INTRODUCTION This project falls under the Flagship 3: Wellington Coordinated Project. It supports other projects within FP3 to create a holistic understanding of risks posed by collapsed buildings due to future earthquake/s and the secondary consequences of cordoning in the short, mid and long term. Cordoning of the Christchurch CBD for more than two years and its subsequent implications on people and businesses had a significant impact on the recovery of Christchurch. Learning from this and experiences from the Kaikōura earthquake (where cordons were also established around selected buildings, Figure 3) have highlighted the need to understand the effects of cordons and plan for it before an earthquake occurs
Existing unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings are often composed of traditional construction techniques, with poor connections between walls and diaphragms that results in poor performance when subjected to seismic actions. In these cases the application of the common equivalent static procedure is not applicable because it is not possible to assure “box like” behaviour of the structure. In such conditions the ultimate strength of the structure relies on the behaviour of the macro-elements that compose the deformation mechanisms of the whole structure. These macroelements are a single or combination of structural elements of the structure which are bonded one to each other. The Canterbury earthquake sequence was taken as a reference to estimate the most commonly occurring collapse mechanisms found in New Zealand URM buildings in order to define the most appropriate macroelements.
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.
