Search

found 1000 results

Images for ground; more images...

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Generalized conditional intensity measure (GCIM) method is extended to ground motion selection for scenario ruptures. Using different rupture scenarios and site conditions, various aspects of the GCIM methodology are scrutinized, including: (i) implementation of different weight vectors and the composition of the IM vector; (ii) quantifying the importance of replicate selections for different number of desired ground motions; and (iii) the effect of considering bounds on the implicit causal parameters of the prospective ground motions. Using the extended methodology, representative ground motion ensembles for several major earthquake scenarios in New Zealand are developed. Cases considered include representative ground motions for the occurrence of Alpine, Hope, and Porters Pass earthquakes in Christchurch city, and the occurrence of Wellington, Wairarapa, and Ohariu fault ruptures in Wellington city. Challenges in the development of ground motion ensembles for subduction zone earthquakes are also highlighted. The selected scenario-based ground motion sets can be used to complement ground motions which are often selected in conjunction with probabilistic seismic hazard analysis, in order to understand the performance of structures for the question “what if this fault ruptures?”

Images, UC QuakeStudies

A view across the corner of London and Canterbury Streets to the Ground Culinary Centre. Large sections of the building's walls have cracked and collapsed, spilling masonry onto the footpath. Wire fencing has been placed around the building as a cordon.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

A sign on the wire fencing in front of the Ground Culinary Centre on the corner of London and Canterbury Streets. The sign reads, "Ground has moved to Dublin Street at the Four Ships/Top Club & takeaway food in caravan outside Portico". The background, the original store can be seen, damaged severely after the 22 February 2011 earthquake.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Background This study examines the performance of site response analysis via nonlinear total-stress 1D wave-propagation for modelling site effects in physics-based ground motion simulations of the 2010-2011 Canterbury, New Zealand earthquake sequence. This approach allows for explicit modeling of 3D ground motion phenomena at the regional scale, as well as detailed nonlinear site effects at the local scale. The approach is compared to a more commonly used empirical VS30 (30 m time-averaged shear wave velocity)-based method for computing site amplification as proposed by Graves and Pitarka (2010, 2015), and to empirical ground motion prediction via a ground motion model (GMM).

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

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

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

This research investigates the validation of simulated ground motions on complex structural systems. In this study, the seismic responses of two buildings are compared when they are subjected to as-recorded ground motions and simulated ones. The buildings have been designed based on New Zealand codes and physically constructed in Christchurch, New Zealand. The recorded ground motions are selected from 40 stations database of the historical 22 Feb. 2011 Christchurch earthquake. The Graves and Pitarka (2015) methodology is used to generate the simulated ground motions. The geometric mean of maximum inter-story drift and peak floor acceleration are selected as the main seismic responses. Also, the variation of these parameters due to record to record variability are investigated. Moreover, statistical hypothesis testing is used to investigate the similarity of results between observed and simulated ground motions. The results indicate a general agreement between the peak floor acceleration calculated by simulated and recorded ground motions for two buildings. While according to the hypothesis tests result, the difference in drift can be significant for the building with a shorter period. The results will help engineers and researchers to use or revise the procedure by using simulated ground motions for obtaining seismic responses.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

This paper provides a brief discussion of observed strong ground motions from the 14 November 2016 Mw7.8 Kaikoura earthquake. Specific attention is given to examining observations in the near-source region where several ground motions exceeding 1.0g horizontal are recorded, as well as up to 2.7g in the vertical direction at one location. Ground motion response spectra in the near-source, North Canterbury, Marlborough and Wellington regions are also examined and compared with design levels. Observed spectral amplitudes are also compared with predictions from empirical and physics-based ground motion modelling.

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.

Images, Canterbury Museum

One round metal and plastic badge featuring a stylised image of a panda on a pink background; across the top runs the word 'love' and across the bottom the words 'Grand Ground Dreamu'. This metal and plastic badge featuring a stylised image of a panda on a pink background from the Japanese brand Grand Ground Dreamu, was left at the site of the ...

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

We present the initial findings from a study of adaptive resilience of lifelines organisations providing essential infrastructure services, in Christchurch, New Zealand following the earthquakes of 2010-2011. Qualitative empirical data was collected from 200 individuals in 11 organisations. Analysis using a grounded theory method identified four major factors that aid organisational response, recovery and renewal following major disruptive events. Our data suggest that quality of top and middle-level leadership, quality of external linkages, level of internal collaboration, ability to learn from experience, and staff well-being and engagement influence adaptive resilience. Our data also suggest that adaptive resilience is a process or capacity, not an outcome and that it is contextual. Post-disaster capacity/resources and post-disaster environment influence the nature of adaptive resilience.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

This paper examines the consistency of seismicity and ground motion models, used for seismic hazard analysis in New Zealand, with the observations in the Canterbury earthquakes. An overview is first given of seismicity and ground motion modelling as inputs of probabilistic seismic hazard analysis, whose results form the basis for elastic response spectra in NZS1170.5:2004. The magnitude of earthquakes in the Canterbury earthquake sequence are adequately allowed for in the current NZ seismicity model, however the consideration of ‘background’ earthquakes as point sources at a minimum depth of 10km results in up to a 60% underestimation of the ground motions that such events produce. The ground motion model used in conventional NZ seismic hazard analysis is shown to provide biased predictions of response spectra (over-prediction near T=0.2s , and under-predictions at moderate-to-large vibration periods). Improved ground motion prediction can be achieved using more recent NZ-specific models.