Search

found 897 results

Images for bridge; more images...

Research papers, The University of Auckland Library

The paper proposes a simple method for quick post-earthquake assessment of damage and condition of a stock of bridges in a transportation network using seismic data recorded by a strong motion array. The first part of the paper is concerned with using existing free field strong motion recorders to predict peak ground acceleration (PGA) at an arbitrary bridge site. Two methods are developed using artificial neural networks (a single network and a committee of neural networks) considering influential parameters, such as seismic magnitude, hypocentral depth and epicentral distance. The efficiency of the proposed method is explored using actual strong motion records from the devastating 2010 Darfield and 2011 Christchurch earthquakes in New Zealand. In the second part, two simple ideas are outlined how to infer the likely damage to a bridge using either the predicted PGA and seismic design spectrum, or a broader set of seismic metrics, structural parameters and damage indices.

Research Papers, Lincoln University

There is a critical strand of literature suggesting that there are no ‘natural’ disasters (Abramovitz, 2001; Anderson and Woodrow, 1998; Clarke, 2008; Hinchliffe, 2004). There are only those that leave us – the people - more or less shaken and disturbed. There may be some substance to this; for example, how many readers recall the 7.8 magnitude earthquake centred in Fiordland in July 2009? Because it was so far away from a major centre and very few people suffered any consequences, the number is likely to be far fewer than those who remember (all too vividly) the relatively smaller 7.1 magnitude Canterbury quake of September 4th 2010 and the more recent 6.3 magnitude February 22nd 2011 event. One implication of this construction of disasters is that seismic events, like those in Canterbury, are as much socio-political as they are geological. Yet, as this paper shows, the temptation in recovery is to tick boxes and rebuild rather than recover, and to focus on hard infrastructure rather than civic expertise and community involvement. In this paper I draw upon different models of community engagement and use Putnam’s (1995) notion of ‘social capital’ to frame the argument that ‘building bridges’ after a disaster is a complex blend of engineering, communication and collaboration. I then present the results of a qualitative research project undertaken after the September 4th earthquake. This research helps to illustrate the important connections between technical rebuilding, social capital, recovery processes and overall urban resilience.