Seismic damage assessment of under-construction industrial buildings: Insights from the february 2023 Türkiye-Syria earthquakes
Source abstract
Abstract
In the aftermath of major global earthquakes, not only do we face a profound impact on human lives, but also substantial economic losses are incurred. Such economic downturns are primarily attributed to the collapse or impairment of industrial structures, rendering them unusable and resulting in functional losses. In the wake of the devastating earthquakes of February 6, 2023, which caused significant loss of life and damaged over a million residential and industrial structures, Türkiye faced a monumental challenge in assessing and addressing the structural integrity of industrial constructions. The two main tremors, recorded with moment magnitudes 7.7 for Pazarcık and 7.6 for Elbistan, occurred along the East Anatolian Fault Zone (EAFZ), a significant tectonic boundary delineating the convergence zone of the Arabian and Anatolian tectonic plates. This study initially scrutinized the damages and underlying causes in industrial buildings with various supporting systems through field observations. Furthermore, a comprehensive three-dimensional non-linear numerical analysis was conducted on a three-story unfinished industrial structure that had suffered significant damage during the earthquakes. The time history analyses were performed using earthquake acceleration records closest to the structure, based on the finite element method. In creating the structural model, section and reinforcement details specified in the existing design project of the building were used, and both section capacities and non-linear behavior characteristics were defined according to TBEC 2018. The comparison between the damage conditions observed post-earthquake and those obtained from numerical analyses underlined the unchanged state of the structure, despite an increase in plastic rotation rates of structural elements after the Elbistan earthquake. Furthermore, relative to the thresholds set by the TBEC 2018, the observed peak displacements and story drifts did not surpass the code limits, despite the first floor showing concentrated story drift leading to permanent deformations. In addition to numerical analyses, comprehensive field observations reveal the critical influence of manufacturing and construction processes on the seismic resilience of structures. It is evident that enhancing the quality of construction materials, ensuring compliance with reinforcement steel's ductility requirements, and employing stringent quality control measures during the production phase are imperative to mitigate seismic risks.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: earthquake and tectonic studies · Seismic Performance and Analysis · Structural Response to Dynamic Loads
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (97)
Show source-provided references
1. Boğaziçi University, “Kandilli Observatory and Earthquake Research Institute Regional Earthquake-Tsunami Monitoring Center.” http://www.koeri.boun.edu.tr/sismo/2/tr/.
2. SBB, “2023 Kahramanmaraş and Hatay Earthquakes Report,” Pres. Repub. Türkiye Pres. Strateg. Budg., pp. 1–140, 2023, [Online]. Available: https://www.sbb.gov.tr/2023-kahramanmaras-ve-hatay-depremleri-raporu/.
3. Preconditioning the 2023 Kahramanmaraş (Türkiye) earthquake disaster10.1038/s43017-023-00411-2 ↗
4. Effect on RC buildings of 6 February 2023 Türkiye earthquake doublets and new doctrines for seismic design10.1016/j.engfailanal.2023.107521 ↗
5. AFAD, “Regarding 06 February Pazarcık (Kahramanmaraş)MW7.7 Elbistan (Kahramanmaraş) MW 7.6 Earthquakes Preliminary Assessment Report,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://deprem.afad.gov.tr/.
6. Moment magnitudes of two large Turkish earthquakes on February 6, 2023 from long-period coda10.1016/j.eqs.2023.02.008 ↗
7. CENC, “China Earthquake Networks Center.” https://data.earthquake.cn/datashare/report.shtml?PAGEID=earthquake_dzzyjz.
8. GCMT, “Global Centroid Moment Tensor.” https://www.globalcmt.org/.
9. GFZ, “German Research Center for Geosciences.” https://geofon.gfz-potsdam.de/.
10. INGV, “Istituto Nazionale Di Geofisica E Vulcanologia.”
11. USGS, “United States Geological Survey.”
12. The importance of indirect losses in the seismic risk assessment of industrial buildings – an application to precast RC buildings in Portugal10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.102949 ↗
13. K. Nasserasadi and M. Ghafory-Ashtiany, “Major Contributing Factors to Seismic Risk of Industrial Facilities,” 2008.
14. Precast industrial buildings in Southern Europe: loss of support at frictional beam-to-column connections under seismic actions10.1007/s10518-017-0196-5 ↗
15. A Damage Scenario for the 2012 Northern Italy Earthquakes and Estimation of the Economic Losses to Residential Buildings10.1007/s13753-017-0142-9 ↗
16. Low-LOD code-driven identification of the high seismic risk areas for industrial buildings in Italy10.1007/s10518-020-00867-3 ↗
17. TMMOB, “TMMOB 6 FEBRUARY EARTHQUAKES 8TH MONTH EVALUATION REPORT,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.tmmob.org.tr/icerik/tmmob-6-subat-depremleri-8-ay-degerlendirme-raporu-yayimlandi.
18. Performance of industrial buildings during the Emilia earthquakes in Northern Italy and recommendations for their strengthening10.1007/s10518-013-9466-z ↗
19. Failure of industrial structures induced by the Emilia (Italy) 2012 earthquakes10.1016/j.engfailanal.2013.02.009 ↗
20. Damage and collapses in industrial precast buildings after the 2012 Emilia earthquake10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.01.059 ↗
21. Failure of an industrial building during a recent earthquake in Türkiye10.1016/j.engfailanal.2004.09.004 ↗
22. Structural aspects and seismic performance of 1-STory Precast Buildings in Türkiye10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000316 ↗
23. Assessment of one story existing precast industrial buildings in Türkiye based on fragility curves10.1007/s10518-016-9956-x ↗
24. M. Posada and S.L. Wood, “SEISMIC PERFORMANCE OF PRECAST INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS IN TÜRKIYE,” 2002.
25. Seismic vulnerability assessment of precast RC industrial buildings in Türkiye10.1016/j.soildyn.2020.106539 ↗
26. Seismic performance of RC precast industrial buildings—learning with the past earthquakes10.1007/s41062-018-0191-y ↗
27. M. Rahnama and G. Morrow, “Performance of industrial facilities in the August 17, 1999, Izmit earthquake.,” 2000.
28. The impact of the 12 May 2008 Wenchuan earthquake on industrial facilities10.1016/j.jlp.2009.10.004 ↗
29. Field reconnaissance on seismic performance and functionality of Turkish industrial facilities affected by the 2023 Kahramanmaras earthquake sequence
30. S. Öztürk, E. Altunsu, O. Güneş, and A. Sarı, “Investigation of Industrial Structure Performances in the Hatay and Gaziantep Provinces During the Türkiye Earthquakes on February 6, 2023,” SSRN, 2023, doi: 10.2139/SSRN.4523367.10.2139/ssrn.4523367 ↗
31. Code-based damage assessment of existing precast industrial buildings following the February 6th, 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquakes (Pazarcık Mw 7.7 and Elbistan Mw7. 6)”
32. Investigation of precast reinforced concrete structures during the 6 february 2023 Türkiye earthquakes10.3390/su152014846 ↗
33. Structural damages in masonry buildings in Adıyaman during the Kahramanmaraş (Turkiye) earthquakes (Mw 7.7 and Mw 7.6) on 06 February 2023
34. Investigating the structural damage in Hatay province after Kahramanmaraş-Türkiye earthquake sequences
35. Structural Failures of Adobe Buildings during the February 2023 Kahramanmaraş (Türkiye) Earthquakes10.3390/app13158937 ↗
36. Damage assessment of Siverek Castle during the Kahramanmaraş Earthquakes (Mw 7.7 and Mw 7.6) on 06 February 2023: remediation and strengthening proposals10.1016/j.enggeo.2024.107511 ↗
37. Structural damage evaluation of mosques and minarets in Adıyaman due to the 06 February 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquakes
38. Structural damage assessment of reinforced concrete buildings in Adıyaman after Kahramanmaraş (Türkiye) Earthquakes on 6 February 202310.1016/j.engfailanal.2023.107799 ↗
39. Structural damage observed in reinforced concrete buildings in Adiyaman during the 2023 Turkiye Kahramanmaras Earthquakes10.1016/j.istruc.2023.105578 ↗
40. E. Işık, F. Avcil, R. İzol, A. Büyüksaraç, H. Bilgin, E. Harirchian, E. Arkan, “Field Reconnaissance and Earthquake Vulnerability of the RC Buildings in Adıyaman during 2023 Türkiye Earthquakes.” Applied Sciences 14, no. 7: 2860. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14072860.10.3390/app14072860 ↗
41. Performance of RC buildings after Kahramanmaraş Earthquakes: lessons toward performance based design10.1007/s11803-023-2206-8 ↗
42. F. Avcil, E. Işık, R. İzol et al. “Effects of the February 6, 2023, Kahramanmaraş earthquake on structures in Kahramanmaraş city”. Nat Hazards 120, 2953–2991, 2024. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-023-06314-1.10.1007/s11069-023-06314-1 ↗
43. The effect of material quality on buildings moderately and heavily damaged by the Kahramanmaraş Earthquakes10.3390/app131910668 ↗
44. Geotechnical and Structural Damages Caused by the 2023 Kahramanmaraş Earthquakes in Gölbaşı (Adıyaman)10.3390/app14052165 ↗
45. Turkish Statistical Institute (TÜİK). (2023). Construction Permits Statistics. Retrieved June 10, 2024, from https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Kategori/GetKategori?p=yapi-izin-istatistikleri-105&dil=1.
