Search

found 64 results

Images for Innovative; more images...

Research Papers, Lincoln University

4th September 2010 a 7.1 magnitude earthquake strikes near Christchurch, New Zealand’s second largest city of approximately 370,000 people. This is followed by a 6.3 magnitude quake on 22nd February 2011 and a 6.4 on 13th June. In February 181 people died and a state of national emergency was declared from 23 February to 30th April. Urban Search and Rescue teams with 150 personnel from New Zealand and 429 from overseas worked tirelessly in addition to Army, Police and Fire services. Within the central business district 1,000 buildings (of 4,000) are expected to be demolished. An estimated 10,000 houses require demolition and over 100,000 were damaged. Meanwhile the over 7,000 aftershocks have become part of the “new normal” for us all. During this time how have libraries supported their staff? What changes have been made to services? What are the resourcing opportunities? This presentation will provide a personal view from Lincoln University, Te Whare Wanaka o Aoraki, Library Teaching and Learning. Lincoln is New Zealand's third oldest university having been founded in 1878. Publicly owned and operated it is New Zealand's specialist land-based university. Lincoln is based on the Canterbury Plains, 22 kilometres south of Christchurch. On campus there was mostly minor damage to buildings while in the Library 200,000 volumes were thrown from the shelves. I will focus on the experiences of the Disaster Team and on our experiences with hosting temporarily displaced staff and students from the Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology, Library, Learning & Information Services. Experiences from two other institutions will be highlighted: Christchurch City Libraries, Ngā Kete Wānanga-o-Ōtautahi. Focusing on the Māori Services Team and the Ngā Pounamu Māori and Ngāi Tahu collections. The Central library located within the red zone cordon has been closed since February, the Central library held the Ngā Pounamu Māori and Ngai Tahu collections, the largest Māori collections in the Christchurch public library network. The lack of access to these collections changed the way the Māori Services Team, part of the larger Programmes, Events and Learning Team at Christchurch City Libraries were able to provide services to their community resulting in new innovative outreach programmes and a focus on promotion of online resources. On 19th December the “temporary” new and smaller Central library Peterborough opened. The retrieved Ngā Pounamu Māori and Ngai Tahu collections "Ngā rakau teitei e iwa”, have since been re-housed and are once again available for use by the public. Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu. This organisation, established by the Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu Act 1996, services the statutory rights for the people of Ngāi Tahu descent and ensures that the benefits of their Treaty Claim Settlement are enjoyed by Ngāi Tahu now and in the future. Ngāi Tahu are the indigenous Māori people of the southern islands of New Zealand - Te Waipounamu. The iwi (people) hold the rangatiratanga or tribal authority to over 80 per cent of the South Island. With their headquarters based in the central business they have also had to be relocated to temporary facilities. This included their library/archive collection of print resources, art works and taonga (cultural treasures).

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Timber has experienced renewed interests as a sustainable building material in recent times. Although traditionally it has been the prime choice for residential construction in New Zealand and some other parts of the world, its use can be increased significantly in the future through a wider range of applications, particularly when adopting engineered wood material, Research has been started on the development of innovative solutions for multi-storey non-residential timber buildings in recent years and this study is part of that initiative. Application of timber in commercial and office spaces posed some challenges with requirements of large column-free spaces. The current construction practice with timber is not properly suited for structures with the aforementioned required characteristics and new type of structures has to be developed for this type of applications. Any new structural system has to have adequate capacity for carry the gravity and lateral loads due to occupancy and the environmental effects. Along with wind loading, one of the major sources of lateral loads is earthquakes. New Zealand, being located in a seismically active region, has significant risk of earthquake hazard specially in the central region of the country and any structure has be designed for the seismic loading appropriate for the locality. There have been some significant developments in precast concrete in terms of solutions for earthquake resistant structures in the last decade. The “Hybrid” concept combining post-tensioning and energy dissipating elements with structural members has been introduced in the late 1990s by the precast concrete industry to achieve moment-resistant connections based on dry jointed ductile connections. Recent research at the University of Canterbury has shown that the concept can be adopted for timber for similar applications. Hybrid timber frames using post-tensioned beams and dissipaters have the potential to allow longer spans and smaller cross sections than other forms of solid timber frames. Buildings with post-tensioned frames and walls can have larger column-free spaces which is a particular advantage for non-residential applications. While other researchers are focusing on whole structural systems, this research concentrated on the analysis and design of individual members and connections between members or between member and foundation. This thesis extends existing knowledge on the seismic behaviour and response of post-tensioned single walls, columns under uni-direction loads and small scale beam-column joint connections into the response and design of post-tensioned coupled walls, columns under bi-directional loading and full-scale beam-column joints, as well as to generate further insight into practical applications of the design concept for subassemblies. Extensive experimental investigation of walls, column and beam-column joints provided valuable confirmation of the satisfactory performance of these systems. In general, they all exhibited almost complete re-centering capacity and significant energy dissipation, without resulting into structural damage. The different configurations tested also demonstrated the flexibility in design and possibilities for applications in practical structures. Based on the experimental results, numerical models were developed and refined from previous literature in precast concrete jointed ductile connections to predict the behaviour of post-tensioned timber subassemblies. The calibrated models also suggest the values of relevant parameters for applications in further analysis and design. Section analyses involving those parameters are performed to develop procedures to calculate moment capacities of the subassemblies. The typical features and geometric configurations the different types of subassemblies are similar with the only major difference in the connection interfaces. With adoption of appropriate values representing the corresponding connection interface and incorporation of the details of geometry and configurations, moment capacities of all the subassemblies can be calculated with the same scheme. That is found to be true for both post-tensioned-only and hybrid specimens and also applied for both uni-directional and bi-directional loading. The common section analysis and moment capacity calculation procedure is applied in the general design approach for subassemblies.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

