Rapid, accurate structural health monitoring (SHM) assesses damage to optimise decision-making. Many SHM methods are designed to track nonlinear stiffness changes as damage. However, highly nonlinear pinched hysteretic systems are problematic in SHM. Model-based SHM often fails as any mismatch between model and measured response dynamics leads to significant error. Thus, modelfree methods of hysteresis loop tracking methods have emerged. This study compares the robustness and accuracy in the presence of significant measurement noise of the proven hysteresis loop analysis (HLA) SHM method with 3 emerging model-free methods and 2 further novel adaptations of these methods using a highly nonlinear, 6-story numerical structure to provide a known ground-truth. Mean absolute errors in identifying a known nonlinear stiffness trajectory assessed at four points over two successive ground motion inputs from September 2010 and February 2011 in Christchurch range from 1.71-10.52%. However, the variability is far wider with maximum errors ranging from 3.90-49.72%, where the second largest maximum absolute error was still 19.74%. The lowest mean and maximum absolute errors were for the HLA method. The next best method had mean absolute error of 2.92% and a maximum of 10.51%. These results show the clear superiority of the HLA method over all current emerging model-free methods designed to manage the highly nonlinear pinching responses common in reinforced concrete structures. These results, combined with high robustness and accuracy in scaled and fullscale experimental studies, provide further validation for using HLA for practical implementation.
The 4th of September 2010 Mw 7.1 Darfield (Canterbury) earthquake had generated significant ground shaking within the Christchurch Central Business District (CBD). Despite the apparently significant shaking, the observed structural damage for pre-1970s reinforced concrete (RC) buildings was indeed limited and lower than what was expected for such typology of buildings. This paper explores analytically and qualitatively the different aspects of the "apparent‟ good seismic performance of the pre-1970s RC buildings in the Christchurch CBD, following the earthquake reconnaissance survey by the authors. Damage and building parameters survey result, based on a previously established inventory of building stock of these non-ductile RC buildings, is briefly reported. From an inventory of 75 buildings, one building was selected as a numerical case-study to correlate the observed damage with the non-linear analyses. The result shows that the pre-1970s RC frame buildings performed as expected given the intensity of the ground motion shaking during the Canterbury earthquake. Given the brittle nature of this type of structure, it was demonstrated that more significant structural damage and higher probability of collapse could occur when the buildings were subjected to alternative input signals with different frequency content and duration characteristics and still compatible to the seismicity hazard for Christchurch CBD.
Earthquake Engineering is facing an extraordinarily challenging era, the ultimate target being set at increasingly higher levels by the demanding expectations of our modern society. The renewed challenge is to be able to provide low-cost, thus more widely affordable, high-seismic-performance structures capable of sustaining a design level earthquake with limited or negligible damage, minimum disruption of business (downtime) or, in more general terms, controllable socio-economical losses. The Canterbury earthquakes sequence in 2010-2011 has represented a tough reality check, confirming the current mismatch between societal expectations over the reality of seismic performance of modern buildings. In general, albeit with some unfortunate exceptions, modern multi-storey buildings performed as expected from a technical point of view, in particular when considering the intensity of the shaking (higher than new code design) they were subjected to. As per capacity design principles, plastic hinges formed in discrete regions, allowing the buildings to sway and stand and people to evacuate. Nevertheless, in many cases, these buildings were deemed too expensive to be repaired and were consequently demolished. Targeting life-safety is arguably not enough for our modern society, at least when dealing with new building construction. A paradigm shift towards damage-control design philosophy and technologies is urgently required. This paper and the associated presentation will discuss motivations, issues and, more importantly, cost-effective engineering solutions to design buildings capable of sustaining low-level of damage and thus limited business interruption after a design level earthquake. Focus will be given to the extensive research and developments in jointed ductile connections based upon controlled rocking & dissipating mechanisms for either reinforced concrete and, more recently, laminated timber structures. An overview of recent on-site applications of such systems, featuring some of the latest technical solutions developed in the laboratory and including proposals for the rebuild of Christchurch, will be provided as successful examples of practical implementation of performance-based seismic design theory and technology.
