Search

found 2 results

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Research Report: 2010-02The objective in writing this report is to provide a guide to structural engineers on how to assess the potential seismic performance of existing hollow-core floors in buildings and the steps involved in the design of new floors. Hollow-core units in New Zealand do not contain stirrups within the precast concrete section. This is due to the way that they are manufactured. The only reinforcement in the great majority of hollow-core units consists of pretensioned strands that are located close to the soffit. A consequence of this is that hollow-core units have a number of potential brittle failure modes that can occur when adverse structural actions are induced in the units. These adverse actions can be induced in a major earthquake due to the relative vertical, horizontal and rotational displacements that occur between hollow-core units and adjacent structural elements, such as beams or structural walls. A number of large scale structural tests backed up by analytical research has shown that extensive interaction occurs between floors containing prestressed precast units and other structural elements, such as walls and beams. The constraint that prestressed units in a floor can apply to adjacent beams can result in an increase in strength of the beams to a considerably greater strength than that indicated in editions of the New Zealand Structural Concrete Standard published prior to 2006. The extent of this increase is such that it could in some cases result in the development of a non-ductile failure mechanism instead of the ductile failure mechanism assumed in the design. Prestressed floor units tie the floor bays together leaving a weak section where the floor joins to supporting structural elements. The restraint provided by the prestress restricts the opening of cracks within the bay. In the event of an earthquake this restraint can result in wide cracks developing at some of the boundaries to floor bays. These cracks may have a significant influence on the performance of the floor when it acts as a diaphragm to transfer seismic forces to the lateral force resisting structural elements in the building. The report contains details of; 1. The different failure modes, which may be induced in hollow-core floors, and the failure modes that may develop in a buildings due to the presence of hollow-core units in the floors; 2. Criteria that may be used to assess the magnitude of the design earthquake which may be safely resisted by a hollow-core floor in a building; 3. Details of how construction practice related to the use of hollow-core floors in New Zealand has changed over the last five decades. This highlights particular aspects that need to be considered in carrying out an assessment of existing hollow-core floors; 4. Information on how a new hollow-core floor may be designed to be consistent with the Earthquake Actions Standard, NZS1170.5: 2004 and the Structural Concrete Standard, NZS3101: 2006 (plus Amendment 2); 5. A review of the research findings relevant to the behaviour of New Zealand hollow-core floors under earthquake conditions. Research that was used to develop the assessment and design criteria is described together with details of how the different criteria were developed from this work.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Research Report No.2010-03Ground motion prediction equations (GMPEs) for geometric-mean pseudo-spectral acceleration amplitudes from New Zealand (NZ) earthquakes are developed. A database of 2437 three-component ground motion records is developed by applying stringent quality criteria to the historically recorded events in NZ. Despite the large number of records, the database is deficient in empirical records from large magnitude events recorded at close distances to the fault rupture plane. As a result, the basis for the NZ-specific GMPE development is to examine the applicability of foreign GMPEs for similar tectonic regions and then modify the most applicable GMPEs based on both theoretical and statistically significant empirically-driven arguments. For active shallow crustal events, five different GMPEs are considered. It was found that the McVerry et al. (2006) model, which is the current model upon which seismic design guidelines and site-specific seismic hazard analyses in NZ are based, provided the worst fit to the NZ database, and that the Chiou et al. (2010) (C10) modification of the Chiou and Youngs (2008) model was the most applicable. Discrepancies between the C10 model and the NZ database that were empirically identified and theoretically justified were used to modify the C10 model for: (i) small magnitude scaling; (ii) scaling of short period ground motion from normal faulting events in volcanic crust; (iii) scaling of ground motions on very hard rock sites; (iv) anelastic attenuation in the NZ crust; and (v) consideration of the increased anelastic attenuation in the Taupo Volcanic Zone (TVZ). For subduction slab events, initially three models were considered. It was found that all of the models had some significant biases with respect to applicability for NZ. The Zhao et al. (2006) (Z06) model was selected because of the rigorous database upon which it was developed and modified by: (i) NZ-specific scaling at small magnitudes; (ii) path scaling at large distances; (iii) consideration of the increased TVZ attenuation; and (iv) revision of the standard deviation model. Based on these modifications the developed model showed no bias of the inter- and intra-event residuals as a function of various predictor variables. The standard deviation of the residuals using the revised standard deviation model also indicated that the model has an adequate precision. Three GMPEs were considered for subduction interface events. The Zhao et al. (2006) (Z06) model was the best performing model with only bias exhibited in the site response model, and possible over-prediction of large magnitude events. The Z06 interface model was modified to account for site response and magnitude scaling using the same functional forms as those of the developed active shallow crustal and subduction slab models. The developed model showed no bias of the inter- and intra-event residuals as a function of various predictor variables. The developed GMPEs include specific features as evident in the NZ database; consistent scaling for parameters not well constrained by the NZ database; and pseudo-spectral amplitudes for vibration periods from 0.01 to 10 seconds. Hence, these models represent a significant advance in the state-of-the art for empirical ground motion prediction in NZ.