Buildings subject to earthquake shaking will tend to move not only horizontally but also rotate in plan. In-plan rotation is known as “building torsion” and it may occur for a variety of reasons, including stiffness and strength eccentricity and/or torsional effects from ground motions. Methods to consider torsion in structural design standards generally involve analysis of the structure in its elastic state. This is despite the fact that the structural elements can yield, thereby significantly altering the building response and the structural element demands. If demands become too large, the structure may collapse. While a number of studies have been conducted into the behavior of structures considering inelastic building torsion, there appears to be no consensus that one method is better than another and as a result, provisions within current design standards have not adopted recent proposals in the literature. However, the Canterbury Earthquakes Royal Commission recently made the recommendation that provisions to account for inelastic torsional response of buildings be introduced within New Zealand building standards. Consequently, this study examines how and to what extent the torsional response due to system eccentricity may affect the seismic performance of a building and considers what a simple design method should account for. It is concluded that new methods should be simple, be applicable to both the elastic and inelastic range of response, consider bidirectional excitation and include guidance for multi-story systems.
The 2010-2011 Christchurch earthquakes generated damage in several Reinforced Concrete (RC) buildings, which had RC walls as the principal resistant element against earthquake demand. Despite the agreement between structural engineers and researchers in an overall successfully performance there was a lack of knowledge about the behaviour of the damaged structures, and even deeper about a repaired structure, which triggers arguments between different parties that remains up to these days. Then, it is necessary to understand the capacity of the buildings after the earthquake and see how simple repairs techniques improve the building performance. This study will assess the residual capacity of ductile slender RC walls according to current standards in New Zealand, NZS 3101.1 2006 A3. First, a Repaired RC walls Database is created trying to gather previous studies and to evaluate them with existing international guidelines. Then, an archetype building is designed, and the wall is extracted and scaled. Four half-scale walls were designed and will be constructed and tested at the Structures Testing Laboratory at The University of Auckland. The overall dimensions are 3 [m] height, 2 [m] length and 0.175 [m] thick. All four walls will be identical, with differences in the loading protocol and the presence or absence of a repair technique. Results are going to be useful to assess the residual capacity of a damaged wall compare to the original behaviour and also the repaired capacity of walls with simpler repair techniques. The expected behaviour is focussed on big changes in stiffness, more evident than in previously tested RC beams found in the literature.
The 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence, and the resulting extensive data sets on damaged buildings that have been collected, provide a unique opportunity to exercise and evaluate previously published seismic performance assessment procedures. This poster provides an overview of the authors’ methodology to perform evaluations with two such assessment procedures, namely the P-58 guidelines and the REDi Rating System. P-58, produced by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in the United States, aims to facilitate risk assessment and decision-making by quantifying earthquake ground shaking, structural demands, component damage and resulting consequences in a logical framework. The REDi framework, developed by the engineering firm ARUP, aids stakeholders in implementing resilience-based earthquake design. Preliminary results from the evaluations are presented. These have the potential to provide insights on the ability of the assessment procedures to predict impacts using “real-world” data. However, further work remains to critically analyse these results and to broaden the scope of buildings studied and of impacts predicted.
This research investigates the validation of simulated ground motions on complex structural systems. In this study, the seismic responses of two buildings are compared when they are subjected to as-recorded ground motions and simulated ones. The buildings have been designed based on New Zealand codes and physically constructed in Christchurch, New Zealand. The recorded ground motions are selected from 40 stations database of the historical 22 Feb. 2011 Christchurch earthquake. The Graves and Pitarka (2015) methodology is used to generate the simulated ground motions. The geometric mean of maximum inter-story drift and peak floor acceleration are selected as the main seismic responses. Also, the variation of these parameters due to record to record variability are investigated. Moreover, statistical hypothesis testing is used to investigate the similarity of results between observed and simulated ground motions. The results indicate a general agreement between the peak floor acceleration calculated by simulated and recorded ground motions for two buildings. While according to the hypothesis tests result, the difference in drift can be significant for the building with a shorter period. The results will help engineers and researchers to use or revise the procedure by using simulated ground motions for obtaining seismic responses.
New Zealand has a long tradition of using light timber frame for construction of its domestic dwellings. After the most recent earthquakes (e.g. Canterbury earthquakes sequence), wooden residential houses showed satisfactory life safety performance. However, poor performance was reported in terms of their seismic resilience. Although numerous innovative methods to mitigate damage have been introduced to the New Zealand community in order to improve wooden house performance, these retrofit options have not been readily taken up. The low number of retrofitted wooden-framed houses leads to questions about whether homeowners are aware of the necessity of seismic retrofitting their houses to achieve a satisfactory seismic performance. This study aims to explore different retrofit technologies that can be applied to wooden-framed houses in Wellington, taking into account the need of homeowners to understand the risk, likelihood and extent of damage expected after an event. A survey will be conducted in Wellington about perceptions of homeowners towards the expected performance of their wooden-framed houses. The survey questions were designed to gain an understanding of homeowners' levels of safety and awareness of possible damage after a seismic event. Afterwards, a structural review of a sample of the houses will be undertaken to identify common features and detail potential seismic concerns. The findings will break down barriers to making improvements in the performance of wooden-framed houses and lead to enhancements in the confidence of homeowners in the event of future seismic activity. This will result in increased understanding and contribute towards an accessible knowledge base, which will possibly increase significantly the use of these technologies and avoid unnecessary economic and social costs after a seismic event.
