T.R.

GEBZE TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING

URBAN EARTHQUAKE RISK ASSESSMENT

ECE GÜRTEKİN (1801082639)

A REPORT SUBMITTED AS A GRADUATION PROJECT IN

CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

PROJECT SUPERVISORS
Assoc. Dr. Ahu MUTLU
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Abdullah Can ZÜLFİKAR
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Savaş KARABULUT
Assoc. Dr. Ülgen Mert TUĞSAL

GEBZE
2023
 T.R.
GEBZE TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING

URBAN EARTHQUAKE RISK ASSESSMENT

ECE GÜRTEKİN (1801082639)

A REPORT SUBMITTED AS A GRADUATION PROJECT IN

CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

PROJECT SUPERVISORS
Assoc. Dr. Ahu MUTLU
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Abdullah Can ZÜLFİKAR
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Savaş KARABULUT
Assoc. Dr. Ülgen Mert TUĞSAL

GEBZE
2023
 Summary

In this study, first of all, earthquake data from the official website of Kandilli
from 1900 to the present day were taken, and earthquakes were mapped over the
Marmara Region, colored according to magnitude and depth, by using the Pygmt
module in Python.

Then, in order to reveal the seismicity and earthquake risk of the Çayırova
region, which is limited to 40° 48' 44.5752'' North and 29° 22' 13.6092'' East, the
earthquakes in that region were listed, and seismic risk and recurrence period
calculations were made to investigate the seismicity of the study area. For
earthquakes that occurred between 1900-2022 in the study area, the earthquake risk
of the region was determined by using the magnitude-frequency statistical method
according to the Gutenberg and Richter relationship, based on the annual maximum
earthquakes. Using the data of earthquakes that occurred between 1900-2022,
magnitude-frequency correlation was determined, seismic risk and recurrence
period calculations were made.

As the third step, building inventory was started. Using the Çayırova
Municipality BELNET system, a total of 968 buildings were examined in detail,
examined according to many factors, and the building inventory was combined in
an excel file by entering the website "https://binariskdagilimi.streamlit.app" for
each building. Statistics of our buildings have been made according to various
factors and are shown on the following pages.

Following this process, estimated earthquake damage analyzes were calculated

for the regions by using the Earthquake Loss Estimation Routine (ELER) program,
which performs earthquake hazarda and damage analysis for the building inventory.
In the last stage, as a result of the analyzes carried out, the damage distributions in
the research areas were conveyed and mutual comparisons and evaluations were
made.

Keywords: Çayırova-Özgürlük Mahallesi, Pygmt Module, Building

Inventory, Earthquake Loss Estimation Routine(ELER), Earthquake Damage and
Risk Assessment

iii
 Özet

Bu çalışmada öncelikle Kandilli'nin resmi internet sitesinden 1900'den günümüze

deprem verileri alınmış, Python'da Pygmt modülü kullanılarak depremler
Marmara Bölgesi üzerinden büyüklük ve derinliklerine göre renklendirilmiş
olarak haritalanmıştır.

Daha sonra 40° 48' 44.5752'' Kuzey ve 29° 22' 13.6092'' Doğu ile sınırlı olan
Çayırova bölgesinin sismisitesini ve deprem riskini ortaya koymak amacıyla o
bölgedeki depremler listelenmiş, sismik risk ve çalışma alanının depremselliğini
araştırmak için tekrarlama periyodu hesaplamaları yapılmıştır. Çalışma alanında
1900-2022 yılları arasında meydana gelen depremler için, yıllık maksimum
büyüklüğe sahip depremler baz alınarak Gutenberg ve Richter ilişkisine göre
büyüklük-frekans istatistiksel yöntemi kullanılarak bölgenin deprem riski
belirlenmiştir. 1900-2022 yılları arasında meydana gelen depremlerin verileri
kullanılarak büyüklük-frekans korelasyonu belirlenmiş, sismik risk ve tekrarlanma
periyodu hesapları yapılmıştır.

Üçüncü adım olarak bina envanterine geçilmiştir. Çayırova Belediyesi BELNET

sistemi kullanılarak toplam 968 adet bina detaylı incelenmiş, birçok faktöre göre
değerlendirilmiş ve her biri için "https://binariskdagilimi.streamlit.app" web
sitesine girilerek bina envanteri bir excel dosyasında birleştirilmiştir.
Binalarımızın çeşitli faktörlerine göre istatistikleri yapılmıştır.

Bina envanteri tamamlandıktan sonra, deprem tehlike ve hasar analizi yapan

Earthquake Loss Estimation Routine (ELER) programı kullanılarak bölgeler için
tahmini deprem hasar analizleri hesaplanmıştır. Son aşamada ise yapılan analizler
sonucunda araştırma alanlarındaki hasar dağılımları aktarılarak karşılaştırma ve
değerlendirmeler yapılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Çayırova, Pygmt Modülü, Bina Envanteri, Deprem Kayıp

Tahmin Rutini (ELER), Deprem Hasar ve Risk Değerlendirmesi

iv
 THANKS

First of all, to all my proffesors who did not spare their support and help in
my undergraduate education,

To Çayırova Municipality, which provides information and documents for the

building inventory,

To Volkan Ergen, who did not spare his help in the ELER section,

To my family, who have provided all kinds of financial and moral support for
my education until now,

Since the project is a group effort, I would like to express my sincere thanks
to my esteemed teammates.

v
 TABLE OF CONTESTS
Summary .......................................................................................................................... iii
Özet .................................................................................................................................. iv
THANKS .......................................................................................................................... v
LIST OF ICONS AND ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................... viii

LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................... ix

LIST OF TABLES.................................................................................................................. x

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1
1.1 General Introduction ......................................................................................................... 2

1.2. Graduation Project Subject .............................................................................................. 3

1.3 Problem Description ......................................................................................................... 3

1.4 Hypothesis-Assumption.................................................................................................... 3

1.5 Purpose of the project ....................................................................................................... 3

1.6 Project Outcomes .............................................................................................................. 4

1.7 Limitations of the Study ................................................................................................... 4

1.8 Research Method .............................................................................................................. 4

2. LITERATURE RESEARCH ........................................................................................ 6

2.1 PyGMT ............................................................................................................................. 6

2.2. Street Survey Part ............................................................................................................ 8

2.2.1 Rapid assessment methods for Earthquake-Risk buildings ....................................... 8

2.2.2 Simplified Methods to Determine the Regional EQ Risk Distribution of
Buildings ............................................................................................................................. 9
2.3. Seismic Hazard Assessment .......................................................................................... 26

2.3.a. Deterministic Hazard Assessment ........................................................................... 27

2.3.b. Probabilistic Hazard Assessment ............................................................................ 27
2.4. ELER Methodology ....................................................................................................... 29

3. ANALYSES AND EVALUATIONS ......................................................................... 30

3.2.Street Surveying ............................................................................................................. 32

3.2.1.Building Typology and Performance Point Distrubation ...................................... 36

Building Risk Info .......................................................................................................... 38
3.2.2 Building Coding ....................................................................................................... 39
vi
 3.2.3 Building Coding Statistics ....................................................................................... 41
4.Seismic Hazard Assessment ........................................................................................ 42
4.2. Probabilistic Hazard Assessment................................................................................... 42

4.3 Deterministic Hazard Assessment .................................................................................. 45

Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 50
References ....................................................................................................................... 51

vii
 LIST OF ICONS AND ABBREVIATIONS

EQ: Earthquake
M: Magnitude
PGA: Peak Ground Acceleration
Log λ(m )=a-bm :Gutenberg Richter Scale

Sa Spectral Acceleration
KOERİ: Kandilli Observatory and Earthquake Research Institute
TDBY: Türkiye Bina Deprem Yönetmeliği
Sd : Spectral Displacement

