Validation is an essential step to assess the applicability of simulated ground motions for utilization in engineering practice, and a comprehensive analysis should include both simple intensity measures (PGA, SA, etc), as well as the seismic response of a range of complex systems obtained by response history analysis. In order to enable a spectrum of complex structural systems to be considered in systematic validation of ground motion simulations in a routine fashion, an automated workflow was developed. Such a workflow enables validation of simulated ground motions in terms of different complex model responses by considering various ground motion sets and different ground motion simulation methods. The automated workflow converts the complex validation process into a routine one by providing a platform to perform the validation process promptly as a built-in process of simulation post-processing. As a case study, validation of simulated ground motions was investigated via the automated workflow by comparing the dynamic responses of three steel special moment frame (SMRF) subjected to the 40 observed and 40 simulated ground motions of 22 February 2011 Christchurch earthquake. The seismic responses of the structures are principally quantified via the peak floor acceleration and maximum inter-storey drift ratio. Overall, the results indicate a general agreement in seismic demands obtained using the recorded and simulated ensembles of ground motions and provide further evidence that simulated ground motions can be used in code-based structural performance assessments in-place of, or in combination with, ensembles of recorded ground motions.
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.
Though generally considered “natural” disasters, cyclones and earthquakes are increasingly being associated with human activities, incubated through urban settlement patterns and the long-term redistribution of natural resources. As society is becoming more urbanized, the risk of human exposure to disasters is also rising. Architecture often reflects the state of society’s health: architectural damage is the first visible sign of emergency, and reconstruction is the final response in the process of recovery. An empirical assessment of architectural projects in post-disaster situations can lead to a deeper understanding of urban societies as they try to rebuild. This thesis offers an alternative perspective on urban disasters by looking at the actions and attitudes of disaster professionals through the lens of architecture, situated in recent events: the 2010 Christchurch earthquake, the 2010 Haiti earthquake, and the 2005 Hurricane Katrina. An empirical, multi-hazard, cross-sectional case study methodology was used, employing grounded theory method to build theory, and a critical constructivist strategy to inform the analysis. By taking an interdisciplinary approach to understanding disasters, this thesis positions architecture as a conduit between two divergent approaches to disaster research: the hazards approach, which studies the disaster cycles from a scientific perspective; and the sociological approach, which studies the socially constructed vulnerabilities that result from disasters, and the elements of social change that accompany such events. Few studies to date have attempted to integrate the multi-disciplinary perspectives that can advance our understanding of societal problems in urban disasters. To bridge this gap, this thesis develops what will be referred to as the “Rittelian framework”—based on the work of UC Berkeley’s architecture professor Horst Rittel (1930-1990). The Rittelian framework uses the language of design to transcend the multiple fields of human endeavor to address the “design problems” in disaster research. The processes by which societal problems are addressed following an urban disaster involve input by professionals from multiple fields—including economics, sociology, medicine, and engineering—but the contribution from architecture has been minimal to date. The main impetus for my doctoral thesis has been the assertion that most of the decisions related to reconstruction are made in the early emergency recovery stages where architects are not involved, but architects’ early contribution is vital to the long-term reconstruction of cities. This precipitated in the critical question: “How does the Rittelian framework contribute to the critical design decisions in modern urban disasters?” Comparative research was undertaken in three case studies of recent disasters in New Orleans (2005), Haiti (2010) and Christchurch (2010), by interviewing 51 individuals who were selected on the basis of employing the Rittelian framework in their humanitarian practice. Contextualizing natural disaster research within the robust methodological framework of architecture and the analytical processes of sociology is the basis for evaluating the research proposition that architectural problem solving is of value in addressing the ‘Wicked Problems’ of disasters. This thesis has found that (1) the nuances of the way disaster agents interpret the notion of “building back better” can influence the extent to which architectural professionals contribute in urban disaster recovery, (2) architectural design can be used to facilitate but also impede critical design decisions, and (3) framing disaster research in terms of design decisions can lead to innovation where least expected. This empirical research demonstrates how the Rittelian framework can inform a wider discussion about post-disaster human settlements, and improve our resilience through disaster research.
