한국건축시공학회지 (Journal of the Korea Institute of Building Construction)

  • 제23권4호
  • /
  • Pages.405-416
  • /
  • 2023
  • /
  • 1598-2033(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2233-5706(eISSN)
한국건축시공학회 (The Korean Institute of Building Construction)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

지진의 위험요인을 고려한 공동주택의 내진보강 우선순위 결정에 관한 연구

A Study on Priority Determination of Seismic Reinforcement of Apartment Houses Considering Earthquake Risk Factors

  • Han, Bum-Jin (Department of Smart City Construction Convergence Engineering, Daejin University)
  • 투고 : 2023.05.19
  • 심사 : 2023.06.26
  • 발행 : 2023.08.20
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

최근 중국과 튀르키예에서 발생한 지진과 함께 세계 곳곳에서 지진으로 인한 피해가 발생하고 있으며, 그 피해의 정도 또한 매우 심각한 상황이다. 지진 활성단층에 위치한 우리나라도 더 이상 지진의 안전지대가 아니며, 지진에 대한 선제적 대응이 절대적으로 필요한 시점이다. 정부에서는 기존에 지어진 공공건축물에 대한 내진성능평가, 절차, 내진보강 방법 등을 마련하여 내진설계가 미흡한 시설물에 대한 내진보강을 추진하고 있다. 하지만 민간 소유의 아파트는 강제할 방법이 없고, 사전 연구와 가이드라인의 부족으로 국민 안전을 위한 선제적 조치가 매우 미흡한 실정이다. 국내 주거용 건축물의 약 48%가 30년 이상 된 노후 건축물이며, 그 중 공동주택은 80% 이상으로 그 심각성을 뒷받침하고 있다. 본 연구에서는 건축물의 내진설계 기준을 기반으로 지반 유형, 건물의 중요도, 노후도, 층수 등 공동주택의 내진보강을 위한 총 7개의 주요 영향 요인을 도출하고, 내진보강 우선순위를 보다 간결하고 효율적으로 결정할 수 있는 알고리즘을 제안하였다.

Recent seismic activities in countries like China and Turkey have underscored the widespread and severe damages that earthquakes can inflict globally. Being situated in a seismically active zone, South Korea can no longer regard itself as immune to earthquake hazards, necessitating the urgent adoption of proactive measures against such threats. The government has been proactive in evaluating, formulating processes, and methods for the seismic retrofitting of public buildings lacking in earthquake resistance. However, enforcement mechanisms for privately-owned apartment complexes are absent, and in the face of insufficient previous research and guidelines, preemptive measures for public safety remain alarmingly inadequate. With over 48% of residential structures in Korea aged over 30 years, and apartment complexes constituting more than 80% of these, the gravity of the situation is undeniable. This study deduces key factors for seismic retrofitting of apartment buildings like earthquake zones, soil type, building significance, aging degree, vulnerability, etc., based on building seismic design codes. It further proposes an algorithm for a more succinct and efficient determination of the priority of seismic reinforcements for apartment buildings.

키워드

과제정보

This research was supported by a grant(NRF- 2021R1F1A1046321) from the National Research Foundation of Korea by Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning.