ELER : Earthquake Loss Estimation Routine

viii
 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Özgürlük Neighbourhood ....................................................................................... 4
Figure 2: Representation of Last EQ in PYGMT ................................................................. 7
Figure 3: Reinforced Concrete Frame and Reinforced Concrete Frame and Shear
Wall System ............................................................................................................................ 11
Figure 4: Number of Floors ................................................................................................... 12
Figure 5 Building Construction Year ................................................................................... 14
Figure 6 : Building Construction Date ................................................................................. 14
Figure 7 Build Number Stage ................................................................................................ 14
Figure 8: Coordinate Input ................................................................................................... 15
Figure 9:Soil Type Input........................................................................................................ 17
Figure 10:Spectral Acceleration Input ................................................................................. 18
Figure 11: Building Visual Quality Input ............................................................................ 19
Figure 12:Vertical Irregularities Input ................................................................................ 20
Figure 13:Soft/Weak Floor Input ......................................................................................... 20
Figure 14:Heavy Overhang Input ......................................................................................... 21
Figure 15:Short Column Effect Input .................................................................................. 22
Figure 16: Irregularities in Plan Input ................................................................................. 24
Figure 17: Building Status Input .......................................................................................... 25
Figure 18:Eler Methodology ................................................................................................. 29
Figure 19: Display of Earthquakes in the Marmara Region .............................................. 30
Figure 20:Defining Turkey Map in Phyton ......................................................................... 30
Figure 21:Display of Earthquakes in the Çayırova Region................................................ 31
Figure 22: Rainforced Concrete Frame with Shear Wall Building ................................... 32
Figure 23:Vertical Irregularities in Structures ................................................................... 33
Figure 24:Heavy Overhang in Building ............................................................................... 33
Figure 25:Weak Floor Irregularity in Structure ................................................................. 34
Figure 26:Short Column Effect in Structure ....................................................................... 34
Figure 27:Locations and the Building Performance Points (PP) of the total 968
buildings analyzed, Çayırova/Kocaeli .................................................................................. 36
Figure 28: Distribution of Building Performance Point ..................................................... 37
Figure 29:Distrubution of Building Performance Point ..................................................... 37
Figure 30: Building Typology................................................................................................ 38
Figure 31: Building Type % .................................................................................................. 41
Figure 32: Number of Floors % ............................................................................................ 41
Figure 33: Construction Date % ........................................................................................... 42
Figure 34: LogN- Magnitude Graph .................................................................................... 42
Figure 35: Return Periods ..................................................................................................... 44
Figure 36:Probability of Exceedence .................................................................................... 44
Figure 37:Historical Earthquake Distrubition in Marmara Region ................................. 45
Figure 38:1754 Earthquake Input in ELER ........................................................................ 47
Figure 39:PGA Distrubition of 1754 Earthquake ............................................................... 48

ix
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Negative Parameters .............................................................................................. 35

Table 2:Negative Parameter Effects on Structure Performance Scores .......................... 35
Table 3: Building Risk Info .................................................................................................. 38
Table 4: Building Typology % ............................................................................................. 38
Table 5: Building Coding System ........................................................................................ 39
Table 6:Classifying Building According to Building Coding System ............................... 40
Table 7:Statistics of Building Coding System ..................................................................... 40
Table 8:Return Periods ......................................................................................................... 43
Table 9:Cumulative Frequency– LogN Values .................................................................. 43
Table 10:Historical Earthquakes ......................................................................................... 45
Table 11:All Historical Earthquakes Information Tables................................................. 46
Table 12:Table 12: PGA /PGV/Sa0.2/Sa1.0 Distrubition .................................................. 48
Table 13: Damage Analysis .................................................................................................. 49
Table 14:Damage Analysis According to Different Relation ............................................ 49

x
1. INTRODUCTION

It is necessary to take into account the damages and losses in terms of lives and
property caused by earthquakes, which occur in our country's earthquake zone.
Attempting to identify the losses that may be caused by earthquakes beforehand
will provide important information for taking necessary precautions before the
earthquake and reducing losses in terms of lives and property, as well as reducing
repair or reconstruction work. Therefore, making earthquake damage estimates is
of great importance for our country's concept of earthquake.

1
1.1 General Introduction

An earthquake is the shaking of the ground caused by the displacement of

energy accumulations deep in the earth. Earthquakes occur as a result of geological
movements on the earth and can occur for various reasons. For example,
earthquakes that occur as a result of the movements of tectonic plates, earthquakes
that occur as a result of volcanic movements, and even earthquakes that can occur
as a result of human activities. Turkey is located in a region with a rich history of
earthquakes. From the time when records of earthquakes began, our country has
experienced large and destructive earthquakes. In our country's history, there have
been earthquakes with destructive effects such as the 7.43 magnitude earthquake in
Izmit in 1999, the 7.35 magnitude earthquake in Marmara Region 1766, the 7.16
and 7.32 magnitude earthquake in Izmit in 1754 and 1894.

Our country has made long-term financial and emotional efforts to heal the
wounds caused by the earthquake. However, there has been almost no research on
the "Çayırova" district and the "Özgürlük" district. This study includes subjects
such as examining the structural features of the buildings in the region, determining
the earthquake hazard level in the region, and how much damage the buildings can
be damaged in earthquakes by using this information.

The earthquake seismic assessment of the Cayirova region was carried out with
the ELER program. A tool for assessing a building's seismic performance is the
ELER program. It is based on structural engineering principles and considers a
number of variables, including the kind of building, the building materials used, the
local soil conditions, and the projected earthquake intensity. Turkey makes
extensive use of the ELER program to evaluate the seismic security of structures
and identify the necessary retrofitting solutions to enhance their performance during
earthquakes. The outcomes of the ELER study offer useful data for earthquake
engineering decision-making, assisting in lowering the potential harm and loss of
life and property brought on by earthquakes.

2
 1.2. Graduation Project Subject

The project has two semesters of work. This project aims to create an inventory
of buildings for an urban area for further seismic hazard and risk assessment. This
building inventory aimed to examine the "Özgürlük Neighbourhood" of Gebze /
Çayırova District. A total of 968 building surveys were conducted in this
neighborhood. It is requested to create earthquake damage and risk analyzes of
these buildings in the region.

1.3 Problem Description

The buildings in the Özgürlük Neighbourhoodof the Çayırova Region, where

our school is located, are quite old and no studies have been conducted to assess the
risk in a possible earthquake. For Çayırova, the lack of an up-to-date damage
estimation and assessment situation in the old urbanization areas will lead to failure
of risk assessments and inadequacies in disaster management, and the disruption of
some preventive activities will cause problems and life risks.

1.4 Hypothesis-Assumption

It is assumed that the earthquake damage estimation assessment of the

"Çayırova-Özgürlük Neighourhood" settlements within the scope of the project
using the ELER method will benefit the measures and precautions to be taken
before the earthquake occurs. These estimates were made using earthquake data
with the largest magnitude in history.

1.5 Purpose of the project

With the creation of the earthquake damage estimation assessment report of

Özgürlük Neighbourhood, one of the residential areas of Çayırova, it is aimed to
investigate the reliability of the old residential areas against earthquakes and to form
a basis for the assessment of earthquake damage estimation in Çayırova.

3
1.6 Project Outcomes

It is estimated that the old buildings in the "Özgürlük Neighbourhood", most

of which were built before the 1999 earthquake, are quite vulnerable to
earthquakes and will have a low score in the building inventory.

1.7 Limitations of the Study

The study area is located at the latitude 40.827774 and longitude 29.381590 in
the “Özgürlük Neighbourhood” in the Çayırova District of Kocaeli, the district was
established on an area of 1740754 m² and the studied area is shown in Figure 1

Figure 1: Özgürlük Neighbourhood

1.8 Research Method

In terms of finances and society, seismic risk analysis is very important to and
civilisation. These studies allow us to calculate losses and damages. These
investigations can enhance government and non-governmental projects like
planning and risk mitigation. Due to the significance of this subject, regional and
international projects have been numerous in numerous nations.

4
 In the past, while street research was being conducted, it was expected that the
buildings would be visited and examined one by one. But nowadays, this building
survey job can be done online. We used the BELNET system of Çayırova
Municipality while doing street research. We examined our 968 buildings with
various parameters. Then, we entered the
"https://binariskdagilimi.streamlit.app/Bina_Tipi" site created by the students of
our school Gebze Technical University and combined our building topologies in an
excel file simultaneously.

5
2. LITERATURE RESEARCH

2.1 PyGMT

At the beginning of our work, I said that we started our project with Python.
We made our visualization using the PYGMT module in Python. So what is this
PYGMT?

For creating beautiful maps and visuals in Python, PyGMT is a potent tool. It
is a command-line software wrapper for the Generic Mapping Tools (GMT), which
is frequently used in the earth sciences. GMT was created for seismology initially,
but it has since been used in geology, oceanography, and planetary science, among
many other disciplines. PyGMT is a potent tool for data processing and
visualization since it enables users to use all of GMT's features from Python.