46. Disaster and Emergency Management Authority (AFAD). (2023). “Earthquake Impact and Structural Evaluation Report.” Retrieved from https://www.afad.gov.tr/.
47. Turkish Chamber of Civil Engineers (İMO). (2023). “Earthquake Report.” Retrieved from https://www.imo.org.tr/.
48. Eldar, B., and Singh, G. (2022). Analysis of irregular multistorey buildings with and without floating columns under seismic loading. Materials Today: Proceedings.10.1016/j.matpr.2022.11.214 ↗
49. Developing a Regression Model for Predicting the Seismic Input Energy of RC Buildings Using 6 February 2023 Kahramanmaraş Earthquake10.46810/tdfd.1362191 ↗
50. Analysis of progressive collapse of building using ETABS
51. Seismic performance assessment of a low-rise thin reinforced concrete wall building with unconnected fiber reinforced elastomeric isolators using real-time hybrid simulations
52. The earthquake catalogues for Turkey
53. A homogeneous earthquake catalogue for Turkey10.5194/nhess-21-2059-2021 ↗
54. Alsinawi S.A., Baban S.G., Issa A.S. (1985). Historical seismicity of the Arab region. IASPEI/UNESCO Working Group on Historical Seismograms and Earthquakes. Tokyo.
55. Ambraseys N.N. (2009). Earthquakes in the Mediterranean and Middle East: a multidisciplinary study of seismicity up to 1900. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139195430 ↗
56. Revision of the tsunami catalogue affecting Turkish coasts and surrounding regions10.5194/nhess-11-273-2011 ↗
57. Surface ruptures along the Maras segment of the East from Tectonic and GPS data
58. Historical earthquake activity of the northern part of the Dead Sea Fault Zone, southern Türkiye10.1016/j.tecto.2006.08.005 ↗
59. A comparative analysis of seismic and structural parameters for historical period earthquakes in Türkiye.
60. Şeşetyan, K., Stucchi, M., Castelli, V., & Gómez Capera, A.A. (2023). Kahramanmaraş-Gaziantep Türkiye M7. 7 Earthquake, 6 February 2023 (04: 17 GMT+ 03: 00) Large historical earthquakes of the earthquake-affected region: a preliminary report.
61. Temporary seismic quiescence: SE Türkiye10.1111/j.1365-246X.1989.tb04453.x ↗
62. Slip rates and seismic potential on the East Anatolian Fault System using an improved GPS velocity field10.1016/j.jog.2016.01.001 ↗
63. Probabilistic seismic-hazard assessment for east anatolian fault zone using planar fault source models10.1785/0120170009 ↗
64. Active seismotectonics of the East Anatolian Fault10.1093/gji/ggac045 ↗
65. The overall-subshear and multi-segment rupture of the 2023 Mw7. 8 Kahramanmaraş, Turkey earthquake in millennia supercycle.10.1038/s43247-023-01030-x ↗
66. A. Kürçer, H. Elmacı, E. Özdemir, C. Güven, and S. Özalp, “February 06, 2023 Kahramanmaraş Earthquakes (Mw=7.6, Mw=7.7) Field Observation and Evaluation Report, Mineral Research and Exploration Institute, Ankara (in Turkish),” 2023.
67. The East Anatolian Fault: a major structure in eastern Türkiye10.1016/0012-821X(76)90038-8 ↗
68. Sengor, A.M.C., Gorur, N. & Saroglu, F. Strike-slip faulting and related basin formation in zones of tectonic escape: Türkiye as a case study. In: Biddle, K., & Christie-Blick, N. (Eds)., Strike-slip Faulting and Basin Formation. Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, Special Publication 37, Tulsa, OK (1985).10.2110/pec.85.37.0227 ↗
69. Global Positioning System constraints on plate kinematics and dynamics in the eastern Mediterranean and Caucasus10.1029/1999JB900351 ↗
70. GPS constraints on continental deformation in the Africa-Arabia-Eurasia continental collision zone and implications for the dynamics of plate interactions10.1029/2005JB004051 ↗
71. Türkiye'nin Neotektoniğinin Esasları.
72. Tethyan evolution of Türkiye: a plate tectonic approach10.1016/0040-1951(81)90275-4 ↗
73. Türkiye Earthquake Hazard Map, Disaster and Emergency Management Authority, AFAD. Available online: https://tdth.afad. gov.tr/ (accessed on 10 December 2023).
