A photograph captioned by Paul Corliss, "Avonside and Retreat Roads post earthquake".
Pumice materials, which are problematic from an engineering viewpoint, are widespread in the central part of the North Island. Considering the impacts of the 2010-2011 Christchurch earthquakes, a clear understanding of their properties under earthquake loading is necessary. For example, the 1987 Edgecumbe earthquake showed evidence of localised liquefaction of sands of volcanic origin. To elucidate on this, research was undertaken to investigate whether existing empirical field-based methods to evaluate the liquefaction potential of sands, which were originally developed for hard-grained soils, are applicable to crushable pumice-rich deposits. For this purpose, two sites, one in Whakatane and another in Edgecumbe, were selected where the occurrence of liquefaction was reported following the Edgecumbe earthquake. Manifestations of soil liquefaction, such as sand boils and ejected materials, have been reported at both sites. Field tests, including cone penetration tests (CPT), shear-wave velocity profiling, and screw driving sounding (SDS) tests were performed at the sites. Then, considering estimated peak ground accelerations (PGAs) at the sites based on recorded motions and possible range of ground water table locations, liquefaction analysis was conducted at the sites using available empirical approaches. To clarify the results of the analysis, undisturbed soil samples were obtained at both sites to investigate the laboratory-derived cyclic resistance ratios and to compare with the field-estimated values. Research results clearly showed that these pumice-rich soils do not fit existing liquefaction assessment frameworks and alternate methods are necessary to characterise them.
Spatial variations in river facies exerted a strong influence on the distribution of liquefaction features observed in Christchurch during the 2010-11 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES). Liquefaction and liquefaction-induced ground deformation was primarily concentrated near modern waterways and areas underlain by Holocene fluvial deposits with shallow water tables (< 1 to 2 m). In southern Christchurch, spatial variations of liquefaction and subsidence were documented in the suburbs within inner meander loops of the Heathcote River. Newly acquired geospatial data, geotechnical reports and eye-witness discussions are compiled to provide a detailed account of the surficial effects of CES liquefaction and ground deformation adjacent to the Heathcote River. LiDAR data and aerial photography are used to produce a new series of original figures which reveal the locations of recurrent liquefaction and subsidence. To investigate why variable liquefaction patterns occurred, the distribution of surface ejecta and associated ground damage is compared with near-surface sedimentologic, topographic, and geomorphic variability to seek relationships between the near-surface properties and observed ground damages. The most severe liquefaction was concentrated within a topographic low in the suburb of St Martins, an inner meander loop of the Heathcote River, with liquefaction only minor or absent in the surrounding areas. Subsurface investigations at two sites in St Martins enable documentation of fluvial stratigraphy, the expressions of liquefaction, and identification of pre-CES liquefaction features. Excavation to water table depths (~1.5 m below the surface) across sand boils reveals multiple generations of CES liquefaction dikes and sills that cross-cut Holocene fluvial and anthropogenic stratigraphy. Based on in situ geotechnical tests (CPT) indicating sediment with a factor of safety < 1, the majority of surface ejecta was sourced from well-sorted fine to medium sand at < 5 m depth, with the most damaging liquefaction corresponding with the location of a low-lying sandy paleochannel, a remnant river channel from the Holocene migration of the meander in St Martins. In the adjacent suburb of Beckenham, where migration of the Heathcote River has been laterally confined by topography associated with the volcanic lithologies of Banks Peninsula, severe liquefaction was absent with only minor sand boils occurring closest to the modern river channel. Auger sampling across the suburb revealed thick (>1 m) clay-rich overbank and back swamp sediments that produced a stratigraphy which likely confined the units susceptible to liquefaction and prevented widespread ejection of liquefied material. This analysis suggests river migration promotes the formation and preservation of fluvial deposits prone to liquefaction. Trenching revealed the strongest CES earthquakes with large vertical accelerations favoured sill formation and severe subsidence at highly susceptible locations corresponding with an abandoned channel. Less vulnerable sites containing deeper and thinner sand bodies only liquefied in the strongest and most proximal earthquakes forming minor localised liquefaction features. Liquefaction was less prominent and severe subsidence was absent where lateral confinement of a Heathcote meander has promoted the formation of fluvial stratum resistant to liquefaction. Correlating CES liquefaction with geomorphic interpretations of Christchurch’s Heathcote River highlights methods in which the performance of liquefaction susceptibility models can be improved. These include developing a reliable proxy for estimating soil conditions in meandering fluvial systems by interpreting the geology and geomorphology, derived from LiDAR data and modern river morphology, to improve the methods of accounting for the susceptibility of an area. Combining geomorphic interpretations with geotechnical data can be applied elsewhere to identify regional liquefaction susceptibilities, improve existing liquefaction susceptibility datasets, and predict future earthquake damage.