Gravelly soils’ liquefaction has been documented since early 19th century with however the focus being sand-silts mixture – coarse documentation of this topic, that gravels do in fact liquefy was only acknowledged as an observation. With time, we have been impacted by earthquakes, EQ causing more damage to our property: life and environment-natural and built. In this realm of EQ related-damage the ground or soils in general act as buffer between the epicentre and the structures at a concerned site. Further, in this area, upon the eventual acknowledgement of liquefaction of soils as a problem, massive efforts were undertaken to understand its mechanics, what causes and thereby how to mitigate its ill-effects. Down that lane, gravelly soils’ liquefaction was another milestone covered in early 20th century, and thus regarded as a problematic subject. This being a fairly recent acknowledgement, efforts have initiated in this direction (or area of particle size under consideration-gravels>2mm), with this research outputs intended to complement that research for the betterment of our understanding of what’s happening and how shall we best address it, given the circumstances: socio (life) - environment (structures) - economic (cost or cost-“effectiveness’) and of course political (our “willingness” to want to address the problem). Case histories from at least 29 earthquakes worldwide have indicated that liquefaction can occur in gravelly soils (both in natural deposits and manmade reclamations) inducing large ground deformation and causing severe damage to civil infrastructures. However, the evaluation of the liquefaction resistance of gravelly soils remains to be a major challenge in geotechnical earthquake engineering. To date, laboratory tests aimed at evaluating the liquefaction resistance of gravelly soils are still very limited, as compared to the large body of investigations carried out on assessing the liquefaction resistance of sandy soils. While there is a general agreement that the liquefaction resistance of gravelly soils can be as low as that of clean sands, previous studies suggested that the liquefaction behaviour of gravelly soils is significantly affected by two key factors, namely relative density (Dr) and gravel content (Gc). While it is clear that the liquefaction resistance of gravels increases with the increasing Dr, there are inconclusive and/or contradictory results regarding the effect of Gc on the liquefaction resistance of gravelly soils. Aimed at addressing this important topic, an investigation is being currently carried out by researchers at the University of Canterbury, UC. As a first step, a series of undrained cyclic triaxial tests were conducted on selected sand-gravel mixtures (SGMs), and inter-grain state framework concepts such as the equivalent and skeleton void ratios were used to describe the joint effects of Gc and Dr on the liquefaction resistance of SGMs. Following such experimental effort, this study is aimed at providing new and useful insights, by developing a critical state-based method combined with the inter-grain state framework to uniquely describe the liquefaction resistance of gravelly soils. To do so, a series of monotonic drained triaxial tests will be carried out on selected SGMs. The outcomes of this study, combined with those obtained to date by UC researchers, will greatly contribute to the expansion of a worldwide assessment database, and also towards the development of a reliable liquefaction triggering procedure for characterising the liquefaction potential of gravelly soils, which is of paramount importance not only for the New Zealand context, but worldwide. This will make it possible for practising engineers to identify liquefiable gravelly soils in advance and make sound recommendations to minimise the impact of such hazards on land, and civil infrastructures.
