Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Earthquake performance assessment and rehabilitation of two historical unreinforced masonry buildings

  • Original Research Paper
  • Published:
Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The paper describes the earthquake performance assessment of two historical buildings located in Istanbul exposed to a Mw = 7+ earthquake expected to hit the city and proposes solutions for their structural rehabilitation and/or strengthening. Both buildings are unreinforced clay brick masonry (URM) structures built in 1869 and 1885, respectively. The first building is a rectangular-shaped structure rising on four floors. The second one is L-shaped with one basement and three normal floors above ground. They survived the 1894, Ms = 7.0 Istanbul Earthquake, during which widespread damage to URM buildings took place in the city. Earthquake ground motion to be used in performance assessment and retrofit design is determined through probabilistic and deterministic seismic hazard assessment. Strength characteristics of the brick walls are assessed on the basis of Schmidt hammer test results and information reported in the literature. Dynamic properties of the buildings (fundamental vibration periods) are measured via ambient vibration tests. The buildings are modelled and analyzed as three-dimensional assembly of finite elements. Following the preliminary assessment based on the equivalent earthquake loads method, the dynamic analysis procedure of FEMA 356 (Pre-standard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, 2000) and ASCE/SEI 41-06 (Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, 2007) is followed to obtain dynamic structural response of the buildings and to evaluate their earthquake performance. In order to improve earthquake resistance of the buildings, reinforced cement jacketing of the main load carrying walls and application of fiber reinforced polymer bands to the secondary walls are proposed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ambraseys NN, Finkel CF (1991) Long-term seismicity of Istanbul and of the Marmara sea region. Terra Nova 3: 527–539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ASCE/SEI 41-06: (2007) Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston

    Google Scholar 

  • Erdik M, Demircioğlu MB, Şeşetyan K, Durukal E, Siyahi B (2004) Assessment of probabilistic earthquake hazard in the Marmara region. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 24: 605–631

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eurocode 6 (1996) Design of masonry structures–Part 1-1: general rules for buildings: rules for reinforced and unreinforced masonry. European Committee for Standardization, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Eurocode 8 (1998) Design provisions for earthquake resistance of structures, Part 1–4: General rules: strengthening and repair of buildings. ENV 1998-1-4 European committee for standardization, Brussels

  • FEDRA v.05/05: (1997) Finite element analysis program for masonry buildings according to Eurocode 6. RUNET software & expert systems, Norway

    Google Scholar 

  • FEMA 303, NEHRP: (1997) Recommended provisions for seismic regulations for new buildings and other structures. Building Seismic Safety Council for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • FEMA 356: (2000) Pre-standard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), Reston

    Google Scholar 

  • IBC: (2006) International building code. International Code Council, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • LabView 8 (2007) National Instruments

  • NAVFAC (1992) Masonry structural design for buildings, Technical Manual No. 5-809-3, Navy manual, NAVFAC DM-2.9, Air force manual No. 88-3, Chapter 3, Departments of the Army, the Navy and the Air Force

  • SAP: (2000) Static and dynamic finite element analysis of structures, advanced v11. Computers and Structures Inc., California

    Google Scholar 

  • Specification for buildings to be built in seismic zones (2007) Ministry of public works and settlement. Government of Republic of Turkey

  • Tassios TP, Mamillan M (1994) Valutatzione strutturale dei monumenti antichi, ASSIRCO (Associazione italiana ristrutturazione e consolidamento costruzioni). Edizioni Kappa, Roma

    Google Scholar 

  • UNIDO/UNDP (1983) Construction under seismic condition in the Balkan region. vol. 5: Repair and Strengthening of reinforced concrete, stone and brick masonry buildings, Vienna

  • UNIDO/UNDP (1984) Construction under seismic condition in the Balkan region. vol. 6: repair and Strengthening of cultural monuments, Vienna

  • Tomazevic M, Lutman M, Weiss P (1993) The seismic resistance of historical urban buildings and the interventions in their floor systems: an experimental study. Mason Soc J 12(1): 1993

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomazevic M, Lutman M, Weiss P (1996) Seismic upgrading of old brick masonry urban houses: Tying of walls with steel ties. Earthq Spectra 12(3)

  • Tomazevic M (1999) Earthquake resistant design of masonry buildings. Imperial College Press, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ufuk Hancilar.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hancilar, U., Çaktı, E. & Erdik, M. Earthquake performance assessment and rehabilitation of two historical unreinforced masonry buildings. Bull Earthquake Eng 10, 307–330 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-011-9281-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-011-9281-3

Keywords

Navigation