Liquefaction in the drains in Avonside after the September 4th earthquake.
Plastic and wood model of three liquefaction volcanoes. The working model pumps water over the grey surface which is decorated with a basket of laundry, a bucket of pegs and a football. The model is surrounded by artificial green grass and rests atop a black wooden base.
Grass growing through liquefaction silt in Avondale. The photographer comments, "Although this grass seems to be growing on the liquefaction created by the earthquakes in Christchurch, New Zealand, they are actually only growing through it. Nothing seems to grow even though seeds will sprout almost anywhere else. The seeds are growing in the soil which got covered up by the liquefaction. If liquefaction gets mixed with even a little soil then nature can get a foothold".
Bare patches of ground at Sullivan Park in Avonside. The bare patches mark where liquefaction covered the grass after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
Dried liquefaction silt in North New Brighton. The photographer comments, "The liquefaction after the 23 December earthquake in Christchurch started to dry out and the thicker deposits started to curl up like broken drain pipe".
Liquefaction flooding in Travis Country.
A photograph of several earthquake-damaged houses on Chester Street East. A pile of liquefaction silt is on the footpath in the foreground.
A police car drives down a liquefaction-covered Geraldine Street in St Albans, past residents with shovels and wheelbarrows clearing silt.
Liquefaction and flooding in Waitaki Street, Bexley. The photographer comments, "Waitaki Street a week after the Christchurch Earthquake. Because of the damage to the drains and liquefaction in the area the streets are not drying out".
Footprints in liquefaction silt on the side of a residential street. The photographer comments, "Silt has accumulated everywhere".
The Canterbury Earthquakes of 2010-2011, in particular the 4th September 2010 Darfield earthquake and the 22nd February 2011 Christchurch earthquake, produced severe and widespread liquefaction in Christchurch and surrounding areas. The scale of the liquefaction was unprecedented, and caused extensive damage to a variety of man-made structures, including residential houses. Around 20,000 residential houses suffered serious damage as a direct result of the effects of liquefaction, and this resulted in approximately 7000 houses in the worst-hit areas being abandoned. Despite the good performance of light timber-framed houses under the inertial loads of the earthquake, these structures could not withstand the large loads and deformations associated with liquefaction, resulting in significant damage. The key structural component of houses subjected to liquefaction effects was found to be their foundations, as these are in direct contact with the ground. The performance of house foundations directly influenced the performance of the structure as a whole. Because of this, and due to the lack of research in this area, it was decided to investigate the performance of houses and in particular their foundations when subjected to the effects of liquefaction. The data from the inspections of approximately 500 houses conducted by a University of Canterbury summer research team following the 4th September 2010 earthquake in the worst-hit areas of Christchurch were analysed to determine the general performance of residential houses when subjected to high liquefaction loads. This was followed by the detailed inspection of around 170 houses with four different foundation types common to Christchurch and New Zealand: Concrete perimeter with short piers constructed to NZS3604, concrete slab-on-grade also to NZS3604, RibRaft slabs designed by Firth Industries and driven pile foundations. With a focus on foundations, floor levels and slopes were measured, and the damage to all areas of the house and property were recorded. Seven invasive inspections were also conducted on houses being demolished, to examine in more detail the deformation modes and the causes of damage in severely affected houses. The simplified modelling of concrete perimeter sections subjected to a variety of liquefaction-related scenarios was also performed, to examine the comparative performance of foundations built in different periods, and the loads generated under various bearing loss and lateral spreading cases. It was found that the level of foundation damage is directly related to the level of liquefaction experienced, and that foundation damage and liquefaction severity in turn influence the performance of the superstructure. Concrete perimeter foundations were found to have performed most poorly, suffering high local floor slopes and being likely to require foundation repairs even when liquefaction was low enough that no surface ejecta was seen. This was due to their weak, flexible foundation structure, which cannot withstand liquefaction loads without deforming. The vulnerability of concrete perimeter foundations was confirmed through modelling. Slab-on-grade foundations performed better, and were unlikely to require repairs at low levels of liquefaction. Ribraft and piled foundations performed the best, with repairs unlikely up to moderate levels of liquefaction. However, all foundation types were susceptible to significant damage at higher levels of liquefaction, with maximum differential settlements of 474mm, 202mm, 182mm and 250mm found for concrete perimeter, slab-on-grade, ribraft and piled foundations respectively when subjected to significant lateral spreading, the most severe loading scenario caused by liquefaction. It was found through the analysis of the data that the type of exterior wall cladding, either heavy or light, and the number of storeys, did not affect the performance of foundations. This was also shown through modelling for concrete perimeter foundations, and is due to the increased foundation strengths provided for heavily cladded and two-storey houses. Heavy roof claddings were found to increase the demands on foundations, worsening their performance. Pre-1930 concrete perimeter foundations were also found to be very vulnerable to damage under liquefaction loads, due to their weak and brittle construction.
