**5. Case study**

The rule of art applies to the case study to identify the building's damage analyses and possible collapse scenarios. The case study is selected from the Adana-Tepebağ region, which is under risk of seismicity.

## **5.1 Traditional Tepebağ house with inventory number 63**

The house is located in Adana-Tepebağ, with inventory number 63. It is assumed that it was constructed in the nineteenth century. The house is built on two floors with load-bearing structural system. Brick material was primarily used in masonry walls. Timber material was used in different parts of the structure; in floor-roof slabs and beams inside the brick masonry walls. Besides, the oriel was constructed with timber materials. And dry soil with timber beams was used for building the flat roof (**Table 7**), [12].

According to the rule of art, crack and degradation analysis and possible collapse scenario were determined for the traditional Tepebağ house with inventory number 63. In the following pictures (**Figures 6**–**9**), cracks and damaged areas of the house are identified with arrows, lines, and instructions.

On the north side of the building facade, there was a significant loss of brick materials because of the low bonding strength of the bricks and the detachment of the masonry leaves. The second clue of the detachment of the masonry leaves was one crack on the upper corner of the roof, which was under the stress of vertical loads (**Table 8**).

**Table 7.** *Traditional Tepebağ houses with inventory number 63 [12].*

*Morphology of the Vernacular Masonry Structure in Adana City and Its Qualitative Analysis… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.108692*

**Figure 6.** *Traditional Tepebağ house with inventory number 63, north-east view.*

**Figure 7.** *Traditional Tepebağ house with inventory number 63, east view.*

The timber beams and lintel were at risk of deterioration and were not continuing through the entire wall length. The load-bearing walls are insufficient to support the dead load of the flat dry soil roof. Therefore, there was a detachment and outpour

**Figure 8.** *Traditional Tepebağ house with inventory number 63, south-west view.*

**Figure 9.**

*Traditional Tepebağ house with inventory number 63, west view.*

within the joint parts of the masonry and the roof beams. The stone arch was supported with thick masonry brick walls. However, one side of the arch wall was standing on the opening of the brick masonry, which caused cracks and deflection (**Table 9**).

*Morphology of the Vernacular Masonry Structure in Adana City and Its Qualitative Analysis… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.108692*

#### **Table 8.**

*The rule of art, crack, and degradation analysis and possible collapse scenario for the traditional Tepebağ house with inventory number 63, A.*


### **Table 9.**

*The rule of art, crack, and degradation analysis and possible collapse scenario for the traditional Tepebağ house with inventory number 63, B.*
