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.
The 22 February 2011, Mw6.2-6.3 Christchurch earthquake is the most costly earthquake to affect New Zealand, causing 181 fatalities and severely damaging thousands of residential and commercial buildings, and most of the city lifelines and infrastructure. This manuscript presents an overview of observed geotechnical aspects of this earthquake as well as some of the completed and on-going research investigations. A unique aspect, which is particularly emphasized, is the severity and spatial extent of liquefaction occurring in native soils. Overall, both the spatial extent and severity of liquefaction in the city was greater than in the preceding 4th September 2010 Darfield earthquake, including numerous areas that liquefied in both events. Liquefaction and lateral spreading, variable over both large and short spatial scales, affected commercial structures in the Central Business District (CBD) in a variety of ways including: total and differential settlements and tilting; punching settlements of structures with shallow foundations; differential movements of components of complex structures; and interaction of adjacent structures via common foundation soils. Liquefaction was most severe in residential areas located to the east of the CBD as a result of stronger ground shaking due to the proximity to the causative fault, a high water table approximately 1m from the surface, and soils with composition and states of high susceptibility and potential for liquefaction. Total and differential settlements, and lateral movements, due to liquefaction and lateral spreading is estimated to have severely compromised 15,000 residential structures, the majority of which otherwise sustained only minor to moderate damage directly due to inertial loading from ground shaking. Liquefaction also had a profound effect on lifelines and other infrastructure, particularly bridge structures, and underground services. Minor damage was also observed at flood stop banks to the north of the city, which were more severely impacted in the 4th September 2010 Darfield earthquake. Due to the large high-frequency ground motion in the Port hills numerous rock falls and landslides also occurred, resulting in several fatalities and rendering some residential areas uninhabitable.
Six months after the 4 September 2010 Mw 7.1 Darfield (Canterbury) earthquake, a Mw 6.2 Christchurch (Lyttelton) aftershock struck Christchurch on the 22 February 2011. This earthquake was centred approximately 10km south-east of the Christchurch CBD at a shallow depth of 5km, resulting in intense seismic shaking within the Christchurch central business district (CBD). Unlike the 4 Sept earthquake when limited-to-moderate damage was observed in engineered reinforced concrete (RC) buildings [35], in the 22 February event a high number of RC Buildings in the Christchurch CBD (16.2 % out of 833) were severely damaged. There were 182 fatalities, 135 of which were the unfortunate consequences of the complete collapse of two mid-rise RC buildings. This paper describes immediate observations of damage to RC buildings in the 22 February 2011 Christchurch earthquake. Some preliminary lessons are highlighted and discussed in light of the observed performance of the RC building stock. Damage statistics and typical damage patterns are presented for various configurations and lateral resisting systems. Data was collated predominantly from first-hand post-earthquake reconnaissance observations by the authors, complemented with detailed assessment of the structural drawings of critical buildings and the observed behaviour. Overall, the 22 February 2011 Mw 6.2 Christchurch earthquake was a particularly severe test for both modern seismically-designed and existing non-ductile RC buildings. The sequence of earthquakes since the 4 Sept 2010, particularly the 22 Feb event has confirmed old lessons and brought to life new critical ones, highlighting some urgent action required to remedy structural deficiencies in both existing and “modern” buildings. Given the major social and economic impact of the earthquakes to a country with strong seismic engineering tradition, no doubt some aspects of the seismic design will be improved based on the lessons from Christchurch. The bar needs to and can be raised, starting with a strong endorsement of new damage-resisting, whilst cost-efficient, technologies as well as the strict enforcement, including financial incentives, of active policies for the seismic retrofit of existing buildings at a national scale.