A digitally manipulated image of broken objects. The photographer comments, "Digital painting of breakages and liquefaction after the February 22 earthquake in Christchurch".
Aerial footage of a site in Avondale where several liquefaction remediation options are being tested. Gelignite explosives have been buried throughout the site. These will be set off to simulate liquefaction caused by an earthquake. The result, if successful, will help EQC protect people's houses from future earthquakes, and settle land claims. The video was recorded using a drone aircraft.
People walking amongst silt in Hagley Park shortly after the 22 February 2011 earthquake. These silt deposits were caused by the soil liquefying during the 22 February 2011 earthquake. The water flowed out, bringing sand with it.
People walking amongst silt in Hagley Park shortly after the 22 February 2011 earthquake. These silt deposits were caused by the soil liquefying during the 22 February 2011 earthquake. The water flowed out, bringing sand with it.
A video of a residential area in Christchurch, recorded in December 2011. The video captures a 6.0 magnitude earthquake, and the liquefaction caused by this tremor.
A woman walks through liquefaction in Hendon Street in St Albans. The photographer comments, "Hendon St, St Albans, is very heavily silted".
Flooding and liquefaction surround a house in Richmond. Bricks have fallen from the walls of the house, exposing the wooden framework beneath.
This study analysed liquefaction susceptibility and estimated ground settlements for two earthquake scenarios (foothills and Alpine Fault) for eastern Waimakariri District. The report was later partially superseded by Earthquake hazard assessment for Waimakariri District (Yetton and McCahon, 2009), which while not using such detailed analytical methods as the 2000 Beca report, reviewed new information available since 2000 (including that collected as part of the Pegasus Town development). This showed that the liquefaction susceptibility in eastern Waimakariri district was in fact much more variable than suggested in the 2000 Beca maps, and that liquefaction susceptibility was extremely difficult to predict without a site-specific investigation. See Object Overview for background and usage information.
A sign on Robson Avenue warning the public of "Low Power Lines". The power poles sank during the earthquake due to liquefaction destabilising the ground underneath.
In the aftermath of the 22 February 2011 earthquake, the Natural Hazards Research Platform (NHRP) initiated a series of Short Term Recovery Projects (STRP) aimed at facilitating and supporting the recovery of Christchurch from the earthquake impacts. This report presents the outcomes of STRP 6: Impacts of Liquefaction on Pipe Networks, which focused on the impacts of liquefaction on the potable water and wastewater systems of Christchurch. The project was a collaborative effort of NHRP researchers with expertise in liquefaction, CCC personnel managing and designing the systems and a geotechnical practitioner with experience/expertise in Christchurch soils and seismic geotechnics.
A map showing the extent of liquefaction caused by the 22 February 2011 earthquake.
Liquefaction and flooding in a street in Kaiapoi, after the September 4th earthquake.
Liquefaction lessons from the 2011 Christchurch earthquake, and biotechnologists doing interesting things with plants.
Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "Earthquake in Christchurch. Damage and liquefaction around the city's boundary".
Cracks and liquefaction on a street in Avonside after the September 4th earthquake.
Cracks and liquefaction on a street in Avonside after the September 4th earthquake.