74. Structural damages observed in buildings after the January 24, 2020 Elazığ-Sivrice earthquake in Türkiye.
75. Toplu, E., Kayatürk, D., & Arslan, Ş. Comparative analysis of peak ground accelerations considering epicenter distances in Hatay and Kahramanmaraş provinces during the 2023 Pazarcık earthquake.10.31462/icearc.2023.sme304 ↗
76. The East Anatolian Fault: geometry, segmentation and jog characteristics. Geological Society, London10.1144/SP372.14 ↗
77. Parlak, O., Yavuzoğlu, A., Bayrak, A., Karayazı, O., Olgun, S.̧, 2023. 06 Şubat 2023 Ekinözü (Kahramanmaraş) Depremi (Mw 7,6) Saha Gözlemleri ve Değerlendirmeler. MTA Genel Müdürlüğü, Rapor No: 14139, 99s., Ankara.
78. Turkish Accelerometric Database and Analysis System. Available online: https://tadas. afad.gov.tr/ (accessed on 10 December 2023).
79. Fault modeling around southern Anatolia using the aftershock sequence of the Kahramanmaraş earthquakes (Mw= 7.7 and Mw= 7.6) and an interpretation of potential field data
80. How long the Mw≥ 5 aftershocks of the 6 February 2023 Mw 7.8 Turkiye earthquake shall continue10.1007/s11069-023-05953-8 ↗
81. Investigation of RC Buildings after 6 February 2023, Kahramanmaraş, Türkiye Earthquakes.10.3390/buildings13071789 ↗
82. Braided river deposits related to progressive Miocene surface uplift in Kahraman Maras area, SE Türkiye.10.1002/(SICI)1099-1034(199901/06)34:1/2<159::AID-GJ819>3.0.CO;2-Z ↗
83. Fay Üzerinde Yaşayan Kentlerimiz: Kahramanmaraş Raporu-9, TMMOB, Jeoloji Mühendisleri Odası, 2021.
84. S.K. Hüsing, W.J. Zachariasse, D.J. Van Hinsbergen, W. Krijgsman, M. Inceöz, M. Harzhauser, A. KrohOligocene–Miocene basin evolution in SE Anatolia, Türkiye: constraints on the closure of the eastern Tethys gateway London , Geological Society , 311 Special Publications2009, , 107–132.10.1144/SP311.4 ↗
85. Türkiye Building Earthquake Code (TBEC:2018), (in Turkish), Minist. Public Work. Settl., 2018.
86. AFAD T.A.D.A.S.. (n.d.). TADAS (Turkish Earthquake Data Center). Retrieved from https://tadas.afad.gov.tr.
87. European Committee for Standardization (2004). Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance - Part 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings (EN 1998-1:2004). Brussels: CEN.
88. TS 708, Çelik - Betonarme için - Donatı çeliği, 2016.
89. Effect of carbon content on the structure and mechanical properties of high-strength weldable steel 03G4N2MAF10.1007/BF00705388 ↗
90. W.F. Smith and J. Hashemi, (2006). Foundations of Mater. Sci. and Eng., 4th ed., McGraw-Hill, Higher Education, Boston, p. 388.
91. TS EN 206, Beton - Özellik, performans, imalat ve uygunluk, 2021.
92. TS EN 13670, Beton yapıların inşaası, 2010.
93. Residual flexural strength of corroded reinforced concrete beams10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.04.018 ↗
94. TS 500, Betonarme yapıların tasarım ve yapım kuralları, 2013.
95. T.S. EN 1992-1, Beton yapıların tasarımı, 2005.
96. Performance of precast concrete structures in October 2011 Van earthquake, Türkiye10.1680/macr.13.00097 ↗
97. Giandomenico Toniolo, Antonella Colombo, Precast concrete structures: the lessons learned from the L’Aquila earthquake, Structural ConcreteVolume 13, Issue 2, DOI: 10.1002/suco.201100052.10.1002/suco.201100052 ↗