The recent Canterbury earthquake sequence in 2010-2011 highlighted a uniquely severe level of structural damage to modern buildings, while confirming the high vulnerability and life threatening of unreinforced masonry and inadequately detailed reinforced concrete buildings. Although the level of damage of most buildings met the expected life-safety and collapse prevention criteria, the structural damage to those building was beyond economic repair. The difficulty in the post-event assessment of a concrete or steel structure and the uneconomical repairing costs are the big drivers of the adoption of low damage design. Among several low-damage technologies, post-tensioned rocking systems were developed in the 1990s with applications to precast concrete members and later extended to structural steel members. More recently the technology was extended to timber buildings (Pres-Lam system). This doctoral dissertation focuses on the experimental investigation and analytical and numerical prediction of the lateral load response of dissipative post-tensioned rocking timber wall systems. The first experimental stages of this research consisted of component testing on both external replaceable devices and internal bars. The component testing was aimed to further investigate the response of these devices and to provide significant design parameters. Post-tensioned wall subassembly testing was then carried out. Firstly, quasi-static cyclic testing of two-thirds scale post-tensioned single wall specimens with several reinforcement layouts was carried out. Then, an alternative wall configuration to limit displacement incompatibilities in the diaphragm was developed and tested. The system consisted of a Column-Wall-Column configuration, where the boundary columns can provide the support to the diaphragm with minimal uplifting and also provide dissipation through the coupling to the post-tensioned wall panel with dissipation devices. Both single wall and column-wall-column specimens were subjected to drifts up to 2% showing excellent performance, limiting the damage to the dissipating devices. One of the objectives of the experimental program was to assess the influence of construction detailing, and the dissipater connection in particular proved to have a significant influence on the wall’s response. The experimental programs on dissipaters and wall subassemblies provided exhaustive data for the validation and refinement of current analytical and numerical models. The current moment-rotation iterative procedure was refined accounting for detailed response parameters identified in the initial experimental stage. The refined analytical model proved capable of fitting the experimental result with good accuracy. A further stage in this research was the validation and refinement of numerical modelling approaches, which consisted in rotational spring and multi-spring models. Both the modelling approaches were calibrated versus the experimental results on post-tensioned walls subassemblies. In particular, the multi-spring model was further refined and implemented in OpenSEES to account for the full range of behavioural aspects of the systems. The multi-spring model was used in the final part of the dissertation to validate and refine current lateral force design procedures. Firstly, seismic performance factors in accordance to a Force-Based Design procedure were developed in accordance to the FEMA P-695 procedure through extensive numerical analyses. This procedure aims to determine the seismic reduction factor and over-strength factor accounting for the collapse probability of the building. The outcomes of this numerical analysis were also extended to other significant design codes. Alternatively, Displacement-Based Design can be used for the determination of the lateral load demand on a post-tensioned multi-storey timber building. The current DBD procedure was used for the development of a further numerical analysis which aimed to validate the procedure and identify the necessary refinements. It was concluded that the analytical and numerical models developed throughout this dissertation provided comprehensive and accurate tools for the determination of the lateral load response of post-tensioned wall systems, also allowing the provision of design parameters in accordance to the current standards and lateral force design procedures.