Small, tight-knit communities, are complex to manage from outside during a disaster. The township of Lyttelton, New Zealand, and the communities of Corsair Bay, Cass Bay, and Rapaki to the east, are especially more so difficult due to the terrain that encloses them, which caused them to be cut-off from Christchurch, the largest city in the South Island, barely 10 km away, after the Mw 7.1 Darfield Earthquake and subsequent Canterbury Earthquake Sequence. Lyttelton has a very strong and deep-rooted community spirit that draws people to want to be a part of Lyttelton life. It is predominantly residential on the slopes, with retail space, service and light industry nestled near the harbour. It has heritage buildings stretching back to the very foundation of Canterbury yet hosts the largest, modern deep-water port for the region. This study contains two surveys: one circulated shortly before the Darfield Earthquake and one circulated in July 2011, after the Christchurch and Sumner Earthquakes. An analytical comparison of the participants’ household preparedness for disaster before the Darfield Earthquake and after the Christchurch and Sumner Earthquakes was performed. A population spatiotemporal distribution map was produced that shows the population in three-hourly increments over a week to inform exposure to vulnerability to natural hazards. The study went on to analyse the responses of the participants in the immediate period following the Chrsitchurch and Sumner Earthquakes, including their homeward and subsequent journeys, and the decision to evacuate or stay in their homes. Possible predictors to a decision to evacuate some or all members of the household were tested. The study also asked participants’ views on the events since September 2010 for analysis.
On the second day of teaching for 2011, the University of Canterbury (UC) faced the most significant crisis of its 138-year history. After being shaken severely by a magnitude 7.1 earthquake on 4 September 2010, UC felt it was well along the pathway to getting back to ‘normal’. That all changed at 12:51pm on 22 February 2011, when Christchurch city was hit by an even more devastating event. A magnitude 6.3 (Modified Mercalli intensity ten – MM X) earthquake, just 13km south-east of the Christchurch city centre, caused vertical peak ground accelerations amongst the highest ever recorded in an urban environment, in some places more than twice the acceleration due to gravity. The earthquake caused immediate evacuation of the UC campus and resulted in significant damage to many buildings. Thankfully there were no serious injuries or fatalities on campus, but 185 people died in the city and many more suffered serious injuries. At the time of writing, eighteen months after the first earthquake in September, Christchurch is still experiencing regular earthquakes. Seismologists warn that the region may experience heightened seismicity for a decade or more. While writing this report we have talked with many different people from across the University. People’s experiences are different and we have not managed to talk with everyone, but we hope that by drawing together many different perspectives from across the campus that this report will serve two purposes; to retain our institutional memory of what we have learnt over the past eighteen months, and also to share our learnings with other organisations in New Zealand and around the world who, we hope, will benefit from learning about our experience.
This paper provides a summary of the ground motions observed in the recent Canterbury, New Zealand earthquake sequence. The sequence occurred in a region of relatively moderate seismicity, 130km to the east of the Alpine Fault, the major plate-boundary in the region. From an engineering perspective, the sequence has been primarily comprised of the initial 04/09/2010 Darfield earthquake (Mw7.1) followed by the 22/02/2011 Christchurch earthquake (Mw6.3), and two aftershocks on 13/06/ 2011 (Mw5.3 and 6.0, respectively). The dense spacing of strong motions in the region, and their close proximity to the respective causative faults, has resulted in strong ground motions far exceeding the previous catalogue of strong motion observed in New Zealand. The observed ground motions have exhibited clear evidence of: (i) near-source directivity; (ii) sedimentary basin focusing, amplification and basin effect refraction; (iii) non-linear site response; (iv) cyclic mobility postliquefaction; and (v) extreme vertical ground motions exceeding 2g, among others.
On 15 August 1868, a great earthquake struck off the coast of the Chile-Peru border generating a tsunami that travelled across the Pacific. Wharekauri-Rekohu-Chatham Islands, located 800 km east of Christchurch, Aotearoa-New Zealand (A-NZ) was one of the worst affected locations in A-NZ. Tsunami waves, including three over 6 metres high, injured and killed people, destroyed buildings and infrastructure, and impacted the environment, economy and communities. While experience of disasters, and advancements in disaster risk reduction systems and technology have all significantly advanced A-NZ’s capacity to be ready for and respond to future earthquakes and tsunami, social memory of this event and other tsunamis during our history has diminished. In 2018, a team of scientists, emergency managers and communication specialists collaborated to organise a memorial event on the Chatham Islands and co-ordinate a multi-agency media campaign to commemorate the 150th anniversary of the 1868 Arica tsunami. The purpose was to raise awareness of the disaster and to encourage preparedness for future tsunami. Press releases and science stories were distributed widely by different media outlets and many attended the memorial event indicating public interest for commemorating historical disasters. We highlight the importance of commemorating disaster anniversaries through memorial events, to raise awareness of historical disasters and increase community preparedness for future events – “lest we forget and let us learn.”
