Evaluation of Liquefaction Potential Index (LPI) for Assessing Liquefactio…
Research papers, University of Canterbury Library
None
None
This report presents an overview of the soil profile characteristics at a number of strong motion station (SMS) sites in Christchurch and its surrounds. An extensive database of ground motion records has been captured by the SMS network in the Canterbury region during the Canterbury earthquake sequence. However in order to comprehensively understand the ground motions recorded at these sites and to be able to relate these motions to other locations, a detailed understanding of the shallow geotechnical profile at each SMS is required. The original NZS1170.5 (SNZ 2004) site subsoil classifications for each SMS site is based on regional geological information and well logs located at varying distances from the site. Given the variability of Christchurch soils, more detailed investigations are required in close vicinity to each SMS to better understand stratigraphy and soil properties, which are important in seismic site response. In this regard, CPT, SPT and borehole data, shear wave velocity (Vs) profiles, and horizontal to vertical spectral ratio measurements (H/V) in close vicinity to the SMS were used to develop representative soil profiles at each site. NZS1170.5 (SNZ 2004) site subsoil classifications were updated using Vs and SPT N60 criteria. Site class E boundaries were treated as a sliding scale rather than as a discrete boundary to account for locations with similar site effects potential, an approach which was shown to result in a better delineation between the site classes. SPT N60 values often indicate a stiffer site class than the Vs data for softer soil sites, highlighting the disparity between the two site investigation techniques. Both SPT N60 and Vs based site classes did not always agree with the original site classifications. This emphasises the importance of having detailed site‐specific information at SMS locations in order to properly classify them. Furthermore, additional studies are required to harmonize site classification based on SPT N60 and Vs. Liquefaction triggering assessments were carried out for the Darfield and Christchurch earthquakes, and compared against observed liquefaction surface manifestations and ground motions characteristics at each SMS. In general, the characteristics of the recorded ground motions at each site correlate well with the triggering analyses. However, at sites that likely liquefied at depth (as indicated by triggering analyses and/or inferred from the characteristics of the recorded surface acceleration time series), the presence of a non‐liquefiable crust layer at many of the SMS locations prevented the manifestation of any surface effects.
Deconstruction, at the end of the useful life of a building, produces a considerable amount of materials which must be disposed of, or be recycled / reused. At present, in New Zealand, most timber construction and demolition (C&D) material, particularly treated timber, is simply waste and is placed in landfills. For both technical and economic reasons (and despite the increasing cost of landfills), this position is unlikely to change in the next 10 – 15 years unless legislation dictates otherwise. Careful deconstruction, as opposed to demolition, can provide some timber materials which can be immediately re-used (eg. doors and windows), or further processed into other components (eg. beams or walls) or recycled (‘cascaded’) into other timber or composite products (e.g. fibre-board). This reusing / recycling of materials is being driven slowly in NZ by legislation, the ‘greening’ of the construction industry and public pressure. However, the recovery of useful material can be expensive and uneconomic (as opposed to land-filling). In NZ, there are few facilities which are able to sort and separate timber materials from other waste, although the soon-to-be commissioned Burwood Resource Recovery Park in Christchurch will attempt to deal with significant quantities of demolition waste from the recent earthquakes. The success (or otherwise) of this operation should provide good information as to how future C&D waste will be managed in NZ. In NZ, there are only a few, small scale facilities which are able to burn waste wood for energy recovery (e.g. timber mills), and none are known to be able to handle large quantities of treated timber. Such facilities, with constantly improving technology, are being commissioned in Europe (often with Government subsidies) and this indicates that similar bio-energy (co)generation will be established in NZ in the future. However, at present, the NZ Government provides little assistance to the bio-energy industry and the