Betonarme bir yapının TBDY-2018 ve DBYBHY-2007 yönetmeliklerine göre tasarımı
Design of a reinforced concrete building according to TBDY-2018 and DBYBHY-2007 regulations
Yazar: METİN BARIŞ SÖNMEZ
Danışman: PROF. DR. TÜLAY AKSU ÖZKUL
İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi / Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü / İnşaat Mühendisliği Ana Bilim Dalı / Yapı Mühendisliği Bilim Dalı
Derece: Yüksek Lisans, 2023
Konu: İnşaat Mühendisliği = Civil Engineering
Dizin: Betonarme binalar = Reinforced concrete buildings ; Betonarme yapılar = Reinforced concrete structures ; Deprem yönetmelikleri = Earthquake regulations ; Kirişler = Beams ; Kolon kiriş birleşimi =

Özet:
Bu tez kapsamında 16 katlı betonarme bir yapının güncel olarak yürürlükte olan Türkiye Bina Deprem Yönetmeliği(TBDY-2018) ve bu yönetmeliğin yayınlanması ile yürürlükten kalkan Deprem Bölgelerinde Yapılacak Binalar Hakkında Yönetmelik(DBYBHY-2007) şartlarına göre analizleri yapılmıştır. Bu analizlerde öncelikle yönetmelik şartlarını sağlayacak şekilde hesap yapılmış, ardından eleman enkesitleri sabit tutularak DBYBHY-2007'ye göre hesap tekrarlanmıştır. İki yönetmeliğe göre çözüm sonucunda elde edilen iç kuvvetler, periyot, taban kesme kuvvetleri, donatı ihtiyaçları ve maliyet ve taşıyıcı eleman boyutları gibi değerler karşılaştırılmış ve değişen şartların bu değerlere etkisi incelenmiştir.
Birinci bölümde depremlerle ilgili genel bilgi verilerek ülkemizde şu ana kadar yürürlüğe girmiş yönetmeliklerden bahsedilmiş, projenin kapsamı ve amacı açıklandıktan sonra konu ile ilgili yapılan çalışmalardan bahsedilmiştir.
İkinci bölümde öncelikle güncel olarak yürürlükte olan Türkiye Bina Deprem Yönetmeliği'nin (TBDY-2018) tez konusuyla alakalı tasarım ilkeleri açıklanmış ve kontrol yapılacak kriterler belirlenmiştir. Ardından Deprem Bölgelerinde Yapılacak Binalar Hakkında Yönetmelik(DBYBHY-2007) için de benzer şekilde tasarım ilkeleri ve kontrol kriterleri açıklanmıştır.
Üçüncü bölümün ilk kısmında Türkiye Bina Deprem Yönetmeliği'ne göre tasarım yapılmıştır. Hesap yapılacak bina ile ilgili bilgiler, kullanılacak malzemeler açıklandıktan sonra oluşturulan proje binası için deprem parametreleri hesaplanmıştır. Bina düzensizlik durumları kontrol edilmiş ve bu düzenszilik durumlarının nasıl etkileri olabileceği açıklanmıştır. Yükler belirlendikten sonra döşeme, kolon, kiriş ve perdeler yönetmelik şartlarına uygun boyutlandırılmış ve ETABS programında bu boyutların ve donatıların uygunluğu kontrol edilmiştir. Hesapta kullanılacak yük kombinasyonları, kütle modelleme ve hesap yöntemleri ile ilgili ayrıntılar açıklanarak mod birleştirme yöntemine göre hesap ve kontroller yapılmıştır. En son olarak ayrı bir modelde temel modellenmiş ve seçilen  temel ölçüsüne göre zımbalama kontrolü yapılmış ve temel donatıları belirlenmiştir ve ardından temel hariç kısım için donatı ve beton maliyet hesabı yapılmıştır. Üçüncü bölümün ikinci kısmında ise Deprem Bölgelerinde Yapılacak Binalar Hakkında Yönetmelik şartlarına göre bina ve malzeme ile ilgili parametreler değiştirilmeden deprem parametreleri belirlenmiştir. Düzensizlik durumları kontrol edilmiş ve yük ve yük kombinasyonları tanımlanmıştır. Döşeme, kolon, kiriş ve perdeler yönetmelik şartlarına uygun boyutlandırılmış ve ETABS programında bu boyutların ve donatıların uygunluğu kontrol edilmiştir. Ardından donatı ve beton maliyet hesabı yapılmıştır. İkinci kısmın sonunda TBDY-2018'e göre hesapta seçilen eleman enkesitleri aynen kullanılarak DBYBHY-2007'ye göre tekrar hesap yapılmış ve yapı periyot ve taban kesme kuvvetleri incelenmiştir.