The Mw 6.2 February 22nd 2011 Christchurch earthquake (and others in the 2010-2011 Canterbury sequence) provided a unique opportunity to study the devastating effects of earthquakes first-hand and learn from them for future engineering applications. All major events in the Canterbury earthquake sequence caused widespread liquefaction throughout Christchurch’s eastern suburbs, particularly extensive and severe during the February 22nd event. Along large stretches of the Avon River banks (and to a lesser extent along the Heathcote) significant lateral spreading occurred, affecting bridges and the infrastructure they support. The first stage of this research involved conducting detailed field reconnaissance to document liquefaction and lateral spreading-induced damage to several case study bridges along the Avon River. The case study bridges cover a range of ages and construction types but all are reinforced concrete structures which have relatively short, stiff decks. These factors combined led to a characteristic deformation mechanism involving deck-pinning and abutment back-rotation with consequent damage to the abutment piles and slumping of the approaches. The second stage of the research involved using pseudo-static analysis, a simplified seismic modelling tool, to analyse two of the bridges. An advantage of pseudo-static analysis over more complicated modelling methods is that it uses conventional geotechnical data in its inputs, such as SPT blowcount and CPT cone resistance and local friction. Pseudo-static analysis can also be applied without excessive computational power or specialised knowledge, yet it has been shown to capture the basic mechanisms of pile behaviour. Single pile and whole bridge models were constructed for each bridge, and both cyclic and lateral spreading phases of loading were investigated. Parametric studies were carried out which varied the values of key parameters to identify their influence on pile response, and computed displacements and damages were compared with observations made in the field. It was shown that pseudo-static analysis was able to capture the characteristic damage mechanisms observed in the field, however the treatment of key parameters affecting pile response is of primary importance. Recommendations were made concerning the treatment of these governing parameters controlling pile response. In this way the future application of pseudo-static analysis as a tool for analysing and designing bridge pile foundations in liquefying and laterally spreading soils is enhanced.
In most design codes, infill walls are considered as non-structural elements and thus are typically neglected in the design process. The observations made after major earthquakes (Duzce 1999, L’Aquila 2009, Christchurch 2011) have shown that even though infill walls are considered to be non-structural elements, they interact with the structural system during seismic actions. In the case of heavy infill walls (i.e. clay brick infill walls), the whole behaviour of the structure may be affected by this interaction (i.e. local or global structural failures such as soft storey mechanism). In the case of light infill walls (i.e. non-structural drywalls), this may cause significant economical losses. To consider the interaction of the structural system with the ‘non-structural ’infill walls at design stage may not be a practical approach due to the complexity of the infill wall behaviour. Therefore, the purpose of the reported research is to develop innovative technological solutions and design recommendations for low damage non-structural wall systems for seismic actions by making use of alternative approaches. Light (steel/timber framed drywalls) and heavy (unreinforced clay brick) non-structural infill wall systems were studied by following an experimental/numerical research programme. Quasi-static reverse cyclic tests were carried out by utilizing a specially designed full scale reinforced concrete frame, which can be used as a re-usable bare frame. In this frame, two RC beams and two RC columns were connected by two un-bonded post tensioning bars, emulating a jointed ductile frame system (PRESSS technology). Due to the rocking behaviour at the beam-column joint interfaces, this frame was typically a low damage structural solution, with the post-tensioning guaranteeing a linear elastic behaviour. Therefore, this frame could be repeatedly used in all of the tests carried out by changing only the infill walls within this frame. Due to the linear elastic behaviour of this structural bare frame, it was possible to extract the exact behaviour of the infill walls from the global results. In other words, the only parameter that affected the global results was given by the infill walls. For the test specimens, the existing practice of construction (as built) for both light and heavy non-structural walls was implemented. In the light of the observations taken during these tests, modified low damage construction practices were proposed and tested. In total, seven tests were carried out: 1) Bare frame , in order to confirm its linear elastic behaviour. 2) As built steel framed drywall specimen FIF1-STFD (Light) 3) As built timber framed drywall specimen FIF2-TBFD (Light) 4) As built unreinforced clay brick infill wall specimen FIF3-UCBI (Heavy) 5) Low damage steel framed drywall specimen MIF1-STFD (Light) 6) Low damage timber framed drywall specimen MIF2-TBFD (Light) 7) Low damage unreinforced clay brick infill wall specimen MIF5-UCBI (Heavy) The tests of the as built practices showed that both drywalls and unreinforced clay brick infill walls have a low serviceability inter-storey drift limit (0.2-0.3%). Based on the observations, simple modifications and details were proposed for the low damage specimens. The details proved to be working effectively in lowering the damage and increasing the serviceability drift limits. For drywalls, the proposed low damage solutions do not introduce additional cost, material or labour and they are easily applicable in real buildings. For unreinforced clay brick infill walls, a light steel sub-frame system was suggested that divides the infill panel zone into smaller individual panels, which requires additional labour and some cost. However, both systems can be engineered for seismic actions and their behaviour can be controlled by implementing the proposed details. The performance of the developed details were also confirmed by the numerical case study analyses carried out using Ruaumoko 2D on a reinforced concrete building model designed according to the NZ codes/standards. The results have confirmed that the implementation of the proposed low damage solutions is expected to significantly reduce the non-structural infill wall damage throughout a building.