Surface rupture of the previously unrecognised Greendale Fault extended west-east for ~30 km across alluvial plains west of Christchurch, New Zealand, during the Mw 7.1 Darfield (Canterbury) earthquake of September 2010. Surface rupture displacement was predominantly dextral strike-slip, averaging ~2.5 m, with maxima of ~5 m. Vertical displacement was generally less than 0.75 m. The surface rupture deformation zone ranged in width from ~30 to 300 m, and comprised discrete shears, localised bulges and, primarily, horizontal dextral flexure. About a dozen buildings, mainly single-storey houses and farm sheds, were affected by surface rupture, but none collapsed, largely because most of the buildings were relatively flexible and resilient timber-framed structures and also because deformation was distributed over a relatively wide zone. There were, however, notable differences in the respective performances of the buildings. Houses with only lightly-reinforced concrete slab foundations suffered moderate to severe structural and non-structural damage. Three other buildings performed more favourably: one had a robust concrete slab foundation, another had a shallow-seated pile foundation that isolated ground deformation from the superstructure, and the third had a structural system that enabled the house to tilt and rotate as a rigid body. Roads, power lines, underground pipes, and fences were also deformed by surface fault rupture and suffered damage commensurate with the type of feature, its orientation to the fault, and the amount, sense and width of surface rupture deformation.
The Porter's Pass-Amberley Fault Zone (PPAFZ) is a complex zone of anastomosing faults and folds bounding the south-eastern edge of the transition from subducting Pacific Plate to continental collision on the Australia Plate boundary. This study combines mapping of a 2000 km2 zone from the Southern Alps northeast to the coast near Amberley, 40 km north of metropolitan Christchurch, with an analysis of seismicity and a revision of regional seismic hazard. Three structural styles: 1) a western strike-slip, and 2) a more easterly thrust and reverse domain, pass into 3) a northwest verging fold belt on the northern Canterbury Plains, reflecting the structural levels exposed and the evolving west to east propagation. Basal remnants of a Late Cretaceous-Cenozoic, largely marine sedimentary cover sequence are preserved as outliers that unconformably overlie Mesozoic basement (greywacke and argillite of the Torlesse terrain) in the mountains of the PPAFZ and are underlain by a deeply leached zone which is widely preserved. Structure contouring of the unconformity surface indicates maximum, differential uplift of c.2600 m in the southwest, decreasing to c.1200 m in the coastal fold belt to the northeast. Much lower rates (or reversal) of uplift are evident a few kilometres southeast of the PPAFZ range-front escarpment. The youngest elements of the cover sequence are basement-derived conglomerates of Plio-Pleistocene age preserved on the SE margin. The source is more distant than the intervening mountains of the PPAFZ, probably from the Southern Alps, to the west and northwest. The absence of another regional unconformity on Mesozoic basement, older than Pleistocene, indicates that this uplift is post-Pliocene. Late Pleistocene(<100 kyr) differential uplift rates of c.0.5-2.7 m/kyr from uplifted marine terraces at the east coast, and rates of 2.5-3.3 m/kyr for tectonically-induced river-down cutting further west, suggest that uplift commenced locally during the last 1 Ma, and possibly within the last 0.5 Ma, if average rates are assumed to be uniform over time. Analysis of seismicity, recorded during a 10 week regional survey of micro earthquakes in 1990, identified two seismic zones beneath North Canterbury: 1) a sub-horizontal zone of activity restricted to the upper crust (≤12 km); and 2) a seismic zone in the lower crust (below a ceiling of ≤17 km), that broadens vertically to the north and northwest to a depth of c.40 km, with a bottom edge which dips 10°N and 15°NW, respectively. No events were recorded at depths between 12 km and 17 km, which is interpreted as a relatively aseismic, mid-crustal ductile layer. Marked differences (up to 60°) in the trend of strain axes