참고문헌

  1. Ministry of Public Administration and Security. 2016 Announcement of Results of Promotion of seismic retrofit measures for existing public facilities. Sejong (Korea): Ministry of Public Administration and Security; 2017. p. 129-303. 
  2. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. Guidelines for evaluating seismic performance of previously constructed facilities (buildings). Sejong (Korea): Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport; 2019. 19 p. 
  3. Jo JR, Kwack YJ, Han JT, Shin HS, Jo CB, Jin WJ, Kim JM, Lee SH, Lee YH, Shin JW, Jeon JS, Jang YG, Park DH, Oh CK, Ha IS, Song JH. Strategic study on seismic performance level inspection and management system of deteriorated infrastructure. Goyang (Korea): Korea Institute of Civil Engineering and Building Technology. 2019 Dec. 189 p. Report No.: KICT 2019-109. 
  4. Lee YJ, Kim JY. Determining the seismic-retrofit priority for school facilities. Journal of The Korea Society of Hazard Mitigation. 2019 Jun;19(7):11-20. https://doi.org/10.9798/KOSHAM.2019.19.7.11 
  5. Chung L, Woo S. Seismic performance preliminary evaluation method of reinforced concrete apartments with bearing wall system, Journal of the Korea Concrete Institute. 2007 Jun;19(3):293-300.  https://doi.org/10.4334/JKCI.2007.19.3.293
  6. Santarsiero G, Masi A, Manfredi V, Ventura G. Requalification of RC frame apartment buildings: Comparison of seismic retrofit solutions based on a multi-criteria approach. Sustainability. 2021 Sep;13(17):9962. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13179962 
  7. Hur J, Kim HK, Shin MJ. Improvement plan of seismic retrofitting support system for establishing earthquake disaster prevention policy. Journal of the Korea Academia Industrial cooperation Society. 2017 Jul;18(7):611-7. https://doi.org/10.5762/KAIS.2017.18.7.611 
  8. Lee JS. A study on the U.S. legislation for earthquake response - Focused on the United States Federal Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act and California Emergency Service Act. 2017 Mar;34(1):25-57. https://doi.org/10.18018/HYLR.2017.34.1.027 
  9. David B, Brian E, Mike H, Ian M, Mark T, Reid Z, Amit K, Andrew P. Unreinforced masonry(URM) seismic retrofit project. Portland (OR): Portland Bureau of Emergency Management. 2015 Apr. p. 1-31. 
  10. Park J, Kim S. A study on evaluation criteria for infrastructure importance regarding earthquake. Journal of The Korean Society of Industry Convergence. 2018 Jun;21(6):317-27.  https://doi.org/10.21289/KSIC.2018.21.6.317
  11. Ha KJ, Lee DL. Support schemes to encourage seismic retrofitting of existing buildings for earthquakes. Journal of Architectural Institute of Korea. 2022 Dec;24(6):121-8. 
  12. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. Guidelines for evaluating seismic performance of previously constructed facilities. Sejong (Korea): Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport; 2021 May. 19 p. 
  13. Shin JS, Kim JH, Lee KH. Seismic assessment of damaged piloti-type RC building subjected to successive earthquakes. The Journal of The International Association for Earthquake engineering. 2014 Feb;43(11):1603-19. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2412 
  14. Gong M, Zuo Z, Wang X, Lu X, Xie L. Comparing seismic performances of pilotis and bare RC frame structures by shaking table tests. Engineering Structures. 2019 Nov;199:109442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.109442 
  15. Hong DV, Lee DH, Shin JU, Lee KH. Influence of shear-axial force interaction on the seismic performance of a piloti building subjected to the 2017 earthquake in Pohang Korea. Structural Concrete. 2020 Feb;21(1):220-34. https://doi.org/10.1002/suco.201800291 
  16. Jintendra K, Bothara P, Dhakai, Jhon B. Seismic performance of an unreinforced masonry building: An experimental investigation. The Journal of The International Association for Earthquake engineering. 2010 Jan;39(1):45-68. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.932 
  17. Cardoso R, Lopes M, Bento R. Seismic evaluation of old masonry buildings. Part I: Method description and application to a case-study. Engineering structures. 2005 Dec;27(14):2024-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.06.012 
  18. D'Ayala D. Handbook of seismic risk analysis and management of civil infrastructure systems. Cambridge(UK): Civil and Structural Engineering; c2013. Chapter 13, Assessing the seismic vulnerability of masonry buildings; p. 334-65. https://doi.org/10.1533/9780857098986.3.334 
  19. Repapis C, Vintzileou E, Zeris C. Evaluation of the seismic performance of existing rc buildings i: Suggested methodology. Journal of Earthquake Engineering. 2006 Oct;10(2):265-87. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632460609350596 
  20. Celarec D, Dolsek M. The impact of modelling uncertainties on the seismic performance assessment of reinforced concrete frame buildings. Engineering Structures. 2013 Jul;52:340-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2013.02.036 
  21. Giordano D, Maiorana F. Teaching algorithms: Visual language vs flowchart vs textual language. 2015 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON). 2015 Mar 18-20; Tallin, Estonia. Manhattan (NY): Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers; 2015. p. 15092691. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2015.7096016 
  22. Andrzejewska M, Stolinska A, Blasiak W, Peczkowski P, Rosiek R, Rozek B, Wcislo D. Eye-tracking verification of the strategy used to analyse algorithms expressed in a flowchart and pseudocode. Interactive learning environments, 2016 Aug; 24(8):1981-95. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2015.1073746