Dördüncü bölümde hesap sonuçlarının iki yönetmelik arasındaki farkları incelenmiştir. Periyotlar, taban kesme kuvvetleri, eleman enkesitleri, donatı yüzdeleri, yaklaşık maliyetler, iç kuvvetler ve düzensizlik durumları açısından iki yönetmeliğe göre çözümler karşılaştırılmıştır.
Beşinci bölümde dördüncü bölümdeki karşılaştırmaların sonuçları ve ulaşılan genel sonuçlar açıklanmıştır.

Abstract:
Within the scope of this thesis, a 16-storey reinforced concrete structure was analyzed according to the current Turkish Building Earthquake Code (TBDY-2018) and the Regulation on Buildings to be Constructed in Earthquake Zones (DBYBHY-2007), which was abolished with the publication of this regulation. In these analyzes, firstly, the calculation was made in a way to meet the regulations, then the calculation was repeated according to DBYBHY-2007, keeping the cross-sections of the elements constant. Values such as internal forces, period, base shear forces, reinforcement requirements and cost and carrier element dimensions obtained as a result of the solution according to the two regulations were compared and the effects of changing conditions on these values were examined.In the first chapter, by giving general information about earthquakes, the regulations that have come into force in our country so far are mentioned, and after the scope and purpose of the project are explained, the studies on the subject are mentioned.
In the second part, first of all, the design principles of the Turkish Building Earthquake Code (TBDY-2018), which is currently in force, are explained and the criteria to be checked are determined. Then, similarly, the design principles and control criteria are explained for the Regulation on Buildings to be Constructed in Earthquake Zones (DBYBHY-2007).
In the first part of the third chapter, the design was made according to the Turkish Building Earthquake Code. After the information about the building to be calculated and the materials to be used were explained, the earthquake parameters were calculated for the project building. Building irregularities have been checked and the effects of these irregularities have been explained. After the loads were determined, floors, columns, beams and walls were dimensioned in accordance with the regulations and the suitability of these dimensions and reinforcements was checked in the ETABS program. The load combinations to be used in the calculation, the mass modeling and the calculation methods were explained and the calculations and controls were made according to the mode combination method. Finally, the foundation was modeled in a separate model and punching control was made according to the selected foundation size, and the foundation reinforcements were determined, and then the cost of reinforcement and concrete was calculated for the part excluding the foundation. In the second part of the third chapter, earthquake parameters have been determined without changing the parameters related to the building and materials, according to the regulations on the Buildings to be Constructed in Seismic Zones. Irregularities are checked and load and load combinations are defined. Floors, columns, beams and shear walls were dimensioned in accordance with the regulations and the suitability of these dimensions and reinforcements was checked in the ETABS program. Then, reinforcement and concrete cost calculations were made. At the end of the second part, the selected element cross-sections in the calculation according to TBDY-2018 were used exactly and the calculation was made according to DBYBHY-2007 and the period and base shear forces of the structure were examined.
