Yapı Kabuğunda Kullanıcı Güvenliği ve Riskleri

Hızlı kentleşme, hızlı üretim ve yapılaşma biçimleri, tasarım yöntemlerinin ve zorunlulukların gelişimlerin gerisinde kalması, sosyolojik değişim, ekolojik dönüşümler vb. gibi nedenlerle farklılaşan yapma çevre içerisinde oluşan güvenlik sorunları bireylerin yaşamlarını olumsuz bir biçimde etkilemektedir. Yapılar bu değişimler nedeniyle güvenli bir yaşam ortamı sunmaktan uzaklaşmaktadır. Özellikle yapının iç yaşantısı ile yakın çevresi arasında bir sınır ve eşik görevi yapan yapı kabuğu kullanıcı güvenliğinin sağlanmasında önemli bir yapı elemanıdır. Ancak Türkiye’de mimari tasarımda yaygın olarak kullanılan geleneksel tasarım yöntemi bu güvenlik sorunlarının çözümü için yetersiz kalmaktadır. Bu sorunların çözümlenebilmesi için risk analizli tasarım yönteminin kullanımının benimsenmesi gerekmektedir. Bu çalışmanın amacı; yapı ve yapı kabuğunda oluşması olası risklerin tanımlanması, analiz edilmesi, önceliklendirilmesi sistemini temel alan risk analizli tasarım yöntemi konusunda tasarımcılara bilgi ve bilinç kazandırmaktır. Araştırmada, yapı kabuğuna ilişkin riskler kapsamlı bir literatür, olay ve istatistiksel araştırma sonucunda belirlenmiş, sınıflandırılmış ve tanımlanmıştır. Tanımlanmış olan risklerin ortadan kaldırılması ya da çözümlenmesi için risk analizli tasarım yöntemi önerisi geliştirilmiştir. Bu yöntemin Türkiye’de güvenli yapı ve yapı kabuğu tasarlama konusunda rehberlik edeceği varsayılmaktadır

Occupant Safety and Risks Related to Building Envelope

The need for shelter in humans has emerged to protect themselves from adverse environmental conditions and to meet l their physiological needs in a safe and healthy living area. However, in today’s spatial changes and transformations, a wide range of risk-based problems of the occupants are either ignored / pushed in to the background in the design processes, or people are afraid of such problems. In built environments, designed by ignoring these risks, people constantly feel threatened and endangered. People’s lives are hampered by the problems posed by these risks that must be prevented before they occur. However, in Turkey, there exists no architectural design procedure that considers the risks in building production. This is mainly because occupants and builders prioritize economic and social concerns rather than health and safety issues. Arising from the need to live in a safe environment, buildings have turned into an element that negatively affects the need of people due to the changes in time. Building envelopes play an important role in providing a safe environment to protect buildings from external safety issues, especially as a boundary between indoor and outdoor environments. However, as the changes over time has been reflected in the building envelope, there have been significant increases in the downside of the occupant safety-building envelope relationship. The study aims to classify safety risks of the building envelope according to incidents faced by occupants, to define circumstances to be considered in design processes and, to contribute to the design process with the proposal of a risk analysis method. The study is limited to the risks of the building and the nearby surroundings, which adversely affect the occupant safety associated with the building envelope. Risks for occupants arising from the building envelope, problems encountered, and solutions to prevent these before they occur are discussed. Risks associated with building envelopes were identified, classified, and defined through extensive literature, incident and statistical research. A risk analysis design method proposal was developed and linked with the building envelope to eliminate or resolve identified risks. Safety-related rules in architectural design are usually defined through codes and standards. However, there are different risks beyond the minimum situations likely to be encountered by occupants. Their safety levels cannot be determined by strict criteria. Each design has its own conditions; acceptable risk levels should be defined by consensus among occupants and designers. A design process, that ignores occupant safety issues, may result in injuries, damage to internal organs and skeletal system, cracks and fractures, burning, scalding, poisoning, and death. Occupants face the same life threats as building envelopes are built with similar design negligence. As a result, occupants’ lives are blocked or ended. Therefore, such negative issues should be addressed as a design problem in the design process and resolved in advance. To produce solutions, building envelope, occupant, function and design risks should be identified. In the study, the common conditions of these risks were identified and examined and, consequently, physical, sociological, psychological risks based on the occupants and the problems that may occur due to the reasons of the related risks were explained in relation to the function. After the identification process, the necessary design method proposal was developed to prevent these problems in the design phase. In Turkey, design method based on risk analysis rather than the traditional approach in ensuring occupant safety should be used. Thus, a healthier and more controlled design process will be implemented and as a result, a system that prioritizes occupant safety will be established. Resolving and detailing conditions that pose a threat to occupant in the building envelope before they occur will reduce the obligations and errors in the production process, and will reduce vital safety issues even if they cannot be completely eliminated during use. This change is considered to have a positive effect on building and envelope design in Turkey, which currently carries multiple potential risks. The study is significant in defining risks arising from the building and its nearby surroundings on the basis of building envelope, revealing the adverse effects of the identified risks on the occupant, and it is thought that it will contribute to safe building design studies in the future with the proposed design method involving risk analysis which is suitable for conditions in Turkey, help to resolve risks in the design process before they occur. In addition, it is thought that the study will raise the safety awareness of occupant and designers in buildings and the nearby surrounding area.

