Search

found 353 results

Images for Engineering Building; more images...

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

This report presents the simplified seismic assessment of a case study reinforced concrete (RC) building following the newly developed and refined NZSEE/MBIE guidelines on seismic assessment (NZSEE/MBIE, semi-final draft 26 October 2016). After an overview of the step-by-step ‘diagnostic’ process, including an holistic and qualitative description of the expected vulnerabilities and of the assessment strategy/methodology, focus is given, whilst not limited, to the implementation of a Detailed Seismic Assessment (DSA) (NZSEE/MBIE, 2016c). The DSA is intended to provide a more reliable and consistent outcome than what can be provided by an initial seismic assessment (ISA). In fact, while the Initial Seismic Assessment (ISA), of which the Initial Evaluation Procedure is only a part of, is the more natural and still recommended first step in the overall assessment process, it is mostly intended to be a coarse evaluation involving as few resources as reasonably possible. It is thus expected that an ISA will be followed by a Detailed Seismic Assessment (DSA) not only where the threshold of 33%NBS is not achieved but also where important decisions are intended that are reliant on the seismic status of the building. The use of %NBS (% New Building Standard) as a capacity/demand ratio to describe the result of the seismic assessment at all levels of assessment procedure (ISA through to DSA) is deliberate by the NZSEE/MBIE guidelines (Part A) (NZSEE/MBIE 2016a). The rating for the building needs only be based on the lowest level of assessment that is warranted for the particular circumstances. Discussion on how the %NBS rating is to be determined can be found in Section A3.3 (NZSEE/MBIE 2016a), and, more specifically, in Part B for the ISA (NZSEE/MBIE 2016b) and Part C for the DSA (NZSEE/MBIE 2016c). As per other international approaches, the DSA can be based on several analysis procedures to assess the structural behaviour (linear, nonlinear, static or dynamic, force or displacement-based). The significantly revamped NZSEE 2016 Seismic Assessment Guidelines strongly recommend the use of an analytical (basically ‘by hand’) method, referred to the Simple Lateral Mechanism Analysis (SLaMA) as a first phase of any other numerically-based analysis method. Significant effort has thus been dedicated to provide within the NZSEE 2016 guidelines (NZSEE/MBIE 2016c) a step-by-step description of the procedure, either in general terms (Chapter 2) or with specific reference to Reinforced Concrete Buildings (Chapter 5). More specifically, extract from the guidelines, NZSEE “recommend using the Simple Lateral Mechanism Analysis (SLaMA) procedure as a first step in any assessment. While SLaMA is essentially an analysis technique, it enables assessors to investigate (and present in a simple form) the potential contribution and interaction of a number of structural elements and their likely effect on the building’s global capacity. In some cases, the results of a SLaMA will only be indicative. However, it is expected that its use should help assessors achieve a more reliable outcome than if they only carried out a detailed analysis, especially if that analysis is limited to the elastic range For complex structural systems, a 3D dynamic analysis may be necessary to supplement the simplified nonlinear Simple Lateral Mechanism Analysis (SLaMA).” This report presents the development of a full design example for the the implementation of the SLaMA method on a case study buildings and a validation/comparison with a non-linear static (pushover) analysis. The step-by-step-procedure, summarized in Figure 1, will be herein demonstrated from a component level (beams, columns, wall elements) to a subassembly level (hierarchy of strength in a beam-column joint) and to a system level (frame, C-Wall) assuming initially a 2D behaviour of the key structural system, and then incorporating a by-hand 3D behaviour (torsional effects).