This dissertation addresses several fundamental and applied aspects of ground motion selection for seismic response analyses. In particular, the following topics are addressed: the theory and application of ground motion selection for scenario earthquake ruptures; the consideration of causal parameter bounds in ground motion selection; ground motion selection in the near-fault region where directivity effect is significant; and methodologies for epistemic uncertainty consideration and propagation in the context of ground motion selection and seismic performance assessment. The paragraphs below outline each contribution in more detail. A scenario-based ground motion selection method is presented which considers the joint distribution of multiple intensity measure (IM) types based on the generalised conditional intensity measure (GCIM) methodology (Bradley, 2010b, 2012c). The ground motion selection algorithm is based on generating realisations of the considered IM distributions for a specific rupture scenario and then finding the prospective ground motions which best fit the realisations using an optimal amplitude scaling factor. In addition, using different rupture scenarios and site conditions, two important aspects of the GCIM methodology are scrutinised: (i) different weight vectors for the various IMs considered; and (ii) quantifying the importance of replicate selections for ensembles with different numbers of desired ground motions. As an application of the developed scenario-based ground motion selection method, ground motion ensembles are selected to represent several major earthquake scenarios in New Zealand that pose a significant seismic hazard, namely, Alpine, Hope and Porters Pass ruptures for Christchurch city; and Wellington, Ohariu, and Wairarapa ruptures for Wellington city. A rigorous basis is developed, and sensitivity analyses performed, for the consideration of bounds on causal parameters (e.g., magnitude, source-to-site distance, and site condition) for ground motion selection. The effect of causal parameter bound selection on both the number of available prospective ground motions from an initial empirical as-recorded database, and the statistical properties of IMs of selected ground motions are examined. It is also demonstrated that using causal parameter bounds is not a reliable approach to implicitly account for ground motion duration and cumulative effects when selection is based on only spectral acceleration (SA) ordinates. Specific causal parameter bounding criteria are recommended for general use as a ‘default’ bounding criterion with possible adjustments from the analyst based on problem-specific preferences. An approach is presented to consider the forward directivity effects in seismic hazard analysis, which does not separate the hazard calculations for pulse-like and non-pulse-like ground motions. Also, the ability of ground motion selection methods to appropriately select records containing forward directivity pulse motions in the near-fault region is examined. Particular attention is given to ground motion selection which is explicitly based on ground motion IMs, including SA, duration, and cumulative measures; rather than a focus on implicit parameters (i.e., distance, and pulse or non-pulse classifications) that are conventionally used to heuristically distinguish between the near-fault and far-field records. No ad hoc criteria, in terms of the number of directivity ground motions and their pulse periods, are enforced for selecting pulse-like records. Example applications are presented with different rupture characteristics, source-to-site geometry, and site conditions. It is advocated that the selection of ground motions in the near-fault region based on IM properties alone is preferred to that in which the proportion of pulse-like motions and their pulse periods are specified a priori as strict criteria for ground motion selection. Three methods are presented to propagate the effect of seismic hazard and ground motion selection epistemic uncertainties to seismic performance metrics. These methods differ in their level of rigor considered to propagate the epistemic uncertainty in the conditional distribution of IMs utilised in ground motion selection, selected ground motion ensembles, and the number of nonlinear response history analyses performed to obtain the distribution of engineering demand parameters. These methods are compared for an example site where it is observed that, for seismic demand levels below the collapse limit, epistemic uncertainty in ground motion selection is a smaller uncertainty contributor relative to the uncertainty in the seismic hazard itself. In contrast, uncertainty in ground motion selection process increases the uncertainty in the seismic demand hazard for near-collapse demand levels.
