Search

found 18 results

Images, UC QuakeStudies

A digitally manipulated image of printer's type, spelling out "Safe Dust". The photographer comments, "After the September 2010 Christchurch earthquake liquefaction poured out of the ground mostly in the East of Christchurch. This silt, which was a form of sand was declared safe and would not harm gardens if it was spread around in moderation. After the February 2011 quake as a result of even more liquefaction and the sewers being ruptured, the liquefaction was declared as toxic. People clearing it up should wear a mask, boots and gloves especially when it had dried up and become dusty. This just so happens to be the words found on an old printing press".

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Workers operate a drilling rig inside a Terra Probe truck, which has been raised on jacks to make it stable. The photographer comments, "Another completely different company testing what is below the surface to determine what type of foundations new houses will need. This is in one the blue/green area of earthquake shaken Christchurch. Strangely this is 3 metres away from where the other testing was done".

Articles, UC QuakeStudies

The Christchurch liquefaction study was initiated to better determine liquefaction susceptibility in Christchurch city. It aimed to improve on earlier liquefaction susceptibility maps, which were based on soil type and distribution, by incorporating soil strength data into liquefaction analysis. This stage of the study included collating available geological and geotechnical data from Environment Canterbury and Christchurch City Council into a database, modelling liquefaction hazard and ground damage and presenting these as maps. The report contains many recommendations, which were taken up in subsequent stages of the study. (Note that the results of Stage 1 of the Christchurch liquefaction study were provided to Environment Canterbury as a letter rather than a report. This was a summary of work completed to 30 June 2001, including a review of geological and geotechnical data available within Environment Canterbury and Christchurch City Council records.) See Object Overview for background and usage information.

Articles, UC QuakeStudies

This report provides information on the locations and character of active geological faults and folds in Ashburton District. The faults are mapped at a district scale and the information is intended to highlight areas where there is a risk of permanent fault movement at the ground surface, and where more detailed investigations should be done if development is proposed in that area (depending on the potential activity of the fault and the type of development proposed). See Object Overview for background and usage information. Most of the faults and folds identified at the ground surface in Ashburton District are in rural or very sparsely populated areas. In addition, most of the faults have relatively long recurrence intervals (long-term average time between fault movements) in the order of several thousand years. Following the Ministry for the Environment Active Fault Guidelines, normal residential development would be allowed on or near faults with recurrence intervals this long. There are no recommendations associated with this report. The information in the report will be reviewed as required, after the remaining district reports are completed in the region.

Articles, UC QuakeStudies

This report provides information on the locations and character of active geological faults and folds in Mackenzie District. The faults are mapped at a district scale and the information is intended to highlight areas where there is a risk of fault movement, and where more detailed investigations should be done if development is proposed in that area(depending on the potential activity of the fault and the type of development proposed). Most of the faults and folds identified at the ground surface in Mackenzie District are in rural or very sparsely populated areas. In addition, most of the faults have relatively long recurrence intervals (long-term average time between fault movements) in the order of several thousand years. Following the Ministry for the Environment Active Fault Guidelines, normal residential development would be allowed on or near faults with recurrence intervals this long. There are no recommendations associated with this report. The information in the report will be reviewed as required, after the remaining district reports are completed in the region. See Object Overview for background and usage information.

Videos, UC QuakeStudies

A video of a presentation by Professor David Johnston during the fourth plenary of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. Johnston is a Senior Scientist at GNS Science and Director of the Joint Centre for Disaster Research in the School of Psychology at Massey University. The presentation is titled, "Understanding Immediate Human Behaviour to the 2010-2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence, Implications for injury prevention and risk communication".The abstract for the presentation reads as follows: The 2010 and 2011 Canterbury earthquake sequences have given us a unique opportunity to better understand human behaviour during and immediately after an earthquake. On 4 September 2010, a magnitude 7.1 earthquake occurred near Darfield in the Canterbury region of New Zealand. There were no deaths, but several thousand people sustained injuries and sought medical assistance. Less than 6 months later, a magnitude 6.2 earthquake occurred under Christchurch City at 12:51 p.m. on 22 February 2011. A total of 182 people were killed in the first 24 hours and over 7,000 people injured overall. To reduce earthquake casualties in future events, it is important to understand how people behaved during and immediately after the shaking, and how their behaviour exposed them to risk of death or injury. Most previous studies have relied on an analysis of medical records and/or reflective interviews and questionnaire studies. In Canterbury we were able to combine a range of methods to explore earthquake shaking behaviours and the causes of injuries. In New Zealand, the Accident Compensation Corporation (a national health payment scheme run by the government) allowed researchers to access injury data from over 9,500 people from the Darfield (4 September 2010) and Christchurch (22 February 2011 ) earthquakes. The total injury burden was analysed for demography, context of injury, causes of injury, and injury type. From the injury data inferences into human behaviour were derived. We were able to classify the injury context as direct (immediate shaking of the primary earthquake or aftershocks causing unavoidable injuries), and secondary (cause of injury after shaking ceased). A second study examined people's immediate responses to earthquakes in Christchurch New Zealand and compared responses to the 2011 earthquake in Hitachi, Japan. A further study has developed a systematic process and coding scheme to analyse earthquake video footage of human behaviour during strong earthquake shaking. From these studies a number of recommendations for injury prevention and risk communication can be made. In general, improved building codes, strengthening buildings, and securing fittings will reduce future earthquake deaths and injuries. However, the high rate of injuries incurred from undertaking an inappropriate action (e.g. moving around) during or immediately after an earthquake suggests that further education is needed to promote appropriate actions during and after earthquakes. In New Zealand - as in US and worldwide - public education efforts such as the 'Shakeout' exercise are trying to address the behavioural aspects of injury prevention.