Search

found 627 results

Images for earthquake engineering; more images...

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Damage to ceiling systems resulted in a substantial financial loss to building owners in the Canterbury earthquakes. In some buildings, collapse of ceilings could easily have resulted in severe injury to occupants. This paper summarizes the types of ceiling damage observed in the Canterbury earthquakes, and draws useful lessons from the observed performance of different types of ceiling systems. Existing ceiling manufacturing and installing practices/regulations in New Zealand are critically scrutinized to identify deficiencies, and measures are suggested to improve the practice so that the damage to ceilings and the resulting loss are minimized in future earthquakes.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

This paper discusses the seismic performance of the standard RC office building in Christchurch that is given as a structural design example in NZS3101, the concrete structures seismic standard in New Zealand. Firstly the push-over analysis was carried out to evaluate the lateral load carrying capacity of the RC building and then to compare that carrying capacity with the Japanese standard law. The estimated figures showed that the carrying capacity of the New Zealand standard RC office building of NZS3101:2006 was about one third of Japanese demanded carrying capacity. Secondly, time history analysis of the multi-mass system was performed to estimate the maximum response story drift angle using recorded ground motions. Finally, a three-dimensional analysis was carried out to estimate the response of the building to the 22nd February, 2011 Canterbury earthquake. The following outcomes were obtained. 1) The fundamental period of the example RC building is more than twice that of Japanese simplified calculation, 2) The example building’s maximum storey drift angle reached 2.5% under the recorded ground motions. The main purpose of this work is to provide background information of seismic design practice for the reconstruction of Christchurch.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

In 2016, the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Act 2016 was introduced to address the issue of seismic vulnerability amongst existing buildings in Aotearoa New Zealand. This Act introduced a mandatory scheme to remediate buildings deemed particularly vulnerable to seismic hazard, as recommended by the 2012 Royal Commission into the Canterbury earthquake sequence of 2010–2011. This Earthquake-prone Building (EPB) framework is unusual internationally for the mandatory obligations that it introduces. This article explores and critiques the operation of the scheme in practice through an examination of its implementation provisions and the experiences of more recent seismic events (confirmed by engineering research). This analysis leads to the conclusion that the operation of the current scheme and particularly the application of the concept of EPB vulnerability excludes large numbers of (primarily urban) buildings which pose a significant risk in the event of a significant (but expected) seismic event. As a result, the EPB scheme fails to achieve its goals and instead may create a false impression that it does so