For processing spatial data, PyGMT offers a wide range of features. It can be
used to create maps and graphics as well as other data processing chores like
filtering and gridding. Animations can be produced with PyGMT and are beneficial
for displaying time-series data or dynamic operations. PyGMT's output can be
saved in a number of formats, including PDF, PNG, and JPG, making it suitable for
use in web and other applications.

PyGMT is different from other Python libraries such as Matplotlib, which have
a larger focus on interactivity and supporting multiple backends. PyGMT is
designed specifically for the creation of maps and other illustrations, and it provides
a wide range of options for customizing the appearance of maps, including different
projections, map scales, and color schemes. PyGMT can also be used to visualize
data from various sources, and it was also used by us to visualize the data obtained
from the official website of KOERİ. An example similar to the code we developed
is shown in Figure 2.1.

6
 Figure 2: Representation of Last EQ in PYGMT

In summary, PyGMT is a powerful tool for processing and visualizing spatial

data in Python. Its capabilities for data processing and visualization, as well as the
ability to generate high-quality maps and illustrations, make it a valuable tool for
various scientific fields. It's also widely used in academic and industry
environments. It can be used to generate publication-quality maps, process data,
and make animations. The PyGMT's output can be used in web and other
applications by converting it to different formats. It's different from other Python
libraries such as Matplotlib, PyGMT has a stronger focus on map and illustration
creation.

7
2.2. Street Survey Part

2.2.1 Rapid assessment methods for Earthquake-Risk buildings

Rapid assessment methods for earthquake-risk buildings refer to techniques

and tools used to quickly evaluate the seismic performance and safety of buildings
in the aftermath of an earthquake. The goal of these methods is to provide
emergency responders and building managers with the information they need to
make informed decisions about the use and occupancy of damaged buildings.

There are several different types of rapid assessment methods, each with their
own strengths and weaknesses. Some common methods include visual inspections,
rapid damage assessments, and rapid structural assessments.

Turkey is situated in one of the most active seismic zones in the world, and the
majority of its population lives in regions close to these fault zones, which poses a
constant threat to the country. The devastating earthquakes that have occurred in
the regions where the population has concentrated in the last 20 years have resulted
in significant loss of life and property, and have made the question of earthquake
safety an urgent priority. In light of this, it is crucial to determine the earthquake
reliability of the existing building stock in and around Istanbul, which is home to a
large portion of Turkey's population.

Given the time and economic burdens of retrofitting buildings to meet the new
earthquake regulations that came into effect in 2018, many experts in the field of
earthquake engineering have been exploring alternative solutions to minimize
damage and loss of life in the event of a major earthquake. One of the most
important approaches is to identify the buildings that are most at risk of collapse
and to prioritize them for retrofitting or evacuation in the event of an earthquake.

Rapid assessment methods have been developed both in Turkey and

internationally, to quickly determine the risk of collapse of existing buildings.
These methods can include visual inspections, rapid damage assessments, and rapid
structural assessments. Visual inspections involve a trained inspector conducting a

8
walk-through of the building, looking for visible signs of damage such as cracks in
walls or ceilings, broken windows, and other damage. Rapid damage assessments
involve the use of specialized tools and equipment to quickly gather information
about the condition of a building. Rapid structural assessments involve the use of
engineering analysis to quickly evaluate the structural integrity of a building.

The most important goal of these methods is to prevent loss of life in severe
earthquakes. Rapid assessment methods can provide a solution by determining
whether buildings will collapse under a predicted earthquake load, and by providing
a clear understanding of the risk of collapse of existing structures. Researchers are
continuing to study these methods and apply them to the existing building stock, in
order to establish a comprehensive understanding of the risk of collapse in the event
of a major earthquake. In our study, we worked in “Çayırova-Özgürlük
Neighbourhood” where we used these rapid assessment methods to evaluate the
earthquake risk of the building stock. The results of these assessments can be used
to guide decisions on retrofitting or evacuation, and to prioritize resources and
efforts to protect people and property in the event of an earthquake.

2.2.2 Simplified Methods to Determine the Regional EQ Risk

Distribution of Buildings
In order to determine the priorities in certain areas and the regional distribution
of buildings that may be at risk within the scope of the Law, the stated principles
are used. These methods, which are used to define the regional risk situation, can
be applied in areas containing a statistically significant number of buildings, and
they cannot be used for risk assessment in individual buildings, as required by
science and technique.

The method we used in our study is specifically designed for existing

reinforced concrete buildings with 1 to 7 floors. Therefore, masonry structures in
Özgürlük Neighbourhood were not included in our evaluation. To conduct our
street research, we used the Çayırova Municipality BELNET system, which
allowed us to access building information online. We also used a Building Risk

9
Distribution App, which helped us to organize and analyze our data in an excel file.
The app we used in our building evaluation made our job much easier, as it allowed
us to enter the system by examining our criteria and buildings that we evaluated.
This made the process of evaluating the building risk more efficient and
streamlined.

Overall, these methods are an important tool for identifying the buildings that
are most at risk of collapse in the event of an earthquake and for making decisions
about retrofitting or evacuation. By using these methods, we were able to determine
the regional risk situation and identify the buildings that are most at risk in the
“Özgürlük Neighbourhood” area. This information can be used to guide decisions
on retrofitting or evacuation and to prioritize resources and efforts to protect people
and property in the event of an earthquake.

a) Type of a Structural System

A building that consists of a reinforced concrete frame and walls is called a

reinforced concrete framed building, while a building that consists of a reinforced
concrete frame and shear wall is called a reinforced concrete frame and panel
building.

One of the main differences between these two types of buildings is the way
the load is carried. In a reinforced concrete framed building, the load is mainly
carried by the reinforced concrete frame, which includes columns, beams, and
girders. In contrast, in a reinforced concrete frame and panel building, the load is
carried by both the reinforced concrete frame and the walls (panels), which are
connected to the frame but do not contribute to the load-bearing capacity of the
structure.

Another difference is the way the walls are constructed. In a reinforced

concrete framed building, the walls are typically made of concrete, but they do not
contribute to the load-bearing capacity of the structure. In contrast, in a reinforced
concrete frame and shear wall building, the walls are typically made of precast

10
concrete panels, which are connected to the frame and contribute to the load-bearing
capacity of the structure.

Additionally, the reinforced concrete frame and shear buildings are more
efficient in terms of insulation and soundproofing, they also offer more design
freedom.

In summary, reinforced concrete framed buildings are mainly composed of

reinforced concrete frame and walls, while reinforced concrete frame and panel
buildings have reinforced concrete frame and walls (panels) that contribute to the
load-bearing capacity of the structure, and are more efficient in terms of insulation
and soundproofing. Both types have their own advantages and disadvantages and
the choice of which type of construction to use depends on the specific requirements
of the building project.

The carrier system of the building will be determined and selected as one of
the reinforced concrete frame (BAÇ) and reinforced concrete frame and shear
(BAÇP) systems. If there is a basement floor, it would be appropriate to detect it
from inside the basement, and if there is a shop, it should be determined from inside
the shop. If it cannot be detected, it would be appropriate to choose BAÇ.

An example is shown in the figure below.

Figure 3: Reinforced Concrete Frame and Reinforced Concrete Frame and Shear Wall System

11
b) Number of Floors

The number of stories in a building can have an impact on its overall

performance in terms of seismic resistance and structural integrity. In general, taller
buildings are more susceptible to damage during an earthquake due to the added
weight and forces that must be supported by the structure.

A taller building typically requires more advanced structural design and

construction techniques to ensure that it can withstand the forces of an earthquake.
This can lead to an increase in construction costs and complexity, which can
negatively impact the building's overall performance score.

Additionally, taller buildings typically require more advanced systems such as

elevator, fire safety and mechanical systems that also can have an impact on the
overall performance of the building.

Moreover, in case of emergency evacuation, taller buildings may pose more

problems for the occupants, especially for the higher floors, since it could take more
time to reach the ground. This can also have a negative impact on the overall
performance of the building.

