Though rare and unpredictable, earthquakes can and do cause catastrophic destruction when they impact unprepared and vulnerable communities. Extensive damage and failure of vulnerable buildings is a key factor which contributes to seismic-related disasters, making the proactive management of these buildings a necessity to reduce the risk of future disasters arising. The devastating Canterbury earthquakes of 2010 and 2011 brought the urgency of this issue to national importance in New Zealand. The national earthquake-prone building framework came into effect in 2017, obligating authorities to identify existing buildings with the greatest risk of collapse in strong earthquakes and for building owners to strengthen or demolish these buildings within a designated period of time. Though this framework is unique to New Zealand, the challenge of managing the seismic risk of such buildings is common amongst all seismically-active countries. Therefore, looking outward to examine how other jurisdictions legally manage this challenge is useful for reflecting on the approaches taken in New Zealand and understand potential lessons which could be adopted. This research compares the legal framework used to reduce the seismic risk of existing buildings in New Zealand with that of the similarly earthquake-prone countries of Japan and Italy. These legal frameworks are examined with a particular focus on the proactive goal of reducing risk and improving resilience, as is the goal of the international Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030. The Sendai Framework, which each of the case study countries have committed to and thus have obligations under, forms the legal basis of the need for states to reduce disaster risk in their jurisdictions. In particular, the states’ legal frameworks for existing building risk reduction are examined in the context of the Sendai priorities of understanding disaster risk, strengthening disaster risk governance, and investing in resilience. While this research illustrates that the case study countries have each adopted more proactive risk reduction frameworks in recent years in anticipation of future earthquakes, the frameworks currently focus on a very narrow range of existing buildings and thus are not currently sufficient for promoting the long-term resilience of building stocks. In order to improve resilience, it is argued, legal frameworks need to include a broader range of buildings subject to seismic risk reduction obligations and also to broaden the focus on long-term monitoring of potential risk to buildings.
In major seismic events, a number of plan-asymmetric buildings which experienced element failure or structural collapse had twisted significantly about their vertical axis during the earthquake shaking. This twist, known as “building torsion”, results in greater demands on one side of a structure than on the other side. The Canterbury Earthquakes Royal Commission’s reports describe the response of a number of buildings in the February 2011 Christchurch earthquakes. As a result of the catastrophic collapse of one multi-storey building with significant torsional irregularity, and significant torsional effects also in other buildings, the Royal Commission recommended that further studies be undertaken to develop improved simple and effective guides to consider torsional effects in buildings which respond inelastically during earthquake shaking. Separately from this, as building owners, the government, and other stakeholders, are planning for possible earthquake scenarios, they need good estimates of the likely performance of both new and existing buildings. These estimates, often made using performance based earthquake engineering considerations and loss estimation techniques, inform decision making. Since all buildings may experience torsion to some extent, and torsional effects can influence demands on building structural and non-structural elements, it is crucial that demand estimates consider torsion. Building seismic response considering torsion can be evaluated with nonlinear time history analysis. However, such analysis involves significant computational effort, expertise and cost. Therefore, from an engineers’ point of view, simpler analysis methods, with reasonable accuracy, are beneficial. The consideration of torsion in simple analysis methods has been investigated by many researchers. However, many studies are theoretical without direct relevance to structural design/assessment. Some existing methods also have limited applicability, or they are difficult to use in routine design office practice. In addition, there has been no consensus about which method is best. As a result, there is a notable lack of recommendations in current building design codes for torsion of buildings that respond inelastically. There is a need for building torsion to be considered in yielding structures, and for simple guidance to be developed and adopted into building design standards. This study aims to undertaken to address this need for plan-asymmetric structures which are regular over their height. Time history analyses are first conducted to quantify the effects of building plan irregularity, that lead to torsional response, on the seismic response of building structures. Effects of some key structural and ground motion characteristics (e.g. hysteretic model, ground motion duration, etc.) are considered. Mass eccentricity is found to result in rather smaller torsional response compared to stiffness/strength eccentricity. Mass rotational inertia generally decreases the torsional response; however, the trend is not clearly defined for torsionally restrained systems (i.e. large λty). Systems with EPP and bilinear models have close displacements and systems with Takeda, SINA, and flag-shaped models yield almost the same displacements. Damping has no specific effect on the torsional response for the single-storey systems with the unidirectional eccentricity and excitation. Displacements of the single-storey systems subject to long duration ground motion records are smaller than those for short duration records. A method to consider torsional response of ductile building structures under earthquake shaking is then developed based on structural dynamics for a wide range of structural systems and configurations, including those with low and high torsional restraint. The method is then simplified for use in engineering practice. A novel method is also proposed to simply account for the effects of strength eccentricity on response of highly inelastic systems. A comparison of the accuracy of some existing methods (including code-base equivalent static method and model response spectrum analysis method), and the proposed method, is conducted for single-storey structures. It is shown that the proposed method generally provides better accuracy over a wide range of parameters. In general, the equivalent static method is not adequate in capturing the torsional effects and the elastic modal response spectrum analysis method is generally adequate for some common parameters. Record-to-record variation in maximum displacement demand on the structures with different degrees of torsional response is considered in a simple way. Bidirectional torsional response is then considered. Bidirectional eccentricity and excitation has varying effects on the torsional response; however, it generally increases the weak and strong edges displacements. The proposed method is then generalized to consider the bidirectional torsion due to bidirectional stiffness/strength eccentricity and bidirectional seismic excitation. The method is shown to predict displacements conservatively; however, the conservatism decreases slightly for cases with bidirectional excitation compared to those subject to unidirectional excitation. In is shown that the roof displacement of multi-storey structures with torsional response can be predicted by considering the first mode of vibration. The method is then further generalized to estimate torsional effects on multi-storey structure displacement demands. The proposed procedure is tested multi-storey structures and shown to predict the displacements with a good accuracy and conservatively. For buildings which twist in plan during earthquake shaking, the effect of P-Δλ action is evaluated and recommendations for design are made. P-Δλ has more significant effects on systems with small post- yield stiffness. Therefore, system stability coefficient is shown not to be the best indicator of the importance of P-Δλ and it is recommended to use post-yield stiffness of system computed with allowance for P-Δλ effects. For systems with torsional response, the global system stability coefficient and post- yield stiffness ration do not reflect the significance of P-Δλ effects properly. Therefore, for torsional systems individual seismic force resisting systems should be considered. Accuracy of MRSA is investigated and it is found that the MRSA is not always conservative for estimating the centre of mass and strong edge displacements as well as displacements of ductile systems with strength eccentricity larger than stiffness eccentricity. Some modifications are proposed to get the MRSA yields a conservative estimation of displacement demands for all cases.