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

This poster provides a comparison between the strong ground motions observed in the 22 February 2011 Mw6.3 Christchurch earthquake with those observed in Tokyo during the 11 March 2011 Mw9.0 Tohoku earthquake. The destuction resulting from both of these events has been well documented, although tsunami was the principal cause of damage in the latter event, and less attention has been devoted to the impact of earthquake-induced ground motions. Despite Tokyo being located over 100km from the nearest part of the causative rupture, the ground motions observed from the Tohoku earthquake were significant enough to cause structural damage and also significant liquefaction to loose reclaimed soils in Tokyo Bay. The author was fortunate enough (from the perspective of an earthquake engineer) to experience first-hand both of these events. Following the Tohoku event, the athor conducted various ground motion analyses and reconniassance of the Urayasu region in Tokyo Bay affected by liquefaction in collaboration with Prof. Kenji Ishihara. This conference is therefore a fitting opportunity in which to discuss some of authors insights obtained as a result of this first hand knowledge. Figure 1 illustrates the ground motions recorded in the Christchurch CBD in the 22 February 2011 and 4 September 2010 earthquakes, with that recorded in Tokyo Bay in the 11 March 2011 Tohoku earthquake. It is evident that these three ground motions vary widely in their amplitude and duration. The CBGS ground motion from the 22 February 2011 event has a very large amplitude (nearly 0.6g) and short duration (approx. 10s of intense shaking), as a result of the causal Mw6.3 rupture at short distance (Rrup=4km). The CBGS ground motion from the 4 September 2010 earthquake has a longer duration (approx. 30s of intense shaking), but reduced acceleration amplitude, as a result of the causal Mw7.1 rupture at a short-to-moderate distance (Rrup=14km). Finally, the Urayasu ground motion in Tokyo bay during the 11 March 2011 Tohoku earthquake exhibits an acceleration amplitude similar to the 4 September 2010 CBGS ground motion, but a significantly larger duration (approx 150s of intense shaking). Clearly, these three different ground motions will affect structures and soils in different ways depending on the vibration characteristics of the structures/soil, and the potential for strength and stiffness degradation due to cumulative effects. Figure 2 provides a comparison between the arias intensities of the several ground motion records from the three different events. It can be seen that the arias intensities of the ground motions in the Christchurch CBD from the 22 February 2011 earthquake (which is on average AI=2.5m/s) is approximately twice that from the 4 September 2010 earthquake (average AI≈1.25). This is consistent with a factor of approximately 1.6 obtained by Cubrinovski et al. (2011) using the stress-based (i.e.PGA-MSF) approach of liquefaction triggering. It can also be seen that the arias intensity of the ground motions recorded in Tokyo during the 2011 Tohoku earthquake are larger than ground motions in the Christchurch CBD from the 4 September 2011 earthquake, but smaller than those of the 22 February 2011 earthquake. Based on the arias intensity liquefaction triggering approach it can therefore be concluded that the ground motion severity, in terms of liquefaction potential, for the Tokyo ground motions is between those ground motions in Christchurch CBD from the 4 September 2010 and 22 February 2011 events.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

A magnitude 6.3 earthquake struck the city of Christchurch at 12:51pm on Tuesday 22 February 2011. The earthquake caused 182 fatalities, a large number of injuries, and resulted in widespread damage to the built environment, including significant disruption to the lifelines. The event created the largest lifeline disruption in a New Zealand city in 80 years, with much of the damage resulting from extensive and severe liquefaction in the Christchurch urban area. The Christchurch earthquake occurred when the Canterbury region and its lifelines systems were at the early stage of recovering from the 4 September 2010 Darfield (Canterbury) magnitude 7.1 earthquake. This paper describes the impact of the Christchurch earthquake on lifelines by briefly summarising the physical damage to the networks, the system performance and the operational response during the emergency management and the recovery phase. Special focus is given to the performance and management of the gas, electric and road networks and to the liquefaction ejecta clean-up operations that contributed to the rapid reinstatement of the functionality of many of the lifelines. The water and wastewater system performances are also summarized. Elements of resilience that contributed to good network performance or to efficient emergency and recovery management are highlighted in the paper.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

The University of Canterbury has initialized a research program focusing on the seismic sustainability of structures. As part of this program, the relative seismic sustainability of various structures will be assessed to identify those with the highest sustainability for the Christchurch rebuild and general use in New Zealand. This preliminary case study assesses one reinforced concrete (RC) frame structure and one RC wall structure. The scenario loss is evaluated for two earthquake records considering direct losses only in order to explain and illustrate the methodology.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

On 22 February 2011, Canterbury and its largest city Christchurch experienced its second major earthquake within six months. The region is facing major economic and organisational challenges in the aftermath of these events. Approximately 25% of all buildings in the Christchurch CBD have been “red tagged” or deemed unsafe to enter. The New Zealand Treasury estimates that the combined cost of the February earthquake and the September earthquake is approximately NZ$15 billion[2]. This paper examines the national and regional economic climate prior to the event, discusses the immediate economic implications of this event, and the challenges and opportunities faced by organisations affected by this event. In order to facilitate recovery of the Christchurch area, organisations must adjust to a new norm; finding ways not only to continue functioning, but to grow in the months and years following these earthquakes. Some organisations relocated within days to areas that have been less affected by the earthquakes. Others are taking advantage of government subsidised aid packages to help retain their employees until they can make long-term decisions about the future of their organisation. This paper is framed as a “report from the field” in order to provide insight into the early recovery scenario as it applies to organisations affected by the February 2011 earthquake. It is intended both to inform and facilitate discussion about how organisations can and should pursue recovery in Canterbury, and how organisations can become more resilient in the face of the next crisis.