In summary, taller buildings are more

susceptible to damage during an earthquake
due to the added weight and forces that must be
supported by the structure. They require more
advanced structural design and construction
techniques, which can increase costs and
complexity. They may also pose more
problems for emergency evacuation and have
more advanced systems that can affect overall
performance.
While we were making a visual evaluation,
we evaluated our building floor based on the
Figure 4: Number of Floors
image below. Figure 4: Number of Floors

12
 c) Building Year of Construction
The year of construction of a building can have an impact on its overall
performance in terms of seismic resistance and structural integrity. Buildings that
were constructed before the implementation of modern seismic codes and building
regulations may not have been designed or constructed to withstand the forces of
an earthquake. These older buildings may be at a higher risk of collapse or damage
during an earthquake.

As the building codes and regulations have evolved over time, the requirements
for seismic resistance have become more stringent. Buildings constructed in more
recent years are more likely to have been built in accordance with these updated
codes and regulations and therefore have a higher level of seismic resistance.

For example, in Turkey, the first seismic building code was implemented in
1950, and it has been updated and improved several times since then. Buildings
constructed before the implementation of this code may not have been designed or
constructed to withstand the forces of an earthquake, while buildings constructed
after the code was implemented will have been built to meet the requirements of
the code.

Additionally, older buildings may have suffered from wear and tear over time,
and may have undergone changes or additions that could have affected their
structural integrity. This can also increase the risk of collapse or damage during an
earthquake.

In summary, the year of construction of a building can have an impact on its

overall performance in terms of seismic resistance and structural integrity.
Buildings constructed before the implementation of modern seismic codes and
building regulations may not have been designed or constructed to withstand the
forces of an earthquake, and may be at a higher risk of collapse or damage during
an earthquake. Buildings constructed in more recent years are more likely to have
been built in accordance with updated codes and regulations, and have a higher
level of seismic resistance.

13
 For this part, we have considered 4 criteria. We classified our building as before
2000, between 2000-2007, between 2008-2018 and finally after 2018. Whichever
part it belongs to, we chose it as a guess.

Figure 5 Building
Figure 6Construction
: Building Year
Construction Date

d) Build Number

At this stage, we wrote the parcel information of the buildings we examined by

looking at BELNET. And we got into our system. This helped us to find buildings
easily afterward.

Figure 7 Build Number Stage

e) Building Photo

At this stage, we added a clear photograph from the front of the building that
could represent the building, and saved the photos we added to our computer for
later use.

14
 f) Geographic Coordinates

Geographic coordinates, specifically the location of a building, can have an

impact on its overall risk assessment score in terms of seismic resistance and
structural integrity. Buildings located in areas with a high seismic activity or
proximity to a fault line are at a higher risk of collapse or damage during an
earthquake. The intensity of seismic activity can vary from region to region, and
buildings located in areas with a high seismic activity will typically require more
advanced structural design and construction techniques to ensure that they can
withstand the forces of an earthquake.

Additionally, buildings located in regions with a high risk of soil liquefaction

or landslides may also be at a higher risk of collapse or damage during an
earthquake. Such conditions can cause the soil beneath a building to lose its strength
and stability, which can cause the building to settle or collapse.

Furthermore, the slope of the land can also affect the building's stability.
Buildings constructed on steep slopes may have a higher risk of landslides during
an earthquake.

yaIn summary, geographic coordinates, specifically the location of a building,

can have an impact on its overall risk assessment score in terms of seismic
resistance and structural integrity. Buildings located in areas with high seismic
activity or proximity to a fault line, high risk of soil liquefaction or landslides, or
on steep slopes are at a higher risk of collapse or damage during an earthquake.
These factors are considered in the risk assessment and the building's overall risk
score is determined accordingly.

15
Figure
Figure 7: Coordinate Input 8: Coordinate Input
 g) Soil Class

The soil class of a building site can have an impact on its overall risk
assessment score in terms of seismic resistance and structural integrity. The soil
class refers to the characteristics of the soil beneath a building, including its
strength, stiffness, and ability to support the weight of the building. Different soil
classes have different properties that can affect the stability and safety of a building
during an earthquake.

Buildings constructed on soil with low shear strength and high compressibility,
such as soft soils, may be at a higher risk of damage or collapse during an
earthquake. This is because the building's foundation may not be able to provide
adequate support for the building during an earthquake, which can lead to the
building settling or collapsing.

On the other hand, buildings constructed on soil with high shear strength and
low compressibility, such as hard soils, may be at a lower risk of damage or collapse
during an earthquake. This is because the building's foundation is able to provide
adequate support for the building during an earthquake.

Additionally, the soil class can also affect the building's foundation system.
Buildings constructed on soft soils may require deep foundations, such as piles or
caissons, to provide adequate support. While buildings constructed on hard soils
may require shallow foundations, such as spread footings or slabs.

In summary, the soil class of a building site can have an impact on its overall
risk assessment score in terms of seismic resistance and structural integrity.
Buildings constructed on soil with low shear strength and high compressibility may
be at a higher risk of damage or collapse during an earthquake. While buildings
constructed on soil with high shear strength and low compressibility may be at a
lower risk of damage or collapse during an earthquake. The soil class is considered
during the building design and foundation system selection, and factors that affect
the building's stability and safety are considered in the risk assessment.

According to TDBY2018; ZA class represents the best ground in Turkey. Solid

and hard rocks are in this class. ZB class is designed for slightly weathered rocks.

16
ZC class includes very cracked weak rocks and very compact sand gravel. ZD class
medium compact sand gravel or very solid clays. ZE, on the other hand, includes
problematic floors designed for loose floors.

We were informed by our teachers that it is a ZC ground class. We entered ZC

floor class for all our buildings in our scoring.

Figure 8: Soil Type InputFigure 9:Soil Type Input

h) Spectral Acceleration Coefficient

Spectral acceleration coefficient (Ss) is a measure of the amplitude of ground

motion at a specific frequency and is used to evaluate the seismic hazard of a
particular site. It is defined as the maximum acceleration of the ground, measured
in g (9.81 m/s²), that is expected to occur during a specific earthquake event. The
spectral acceleration coefficient is used to determine the design earthquake ground
motion for a specific site.

It is a measure of how much the ground is expected to move during an

earthquake, and is a key factor in evaluating the risk of damage or collapse of a
building. The higher the spectral acceleration coefficient, the more severe the
expected ground motion, and the greater the risk of damage or collapse of a
building.

17
 The spectral acceleration coefficient can be calculated using various methods,
such as the design spectral response method, the probabilistic seismic hazard
analysis method, or the deterministic seismic hazard analysis method. These
methods use different inputs, such as seismic hazard maps, historical seismicity
data, and ground motion prediction equations to estimate the spectral acceleration
coefficient.

Figure9: Spectral
FigureAcceleration
10:SpectralCoefficent InputInput
Acceleration

In summary, Spectral acceleration coefficient (Ss) is a measure of the

amplitude of ground motion at a specific frequency and is used to evaluate the
seismic hazard of a particular site. It is a key factor in determining the risk of
damage or collapse of a building during an earthquake, and it is calculated using
various methods such as design spectral response method, probabilistic seismic
hazard analysis method, or deterministic seismic hazard analysis method.

i) Building Visual Quality

Building visual quality, also known as architectural quality, refers to the

aesthetic appeal and overall appearance of a building. While building visual quality
is an important aspect of design and construction, it is typically not considered a
primary factor in evaluating the seismic risk of a building.

Seismic risk evaluation focuses primarily on the structural integrity and

stability of a building during an earthquake, rather than its aesthetic appeal. Factors
such as the building's structural system, foundation type, and soil class, as well as
the design load, are considered more important in evaluating seismic risk.

18
 However, in some cases, building visual quality can have a secondary impact
on seismic risk. For instance, buildings that have undergone extensive renovations
or remodeling may have had changes made to their structural system that could
affect their seismic resistance. Also, buildings that are not well-maintained or in
poor condition may be more likely to suffer damage during an earthquake.

In summary, building visual quality, or architectural quality, is an important

aspect of design and construction, but it is not typically considered a primary factor
in evaluating the seismic risk of a building. The primary focus of seismic risk
evaluation is on the structural integrity and stability of a building during an
earthquake, rather than its aesthetic appeal. However, building visual quality can
have a secondary impact on seismic risk, such as changes in the structural system
or poor maintenance.

At this stage, we visually divided it into 3 criteria: good, medium and bad.

Figure10 : Building Visual

Figure 11:Quality Input
Building Visual Quality Input

19
 j) Vertical Irregularities

In order to have large volumes on the ground floors, the vertical carrier
elements can be removed without continuing to the ground floor. There are some
limitations to creating such situations:

1) It is forbidden to place the columns on cantilever beams or on the ends of

the gussets protruding from the column.
2) Shear walls should be strictly continued up to the floor.

