Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering

, Volume 6, Issue 3, pp 505–517 | Cite as

Investigation of dynamic response of masonry minaret structures

  • Adem Dogangun
  • Ramazan Acar
  • Halil Sezen
  • Ramazan Livaoglu
Original Research Paper


Almost all historical minarets in Turkey were constructed using cut stone, masonry blocks or combination of these two materials. The structural and geometrical properties of each masonry minaret, or slender tower structure, depend on many factors including the structural knowledge and applications at the time of construction, experience of the architect or engineer, seismicity of the region, and availability of construction materials in that area. Recent earthquakes in Turkey have shown that most masonry minarets in high seismic regions are vulnerable to structural damage and collapse. In this study, in order to investigate the dynamic behavior of historical unreinforced masonry minarets, three representative minarets with 20, 25, and 30 m height were modeled and analyzed using two ground motions recorded during the 1999 Kocaeli and Duzce, Turkey earthquakes. The modal analyses of the models have shown that the structural periods and the overall structural response are influenced by the minaret height and spectral characteristics of the input motion. The dynamic displacement and axial stress time histories are computed at the critical points on the minarets. During recent earthquakes, most minaret failures occurred above the base of the structure. Consistent with the observed response, the largest stresses were calculated at the same location.


Masonry minaret Dynamic analysis Earthquakes Structural damage 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Acar R, Livaoglu R, Dogangun A et al (2007) The effects of subsoils on the seismic response of reinforced concrete cylindrical minarets. Paper presented at the 5th international conference on seismology and earthquake engineering, Tehran–Iran, 13–16 May 2007Google Scholar
  2. Bayulke N (1998) Structural damage in 27 June 1998 Adana-Ceyhan earthquake, General Directorate of Disaster AffairsGoogle Scholar
  3. Dogangun A (2004) Performance of reinforced concrete buildings during the May 1, 2003 Bingol earthquake in Turkey. Eng Struct 26: 841–856CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dogangun A, Acar R, Livaoglu R et al (2006) Performance of masonry minarets against earthquakes and winds in Turkey. In Hamid A (ed) Proceedings of the First International Conference on Restoration of Heritage Masonry Structures, Cairo-Egypt, 2006Google Scholar
  5. Dogangun A, Sezen H, Tuluk OI et al (2007) Traditional Turkish masonry minarets and their earthquake damage. Int J Archit Heritage: Conserv Anal Restor 1: 1–21Google Scholar
  6. El Attar AG, Saleh AM, Zaghw AH et al (2005) Conservation of a slender historical Mamluk-style minaret by passive control techniques. Struct Control Health Monit 12: 157–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Erdik M, Uckan E, Sesetyan K et al (2002) Feb. 3, 2002 Sultandagi (Turkey) Earthquake, report by the department of earthquake engineering. KOERI, Bogazici UniversityGoogle Scholar
  8. Eurocode 8, EN 1998-6 (2005) Design of structures for earthquake resistance – Part 6: towers, masts and chimneys. European Standard, European Committee for StandardizationGoogle Scholar
  9. Firat YG (2001) A study of the structural response of minarets in the 1999 Anatolian earthquakes. M.Sc.Thesis. Purdue UniversityGoogle Scholar
  10. JSCE Committee (1999) Damage to domes, minarets and historical structures. Report on Kocaeli earthquake, Turkey, Japan Society of Civil EngineersGoogle Scholar
  11. Karaesmen E, Yakut A, Senkaya E et al (1992) A preliminary study of the 13 March 1992 Erzincan earthquake. Report, Middle East Technical UniversityGoogle Scholar
  12. Kohnke P (2006) Theory Manual of ANSYS. 12th edn. SAS IP, IncGoogle Scholar
  13. Motosaka M, Somer A (2002) Ground motion directionality inferred from a survey of minaret damage during the 1999 Kocaeli and Düzce Turkey earthquakes. J Seismol 6: 419–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Nuhoglu A, Sahin S (2005) Sanayi bacalarının ve minarelerin dinamik davranısları (Dynamic behavior of industrial chimneys and minarets). Paper presented at the 1st Earthquake Symposium, Kocaeli–Turkey, 23–25 March 2007 (in Turkish)Google Scholar
  15. Oguzmert M (2002) Dynamic behaviour of masonry minarets. M.Sc.Thesis, Istanbul Technical UniversityGoogle Scholar
  16. Sezen H, Fırat GY, Sozen MA et al (2003) Investigation of the performance of monumental structures during the 1999 Kocaeli and Duzce earthquakes. Paper presented at the 5th National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Istanbul–Turkey, 26–30 May 2003Google Scholar
  17. Sezen H, Acar R, Dogangun A, Livaoglu R (2008) Dynamic analysis and seismic performance of reinforced concrete minarets. Eng Struct, doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.11.005 vol. 30 [in print]
  18. Taşkın B, Özdemir P, Özel NM et al (2003) 06 Haziran 2000, Orta Çankırı Depreminin Deǧerlendirilmesi (Evaluation of Orta-Çankiri June 06, 2000 earthquake). Paper presented at the 5th National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Istanbul–Turkey, 26–30 May 2003Google Scholar
  19. TEC (2007) Specification for buildings to be built in disaster areas. Ministry of Public Works and Settlement, TurkeyGoogle Scholar
  20. Wenk T, Lacave C, Peter K et al (1998) The Adana-Ceyhan Earthquake of June 27, 1998. Report on the reconnaissance mission from July 6–12, 1998 of the Swiss Society of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics (SGEB)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adem Dogangun
    • 1
  • Ramazan Acar
    • 1
  • Halil Sezen
    • 2
  • Ramazan Livaoglu
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringKaradeniz Technical UniversityTrabzonTurkey
  2. 2.Civil and Environmental Engineering and Geodetic ScienceThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA
  3. 3.Department of Civil Engineering, Gümüşhane Engineering FacultyKaradeniz Technical UniversityGumushaneTurkey

Personalised recommendations