In the fourth chapter, the differences between the calculation results and the two regulations are examined. The solutions were compared in terms of periods, base shear forces, element cross-sections, reinforcement percentages, approximate costs, internal forces and irregularities according to the two regulations.Periods compared first and even though the calculated periods were higher the conditions on the 2018 regulation prevent it to use the calculated periods and for both directions the periods are used as Tx=Ty=2s. Similarly on 2007 regulation on X direction because of the condition depend on the building height Tx used as 1.60s and Ty used as 1.504 s as calculated. As a result of the pre-sizing, since the cross-sectional area control conditions became heavier in TBDY-2018, the column sizes that could be selected in 60cmx60cm dimensions according to the old regulation were selected as 70cmx70cm in the new regulation and only the columns were selected smaller in the dimensions of 10x10 in the load-bearing elements in two structures. All other carrier elements are sized in the same dimensions. With the effect of the shrinking sections, the reinforcement needs have also been less in DBYBHY. However, as the section dimensions decreased to 40x40, the column sections towards the top floors were much more difficult than in TBDY-2018. Therefore, while the reinforcements selected in the lower floors were reduced at the same rate by reducing the cross-sections, the selected reinforcements in the upper floors were not reduced. In terms of beam reinforcements due to the shrinking column dimensions, the beam reinforcement needs were higher than those of TBDY-2018 in the calculations made according to DBYBHY-2007 in the controls made on the same floor. As a result, in the cost calculation, the total reinforcement decreased with the decrease in the reinforcement needs in the columns, but the beam reinforcements increased. In terms of controlling irregularity conditions, it has been observed that there is a stiffness irregularity between adjacent floors in the building according to both regulations. While this irregularity was found in both directions in the calculation made according to TBDY, this irregularity was found only in the X direction in the calculation made according to DBYBHY. Since this irregularity is in the building and BYS is not at the values that can be used in the equivalent earthquake load method, the calculations were made according to the mode combination method. According to the two regulations, the internal forces took values close to each other in the lower floors of the building, but the differences increased as the upper floors went up. In general, the most strain in the building was seen at 1.4G+1.6Q loading. In general, in most of the beams, the internal forces were higher in the calculations made according to DBYBHY-2007. As a result, reinforcement needs have also increased in the calculations made according to this regulation. Similarly, although the column sizes decreased in the upper floor columns, the need for reinforcement increased and while 1.30% reinforcement was used in TBDY, this rate increased to 1.91% in DBYBHY.
In the fifth chapter, the results of the comparisons in the fourth chapter and the general conclusions reached are explained. At the beginning of the thesis work, the project building was chosen to have 20 floors and BYS=2. However, as a result of the overturning moment control that came with TBDY-2018, the building height class should be increased in the A15 system selected according to Table 2.8. For BYS=2 and above structures, more shear elements could be added for the project building, and a structure could be built at this height. From this, it was concluded that in TBDY-2018, curtains should be given weight in the carrier system in high-rise buildings.
As a result of the rollover control, the number of floors in the building was reduced to 16, and the calculations were repeated and all controls of TBDY-2018 regarding this building type were made. As a result of the capacity controls of the columns, it was seen that the capacities of the columns were used more than TBDY-2018 in the calculations made according to DBYBHY-2007. In TBDY-2018, as a result of the enlargement of the cross-sections, the concrete area increased and the percentage of reinforcement used was lower, but because the diameter of the reinforcement increased, more reinforcement steel was used according to the calculation made according to DBYBHY-2007. This led to an increase in the cost in TBDY-2018 accounts. Since the building geometry was not changed, the wall sections were kept the same and the reinforcements were not changed. Therefore, it was not possible to make a comparison in terms of cost in terms of curtains. However, in the calculations made, it was seen that the capacities were used at a higher rate in the TBDY-2018 calculations. As a result of the cost calculation, it was seen that the cost of reinforcement and concrete increased by 2.5% in the calculation made according to TBDY-2018. In DBYBHY, it was observed that the base shear forces increased with the decrease of the periods. It was observed that there was an increase of 47% in the X direction and 63% in the Y direction. Since the same periods were used in TBDY, the base shear force values were quite close.