Figure 11: Vertical

Figure Irregularities Input
12:Vertical Irregularities Input

• Soft Floor Irregularity

The difference in stiffness between the floors of the building creates a soft floor
irregularity.

It is desirable to divide the total displacement of the building by the total floor height.
However, if there is a floor with less rigidity, this floor will displace more and this floor
is called soft layer.

20
Figure12: Soft /Weak Figure
Floor Input
13:Soft/Weak Floor Input
 • Heavy Overhang

Heavy overhang" in a building refers to the presence of a large cantilevered

structure extending from the building, such as a balcony, awning, or overhanging
roof. These structures can create additional loads on the building's structure during
an earthquake, which can increase the risk of damage or collapse.

During an earthquake, the ground beneath a building will experience seismic

waves that can cause the building to move and vibrate. The overhang structure,
being a cantilevered structure, it is only supported by one end, and the other end is
free-hanging. Therefore, the overhang structure is more vulnerable to seismic forces
than the rest of the building, and it may experience more significant movement and
deformation. This can cause additional stress on the building's structure and
foundation, increasing the risk of damage or collapse.

Additionally, heavy overhangs can also create a risk of injury to people on or

near the overhang during an earthquake. They may fall or collapse.
In summary, heavy overhangs in a building can increase the risk of damage or
collapse during an earthquake by creating additional loads on the building's
structure and foundation, and these structures can also create a risk of injury to
people on or near the overhang during an earthquake. Therefore, when designing
and building a new structure or retrofitting an existing one, structural engineers

Figure 13: HeavyFigure 14:Heavy

Overhang Input Overhang Input

21
should consider the potential impact of heavy overhangs on the building's seismic
performance and take appropriate measures to mitigate this risk.

• Short Column Effect

Short columns and columns in a structure show more rigid behavior compared
to other columns. Elements with high stiffness are exposed to higher forces as they
absorb more energy during an earthquake. Short column columns are subjected to
very high moments and often burst. For these reasons, short columns are seen as
weak links in structures.

Figure 14: Short Column

Figure Effect Inpıt
15:Short Column Effect Input

k) Ground Slope

The natural slope of the ground, also known as the topography, can have an
impact on a building's seismic performance. Buildings that are constructed on
sloping ground can experience additional forces during an earthquake that can
affect their stability and integrity.

Buildings on steep slopes are more susceptible to landslides and other slope
failures during an earthquake, which can compromise the building's stability and
increase the risk of damage or collapse. Additionally, if the building is not properly
anchored to the slope, it can experience additional stress on its foundation and
structure, increasing the risk of damage or collapse.

22
 On the other hand, buildings constructed on gentle slopes may not be as
susceptible to landslides and other slope failures but the potential soil liquefaction,
lateral spreading and lateral deformation on the slope can cause damage to the
building's foundation and structure.

In summary, the natural slope of the ground, or topography, can have an impact
on a building's seismic performance. Buildings that are constructed on steep slopes
are more susceptible to landslides and other slope failures during an earthquake,
which can compromise the building's stability and increase the risk of damage or
collapse. Buildings constructed on gentle slopes, may not be as susceptible to
landslides but the potential soil liquefaction, lateral spreading, and lateral
deformation on the slope can cause damage to the building's foundation and
structure. Therefore, when designing and building new structures or retrofitting
existing ones, it is important to consider the potential impact of the natural slope of
the ground on the building's seismic performance and take appropriate measures to
mitigate this risk.

l) Irregularity/Torsion Effect in Plan

The proportions of structural components, such as beams and columns, must

be in proportion to the overall scale of the structure, as required by the Turkish
Seismic Code (TBDY 2018). The specifications for the structural elements in the
floor plans must be greater than 20% of the total plan dimensions of the building
floor in the same directions for each material in the two perpendicular directions.
This guarantees that the structural components can distribute and transfer the weight
from the building's floors to its foundation in an efficient manner.

Additionally essential to preserving the building's structural integrity during an

earthquake is the floor plan's geometry. Plan irregularities, such as differences in
the size, spacing, or orientation of structural parts, can lead to weak spots or
structural weaknesses in the building, increasing the risk of damage or collapse. A
building's behavior after an earthquake may also be more complex and challenging
to forecast if its floor plans are asymmetrical.
23
 Moreover, in buildings with crossing in the plan, the floor part that is
responsible for transferring the horizontal loads to the columns and walls should be
limited to the joint. This is to avoid the additional anticipated difficulties in the slabs
and the negative effect on the rigid behavior of the flooring.

In conclusion, it is crucial that the building's plan dimensions, structural

elements, and floor geometry are in proportion and adhere to the regulations set by
the Turkish Seismic Code (TBDY 2018) to ensure the safety and stability of the
building during an earthquake. The irregularities in the plan can create areas of
weakness and vulnerability, making the building more susceptible to damage or
collapse, and also can result in more complex and difficult to predict behavior of
the building during an earthquake.

Figure 15: Irregularity Figure

Effect in16: Irregularities in Plan Input
Plan

24
 m) Adjacent and Separate Structure

The most important thing that separates the adjacent order and the split order
from each other is the distance from the building on the adjacent plot. In the adjacent
order, an adjacent building is The geometry of the floor plan is also crucial in
maintaining the structural integrity of the building during an earthquake.
Irregularities in the plan, such as variations in size, spacing or orientation of
structural elements, can create areas of weakness or vulnerability in the building's
structure, making it more susceptible to damage or collapse. In addition, irregular
floor plans can also result in more complex and difficult to predict behavior of the
building during an earthquake.

built with the building on the adjacent parcel. On the other hand, in the split
order, the building in each parcel cannot be adjacent to the neighboring buildings
in the other parcels.

integrated system refers to a design where the structural elements are closely
interconnected and work together to resist seismic forces. In contrast, a discrete
system refers to a design where the structural elements are separated and work
independently of each other to resist seismic forces.

If its adjacent structure, it can cause a hammering effect. The hammering effect
is defined as; Adjacent structures make various displacements under dynamic
effects such as earthquakes and winds, depending on their mechanical properties

Figure 16: Building Figure

Status 17: Building Status Input 25
such as stiffness and mass centers. At the points where the influence areas of these
displacements intersect, they transfer a sudden load to each other, this phenomenon
is called Collision or Hammering Effect. Neighboring buildings are subject to
different displacements during an earthquake. Therefore, considering that it is not
possible to construct buildings with the same dynamic character side by side in
today's conditions, insufficient or no space between neighboring buildings makes
collision inevitable.

After evaluating all these criteria, the application gives us a building

performance score. It shows the location of our building on the map according to
the coordinates we entered. Finally, we press the save option and collect the data in
excel.

2.3. Seismic Hazard Assessment

As is well known, earthquakes emit a tremendous amount of energy, and it is

crucial to understand how this energy will impact structures. Seismic analysis deals
with the earthquake's response in the area as well as the losses and damages in the
area that will be affected. According to Askan and Yucemen (2010), seismic hazard
is the likelihood that at the construction site, a parameter linked to ground motion
or earthquake magnitude would surpass a specific level within a given time frame.
[melis ] If time is regarded as a year, then seismic hazard refers to the likelihood of
exceeding within the investigation year or the yearly rate of exceeding.

Seismic hazard analysis focuses on calculating the return duration for

earthquakes of a specific size and estimating the likelihood that an area may respond
more strongly than expected to an earthquake of a given intensity. As a consequence
of certain engineering studies, seismic hazard data are given as numerical numbers.
Thus, seismic hazard outputs help structural engineers make informed choices when
calculating the seismic loads to which a project would be subjected.

The results of a seismic hazard study include a hazard curve, hazard map, and
reaction spectrum. Response spectra are expressed responses with varying times
and types of structure. These several forms of intensity measurements include peak

26
ground acceleration (PGA), spectral acceleration (Sa), and spectral displacement
(Sd).

The link between the yearly likelihood of exceeding and the intensity measure
levels is shown by the hazard curve. These graphs enable the determination of the
response of the area, which is shown in the graph as yearly likelihood of
surpassing or probability of occurrence.

There are two types of seismic hazard analysis: probabilistic and deterministic.