for events above and below the inferred ductile layer are observed only north of the PPAFZ. A fundamental, north-to-south increase in the Wave-length of major geological structures occurs across the PPAFZ, and is interpreted as evidence that the upper crust beneath the Canterbury Plains is coupled to the lower crust, whereas the upper crust further north is not. Most of the recorded micro earthquakes <12 km deep beneath the PPAFZ have strike-slip mechanisms. It is probable that faults splay upward into the thrusts and folds at the surface as an evolving transpression zone in response to deep shear in basement. There have been no historic surface ruptures of the PPAFZ, but the zone has been characterised historically by frequent small earthquakes. Paleoseismic data (dated landslides and surface ruptures) compiled in this study, indicate a return period of 1500-1900 years between the last two M>7-7.5 earthquakes, and 500-700 years have elapsed since the last. The magnitudes of these events are estimated at c.M7.5, which represents a probable maximum magnitude for the PPAFZ. There are insufficient data to determine whether or not the frequency of large earthquakes conforms to a recognised model of behaviour, but comparison of the paleoseismic data with the historic record of smaller earthquakes, suggests that the magnitudes of the largest earthquakes in this zone are not exponentially distributed. A seismicity model for the PPAFZ (Elder et al., 1991) is reviewed, and a b-value of 1.0 is found to be consistent with the newly acquired paleoseismic data. This b-value reduces the predicted frequency of large earthquakes (M≥7.0) in this zone by a factor of 3.5, while retaining a conservative margin that allows for temporal variations in the frequency of large events and the possibility that the geological database is incomplete, suggesting grounds for revising the hazard model for Christchurch.
The Porters Pass fault (PPF) is a prominent element of the Porters Pass-Amberley Fault Zone (PPAFZ) which forms a broad zone of active earth deformation ca 100 km long, 60-90 km west and north of Christchurch. For a distance of ca 40 km the PPF is defined by a series of discontinuous Holocene active traces between the Rakaia and Waimakariri Rivers. The amount of slip/event and the timing of paleoearthquakes are crucial components needed to estimate the earthquake potential of a fault. Movement was assumed to be, coseismic and was quantified by measuring displaced geomorphic features using either tape measure or surveying equipment. Clustering of offset data suggests that four to five earthquakes occurred on the PPF during the Holocene and these range between ca 5-7 m/event. Timing information was obtained from four trenches excavated across the fault and an auger adjacent to the fault. Organic samples from these sites were radiocarbon dated and used in conjunction with data from previous studies to identify the occurrence of at least four earthquakes at 8500 ± 200, 5300 ± 700, 2500 ± 200 and 1000 ± 100 years B.P. Evidence suggests that an additional event is also possible at 6200 ± 500 years B.P. The ~1000, 5300 and 6200 years B.P. paleoearthquakes were previously unrecognised, while the 500 year event previously inferred from rock-avalanche data has been discarded. The present data set produces recurrence intervals of ~2000-2500 years for the Holocene. The identification of only one Holocene PPF rupture to the west of Red Lakes indicates the presence of a segment boundary that prevents the propagation of rupture beyond this point. This is consistent with displacement data and results in slip rates of 0.5-0.7 mm/yr and 2.5-3.4 mm/yr to the west and east of Red Lakes respectively. It is possible that the nearby extensional Red Hill Fault influences PPF rupture propagation. The combination of geometric, slip rate and timing data has enabled the magnitude of prehistoric earthquakes on the PPF to be estimated. These magnitudes range from an average of between 6.9 for a fault rupture from Waimakariri River to Red Lakes, to a maximum of 7.4 that ruptures the entire length of the PPAFZ, including the full length of the PPF. These estimates are approximately consistent with previous magnitude estimates along the full length of the PPAFZ of between 7.0 and 7.5.