The recent instances of seismic activity in Canterbury (2010/11) and Kaikōura (2016) in New Zealand have exposed an unexpected level of damage to non-structural components, such as buried pipelines and building envelope systems. The cost of broken buried infrastructure, such as pipeline systems, to the Christchurch Council was excessive, as was the cost of repairing building envelopes to building owners in both Christchurch and Wellington (due to the Kaikōura earthquake), which indicates there are problems with compliance pathways for both of these systems. Councils rely on product testing and robust engineering design practices to provide compliance certification on the suitability of product systems, while asset and building owners rely on the compliance as proof of an acceptable design. In addition, forensic engineers and lifeline analysts rely on the same product testing and design techniques to analyse earthquake-related failures or predict future outcomes pre-earthquake, respectively. The aim of this research was to record the actual field-observed damage from the Canterbury and Kaikōura earthquakes of seismic damage to buried pipeline and building envelope systems, develop suitable testing protocols to be able to test the systems’ seismic resilience, and produce prediction design tools that deliver results that reflect the collected field observations with better accuracy than the present tools used by forensic engineers and lifeline analysts. The main research chapters of this thesis comprise of four publications that describe the gathering of seismic damage to pipes (Publication 1 of 4) and building envelopes (Publication 2 of 4). Experimental testing and the development of prediction design tools for both systems are described in Publications 3 and 4. The field observation (discussed in Publication 1 of 4) revealed that segmented pipe joints, such as those used in thick-walled PVC pipes, were particularly unsatisfactory with respect to the joint’s seismic resilience capabilities. Once the joint was damaged, silt and other deleterious material were able to penetrate the pipeline, causing blockages and the shutdown of key infrastructure services. At present, the governing Standards for PVC pipes are AS/NZS 1477 (pressure systems) and AS/NZS 1260 (gravity systems), which do not include a protocol for evaluating the PVC pipes for joint seismic resilience. Testing methodologies were designed to test a PVC pipe joint under various different simultaneously applied axial and transverse loads (discussed in Publication 3 of 4). The goal of the laboratory experiment was to establish an easy to apply testing protocol that could fill the void in the mentioned standards and produce boundary data that could be used to develop a design tool that could predict the observed failures given site-specific conditions surrounding the pipe. A tremendous amount of building envelope glazing system damage was recorded in the CBDs of both Christchurch and Wellington, which included gasket dislodgement, cracked glazing, and dislodged glazing. The observational research (Publication 2 of 4) concluded that the glazing systems were a good indication of building envelope damage as the glazing had consistent breaking characteristics, like a ballistic fuse used in forensic blast analysis. The compliance testing protocol recognised in the New Zealand Building Code, Verification Method E2/VM1, relies on the testing method from the Standard AS/NZS 4284 and stipulates the inclusion of typical penetrations, such as glazing systems, to be included in the test specimen. Some of the building envelope systems that failed in the recent New Zealand earthquakes were assessed with glazing systems using either the AS/NZS 4284 or E2/VM1 methods and still failed unexpectedly, which suggests that improvements to the testing protocols are required. An experiment was designed to mimic the observed earthquake damage using bi-directional loading (discussed in Publication 4 of 4) and to identify improvements to the current testing protocol. In a similar way to pipes, the observational and test data was then used to develop a design prediction tool. For both pipes (Publication 3 of 4) and glazing systems (Publication 4 of 4), experimentation suggests that modifying the existing testing Standards would yield more realistic earthquake damage results. The research indicates that including a specific joint testing regime for pipes and positioning the glazing system in a specific location in the specimen would improve the relevant Standards with respect to seismic resilience of these systems. Improving seismic resilience in pipe joints and glazing systems would improve existing Council compliance pathways, which would potentially reduce the liability of damage claims against the government after an earthquake event. The developed design prediction tool, for both pipe and glazing systems, uses local data specific to the system being scrutinised, such as local geology, dimensional characteristics of the system, actual or predicted peak ground accelerations (both vertically and horizontally) and results of product-specific bi-directional testing. The design prediction tools would improve the accuracy of existing techniques used by forensic engineers examining the cause of failure after an earthquake and for lifeline analysts examining predictive earthquake damage scenarios.