2.3.a. Deterministic Hazard Assessment

The Deterministic Hazard Assessment approach involves identifying past

earthquakes of high magnitude that have occurred in a specific region. A worst-case
scenario earthquake is then simulated, and an appropriate attenuation relationship
is chosen based on the characteristics of the area. Responses to the simulated
earthquake, such as acceleration and displacement velocity, are calculated using the
selected attenuation relationship. While this approach is practical, it may not take
into account certain uncertainties that play a significant role in determining the
maximum ground acceleration.

2.3.b. Probabilistic Hazard Assessment

The probabilistic approach is favored when assessing seismic hazards because

it accounts for uncertainties related to the seismic characteristics of a specific area.
It produces more accurate and realistic results compared to the deterministic
approach, but it is also more complex and time-consuming. Advantages of using
this method include considering past earthquakes in the area, accounting for
uncertainties related to the sources of earthquakes, calculating the likelihood of
future earthquakes, allowing experts to use their expertise and judgement, and the
ability to express seismic hazard in terms of different measures such as spectral
acceleration, spectral velocity, spectral displacement, and intensity.

27
 The probabilistic seismic hazard analysis process has several stages. The first
step is identifying all of the sources of earthquakes in a region and determining their
geometry and likelihood of producing an earthquake. The second step is
determining the relationship between the magnitude of earthquakes and their
frequency for each source, which is usually done using the Gutenberg-Richter
formula.

Log λ(m )=a-bm (1)

The Gutenberg-Richter formula is used to establish the relationship between

the magnitude of earthquakes and their frequency in a specific region. The formula
uses two statistical values, a and b, which are obtained from analyzing past
earthquakes. The formula also includes 𝜇, which gives the rate of earthquakes with
magnitude greater than M. Not all earthquakes in a region are relevant to assessing
structural hazards, so certain levels of magnitude can be disregarded in engineering.
The likelihood of an earthquake of a certain magnitude recurring can be expressed
using this formula.

−𝑏(𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑥−𝑚min )
𝐹𝑚(𝑚) = 1 − 10−𝑏(𝑚−𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑛 )⁄1 − 10 ,

𝑚𝑚𝑖𝑛 < 𝑚 < 𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑥 (𝟐)

28
2.4. ELER Methodology

ELER has four modules that are prepared for earthquake damage prediction. 1.
The earthquake hazard analysis module provides PGA, PGV, Sa, Sd ground motion
values distribution based on the specified earthquake magnitude and epicenter
information. 2. The Level 0 module estimates loss of life and injuries based on
population information using intensity-loss of life or magnitude-loss of life
relationships through geographic information systems. 3. The Level 1 module
estimates the number of damaged buildings and corresponding loss of life by using
intensity-based empirical damage-visibility relationships. 4. The Level 2 module
estimates the number of damaged buildings and corresponding loss of life by using
spectral acceleration-displacement based damage-visibility evaluation method. The
ELER modules are shown in the Figure 17.

Figure17:
Figure 18:Eler
ELERMethodology
Methodology

29
3. ANALYSES AND EVALUATIONS

3.1. Phyton

In the Python part, we first downloaded the data from the KOERI official
website. We entered our earthquake data range from 01.01.1900 to 31.08.2022, our
depth as 25km and radius as 200km. First, we entered the Turkey coordinates and
defined the Turkey map to python, as shown in figure 17.Then we showed it on the
map using the PYGMT module according to the depth and the magnitude of the
earthquakes.

Figure 20:Defining Turkey Map in Phyton

Figure 19: Display of Earthquakes in the Marmara Region

30
 We did the data download for both the "İzmit-Körfez" area and the Marmara
Region. Maps for Marmara and Çayırova Region are shown in Figures 18 and 19,
respectively.

Figure 21:Display of Earthquakes in the Çayırova Region

As it can be understood, as the sizes of the circles increase, the magnitude of

the earthquake increases and the depth of the earthquake increases as you go from
pink to red.

31
3.2.Street Surveying
In this step, we analyzed a total of 968 buildings as I mentioned in the
methodology section. We followed these steps in order:

a. Type of a Structural System: In this step, we paid attention to whether the

building is reinforced concrete frame or reinforced concrete frame and shear wall
buildig. Examples of two types of buildings are shown below.

Figure 22: Rainforced Concrete Frame with Shear Wall

Building

b. Number of Floors: We determined the number of floors of the building.

c. Building Year of Construction: Using the 2013 and 2021 maps on the Belnet
site, we determined the construction year range of the building. For example, some
buildings did not exist in 2013, so we determined that they were built after 2013.

d. Build Number: We input the building’s parcel information in BELNET site.

e. Building Photo: We recorded photos of the buildings.

f. Geographic coordinates : We entered the coordinates value.

g. Soil Class: Our soil class is ZC in Çayırova.

32
 h.Spectral Acceleration Coefficient: We calculated it together with previous
information.

i. Building visual quality: We rated the buildings as 0 bad, 1 medium and 2

good.

j. Vertical Irregularities: An example of vertical irregularity is shown in the

building below.

Figure 23:Vertical Irregularities in Structures

• Heavy Overhang: An example of buildings with heavy overhangs is shown

below.

Figure 24:Heavy Overhang in Building

33
 • Weak Floor Irregularity: An example of buildings with heavy weak floor
irregularitiy is shown below

Figure 25:Weak Floor Irregularity in Structure

• Short Column Effect: An example of buildings with short column effect is

shown below

Figure 26:Short Column Effect in Structure

34
 k. Ground Slope: If the natural ground slope is below 30º, it will be accepted
that there is no hill-slope effect, and if the natural ground slope is above 30º, it will
be considered that there is a hill-slope effect. A 30º high slope is not available in
most of our buildings.

l. Irregularity/Torsion Effect in Plan: If our plan is not a regular shape, there

is irregularity in the plan.

m. Adjacent and Separate Structure: If our structure is adjacent, we

considered the hammer effect, paying attention to whether the floors are located in
the same horizontal plane.

All these were evaluated and the building performance score was determined
for 968 buildings. The effect of the features on the building performance score and
negative parameters is shown in the table below. After completing these stages
created the typology of our buildings using Excel.

Table 1: Negative Parameters

Table 2:Negative Parameter Effects on Structure Performance Scores

35
3.2.1.Building Typology and Performance Point Distrubation

Figure 27:Locations and the Building Performance Points (PP) of the total 968
buildings analyzed, Çayırova/Kocaeli

The representation of the 968 buildings we examined on the map based on their
performance scores is as above. Our building performance scores range from -80 to
140. The risk increases from purple to red and these are shown in the figure
according to their risks. Buildings in red are risky, while buildings in purple are
safe.

In the process of determining risk classes, first of all, the building performance
score average and standard deviation values were obtained. As a result of the study,
the average of the building performance score was calculated as 31.55 and the
standard deviation as 39.04. By deviating from the mean by the standard deviation,
the risk classes shown schematically in the figure were determined. In the study; As

36
risk classes, a total of 4 groups were formed as high risk, medium risk, low risk and
safe.

120
Number of Buildings Distribution of Building Performance Point (PP)

100

80

60

40

20

0
(-15,-10)

(15,20)
(25,30)

(75,80)

(105,110)
(-85,-80)

(5,10)
(-75,-70)
(-65,-60)

(-45,-40)
(-35,-30)

(55,60)

(85,90)
(-5,0)

(45,50)

(65,70)

(95,100)

(125,130)
(135,140)
(-55,-50)

(-25,-20)

(115,120)
(35,40)

Figure 28: Distribution of Building Performance Point

The building risk status was determined by looking at the place of the
performance score of the examined building within the ranges presented in Table
3, and the building was marked with the relevant color on the aerial photograph.

37

Figure 29:Distrubution of Building Performance Point

 As can be seen from the table 4, 5.5% of our buildings are safe, 16.66% are at low
risk, 34.6% are at medium risk, and 33.11% are at high risk.
Table 3: Building Risk Info

Building Risk Info

Safe 5.50%

Low Risk 16.79%

Medium Risk 34.60%

High Risk 33.11%

Total 100%

The negative parameter contents of our 968 buildings in total are shown in the
table in percentage.