emergence worldwide of shale-gas reserves is likely to push the economic viability of bio-energy further into the future. The behaviour of timber materials placed in landfills is complex and poorly understood. Degrading timber in landfills has the potential to generate methane, a potent greenhouse gas, which can escape to the atmosphere and cancel out the significant benefits of carbon sequestration during tree growth. Improving security of landfills and more effective and efficient collection and utilisation of methane from landfills in NZ will significantly reduce the potential for leakage of methane to the atmosphere, acting as an offset to the continuing use of underground fossil fuels. Life cycle assessment (LCA), an increasingly important methodology for quantifying the environmental impacts of building materials (particularly energy, and global warming potential (GWP)), will soon be incorporated into the NZ Green Building Council Greenstar rating tools. Such LCA studies must provide a level playing field for all building materials and consider the whole life cycle. Whilst the end-of-life treatment of timber by LCA may establish a present-day base scenario, any analysis must also present a realistic end-of-life scenario for the future deconstruction of any 6 new building, as any building built today will be deconstructed many years in the future, when very different technologies will be available to deal with construction waste. At present, LCA practitioners in NZ and Australia place much value on a single research document on the degradation of timber in landfills (Ximenes et al., 2008). This leads to an end-of-life base scenario for timber which many in the industry consider to be an overestimation of the potential negative effects of methane generation. In Europe, the base scenario for wood disposal is cascading timber products and then burning for energy recovery, which normally significantly reduces any negative effects of the end-of-life for timber. LCA studies in NZ should always provide a sensitivity analysis for the end-of-life of timber and strongly and confidently argue that alternative future scenarios are realistic disposal options for buildings deconstructed in the future. Data-sets for environmental impacts (such as GWP) of building materials in NZ are limited and based on few research studies. The compilation of comprehensive data-sets with country-specific information for all building materials is considered a priority, preferably accounting for end-of-life options. The NZ timber industry should continue to ‘champion’ the environmental credentials of timber, over and above those of the other major building materials (concrete and steel). End-of-life should not be considered the ‘Achilles heel’ of the timber story.
Environmental stress and disturbance can affect the structure and functioning of marine ecosystems by altering their physical, chemical and biological features. In estuaries, benthic invertebrate communities play important roles in structuring sediments, influencing primary production and biogeochemical flux, and occupying key food web positions. Stress and disturbance can reduce species diversity, richness and abundance, with ecological theory predicting that biodiversity will be at its lowest soon after a disturbance with assemblages dominated by opportunistic species. The Avon-Heathcote Estuary in Christchurch New Zealand has provided a novel opportunity to examine the effects of stress, in the form of eutrophication, and disturbance, in the form of cataclysmic earthquake events, on the structure and functioning of an estuarine ecosystem. For more than 50 years, large quantities (up to 500,000m3/day) of treated wastewater were released into this estuary but in March 2010 this was diverted to an ocean outfall, thereby reducing the nutrient loading by around 90% to the estuary. This study was therefore initially focussed on the reversal of eutrophication and consequent effects on food web structure in the estuary as it responded to lower nutrients. In 2011, however, Christchurch was struck with a series of large earthquakes that greatly changed the estuary. Massive amounts of liquefied sediments, covering up to 65% of the estuary floor, were forced up from deep below the estuary, the estuary was tilted by up to a 50cm rise on one side and a corresponding drop on the other, and large quantities of raw sewage from broken wastewater infrastructure entered the estuary for up to nine months. This study was therefore a test of the potentially synergistic effects of nutrient reduction and earthquake disturbance on invertebrate communities, associated habitats and food web dynamics. Because there was considerable site-to-site heterogeneity in the estuary, the