This dissertation addresses a diverse range of applied aspects in ground motion simulation validation via the response of complex structures. In particular, the following topics are addressed: (i) the investigation of similarity between recorded and simulated ground motions using code-based 3D irregular structural response analysis, (ii) the development of a framework for ground motion simulations validation to identify the cause of differences between paired observed and simulated dataset, and (iii) the illustration of the process of using simulations for seismic performance-based assessment. The application of simulated ground motions is evaluated for utilisation in engineering practice by considering responses of 3D irregular structures. Validation is performed in a code-based context when the NZS1170.5 (NZS1170.5:2004, 2004) provisions are followed for response history analysis. Two real buildings designed by engineers and physically constructed in Christchurch before the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence are considered. The responses are compared when the buildings are subjected to 40 scaled recorded and their subsequent simulated ground motions selected from 22 February 2011 Christchurch. The similarity of recorded and simulated responses is examined using statistical methods such as bootstrapping and hypothesis testing to determine whether the differences are statistically significant. The findings demonstrate the applicability of simulated ground motion when the code-based approach is followed in response history analysis. A conceptual framework is developed to link the differences between the structural response subjected to simulated and recorded ground motions to the differences in their corresponding intensity measures. This framework allows the variability to be partitioned into the proportion that can be “explained” by the differences in ground motion intensity measures and the remaining “unexplained” variability that can be attributed to different complexities such as dynamic phasing of multi-mode response, nonlinearity, and torsion. The application of this framework is examined through a hierarchy of structures reflecting a range of complexity from single-degree-of-freedom to 3D multi-degree-of-freedom systems with different materials, dynamic properties, and structural systems. The study results suggest the areas that ground motion simulation should focus on to improve simulations by prioritising the ground motion intensity measures that most clearly account for the discrepancies in simple to complex structural responses. Three approaches are presented to consider recorded or simulated ground motions within the seismic performance-based assessment framework. Considering the applications of ground motions in hazard and response history analyses, different pathways in utilising ground motions in both areas are explored. Recorded ground motions are drawn from a global database (i.e., NGA-West2 Ancheta et al., 2014). The NZ CyberShake dataset is used to obtain simulations. Advanced ground motion selection techniques (i.e., generalized conditional intensity measure, GCIM) are used for ground motion selection at a few intensity levels. The comparison is performed by investigating the response of an example structure (i.e., 12-storey reinforced concrete special moment frame) located in South Island, NZ. Results are compared and contrasted in terms of hazard, groundmotion selection, structural responses, demand hazard, and collapse risk, then, the probable reasons for differences are discussed. The findings from this study highlight the present opportunities and shortcomings in using simulations in risk assessment. i
According to TS 1170.5, designing a building to satisfy code-prescribed criteria (e.g., drift limit, member safety, P-Δ stability) at the ultimate limit state and relying on the inherent margins within the design code would lead to an acceptable mean annual frequency of collapse (λ꜀) in the range of 10−⁴ to 10−⁵. Modern performance objectives, such as λ꜀ and expected annual loss (EAL), are not explicitly considered. Although buckling-restrained braced frame (BRBF) buildings were widely adopted as lateral load-resisting systems for office and car park buildings in the Christchurch rebuild following the Canterbury earthquakes in New Zealand, there are currently no official guidelines for their design. The primary focus of this study is to develop a risk-targeted design framework for BRBF buildings that can achieve the performance objectives desired by stakeholders. To this extent, key factors influencing λ꜀ and EAL of BRBF buildings are identified. These factors include gusset plate design, number of storeys, design drift limit, BRBF beam-column connection, brace configuration, brace angle, brace material grade, and analysis method (equivalent lateral force vs. modal response spectrum). A novel 3D BRBF modelling approach capable of simulating out-of-plane buckling failure of buckling-restrained brace (BRB) gusset plates is developed. Prior experimental studies on sub-assemblies conducted elsewhere have demonstrated that gusset plates and end zones may buckle out of plane prematurely, before BRBs reach their maximum axial compression load carrying capacity. Current 2D BRBF macro models, typically used in research, cannot simulate this failure mode. A conventional 2D BRBF model underestimates the λ꜀ of a case-study 4-storey super-X configured steel BRBF building (designed according to NZS-3404) by a factor of two compared to the estimate from the proposed 3D model. These findings suggest that the current NZS-3404 gusset plate design method may undersize gusset plates and that using a 2D BRBF model in this case can significantly underestimate λ꜀. Three improved alternative gusset plate design methods that are easy to implement in practice are identified from the literature. Gusset plates in two case-study 4-storey steel BRBF buildings with super-X and diagonal configurations are designed using both the NZS-3404 method and alternative methods. All three alternative design methods are found to be conservative, resulting in an almost three-fold lower λ꜀ for both case-study BRBF buildings compared to those designed using the NZS-3404 method. Analysis results indicate that (i) bidirectional interaction has no significant effect on gusset plate buckling and (ii) mid-span gusset plates are more susceptible to buckling than corner gusset plates. A framework for seismic loss assessment using incremental dynamic analysis (IDA), called loss-oriented hazard-consistent incremental dynamic analysis (LOHC-IDA), is developed. IDA can be conducted with a generic record set, eliminating the arduous site-specific record selection required to conduct multiple stripe analysis (MSA). Traditional IDA, however, is limited in producing hazard-consistent estimates of engineering demand parameters (EDPs), which LOHC-IDA overcomes. LOHC-IDA improves upon existing methods by: (i) incorporating correlations among engineering demand parameters across intensity levels and (ii) using peak ground acceleration (PGA) to predict peak floor acceleration (PFA). For two case-study steel BRBF buildings, LOHC-IDA estimates the EAL and loss distributions conditioned on the intensity level that closely match the MSA results, with an average absolute error of 5%. The influence of factors beyond gusset plate design on the λ꜀ and EAL of 26 case-study steel BRBF buildings (designed in accordance with TS 1170.5) is examined. Hazard-consistent λ꜀ and EAL for these buildings are estimated using the FEMA P-58 loss and risk assessment framework. Among the 26 case-study buildings, 23 satisfy the maximum code-specified λ꜀ limit of 10−⁴. The EAL, normalised by the total building replacement cost, is highest for 2-storey BRBFs (0.22% on average), followed by 4-storey BRBFs (0.16% on average) and 8-storey BRBFs (0.11% on average). Reducing the design drift limit has the most significant effect on lowering λ꜀ (all BRBF designs were drift governed), followed by transitioning from pinned to moment-resisting beam-column connections, reducing the brace angle, and increasing brace strength. BRBF buildings designed using the equivalent lateral force method, on average, have a lower λ꜀ compared to those designed using the modal response spectrum method. Diagonally configured BRBFs exhibit the lowest λ꜀, followed by super- X and chevron configured BRBFs. Most design variables, apart from drift limit and beam-column connection, have limited influence on EAL. A simple method for EDP-targeted design of steel BRBF buildings is proposed. For this purpose, linear regression and CatBoost machine learning models are developed to predict steel BRBF building EDPs using peak storey drift ratio (PSDR) and PFA estimates from the 26 case-study buildings at intensity levels ranging from 80% to 0.5% probability of exceedance in 50 years. The R²ₐₔⱼ of these models is around 0.98, while the average prediction error is less than 10%. Fundamental period (T₁), total building height (Hₜ), and pseudospectral acceleration at T₁, denoted as Sₐ(T₁), are selected as the features to predict PSDR, while T₁, Hₜ, and PGA are the features selected to predict PFA. The EDP-targeted design has three steps: (i) for a given Hₜ value, the PSDR prediction model is used to identify a suitable T₁ that can achieve a desired PSDR target at the design intensity, (ii) a force-based design is then conducted iteratively to achieve the target T₁ by using an appropriate ductility factor and design drift limit, and (iii) based on the T₁ in the final design iteration, the PFA demand estimated by the PFA prediction models is used as a conservative input for the design of acceleration-sensitive non-structural elements. An equation to predict λ꜀ at the design stage is proposed for collapse risk-targeted seismic design of buildings. This equation comprises three principal components: reserve building strength, a proxy for effective structural stiffness, and reserve building deformation capacity. This equation is calibrated for the collapse risk-targeted design of BRBF buildings in New Zealand using results from 26 case-study BRBF buildings. The validity of this equation is demonstrated with three design verification examples designed to specific λ꜀ targets. Considering λ꜀ from hazard-consistent incremental dynamic analysis as the benchmark, the mean absolute percentage error in the design-stage prediction of λ꜀ of the verification buildings is approximately 10%.
