A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
The paper presents preliminary findings from comprehensive research studies on the liquefaction-induced damage to buildings and infrastructure in Christchurch during the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquakes. It identifies key factors and mechanisms of damage to road bridges, shallow foundations of CBD buildings and buried pipelines, and highlights the implications of the findings for the seismic analysis and design of these structures.
Recurrent liquefaction in Christchurch during the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence created a wealth of shallow subsurface intrusions with geometries and orientations governed by (1) strong ground motion severity and duration, and (2) intrinsic site characteristics including liquefaction susceptibility, lateral spreading severity, geomorphic setting, host sediment heterogeneity, and anthropogenic soil modifications. We present a suite of case studies that demonstrate how each of these characteristics influenced the geologic expressions of contemporary liquefaction in the shallow subsurface. We compare contemporary features with paleo-features to show how geologic investigations of recurrent liquefaction can provide novel insights into the shaking characteristics of modern and paleo-earthquakes, the influence of geomorphology on liquefaction vulnerability, and the possible controls of anthropogenic activity on the geologic record. We conclude that (a) sites of paleo-liquefaction in the last 1000-2000 years corresponded with most severe liquefaction during the Canterbury earthquake sequence, (b) less vulnerable sites that only liquefied in the strongest and most proximal contemporary earthquakes are unlikely to have liquefied in the last 1000-2000 years or more, (c) proximal strong earthquakes with large vertical accelerations favoured sill formation at some locations, (d) contemporary liquefaction was more severe than paleoliquefaction at all study sites, and (e) stratigraphic records of successive dike formation were more complete at sites with severe lateral spreading, (f) anthropogenic fill suppressed surface liquefaction features and altered subsurface liquefaction architecture.
© 2019, Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature. Prediction of building collapse due to significant seismic motion is a principle objective of earthquake engineers, particularly after a major seismic event when the structure is damaged and decisions may need to be made rapidly concerning the safe occupation of a building or surrounding areas. Traditional model-based pushover analyses are effective, but only if the structural properties are well understood, which is not the case after an event when that information is most useful. This paper combines hysteresis loop analysis (HLA) structural health monitoring (SHM) and incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) methods to identify and then analyse collapse capacity and the probability of collapse for a specific structure, at any time, a range of earthquake excitations to ensure robustness. This nonlinear dynamic analysis enables constant updating of building performance predictions following a given and subsequent earthquake events, which can result in difficult to identify deterioration of structural components and their resulting capacity, all of which is far more difficult using static pushover analysis. The combined methods and analysis provide near real-time updating of the collapse fragility curves as events progress, thus quantifying the change of collapse probability or seismic induced losses very soon after an earthquake for decision-making. Thus, this combination of methods enables a novel, higher-resolution analysis of risk that was not previously available. The methods are not computationally expensive and there is no requirement for a validated numerical model, thus providing a relatively simpler means of assessing collapse probability immediately post-event when such speed can provide better information for critical decision-making. Finally, the results also show a clear need to extend the area of SHM toward creating improved predictive models for analysis of subsequent events, where the Christchurch series of 2010–2011 had significant post-event aftershocks.
In practice, several competing liquefaction evaluation procedures (LEPs) are used to compute factors of safety against soil liquefaction, often for use within a liquefaction potential index (LPI) framework to assess liquefaction hazard. At present, the influence of the selected LEP on the accuracy of LPI hazard assessment is unknown, and the need for LEP-specific calibrations of the LPI hazard scale has never been thoroughly investigated. Therefore, the aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of three CPT-based LEPs from the literature, operating within the LPI framework, for predicting the severity of liquefaction manifestation. Utilising more than 7000 liquefaction case studies from the 2010–2011 Canterbury (NZ) earthquake sequence, this study found that: (a) the relationship between liquefaction manifestation severity and computed LPI values is LEP-specific; (b) using a calibrated, LEP-specific hazard scale, the performance of the LPI models is essentially equivalent; and (c) the existing LPI framework has inherent limitations, resulting in inconsistent severity predictions against field observations for certain soil profiles, regardless of which LEP is used. It is unlikely that revisions of the LEPs will completely resolve these erroneous assessments. Rather, a revised index which more adequately accounts for the mechanics of liquefaction manifestation is needed.
A wide range of reinforced concrete (RC) wall performance was observed following the 2010/2011 Canterbury earthquakes, with most walls performing as expected, but some exhibiting undesirable and unexpected damage and failure characteristics. A comprehensive research programme, funded by the Building Performance Branch of the New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, and involving both numerical and experimental studies, was developed to investigate the unexpected damage observed in the earthquakes and provide recommendations for the design and assessment procedures for RC walls. In particular, the studies focused on the performance of lightly reinforced walls; precast walls and connections; ductile walls; walls subjected to bi-directional loading; and walls prone to out-of-plane instability. This paper summarises each research programme and provides practical recommendations for the design and assessment of RC walls based on key findings, including recommended changes to NZS 3101 and the NZ Seismic Assessment Guidelines.
In 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.