Building
Figure Typology
29: Building Typology

100% 6.51% 8.57% 10.02%

25.83% 17.87%
35.33%
80%
60% 83.57%
93.49% 91.43% 89.98%
74.17% 82.13%
40% 64.67%
20%
16.43%
0%
Weak Floor Heavy Short Adjacency Plan Ground Vertical
Overhangs Column Irregularity Slope Irregularity

Doesn't Exist Exist

Table 4: Building Typology %

Figure 30: Building Typology

Typology Weak Floor Heavy Short Column Ground Slope Plan Vertical Ajdacency
% Overhang Irregularity Irregularity

Doesnt 626 64.67% 159 16.43% 905 93.49% 885 91.43% 795 82.13% 871 89.98% 718 74.17%
EXIST

EXIST 342 35.33% 809 83.57% 63 6.51% 83 8.57% 173 17.87% 97 10.02% 250 25.83%

TOTAL 968 100.00% 968 100.00% 968 100.00% 968 100.00% 968 100.00% 968 100.00% 968 100.00%

38
 3.2.2 Building Coding

Building Coding
System

1 2 3

Structural System Number of Floors Construction Period

1: 1-3 Floors (Low – Rise) 1: Before 2000 (Pre - Code)

1: Reinforced Concrete Frame

2: Reinforced Concrete Frame 2: 4-6 Floors (Mid – Rise) 2: 2000 - 2007 (Low – Code)
and Shear Wall 3: 2008 - 2018 (Medium – Code)
3: 6-9 Floors (High – Rise)
4: After 2018 (High – Code)

Table 5: Building Coding System

The building coding system consists of 3 stages.

The first part is the determination of the system of the building. This section is
divided into “Reinforced Concrete Frame” and “Reinforced Concrete Frame and
Shear Wall” system. If our building is "Reinforced Concrete Frame", it gets the
code 1, and "Reinforced Concrete Frame and Shear Wall" gets the code 2.

Then, it is passed to the building floor determination part and the number of
floors is determined. Accordingly, if the buildings are between 1-3 floors, "low-
rise" and 1 code, if 4-6 floors are "medium-floor" and 2 codes, if 6-9 floors are
"high". takes the code 3 as "folded".

Finally, we move on to the construction period. In this section, if the building

is built before 2000, it gets the code 1, if it is between 2000-2008, it is 2, if it is
between 2008-2018, it is 3, and after 2018 it gets the code 4.

Our example of classifying our buildings according to this code is shown in the
table 6.

39
 Table 6:Classifying Building According to Building Coding System

CODE Structural System Type Number of Floors Construction Date

B111 1-3 Before 2000
B112 1-3 2000-2007
B113 1-3 2008-2018
B114 1-3 After 2018
B121 4-6 Before 2000
B122 4-6 2000-2007
Reinforced Concrete
B123 4-6 2008-2018
B124 4-6 After 2018
B131 7-16 Before 2000
B132 7-16 2000-2007
B133 7-16 2008-2018
B134 7-16 After 2018
B211 1-3 Before 2000
B212 1-3 2000-2007
B213 1-3 2008-2018
B214 1-3 After 2018
B221 4-6 Before 2000
Reinforced Concrete
B222 4-6 2000-2007
with
B223 4-6 2008-2018
Shear Walls
B224 4-6 After 2018
B131 7-16 Before 2000
B132 7-16 2000-2007
B133 7-16 2008-2018
B134 7-16 After 2018

According to our statistics, most of our building topology is "B123" with 20.8%
and 201 buildings. This topology is followed by "B122" with 17%, "B121" with
11.4%, and B223 with 10.4%. Our building coding system and building numbers
are shown in detail in the table 7.

Table 7:Statistics of Building Coding System

CODE Quantitiy Percentage CODE Quantitiy Percentage
B111 94 9.7% B211 8 0.8%
B112 91 9.4% B212 7 0.7%
B113 11 1.1% B213 1 0.1%
B114 0 0.0% B214 1 0.1%
B121 110 11.4% B221 33 3.4%
B122 165 17.0% B222 36 3.7%
B123 201 20.8% B223 101 10.4%
B124 51 5.3% B224 25 2.6%
B131 0 0.0% B131 0 0.0%
B132 2 0.2% B132 2 0.2%
B133 18 1.9% B133 18 1.9%
B134 5 0.5% B134 5 0.5%

40
3.2.3 Building Coding Statistics

As we can see in the first graphic, our buildings consist of 22.73% Reinforced
Frame and 77.27% Reinforced Frame and Shear Wall systems. The shear wall
system constitutes the majority of our building typology.

Building Type - Structural Type

22.73%
RC
Frame
Shear
77.27%
Wall

Figure 30:: Building

Figure
Type
31:%Building Type %

As we can see in the graphic, our buildings are medium-rise buildings with a
rate of 74.59%. 22% of our buildings are low rise, and 3.41% of our buildings are
high-rise. The number of high-rise buildings is very few.

3.41% Building Type - Number of Floors

22.00% Low Rise (1-3 Floors)

Mid Rise (4-6 Floors)

74.59%
High Rise (7-16
Floors)

Figure 31: Number

Figure
of 32:
Floors
Number
% of Floors %

41
 Our distribution of building construction years is wide. Our number of new
buildings constitutes a very small majority with a rate of 8%. Our distribution of
building construction years is wide. Our number of new buildings constitutes a very
small majority with a rate of 8%. It consists of buildings constructed before 2000
with a rate of 25.31%, between 2000-2007 with a rate of 31.1%, and between 2008-
2018 with a rate of 35.02%.

Building Type - Construction Date

8.57%

Pre-Code (<2000)
25.31%
Low-Code (2000-
35.02% 2007)
Medium-Code (2008-
31.10% 2018)
High-Code (>2018)

Figure
Figure 32:
33: Construction
Construction Date
Date %
%

4.Seismic Hazard Assessment

At this stage, we made two separate analyzes as deterministic and probabilistic
seismic hazars assesment.
4.2. Probabilistic Hazard Assessment

3.5

2.5
LOG N

1.5

1 y = -0,8761x + 6,4607
0.5

0
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5

MAGNITUDE
Figure33:
Figure 34:LogN – Magnitude
LogN- Magnitude Graph
Graph 42
 For the probabilistic analysis, we used a total of 49370 earthquake data in the
Çayırova Region. Seismic risk and repetition period values were calculated using
calculated A and b values. These calculations for 0.5 unit intervals in the range
3.5≤MD≤8.0 cover the observation interval of 100 years. The calculations used
period intervals of 10 years for the next century. The results are presented in Table
8 , Table 9 , Figure 34, Figure 35.

𝑛(𝑀) = 10𝑎1−𝑏𝑀 (3)

1
𝑄= (4)
𝑛(𝑀)

Table 8:Return Periods

Period Return Period

n(M) M 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 (Year)
23.1972 3.5 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0.04
8.4603 4 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0.12
3.0856 4.5 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0.32
1.1253 5 100.00 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0.89
0.4104 5.5 98.35 99.97 100.00 100.00 100 100 100 100 100 100 2.44
0.1497 6 77.62 94.99 98.88 99.75 99.94 99.99 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 6.68
0.0546 6.5 42.07 66.44 80.56 88.74 93.48 96.22 97.81 98.73 99.27 99.57 18.32
0.0199 7 18.05 32.85 44.97 54.91 63.05 69.72 75.19 79.67 83.34 86.35 50.22
0.0073 7.5 7.00 13.52 19.58 25.21 30.45 35.32 39.85 44.06 47.98 51.62 137.71
0.0026 8 2.61 5.16 7.64 10.05 12.40 14.69 16.92 19.09 21.21 23.27 377.58

Table 9:Cumulative Frequency– LogN Values

Magnitude Frequency (N) Cumulative Frequency (Ni) LogN

3.5-4.0 1553 2406 3,381
4.0-4.5 503 853 2,931
4.5-5.0 242 350 2,544
5.0-5.5 73 108 2,033
5.5-6.0 35 35 1,544

43
 Return Period
400.00

350.00

300.00

250.00
Years

200.00

150.00

100.00

50.00

0.00
3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8
Magnitude

Figure 35: Return Periods

10 year 20 year 30 year 40 year 50 year

60 year 70 year 80 year 90 year 100 year
100
PROBABILITY (%)

80
60
40
20
0
3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5
MAGNITUDE

Figure 36:Probability of Exceedence

44
4.3 Deterministic Hazard Assessment

Figure 37:Historical Earthquake Distrubition in Marmara Region

Date Latitude Longitude Ms Mw Location

10.09.1509 40.9 28,7 7,2 - Istanbul
22.05.1766 40.8 29 7,1 7,35 Marmara
02.09.1754 40.8 29,2 6,8 7,16 Izmit
10.07.1894 40.7 29,6 7,3 7,32 Izmıt
17.08.1999 40.7 29,9 7,4 7,43 Izmıt
Table 10:Historical Earthquakes

Using the historical period earthquakes and instrumental period earthquakes

affecting the Marmara region, 5 scenario earthquakes were created. It is presented

in Table 10.