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Predicting building collapse due to seismic motion is critical in design and more so after a major event. Damaged structures can appear sound, but collapse under following major events. There can thus be significant risk in decision making after a major seismic event concerning the safe occupation of a building or surrounding areas, versus the unknown impact of unknown major aftershocks. Model-based pushover analyses are effective if the structural properties are well understood, which is not valid post-event when this risk information is most useful. This research combines Hysteresis Loop Analysis (HLA) structural health monitoring (SHM) and Incremental Dynamic Analysis (IDA) methods to determine collapse capacity and probability of collapse for a specific structure, at any time, a range of earthquake excitations to ensure robustness. The nonlinear dynamic analysis method presented enables constant updating of building performance predictions using post-event SHM results. The resulting combined methods provide near real-time updating of collapse fragility curves as events progress, quantifying the change of collapse probability or seismic induced losses for decision-making - a novel, higher resolution risk analysis than previously available. The methods are not computationally expensive and there is no requirement for a validated numerical model. Results show significant potential benefits and a clear evolution of risk. They also show clear need for extending SHM toward creating improved predictive models for analysis of subsequent events, where the Christchurch series of 2010-2011 had significant post-event aftershocks after each main event. Finally, the overall method is generalisable to any typical engineering demand parameter.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Recent severe earthquakes, such as Christchurch earthquake series, worldwide have put emphasis on building resilience. In resilient systems, not only life is protected, but also undesirable economic effects of building repair or replacement are minimized following a severe earthquake. Friction connections are one way of providing structure resilience. These include the sliding hinge joint with asymmetric friction connections (SHJAFCs) in beam-to-column connections of the moment resisting steel frames (MRSFs), and the symmetric friction connections (SFCs) in braces of the braced frames. Experimental and numerical studies on components have been conducted internationally. However, actual building performance depends on the many interactions, occurring within a whole building system, which may be difficult to determine accurately by numerical modelling or testing of structural components alone. Dynamic inelastic testing of a full-scale multi-storey composite floor building with full range of non-structural elements (NSEs) has not yet been performed, so it is unclear if surprises are likely to occur in such a system. A 9 m tall three-storey configurable steel framed composite floor building incorporating friction-based connections is to be tested using two linked bi-directional shake tables at the International joint research Laboratory of Earthquake Engineering (ILEE) facilities, Shanghai, China. Beams and columns are designed to remain elastic during an earthquake event, with all non-linear behaviour occurring through stable sliding frictional behaviour, dissipating energy by SHJAFCs used in MRFs and SFCs in braced frames, with and without Belleville springs. Structural systems are configurable, allowing different moment and braced frame structural systems to be tested in two horizontal directions. In some cases, these systems interact with rocking frame or rocking column system in orthogonal directions subjected to unidirectional and bidirectional horizontal shaking. The structure is designed and detailed to undergo, at worst, minor damage under series of severe earthquakes. NSEs applied include precast-concrete panels, glass curtain walling, internal partitions, suspended ceilings, fire sprinkler piping as well as some other common contents. Some of the key design considerations are presented and discussed herein

Videos, UC QuakeStudies

A video of the seminar "Seismic Assessment of Existing Masonry Buildings" presented by Professor Sergio Lagomarsino from the University of Genoa on 27 February 2014 at the University of Canterbury. The seminar demonstrated recent European research into modelling strategies, target performances and acceptance criteria for seismic assessment of masonry buildings.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

A photograph of a bookcase in the Civil Suite at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake. The photograph was taken on the day when the staff were allowed to return to the building. The shelves of the bookcase have been removed, exposing damage along the sides where they knocked against the back panel. Some books have been left on the bottom shelf.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

In recent Canterbury earthquakes, structures have performed well in terms of life safety but the estimated total cost of the rebuild was as high as $40 billion. The major contributors to this cost are repair/demolition/rebuild cost, the resulting downtime and business interruption. For this reason, the authors are exploring alternate building systems that can minimize the downtime and business interruption due to building damage in an earthquake; thereby greatly reducing the financial implications of seismic events. In this paper, a sustainable and demountable precast reinforced concrete (RC) frame system in which the precast members are connected via steel tubes/plates or steel angles/plates and high strength friction grip (HSFG) bolts is introduced. In the proposed system, damaged structural elements in seismic frames can be easily replaced with new ones; thereby making it an easily and quickly repairable and a low-loss system. The column to foundation connection in the proposed system can be designed either as fixed or pinned depending on the requirement of strength and stiffness. In a fixed base frame system, ground storey columns will also be damaged along with beams in seismic events, which are to be replaced after seismic events; whereas in a pin base frame only beams (which are easy to replace) will be damaged. Low to medium rise (3-6 storey) precast RC frame buildings with fixed and pin bases are analyzed in this paper; and their lateral capacity, lateral stiffness and natural period are scrutinized to better understand the pros and cons of the demountable precast frame system with fixed and pin base connections.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

The 22 February 2011, Mw6.2 Christchurch earthquake is the most costly earthquake to affect New Zealand, causing an estimated 181 fatalities and severely damaging thousands of residential and commercial buildings. This paper presents a summary of some of the observations made by the NSF-sponsored GEER Team regarding the geotechnical/geologic aspects of this earthquake. The Team focused on documenting the occurrence and severity of liquefaction and lateral spreading, performance of building and bridge foundations, buried pipelines and levees, and significant rockfalls and landslides. Liquefaction was pervasive and caused extensive damage to residential properties, water and wastewater networks, high-rise buildings, and bridges. Entire neighborhoods subsided, resulting in flooding that caused further damage. Additionally, liquefaction and lateral spreading resulted in damage to bridges and to stretches of levees along the Waimakariri and Kaiapoi Rivers. Rockfalls and landslides in the Port Hills damaged several homes and caused several fatalities.