In most design codes, infill walls are considered as non-structural elements and thus are typically neglected in the design process. The observations made after major earthquakes (Duzce 1999, L’Aquila 2009, Christchurch 2011) have shown that even though infill walls are considered to be non-structural elements, they interact with the structural system during seismic actions. In the case of heavy infill walls (i.e. clay brick infill walls), the whole behaviour of the structure may be affected by this interaction (i.e. local or global structural failures such as soft storey mechanism). In the case of light infill walls (i.e. non-structural drywalls), this may cause significant economical losses. To consider the interaction of the structural system with the ‘non-structural ’infill walls at design stage may not be a practical approach due to the complexity of the infill wall behaviour. Therefore, the purpose of the reported research is to develop innovative technological solutions and design recommendations for low damage non-structural wall systems for seismic actions by making use of alternative approaches. Light (steel/timber framed drywalls) and heavy (unreinforced clay brick) non-structural infill wall systems were studied by following an experimental/numerical research programme. Quasi-static reverse cyclic tests were carried out by utilizing a specially designed full scale reinforced concrete frame, which can be used as a re-usable bare frame. In this frame, two RC beams and two RC columns were connected by two un-bonded post tensioning bars, emulating a jointed ductile frame system (PRESSS technology). Due to the rocking behaviour at the beam-column joint interfaces, this frame was typically a low damage structural solution, with the post-tensioning guaranteeing a linear elastic behaviour. Therefore, this frame could be repeatedly used in all of the tests carried out by changing only the infill walls within this frame. Due to the linear elastic behaviour of this structural bare frame, it was possible to extract the exact behaviour of the infill walls from the global results. In other words, the only parameter that affected the global results was given by the infill walls. For the test specimens, the existing practice of construction (as built) for both light and heavy non-structural walls was implemented. In the light of the observations taken during these tests, modified low damage construction practices were proposed and tested. In total, seven tests were carried out: 1) Bare frame , in order to confirm its linear elastic behaviour. 2) As built steel framed drywall specimen FIF1-STFD (Light) 3) As built timber framed drywall specimen FIF2-TBFD (Light) 4) As built unreinforced clay brick infill wall specimen FIF3-UCBI (Heavy) 5) Low damage steel framed drywall specimen MIF1-STFD (Light) 6) Low damage timber framed drywall specimen MIF2-TBFD (Light) 7) Low damage unreinforced clay brick infill wall specimen MIF5-UCBI (Heavy) The tests of the as built practices showed that both drywalls and unreinforced clay brick infill walls have a low serviceability inter-storey drift limit (0.2-0.3%). Based on the observations, simple modifications and details were proposed for the low damage specimens. The details proved to be working effectively in lowering the damage and increasing the serviceability drift limits. For drywalls, the proposed low damage solutions do not introduce additional cost, material or labour and they are easily applicable in real buildings. For unreinforced clay brick infill walls, a light steel sub-frame system was suggested that divides the infill panel zone into smaller individual panels, which requires additional labour and some cost. However, both systems can be engineered for seismic actions and their behaviour can be controlled by implementing the proposed details. The performance of the developed details were also confirmed by the numerical case study analyses carried out using Ruaumoko 2D on a reinforced concrete building model designed according to the NZ codes/standards. The results have confirmed that the implementation of the proposed low damage solutions is expected to significantly reduce the non-structural infill wall damage throughout a building.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

