Assesses seismic performance of reinforced concrete buildings, indicating the need to consider rupture directivity implications.
Near-fault ground motions influenced by rupture directivity impose seismic demands that differ fundamentally from those associated with conventional far-field earthquakes, particularly in terms of displacement-controlled response. This study presents a performance-based seismic assessment of existing reinforced concrete (RC) buildings subjected to near-fault ground motions in the Sivrice–Pütürge segment of the Malatya–Ovacık Fault Zone, Eastern Anatolia. A probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) was performed using NGA-West2 ground-motion prediction equations together with a regionally defined fault model, and the resulting hazard was evaluated within the framework of the Turkish Building Earthquake Code (TBEC-2018). Code-compatible earthquake records were selected and scaled for the DD-2 design earthquake level, while rupture directivity was represented using a literature-based median amplification factor. Nonlinear time-history analyses were subsequently carried out for three existing RC buildings representing low-, mid-, and high-rise structural typologies. Structural performance was evaluated in terms of roof displacement, interstory drift ratio, base shear, and element-level damage states. The maximum roof displacements reached 0.070 m, 0.107 m, and 0.138 m for the low-, mid-, and high-rise buildings, respectively, corresponding to maximum drift ratios of 0.60%, 0.46%, and 0.34%. The results indicate that rupture directivity has only a limited influence on base shear demand but substantially increases displacement-related response quantities and promotes a redistribution of structural damage from predominantly beam-controlled behavior toward increased participation of columns and shear walls, particularly in medium- and high-rise buildings. These findings demonstrate that conventional code-based assessment procedures may underestimate deformation demands in fault-proximal regions and highlight the importance of explicitly considering rupture directivity in the seismic performance assessment of existing reinforced concrete buildings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kanli et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: