdesk_r13/help/toolbox/curvefit/ch_fitt9.html
McKenzie D (1972) Active tectonics of the Mediterranean region. Geophys J Int 30:109–185
Nakamura Y (1989) A method for dynamic characteristics estimation of subsurface using microtremor on the ground surface. Railw Q 30:25–53
Nakamura Y (1997) Seismic vulnerability indices for ground and structures using microtremor. In: World congress on railway research in Florence, Italy
Nakamura Y (2000) Clear identification of fundamental idea of Nakamura’s technique and its applications. In: 12th World conference on earthquake engineering Auckland, vol 2656
Nakamura Y (2019) What is the Nakamura method. Seismol Res Lett 90:1437–1443
Ozalaybey S, Zor E, Ergintav S, Tapirdamaz MC (2011) Investigation of 3-D basin structures in the Izmit Bay area (Turkey) by single-station microtremor and gravimetric methods. Geophys J Int 186(2):883–894
Ozer C, Kocadagistan ME, Perk S (2019) Earthquake monitoring network of Erzurum: ATANET. Int J Sci Technol Res 5(8):35–47
Saatçioğlu M, Bruneau M (1993) Performances of structures during the 1992 Erzincan earthquake. Can J Civ Eng 20:305–325
Şengör A (1979) The North Anatolian transform fault: its age, offset and tectonic significance. J Geol Soc 136:269–282
SESAME (2004) Guidelines for the Implementation of the H/V Spectral Ratio Technique on Ambient Vibrations: Measurements, Processing and Interpretation. http://sesamefp5.obs.ujfgrenoble.fr/Delivrables/Del-D23. Accessed 13 Apr 2018
Seyitoğlu G, Esat K, Kaypak B (2019) Internal deformation of Turkish-Iranian plateau in the Hinterland of Bitlis-Zagros suture zone. In: Saein A (ed) Developments in structural geology and tectonics, vol 3. Elsevier, pp 161–244
TBEC (2018) Turkey Building Earthquake Standarts. Regulation on Buildings to be Built in Disaster Areas Ministry of Public Works and Settlement Disaster Affairs. Ankara, Turkey
Tun M, Pekkan E, Ozel O, Guney Y (2016) An investigation into the bedrock depth in the Eskisehir Quaternary Basin (Turkey) using the microtremor method. Geophys J Int 207(1):589–607
URL-1 https://peer.berkeley.edu/
URL-2 https://birimler.atauni.edu.tr/deprem-arastirma-merkezi/
URL-3 https://birimler.atauni.edu.tr/insaat-muhendisligi/
URL-4 AFAD | https://tadas.afad.gov.tr
Wathelet M, Chatelain JL, Cornou C, Di Giulio G, Guillier B, Ohrnberger M, Savvaidis A (2020) Geopsy: a user-friendly open-source tool set for ambient vibration processing. Seismol Res Lett 91(3):1878–1889
Wessel P, Smith WHF, Scharroo R, Luis JF, Wobbe F (2013) Generic mapping tools: improved version released. Trans Am Geophys Union 94:409–410
Yalçınkaya E (2010) Why is the ground so important. Geophys Bull 63:77–80
Zhao JX, Zhang J, Asano A (2006) Attenuation relations of strong ground motion in Japan using site classification based on predominant period. Bull Seismol Soc Am 96(3):898–913