___

  • Akasah, Z. A., Alias, M. ve Ramli, A. (2015). Architectural building safety and health performance model for stratified low-cost housing: Education and management tool for building managers. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology International Journal of Structural and Construction Engineering, 9(4), 472–80.
  • Altındaş, S. (2014). Cephelerde yangın oluşumu ve yayılımı. 7. Ulusal Çatı ve Cephe Sempozyumu.
  • Çevre ve Şehircilik Bakanlığı. (2015). Binaların yangından korunması hakkında yönetmelik. Resmi Gazete, 29411.
  • Creaser, W. (2008). Prevention through design (PtD) safe design from an Australian perspective. Journal of Safety Research, 39(2), 131–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr. 2008.02.018
  • Delibaş, K. (2017). Risk toplumu belirsizlikler ve söylentiler sosyolojisi. Ayrıntı Yayınları.
  • Dinçtürk, S. (2007). Türkiye’de vandalizmin sosyal, ekonomik ve psikolojik boyutları. [Yüksek Lisans Tezi]. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi.
  • FEMA (USA Federal Emergency Management Agency). (2007). Design guide for improving critical facility safety from flooding and high winds. (FEMA 543).
  • Güler, Ç. ve Çobanoğlu, Z. (1994). Kazalar ve önlenmesi. Sağlık Bakanlığı Temel Sağlık Hizmetleri Genel Müdürlüğü ve Sağlık Projesi Genel Koordinatörlüğü Yayınları.
  • Ho, D. C., Then, D. S. ve Yau, Y. (2005). Facilitation of urban renewal with building safety and conditions index. CIB Facilities Business and Its Management, 475–486.
  • Ho, D. C., Chau, K. W., Leung, H. F., Cheung, A. K., Yau, Y., Wong, S. K. ve ark. (2008). A survey of the health and safety conditions of apartment buildings in Hong Kong. Building and Environment, 43(5), 764–75.
  • Ho, D. C. ve Yau, Y. (2004). Building safety & conditions index: A benchmarking tool for maintenance managers. Prooceeding of the CIB W70 Facilities Management and Maintenance Symposium, 149–156.
  • İBB (İstanbul Büyükşehir Belediyesi) İtfaiye Daire Başkanlığı. (2018). İstatistikler 2018 (Yangın). İstanbul, İBB İtfaiye Daire Başkanlığı Yayınları.
  • İBB (İstanbul Büyükşehir Belediyesi). (2018). İstanbul imar yönetmeliği. Resmi Gazete, 30426.
  • Karim, H. A. (2012). Low cost housing environment: Compromising quality of life ? Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 35, 44–53.
  • Kılıç, A. (2012a). Otel yangınları ve nedenleri. Yangın ve Güvenlik, 151, 8–12.
  • Kılıç, A. (2012b). Cephe kaplamaları ve cephe yangın güvenliği. Yangın ve Güvenlik, 152, 8–10.
  • Kılıç, A. (2017). Kundaklama ve sabotaj. Yangın ve Güvenlik, 189, 8–10.
  • Li, J., Liu, Q. ve Sang, Y. (2012). Several issues about urbanization and urban safety. Procedia Engineering, 43, 615–621.
  • McDowell, B. D. ve Lemer, A. C. (1991). Uses of risk analysis to achieve balanced safety in building design and operations. National Academies Press.
  • Netherton, M. D. ve Stewart, M. G. (2009). The effects of explosive blast load variability on safety hazard and damage risks for monolithic window glazing. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 36(12), 1346–1354.
  • Poel, I. ve Robaey, Z. (2017). Safe-by-design: From safety to responsibility. NanoEthics, 11(3), 297–306.
  • Scott, A. (2005). Falls on stairways-Literature review report number HSL/2005/10. UK Health and Safety Executive.
  • Şenel, B., Arıcan, N., Üzün, İ., Ersoy, G. ve Ağrıtmış, H. (2006). İstanbul’da balkondan düşmeye bağlı ölümler. Adli Tıp Dergisi, 20(1), 18–23.
  • UK (United Kingdom) Occupational safety & health council-development bureau. (2019). Guidance Notes of Design for Safety. UK Occupational Safety & Health Council-Development Bureau.
  • UN (United Nations) Human Settlements Programme. (2007). Global report on human settlements 2007 enhancing urban safety and security, United Nations Human Settlements Programme.
  • WHO (World Health Organization). (2015). Hospital Safety Index Guide for Evaluators.
  • Wong, S. K., Cheung, A. K. C., Yau, Y., Ho, D.C. ve Chau, K. W. (2006). Are our residential buildings healthy and safe? A survey in Hong Kong. Structural Survey, 24(1), 77–86.
  • USA (United States of America) National Institute of Building Sciences. (2017). Whole building design guide-secure/safe. Aralık 10, 2017 tarihinde https://www.wbdg.org/design-objectives/secure-safe adresinden erişildi.