45
 Table 11:All Historical Earthquakes
Information Tables

Charactheristics of the Scenario Earthquake Charactheristics of the Scenario Earthquake

1754 İzmit Earthquake Mw=7.16 1509 Istanbul Earthquake Ms=7.2
Latitude 40.8 Latitude 40.9
Longitude 29.2 Longitude 28.7
Magnitude (Richter) 7.16 Magnitude (Richter) 7.2
Fault Type Strike Slip Fault Type Strike Slip
Fault Depth 15 Fault Depth 16

Charactheristics of the Scenario Earthquake Charactheristics of the Scenario Earthquake

1766 Marmara Earthquake Mw=7.35 1894 Earthquake Mw=7.3
Latitude 40.8 Latitude 40.7
Longitude 29 Longitude 29.6
Magnitude (Richter) 7.35 Magnitude (Richter) 7.32
Fault Type Strike Slip Fault Type Strike Slip
Fault Depth 17 Fault Depth 15

Charactheristics of the Scenario Earthquake

1999 Earthquake Mw=7.35
Latitude 40.8
Longitude 29
Magnitude (Richter) 7.35
Fault Type Strike Slip
Fault Depth 17

The coordinates and depth of the earthquake for the 5 historical earthquakes
used are defined in the ELER DTA module. All earthquake records used are given
in table 11. The ELER program can assign the earthquake source as a point, as well
as automatically calculate the fault rupture length closest to the marked coordinate
using Turkey Fault data sets.

The damping rate for the structures has been accepted as 5%. The ELER
program includes ground interactions used in ground motions, fault source
properties, and calculations of shear velocity at 30 meters. Ground (field)
corrections can be made directly on the surface by the ELER program. Again, in
this respect, the ELER program settings for Istanbul, the ground shear rate at 30
meters, are accepted as default. ELER, which includes different algorithms in the
calculation of ground motions, was used in this study, the ground motion
attenuation relationship approach developed by Boore in 1997. The algorithm

46
developed by Atkinson & Kaka in 2007 was used for the intensity of the earthquake.
The data entry of the ELER program for the 1754 Istanbul earthquake, which is the
1st scenario earthquake, is given in table 12.

Figure 38:1754 Earthquake Input in ELER

ELER, after the completion of the parameters required for the calculation of
earthquake hazard analysis, ELER 0.2 sec. And 1.0 sec. gives acceleration time
and peak ground acceleration graphs, as seen in Figure 3.3.2. In Figure 3.3.3, the
Marmara distribution of the peak ground acceleration is presented.

47
 Figure 37:Figure
PGA Distrubition
39:PGA Distrubition
of 1754 Earthquake
of 1754 Earthquake

In the creation of earthquake damage hazard, all scenario earthquakes were repeated
using the ELER program DTA module, following the same procedure. Separate
coordinates were entered for each scenario earthquake and the acceleration values in the
entered coordinates were calculated automatically by the ELER program. As shown in
the table, the maximum peak ground acceleration value was found in the 1754 Izmit
earthquake.

Table 12:Table 12: PGA /PGV/Sa0.2/Sa1.0 Distrubition

Date Location Ms Mw PGA (g) PGV(m/s) Sa0.2 (g) Sa1.0 (g)

10.09.1509 İstanbul 7.2 - 0.12 0.12 0.2 0.81
22.05.1766 Marmara 7.1 7.35 0.3 0.32 0.66 0.36
02.09.1754 İzmit 6.8 7.16 0.31 0.37 0.72 0.44
10.07.1894 İzmit 7.3 7.32 0.23 0.25 0.49 0.27
17 08 1999 İzmit 7.4 7.43 0.25 0.29 0.5 0.32
Maximum 0.31

48
 After all these analyzes were done, the level 2 analysis part was started. In this part,
we defined our own building inventory to the ELER program. Then, we made a damage
estimation according to the earthquake that has the peak ground acceleration. I made the
earthquake building damage assessment for all earthquakes according to my own
acceleration reduction relationship. My groupmates also estimated building damage using
a variety of attenuation relationships. Table 1 shows the estimation of damage due to the
attenuation relationship of Bore et al., 1997 for Ground Motion, and Atkinson & Kaka
2007 for Instrumental Intensity. The damage estimation due to other attenuation
relationships is shown in Table 2.
Table 13: Damage Analysis

Earthquake Damage
Total Damage
Date Location Mw No dam. Sli. Mod. Ext. Com.
02.09.1754 izmit 7.16 488.00 170.00 169.00 81.00 60.00 480.00
22.05.1766 Marmara 7.35 503.00 183.00 163.00 70.00 49.00 465.00
10.07.1894 İzmit 7.32 601.00 201.00 116.00 32.00 18.00 367.00
10.09.1509 İstanbul 7.20 807.00 113.00 39.00 6.00 3.00 161.00
17 08 1999 İzmit 7.43 550.00 200.00 140.00 48.00 30.00 418.00

Table 14:Damage Analysis According to Different Relation

49
Conclusion

In this study, earthquake risk situations of reinforced concrete structures

located within the boundaries of Kocaeli province Çayırova district “Özgürlük
Neighbourhood” were determined. The application was made by Gebze Technical
University Civil Engineering Department final year students as a group study
within the scope of their undergraduate thesis. It is envisaged that the results of
the study will be used by the project supporter Çayırova Municipality to
determine regional prioritization in urban transformation activities. The results
obtained from the study are outlined below.

Within the scope of the study, a total of 968 buildings were evaluated.
Earthquake risk assessments were carried out on a total of 968 buildings.

It has been calculated that 33.11% of the reinforced concrete structures in the
examined area are high risk, 34.60% medium risk, 16.79% low risk, 5.5% safe,
and a coloring study was carried out on the current aerial photograph to show the
risk situations.

It is suggested that Çayırova Municipality should start its urban

transformation studies from high-risk buildings and continue the work with
medium-risk buildings.

In the study, the ELER program was used in the Building Earthquake risk
analysis part. Various data of 5 earthquakes, which are historical earthquakes,
were found using ELER, the earthquake that gave the maximum peak ground
acceleration value to the Çayırova region was the 1766 earthquake. (0.31g)

Many attenuation relationships are used in the study, making this study more
comprehensive.

In the study, firstly, Bore et al., 1997 for Ground Motion and Atkinson &
Kaka 2007 attenuation relationship for Instrumental Intensity were used for 5
earthquakes. According to this reduction relationship, the most damaged buildings
were 480 and they were damaged in the 1754 earthquake. Building damage
percentages in other attenuation relationships are shown in the tables on the
previous pages.

50
 References

Calabresi, G. (1960). Some thoughts on risk distribution and the law of torts. Yale
Lj, 70, 499.

DEPREM RİSKLİ BİNALAR İÇİN HIZLI DEĞERLENDİRME

YÖNTEMLERİ 2022- Dr. Ülgen MERT TUĞSAL

FEMA 154 - ATC-21: Rapid visual screening of buildings for potential seismic
hazards: a handbook. (1988). Applied Technology Council. Federal Emergency
Management Agency. Washington DC.

FEMA 155-ATC-21-1:Rapid visual screening of buildings for potential seismic

hazards:supporting documentation. (1988). Applied Technology Council. Federal
Emergency Management Agency. Washington DC.

McGuire, R. K. (2001). Deterministic vs. probabilistic earthquake hazards and

risks. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. Elsevier.

PyGMT.(2022) https://www.earthinversion.com/utilities/pygmt-high-resolution-
topographic-map-in-python/

READER, D., SAVAŞ, G. K., GEDİK, B., ŞUSARLIOĞLU, M. F., & Tarık, K.
A. R. A. (2018). Determining the regional earthquake risk distribution of buildings by
scanning from the street: Erzurum–Yenişehir example. Fırat University Journal of
Engineering Sciences, 30(1), 219-231.

Sucuoğlu H, Yazgan U and Yakut A. (2007). A screening procedure for seismic

risk assessment in urban building stocks. Earthquake Spectra. 23. 441- 458.

51