In the last century, seismic design has undergone significant advancements. Starting from the initial concept of designing structures to perform elastically during an earthquake, the modern seismic design philosophy allows structures to respond to ground excitations in an inelastic manner, thereby allowing damage in earthquakes that are significantly less intense than the largest possible ground motion at the site of the structure. Current performance-based multi-objective seismic design methods aim to ensure life-safety in large and rare earthquakes, and to limit structural damage in frequent and moderate earthquakes. As a result, not many recently built buildings have collapsed and very few people have been killed in 21st century buildings even in large earthquakes. Nevertheless, the financial losses to the community arising from damage and downtime in these earthquakes have been unacceptably high (for example; reported to be in excess of 40 billion dollars in the recent Canterbury earthquakes). In the aftermath of the huge financial losses incurred in recent earthquakes, public has unabashedly shown their dissatisfaction over the seismic performance of the built infrastructure. As the current capacity design based seismic design approach relies on inelastic response (i.e. ductility) in pre-identified plastic hinges, it encourages structures to damage (and inadvertently to incur loss in the form of repair and downtime). It has now been widely accepted that while designing ductile structural systems according to the modern seismic design concept can largely ensure life-safety during earthquakes, this also causes buildings to undergo substantial damage (and significant financial loss) in moderate earthquakes. In a quest to match the seismic design objectives with public expectations, researchers are exploring how financial loss can be brought into the decision making process of seismic design. This has facilitated conceptual development of loss optimisation seismic design (LOSD), which involves estimating likely financial losses in design level earthquakes and comparing against acceptable levels of loss to make design decisions (Dhakal 2010a). Adoption of loss based approach in seismic design standards will be a big paradigm shift in earthquake engineering, but it is still a long term dream as the quantification of the interrelationships between earthquake intensity, engineering demand parameters, damage measures, and different forms of losses for different types of buildings (and more importantly the simplification of the interrelationship into design friendly forms) will require a long time. Dissecting the cost of modern buildings suggests that the structural components constitute only a minor portion of the total building cost (Taghavi and Miranda 2003). Moreover, recent research on seismic loss assessment has shown that the damage to non-structural elements and building contents contribute dominantly to the total building loss (Bradley et. al. 2009). In an earthquake, buildings can incur losses of three different forms (damage, downtime, and death/injury commonly referred as 3Ds); but all three forms of seismic loss can be expressed in terms of dollars. It is also obvious that the latter two loss forms (i.e. downtime and death/injury) are related to the extent of damage; which, in a building, will not just be constrained to the load bearing (i.e. structural) elements. As observed in recent earthquakes, even the secondary building components (such as ceilings, partitions, facades, windows parapets, chimneys, canopies) and contents can undergo substantial damage, which can lead to all three forms of loss (Dhakal 2010b). Hence, if financial losses are to be minimised during earthquakes, not only the structural systems, but also the non-structural elements (such as partitions, ceilings, glazing, windows etc.) should be designed for earthquake resistance, and valuable contents should be protected against damage during earthquakes. Several innovative building technologies have been (and are being) developed to reduce building damage during earthquakes (Buchanan et. al. 2011). Most of these developments are aimed at reducing damage to the buildings’ structural systems without due attention to their effects on non-structural systems and building contents. For example, the PRESSS system or Damage Avoidance Design concept aims to enable a building’s structural system to meet the required displacement demand by rocking without the structural elements having to deform inelastically; thereby avoiding damage to these elements. However, as this concept does not necessarily reduce the interstory drift or floor acceleration demands, the damage to non-structural elements and contents can still be high. Similarly, the concept of externally bracing/damping building frames reduces the drift demand (and consequently reduces the structural damage and drift sensitive non-structural damage). Nevertheless, the acceleration sensitive non-structural elements and contents will still be very vulnerable to damage as the floor accelerations are not reduced (arguably increased). Therefore, these concepts may not be able to substantially reduce the total financial losses in all types of buildings. Among the emerging building technologies, base isolation looks very promising as it seems to reduce both inter-storey drifts and floor accelerations, thereby reducing the damage to the structural/non-structural components of a building and its contents. Undoubtedly, a base isolated building will incur substantially reduced loss of all three forms (dollars, downtime, death/injury), even during severe earthquakes. However, base isolating a building or applying any other beneficial technology may incur additional initial costs. In order to provide incentives for builders/owners to adopt these loss-minimising technologies, real-estate and insurance industries will have to acknowledge the reduced risk posed by (and enhanced resilience of) such buildings in setting their rental/sale prices and insurance premiums.