In the period between September 2010 and December 2011, Christchurch (New Zealand) and its surroundings were hit by a series of strong earthquakes including six significant events, all generated by local faults in proximity to the city: 4 September 2010 (Mw=7.1), 22 February 2011 (Mw=6.2), 13 June 2011 (Mw=5.3 and Mw=6.0) and 23 December 2011 (M=5.8 and (M=5.9) earthquakes. As shown in Figure 1, the causative faults of the earthquakes were very close to or within the city boundaries thus generating very strong ground motions and causing tremendous damage throughout the city. Christchurch is shown as a lighter colour area, and its Central Business District (CBD) is marked with a white square area in the figure. Note that the sequence of earthquakes started to the west of the city and then propagated to the south, south-east and east of the city through a set of separate but apparently interacting faults. Because of their strength and proximity to the city, the earthquakes caused tremendous physical damage and impacts on the people, natural and built environments of Christchurch. The 22 February 2011 earthquake was particularly devastating. The ground motions generated by this earthquake were intense and in many parts of Christchurch substantially above the ground motions used to design the buildings in Christchurch. The earthquake caused 182 fatalities, collapse of two multi-storey reinforced concrete buildings, collapse or partial collapse of many unreinforced masonry structures including the historic Christchurch Cathedral. The Central Business District (CBD) of Christchurch, which is the central heart of the city just east of Hagley Park, was practically lost with majority of its 3,000 buildings being damaged beyond repair. Widespread liquefaction in the suburbs of Christchurch, as well as rock falls and slope/cliff instabilities in the Port Hills affected tens of thousands of residential buildings and properties, and shattered the lifelines and infrastructure over approximately one third of the city area. The total economic loss caused by the 2010-2011 Christchurch earthquakes is currently estimated to be in the range between 25 and 30 billion NZ dollars (or 15% to 18% of New Zealand’s GDP). After each major earthquake, comprehensive field investigations and inspections were conducted to document the liquefaction-induced land damage, lateral spreading displacements and their impacts on buildings and infrastructure. In addition, the ground motions produced by the earthquakes were recorded by approximately 15 strong motion stations within (close to) the city boundaries providing and impressive wealth of data, records and observations of the performance of ground and various types of structures during this unusual sequence of strong local earthquakes affecting a city. This paper discusses the liquefaction in residential areas and focuses on its impacts on dwellings (residential houses) and potable water system in the Christchurch suburbs. The ground conditions of Christchurch including the depositional history of soils, their composition, age and groundwater regime are first discussed. Detailed liquefaction maps illustrating the extent and severity of liquefaction across Christchurch triggered by the sequence of earthquakes including multiple episodes of severe re-liquefaction are next presented. Characteristic liquefaction-induced damage to residential houses is then described focussing on the performance of typical house foundations in areas affected by liquefaction. Liquefaction impacts on the potable water system of Christchurch is also briefly summarized including correlation between the damage to the system, liquefaction severity, and the performance of different pipe materials. Finally, the characteristics of Christchurch liquefaction and its impacts on built environment are discussed in relation to the liquefaction-induced damage in Japan during the 11 March 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake.