Audio, Radio New Zealand

With Adrian Regnault, the General Manager of Building Systems Performance at the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment; Stefano Pampanin, an Associate Professor in Structural Engineering at Canterbury University and the President of the NZ Society for Earthquake Engineering and John Finnegan - structural engineer, Aurecon.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

By closely examining the performance of a 22-storey steel framed building in Christchurch subject to various earthquakes over the past seven years, it is shown that a number of lessons can be learnt regarding the cost-effective consideration of non-structural elements. The first point in this work is that non-structural elements significantly affected the costs associated with repairing steel eccentrically braced frame (EBF) links. The decommissioning or rerouting of non-structural elements in the vicinity of damaged links in the case study building attributed to approximately half the total cost of their repair. Such costs could be significantly reduced if the original positioning of non-structural elements took account of the potential need to repair the EBF links. The second point highlighted is the role that pre-cast cladding apparently played on the distribution and type of damage in the building. Loss estimates obtained following the FEMA P-58 framework vary considerably when cladding is or isnt modelled, both because of changes to drift demands up the height of the building and because certain types of subsequent damage are likely to be cheaper to repair than others. Finally, costly repairs to non-structural partition walls were required not only after the moment magnitude 7.1 earthquake in 2010 but also in multiple aftershocks in the years that followed. Repair costs associated with aftershock events exceeded those from the main event, emphasizing the need to consider aftershocks within modern performance-based earthquake engineering and also the opportunity that exists to make more cost-effective repair strategies following damaging earthquakes.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Paper 201In order to provide information related to seismic vulnerability of non-ductile reinforced concrete (RC) frame buildings, and as a complementary investigation on innovative feasible retrofit solutions developed in the past six years at the University of Canterbury on pre-19170 reinforced concrete buildings, a frame building representative of older construction practice was tested on the shake table. The specimen, 1/2.5 scale, consists of two 3-storey 2-bay asymmetric frames in parallel, one interior and one exterior, jointed together by transverse beams and floor slabs. The as-built (benchmark) specimen was first tested under increasing ground motion amplitudes using records from Loma Prieta Earthquake (California, 1989) and suffered significant damage at the upper floor, most of it due to lap splices failure. As a consequence, in a second stage, the specimen was repaired and modified by removing the concrete in the lap splice region, welding the column longitudinal bars, replacing the removed concrete with structural mortar, and injecting cracks with epoxy resin. The modified as-built specimen was then tested using data recorded during Darfield (New Zealand, 2010) and Maule (Chile, 2010) Earthquakes, with whom the specimen showed remarkably different responses attributed to the main variation in frequency content and duration. In this contribution, the seismic performance of the three series of experiments are presented and compared.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Modern methods of seismic design (since the 1970s) allow structural engineers to design new buildings with the aim of predictable and ductile behaviour in severe earthquakes, in order to prevent collapse and loss of life. However some controlled damage is expected, which may result in the building being damaged beyond economic repair after severe shaking. Seismic protection of structures has seen significant advances in recent decades, due to the development of new technologies and advanced materials. It has only been recently recognised world-wide that it is possible to design economical structures which can resist severe earthquakes with limited or negligible structural damage. There are two alternative ways of designing buildings to avoid permanent damage in severe earthquakes; base isolation and damage-resistant design. Base isolation requires the building to be separated from the ground by isolation devices which can dissipate energy. This is proven technology which may add a little to the initial cost of the building, but will prove to be less expensive in the long term. Damage-resistant design is developing rapidly, in several different forms. These include rocking walls or rocking frames, with or without post-tensioning, and a variety of energy dissipating devices attached to the building in different ways. If not already the case, damage-resistant design will soon become no more expensive than conventional design for new buildings.