sites in this study were selected to represent a eutrophication gradient from relatively “clean” (where the influence of tidal flows was high) to highly impacted (near the historical discharge site). The study was structured around these sites, with components before the wastewater diversion, after the diversion but before the earthquakes, and after the earthquakes. The eutrophication gradient was reflected in the composition and isotopic chemistry of primary producer and invertebrate communities and the characteristics of sediments across the sample sites. Sites closest to the former wastewater discharge pipe were the most eutrophic and had cohesive organic -rich, fine sediments and relatively depauperate communities dominated by the opportunistic taxa Capitellidae. The less-impacted sites had coarser, sandier sediments with fewer pollutants and far less organic matter than at the eutrophic sites, relatively high diversity and lower abundances of micro- and macro-algae. Sewage-derived nitrogen had became incorporated into the estuarine food web at the eutrophic sites, starting at the base of the food chain with benthic microalgae (BMA), which were found to use mostly sediment-derived nitrogen. Stable isotopic analysis showed that δ13C and δ15N values of most food sources and consumers varied spatially, temporally and in relation to the diversion of wastewater, whereas the earthquakes did not appear to affect the overall estuarine food web structure. This was seen particularly at the most eutrophic site, where isotopic signatures became more similar to the cleaner sites over two-and-a-half years after the diversion. New sediments (liquefaction) produced by the earthquakes were found to be coarser, have lower concentrations of heavy metals and less organic matter than old (existing) sediments. They also had fewer macroinvertebrate inhabitants initially after the earthquakes but most areas recovered to pre-earthquake abundance and diversity within two years. Field experiments showed that there were higher amounts of primary production and lower amounts of nutrient efflux from new sediments at the eutrophic sites after the earthquakes. Primary production was highest in new sediments due to the increased photosynthetic efficiency of BMA resulting from the increased permeability of new sediments allowing increased light penetration, enhanced vertical migration of BMA and the enhanced transport of oxygen and nutrients. The reduced efflux of NH4-N in new sediments indicated that the capping of a large portion of eutrophic old sediments with new sediments had reduced the release of legacy nutrients (originating from the historical discharge) from the sediments to the overlying water. Laboratory experiments using an array of species and old and new sediments showed that invertebrates altered levels of primary production and nutrient flux but effects varied among species. The mud snail Amphibola crenata and mud crab Austrohelice crassa were found to reduce primary production and BMA biomass through the consumption of BMA (both species) and its burial from bioturbation and the construction of burrows (Austrohelice). In contrast, the cockle Austrovenus stutchburyi did not significantly affect primary production and BMA biomass. These results show that changes in the structure of invertebrate communities resulting from disturbances can also have consequences for the functioning of the system. The major conclusions of this study were that the wastewater diversion had a major effect on food web dynamics and that the large quantities of clean and unpolluted new sediments introduced to the estuary during the earthquakes altered the recovery trajectory of the estuary, accelerating it at least throughout the duration of this study. This was largely through the ‘capping’ effect of the new liquefied, coarser-grained sediments as they dissipated across the estuary and covered much of the old organic-rich eutrophic sediments. For all aspects of this study, the largest changes occurred at the most eutrophic sites; however, the surrounding habitats were important as they provided the context for recovery of the estuary, particularly because of the very strong influence of sediments, their biogeochemistry, microalgal and macroalgal dynamics. There have been few studies documenting system level responses to eutrophication amelioration and to the best on my knowledge there are no other published studies examining the impacts of large earthquakes on benthic communities in an estuarine ecosystem. This research gives valuable insight and advancements in the scientific understanding of the effects that eutrophication recovery and large-scale disturbances can have on the ecology of a soft-sediment ecosystem.