An as-built reinforced concrete (RC) frame building designed and constructed according to pre-1970s code design construction practice has been recently tested on the shake table at the University of Canterbury. The specimen, 1/2.5 scaled version of the original prototype, consists of two 3-storey 2-bay asymmetric frames in parallel, one interior and one exterior, jointed together by transverse beams and floor slabs. Following the benchmark test, a retrofit intervention has been proposed to rehabilitate the tested specimen. In this paper, detailed information on the assessment and design of the seismic retrofit procedure using GFRP (glass fibre reinforced polymer) materials is given for the whole frame. Hierarchy of strength and sequence of events (damage mechanisms) in the panel zone region are evaluated using a moment-axial load (M-N) interaction performance domain, according to a performance-based retrofit philosophy. Specific limit states or design objectives are targeted with attention given to both strength and deformation limits. In addition, an innovative retrofit solution using FRP anchor dowels for the corner beam-column joints with slabs is proposed. Finally, in order to provide a practical tool for engineering practice, the retrofit procedure is provided in a step-by step flowchart fashion.
Recent advances in timber design at the University of Canterbury have led to new structural systems that are appropriate for a wide range of building types, including multi-storey commercial office structures. These buildings are competitive with more traditional construction materials in terms of cost, sustainability and structural performance. This paper provides seismic design recommendations and analytical modelling approaches, appropriate for the seismic design of post-tensioned coupled timber wall systems. The models are based on existing seismic design theory for precast post-tensioned concrete, modified to more accurately account for elastic deformation of the timber wall systems and the influence of the floor system. Experimental test data from a two storey post-tensioned timber building, designed, constructed and tested at the University of Canterbury is used to validate the analytical models.
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.
The objective of this project is to collect perishable seismic response data from the baseisolated Christchurch Women's Hospital. The strong and continuing sequence of aftershocks presents a unique opportunity to capture high-fidelity data from a modern base-isolated facility. These measurements will provide quantitative information required to assess the mechanisms at play in this and in many other seismically-isolated structures.
Following the 2010-2011 Canterbury (New Zealand) earthquake sequence, lightly reinforced wall structures in the Christchurch central business district were observed to form undesirable crack patterns in the plastic hinge region, while yield penetration either side of cracks and into development zones was less than predicted using empirical expressions. To some extent this structural behaviour was unexpected and has therefore demonstrated that there may be less confidence in the seismic performance of conventionally designed reinforced concrete (RC) structures than previously anticipated. This paper provides an observation-based comparison between the behaviour of RC structural components in laboratory testing and the unexpected structural behaviour of some case study buildings in Christchurch that formed concentrated inelastic deformations. The unexpected behaviour and poor overall seismic performance of ‘real’ buildings (compared to the behaviour of laboratory test specimens) was due to the localization of peak inelastic strains, which in some cases has arguably led to: (i) significantly less ductility capacity; (ii) less hysteretic energy dissipation; and (iii) the fracture of the longitudinal reinforcement. These observations have raised concerns about whether lightly reinforced wall structures can satisfy the performance objective of “Life Safety” at the Ultimate Limit State. The significance of these issues and potential consequences has prompted a review of potential problems with the testing conditions and procedures that are commonly used in seismic experimentations on RC structures. This paper attempts to revisit the principles of RC mechanics, in particular, the influence of loading history, concrete tensile strength, and the quantity of longitudinal reinforcement on the performance of real RC structures. Consideration of these issues in future research on the seismic performance of RC might improve the current confidence levels in newly designed conventional RC structures.
Despite their good performance in terms of their design objectives, many modern code-prescriptive buildings built in Christchurch, New Zealand had to be razed after the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquakes because repairs were deemed too costly due to widespread sacrificial damage. Clearly a more effective design paradigm is needed to create more resilient structures. Rocking, post-tensioned connections with supplemental energy dissipation can contribute to a damage avoidance designs (DAD). However, few have achieved all three key design objectives of damage-resistant rocking, inherent recentering ability, and repeatable, damage-free energy dissipation for all cycles, which together offer a response which is independent of loading history. Results of experimental tests are presented for a near full-scale rocking beam-column sub-assemblage. A matrix of test results is presented for the system under varying levels of posttensioning, with and without supplemental dampers. Importantly, this parametric study delineates each contribution to response. Practical limitations on posttensioning are identified: a minimum to ensure static structural re-centering, and a maximum to ensure deformability without threadbar yielding. Good agreement between a mechanistic model and experimental results over all parameters and inputs indicates the model is robust and accurate for design. The overall results indicate that it is possible to create a DAD connection where the non-linear force-deformation response is loading history independent and repeatable over numerous loading cycles, without damage, creating the opportunity for the design and implementation of highly resilient structures.
A major lesson from the 2011 Christchurch earthquake was the apparent lack of ductility of some lightly reinforced concrete (RC) wall structures. In particular, the structural behaviour of the critical wall in the Gallery Apartments building demonstrated that the inelastic deformation capacity of a structure, as well as potentially brittle failure of the reinforcement, is dependent on the level of bond deterioration between reinforcement and surrounding concrete that occurs under seismic loading. This paper presents the findings of an experimental study on bond behaviour between deformed reinforcing bars and the surrounding concrete. Bond strength and relative bond slip was evaluated using 75 pull-out tests under monotonic and cyclic loading. Variations of the experiments include the loading rate, loading history, concrete strength (25 to 70 MPa), concrete age, cover thickness, bar diameter (16 and 20 mm), embedded length, and the position of the embedded bond region within the specimen (deep within or close to free surface). Select test results are presented with inferred implications for RC structures.