Search

found 2562 results

Images for new building; more images...

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Low Damage Seismic Design (LDSD) guidance material being developed by Engineering NZ is considering a design drift limit for multi-storey buildings of 0.5% at a new damage control limit state (DCLS). The impact of this new design requirement on the expected annual loss due to repair costs is investigated for a four-storey office building with reinforced concrete walls located in Christchurch. The LDSD guidance material aims to reduce the expected annual loss of complying buildings to below 0.1% of building replacement cost. The research tested this expectation. Losses were estimated in accordance with FEMA P58, using building responses from non-linear time history analyses (performed with OpenSees using lumped plasticity models). The equivalent static method, in line with NZS 1170.5 and NZS 3101, was used to design the building to LDSD specifications, representing a future state-of-practice design. The building designed to low-damage specification returned an expected annual loss of 0.10%, and the building designed conventionally returned an expected annual loss of 0.13%. Limitations with the NZS 3101 method for determining wall stiffness were identified, and a different method acknowledging the relationship between strength and stiffness was used to redesign the building. Along with improving this design assumption, the study finds that LDSD design criteria could be an effective way of limiting damage and losses.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Though rare and unpredictable, earthquakes can and do cause catastrophic destruction when they impact unprepared and vulnerable communities. Extensive damage and failure of vulnerable buildings is a key factor which contributes to seismic-related disasters, making the proactive management of these buildings a necessity to reduce the risk of future disasters arising. The devastating Canterbury earthquakes of 2010 and 2011 brought the urgency of this issue to national importance in New Zealand. The national earthquake-prone building framework came into effect in 2017, obligating authorities to identify existing buildings with the greatest risk of collapse in strong earthquakes and for building owners to strengthen or demolish these buildings within a designated period of time. Though this framework is unique to New Zealand, the challenge of managing the seismic risk of such buildings is common amongst all seismically-active countries. Therefore, looking outward to examine how other jurisdictions legally manage this challenge is useful for reflecting on the approaches taken in New Zealand and understand potential lessons which could be adopted. This research compares the legal framework used to reduce the seismic risk of existing buildings in New Zealand with that of the similarly earthquake-prone countries of Japan and Italy. These legal frameworks are examined with a particular focus on the proactive goal of reducing risk and improving resilience, as is the goal of the international Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030. The Sendai Framework, which each of the case study countries have committed to and thus have obligations under, forms the legal basis of the need for states to reduce disaster risk in their jurisdictions. In particular, the states’ legal frameworks for existing building risk reduction are examined in the context of the Sendai priorities of understanding disaster risk, strengthening disaster risk governance, and investing in resilience. While this research illustrates that the case study countries have each adopted more proactive risk reduction frameworks in recent years in anticipation of future earthquakes, the frameworks currently focus on a very narrow range of existing buildings and thus are not currently sufficient for promoting the long-term resilience of building stocks. In order to improve resilience, it is argued, legal frameworks need to include a broader range of buildings subject to seismic risk reduction obligations and also to broaden the focus on long-term monitoring of potential risk to buildings.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "Aftermath of the earthquake in Christchurch where the cleanup has begun. Teams of building inspectors gathered at the Linwood Service Centre before heading into the eastern suburbs en masse. Gary Marshall, left, building inspector from Napier, and Kent Wilson, City Council planner work at a property on Dallington Terrace".

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "Aftermath of the earthquake in Christchurch where the cleanup has begun. Teams of building inspectors gathered at the Linwood Service Centre before heading into the eastern suburbs en masse. Gary Marshall, left, building inspector from Napier, and Kent Wilson, City Council planner work at a property on Dallington Terrace".

Audio, Radio New Zealand

The woman who fought the odds to regain her mobility after being trapped and crushed in her collapsed work place, the PGC building, when Christchurch was devastated by the earthquake of February 22. She is now helping other quake victims, especially the children of injured parents some of who have had long periods of separation.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Bricks have fallen from the walls of the former Princess Cinema in New Brighton, exposing the interior. The photographer comments, "Back of the old Princess Cinema in New Brighton after the earthquake in Christchurch, New Zealand on 22 February. In this picture you can see inside the old cinema curtains. This building has now been knocked down as it was so dangerous".

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Recent earthquakes in New Zealand proved that a shift is necessary in the current design practice of structures to achieve better seismic performance. Following such events, the number of new buildings using innovative technical solutions (e.g. base isolation, controlled rocking systems, damping devices, etc.), has increased, especially in Christchurch. However, the application of these innovative technologies is often restricted to medium-high rise buildings due to the maximum benefit to cost ratio. In this context, to address this issue, a multi-disciplinary geo-structural-environmental engineering project funded by the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE) is being carried out at the University of Canterbury. The project aims at developing a foundation system which will improve the seismic performance of medium-density low-rise buildings. Such foundation is characterized by two main elements: 1) granulated tyre rubber mixed with gravelly soils to be placed beneath the structure, with the goal of damping part of the seismic energy before it reaches the superstructure; and 2) a basement raft made of steel-fibre rubberised concrete to enhance the flexibility of the foundation under differential displacement demand. In the first part of this paper, the overarching objectives, scope and methodology of the project will be briefly described. Then, preliminary findings on the materials characterization, i.e., the gravel-rubber mixtures and steel-fibre rubberised concrete mixes, will be presented and discussed with focus on the mechanical behaviour.

Research Papers, Lincoln University

The Building Act 2004 now requires Territorial Authorities (TAs) to have in place a policy setting out how they intend making existing buildings that would be unable to withstand a moderate earthquake safe for their occupiers. Many of the resultant policies developed by TAs have put in place mandatory upgrade requirements that will force owners to expend large amounts of capital on seismic upgrading of their buildings. The challenge for the property owners and TAs alike is to make such development work economic or the result will be wide scale demolition of old buildings. This has serious implications for both heritage conservation and inner city revitalisation plans that are based on existing heritage buildings. This paper sets out the issues and challenges for the seismic upgrading of buildings in New Zealand and puts forward some potential solutions