Field surveys and experimental studies have shown that light steel or timber framed plasterboard partition walls are particularly vulnerable to earthquake damage prompting the overarching objective of this research, which is to further the development of low damage seismic systems for non-structural partition walls in order to facilitate their adoption by industry to assist with reducing the losses associated with the maintenance and repair cost of buildings across their design life. In particular, this study focused on the behaviour of steel-framed partition walls systems with novel detailing that aim to be “low-damage” designed according to common practice for walls used in commercial and institutional buildings in New Zealand. This objective was investigated by (1) investigating the performance of a flexible track system proposed by researchers and industry by experimental testing of full-scale specimens; (2) investigating the performance of the seismic gap partition wall systems proposed in a number of studies, further developed in this study with input from industry, by experimental testing of full-scale specimens; and (3) investigating the potential implications of using these systems compared with traditionally detailed partition wall systems within multi-storey buildings using the Performance Based Earthquake Engineering loss assessment methodology. Three full-scale testing frames were designed in order to replicate, under controlled laboratory conditions, the effects of seismic shaking on partition walls within multi-storey buildings by the application of quasi-static uni-directional cyclic loading imposing an inter-storey drift. The typical configuration for test specimens was selected to be a unique “y-shape”, including one angled return wall, with typical dimensions of approximately 2400 mm along the main wall and 600 mm along (approximately) the returns walls with a height of 2405 mm from floor to ceiling. The specimens were aligned within test frames at an oblique angle to the direction of loading in order to investigate bi- directional effects. Three wall specimens with flexible track detailing, two identical plane specimens and the third including a doorway, were tested. The detailing involved removing top track anchors within the proximity of wall intersections, thus allowing the tracks to ‘bow’ out at these locations. Although the top track anchors were specified to be removed the proximity of wall intersections, a construction error was made whereby a single top track slab to concrete anchor was left in at the three-way wall junction. Despite this error, the experimental testing was deemed worthwhile since such errors will also occur in practice and because the behaviour of the wall can be examined with this fixing in mind. The specimens also included an acoustic/fire sealant at the top lining to floor boundary. In addition to providing drift capacities, the force-displacement behaviour is also reported, the dissipated energy was computed, and the parameters of the Wayne-Stewart hysteretic model were fitted to the results. The specimen with the door opening behaved significantly different to the plane specimens: damage to the doorway specimen began as cracking of the wallboard propagating from the corners of the doorway following which the L- and Y- shaped junctions behaved independently, whereas damage to the plane specimens began as cracking of the wallboard at the top of the L-junction and wall system deformed as a single unit. The results suggest that bi-directional behaviour is important even if its impact cannot be directly quantified by the experiments conducted. Damage to sealant implies that the bond between plasterboard and sealant is important for its seismic performance. Careful quality control is advised as defects in the bond may significantly impact its ability to withstand seismic movement. Two specimens with seismic gap detailing were tested: a steel stud specimen and a timber stud specimen. Observed drift capacities were significantly greater than traditional plasterboard partition systems. Equations were used to predict the drift at which damage state 1 (DS1) and damage state 2 (DS2) would initiate. The equation used to estimate the drift at the onset of DS1 accurately predicted the onset of plaster cracking but overestimated the drift at which the gap filling material was damaged. The equation used to predict the onset of DS2 provided a lower bound for both specimens and also when used to predict results of previous experimental tests on seismic gap systems. The gap-filling material reduced the drift at the onset of DS1, however, it had a beneficial effect on the re-centring behaviour of the linings. Out-of-plane displacements and return wall configuration did not appear to significantly impact the onset of plaster cracking in the specimens. A loss assessment according to the PBEE methodology was conducted on four steel MRF case study buildings: (1) a 4-storey building designed for the Christchurch region, (2) a 4-storey building designed for the Wellington region, (3) a 12-storey building designed for the Christchurch region, and (4) a 12- storey building designed for the Wellington region. The fragility parameters for a traditional partition system, the flexible track partition system, and the seismic gap steel stud and timber stud partition systems were included within the loss assessment. The order (lowest to highest) of each system in terms of the expected annual losses of each building when incorporating the system was, (1) the seismic gap timber stud system, (2) the seismic gap steel stud system, (3) the traditional/baseline system, and (4) the flexible track system. For the seismic gap timber stud system, which incurred the greatest reduction in expected annual losses for each case study building, the reduction in expected annual losses in comparison to the losses found when using the traditional system ranged from a 5% to a 30% reduction. This reinforces the fact that while there is a benefit to the using low damage partition systems in each building the extent of reduction in expected annual losses is significantly dependent on the particular building design and its location. The flexible track specimens had larger repair costs at small hazard levels compared to the traditional system but smaller repair costs at larger hazard levels. However, the resulting expected annual losses for the flexible track system was higher than the traditional system which reinforces findings from past studies which observed that the greatest contribution to expected annual losses arises from low to moderate intensity shaking seismic events (low hazard levels).