Geosynthetic reinforced soil (GRS) walls involve the use of geosynthetic reinforcement (polymer material) within the retained backfill, forming a reinforced soil block where transmission of overturning and sliding forces on the wall to the backfill occurs. Key advantages of GRS systems include the reduced need for large foundations, cost reduction (up to 50%), lower environmental costs, faster construction and significantly improved seismic performance as observed in previous earthquakes. Design methods in New Zealand have not been well established and as a result, GRS structures do not have a uniform level of seismic and static resistance; hence involve different risks of failure. Further research is required to better understand the seismic behaviour of GRS structures to advance design practices. The experimental study of this research involved a series of twelve 1-g shake table tests on reduced-scale (1:5) GRS wall models using the University of Canterbury shake-table. The seismic excitation of the models was unidirectional sinusoidal input motion with a predominant frequency of 5Hz and 10s duration. Seismic excitation of the model commenced at an acceleration amplitude level of 0.1g and was incrementally increased by 0.1g in subsequent excitation levels up to failure (excessive displacement of the wall panel). The wall models were 900mm high with a full-height rigid facing panel and five layers of Microgird reinforcement (reinforcement spacing of 150mm). The wall panel toe was founded on a rigid foundation and was free to slide. The backfill deposit was constructed from dry Albany sand to a backfill relative density, Dr = 85% or 50% through model vibration. The influence of GRS wall parameters such as reinforcement length and layout, backfill density and application of a 3kPa surcharge on the backfill surface was investigated in the testing sequence. Through extensive instrumentation of the wall models, the wall facing displacements, backfill accelerations, earth pressures and reinforcement loads were recorded at the varying levels of model excitation. Additionally, backfill deformation was also measured through high-speed imaging and Geotechnical Particle Image Velocimetry (GeoPIV) analysis. The GeoPIV analysis enabled the identification of the evolution of shear strains and volumetric strains within the backfill at low strain levels before failure of the wall thus allowing interpretations to be made regarding the strain development and shear band progression within the retained backfill. Rotation about the wall toe was the predominant failure mechanism in all excitation level with sliding only significant in the last two excitation levels, resulting in a bi-linear displacement acceleration curve. An increase in acceleration amplification with increasing excitation was observed with amplification factors of up to 1.5 recorded. Maximum seismic and static horizontal earth pressures were recorded at failure and were recorded at the wall toe. The highest reinforcement load was recorded at the lowest (deepest in the backfill) reinforcement layer with a decrease in peak load observed at failure, possibly due to pullout failure of the reinforcement layer. Conversely, peak reinforcement load was recorded at failure for the top reinforcement layer. The staggered reinforcement models exhibited greater wall stability than the uniform reinforcement models of L/H=0.75. However, similar critical accelerations were determined for the two wall models due to the coarseness of excitation level increments of 0.1g. The extended top reinforcements were found to restrict the rotational component of displacement and prevented the development of a preliminary shear band at the middle reinforcement layer, contributing positively to wall stability. Lower acceleration amplification factors were determined for the longer uniform reinforcement length models due to reduced model deformation. A greater distribution of reinforcement load towards the top two extended reinforcement layers was also observed in the staggered wall models. An increase in model backfill density was observed to result in greater wall stability than an increase in uniform reinforcement length. Greater acceleration amplification was observed in looser backfill models due to their lower model stiffness. Due to greater confinement of the reinforcement layers, greater reinforcement loads were developed in higher density wall models with less wall movement required to engage the reinforcement layers and mobilise their resistance. The application of surcharge on the backfill was observed to initially increase the wall stability due to greater normal stresses within the backfill but at greater excitation levels, the surcharge contribution to wall destabilising inertial forces outweighs its contribution to wall stability. As a result, no clear influence of surcharge on the critical acceleration of the wall models was observed. Lower acceleration amplification factors were observed for the surcharged models as the surcharge acts as a damper during excitation. The application of the surcharge also increases the magnitude of reinforcement load developed due to greater confinement and increased wall destabilising forces. The rotation of the wall panel resulted in the progressive development of shears surface with depth that extended from the backfill surface to the ends of the reinforcement (edge of the reinforced soil block). The resultant failure plane would have extended from the backfill surface to the lowest reinforcement layer before developing at the toe of the wall, forming a two-wedge failure mechanism. This is confirmed by development of failure planes at the lowest reinforcement layer (deepest with the backfill) and at the wall toe observed at the critical acceleration level. Key observations of the effect of different wall parameters from the GeoPIV results are found to be in good agreement with conclusions developed from the other forms of instrumentation. Further research is required to achieve the goal of developing seismic guidelines for GRS walls in geotechnical structures in New Zealand. This includes developing and testing wall models with a different facing type (segmental or wrap-around facing), load cell instrumentation of all reinforcement layers, dynamic loading on the wall panel and the use of local soils as the backfill material. Lastly, the limitations of the experimental procedure and wall models should be understood.