Search

found 139 results

Images for chimney damage; more images...

Images, UC QuakeStudies

A house on Acland Avenue in Avonside that has been abandoned due to damage from the 4 September 2010 earthquake. The house's front garden has become overgrown and weeds have grown up through the cracks in its driveway. Its chimneys have collapsed and have been weather proofed with tarpaulins.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "Gunyah homestead was badly damaged during the September 4th 2010 earthquake, but the Cotterill family are picking up the pieces and rebuilding. Builders repair the master bedroom where a large brick chimney came through the room narrowly missing the Cotterills and totally obliterating their bed".

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "Gunyah homestead was badly damaged during the September 4th 2010 earthquake, but the Cotterill family are picking up the pieces and rebuilding. Builders repair the master bedroom where a large brick chimney came through the room narrowly missing the Cotterills and totally obliterating their bed".

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "Christchurch Earthquake. Wayne Alexander has now lived through 3 earthquakes with a richter scale of 7 plus. 1968 Inangahua, 1989 San Francisco and 2010 Christchurch. His father also lived through three of the same magnitude. They live in one of the old Deans family residences which sustained chimney damage in Saturday's earthquake".

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "Gunyah homestead was badly damaged during the September 4th 2010 earthquake, but the Cottrell family are picking up the pieces and rebuilding. What remains of the master bedroom bed where a large brick chimney fell through the roof crushing the bed where William and Simonetta Cottrell had been sleeping moments before".

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "Christchurch Earthquake. Wayne Alexander has now lived through 3 earthquakes with a richter scale of 7 plus. 1968 Inangahua, 1989 San Francisco and 2010 Christchurch. His father also lived through three of the same magnitude. Wayne and his son Lochlan Alexander (2 yr). They live in one of the old Deans family residences, which sustained chimney damage in Saturday's earthquake".

Research papers, The University of Auckland Library

The M7.1 Darfield earthquake shook the town of Christchurch (New Zealand) in the early morning on Saturday 4th September 2010 and caused damage to a number of heritage unreinforced masonry buildings. No fatalities were reported directly linked to the earthquake, but the damage to important heritage buildings was the most extensive to have occurred since the 1931 Hawke‟s Bay earthquake. In general, the nature of damage was consistent with observations previously made on the seismic performance of unreinforced masonry buildings in large earthquakes, with aspects such as toppled chimneys and parapets, failure of gables and poorly secured face-loaded walls, and in-plane damage to masonry frames all being extensively documented. This report on the performance of the unreinforced masonry buildings in the 2010 Darfield earthquake provides details on typical building characteristics, a review of damage statistics obtained by interrogating the building assessment database that was compiled in association with post-earthquake building inspections, and a review of the characteristic failure modes that were observed.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "Christchurch Earthquake. Wayne Alexander has now lived through 3 earthquakes with a richter scale of 7 plus. 1968 Inangahua, 1989 San Francisco and 2010 Christchurch. His father also lived through three of the same magnitude. (L-R) Lochlan Alexander (2 yr), Wayne Alexander and Annemarie Winstone (mother of Lochlan). They live in one of the old Dean's family residences which sustained chimney damage in Saturday's earthquake".

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "Christchurch Earthquake. Wayne Alexander has now lived through 3 earthquakes with a richter scale of 7 plus. 1968 Inangahua, 1989 San Francisco and 2010 Christchurch. His father also lived through three of the same magnitude. (L-R) Lochlan Alexander (2 yr), Wayne Alexander and Annemarie Winstone (mother of Lochlan). They live in one of the old Deans family residences which sustained chimney damage in Saturday's earthquake".

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Two images of a house, taken before and after the earthquakes. In the after photograph the chimneys are gone, a column supporting the car port has partly collapsed, windows are broken, and the previously neat lawn and driveway are overgrown. The photographer comments, "This was a house that I was selling up to the September 2010 earthquake in Christchurch. It was on Avonside Drive, which was an area that has been badly hit in every earthquake that has hit the area. In the September quake parts of the house moved in different directions and one of the upstairs doors had to be smashed open to release one of the sons from his bedroom. This occurred in the dark with numerous aftershocks shaking the house. Liquefaction poured up through the floor and flowed down the drive. Everyone got out OK, but soon after the house was red stickered meaning it was dangerous to enter. The house was looted many times even though there was constant police patrols. When the most violent earthquake occurred on 22 February 2012 both the tall heavy chimneys came crashing through into the living areas. Subsequent earthquakes and aftershocks have caused one of the brick fence pillars to fall and the front garage pillar to break up and twist. The family's troubles did not end there. They moved into the home of one of their parents and this mansion of a home was so badly affected by the February earthquake that no one could enter to collect any of their or their parents' belongings. They now own a new home, which they are fond of except when the ground shakes yet again. There has been to date 10,712 earthquakes and aftershocks since 4 September 2010".

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

In the last century, seismic design has undergone significant advancements. Starting from the initial concept of designing structures to perform elastically during an earthquake, the modern seismic design philosophy allows structures to respond to ground excitations in an inelastic manner, thereby allowing damage in earthquakes that are significantly less intense than the largest possible ground motion at the site of the structure. Current performance-based multi-objective seismic design methods aim to ensure life-safety in large and rare earthquakes, and to limit structural damage in frequent and moderate earthquakes. As a result, not many recently built buildings have collapsed and very few people have been killed in 21st century buildings even in large earthquakes. Nevertheless, the financial losses to the community arising from damage and downtime in these earthquakes have been unacceptably high (for example; reported to be in excess of 40 billion dollars in the recent Canterbury earthquakes). In the aftermath of the huge financial losses incurred in recent earthquakes, public has unabashedly shown their dissatisfaction over the seismic performance of the built infrastructure. As the current capacity design based seismic design approach relies on inelastic response (i.e. ductility) in pre-identified plastic hinges, it encourages structures to damage (and inadvertently to incur loss in the form of repair and downtime). It has now been widely accepted that while designing ductile structural systems according to the modern seismic design concept can largely ensure life-safety during earthquakes, this also causes buildings to undergo substantial damage (and significant financial loss) in moderate earthquakes. In a quest to match the seismic design objectives with public expectations, researchers are exploring how financial loss can be brought into the decision making process of seismic design. This has facilitated conceptual development of loss optimisation seismic design (LOSD), which involves estimating likely financial losses in design level earthquakes and comparing against acceptable levels of loss to make design decisions (Dhakal 2010a). Adoption of loss based approach in seismic design standards will be a big paradigm shift in earthquake engineering, but it is still a long term dream as the quantification of the interrelationships between earthquake intensity, engineering demand parameters, damage measures, and different forms of losses for different types of buildings (and more importantly the simplification of the interrelationship into design friendly forms) will require a long time. Dissecting the cost of modern buildings suggests that the structural components constitute only a minor portion of the total building cost (Taghavi and Miranda 2003). Moreover, recent research on seismic loss assessment has shown that the damage to non-structural elements and building contents contribute dominantly to the total building loss (Bradley et. al. 2009). In an earthquake, buildings can incur losses of three different forms (damage, downtime, and death/injury commonly referred as 3Ds); but all three forms of seismic loss can be expressed in terms of dollars. It is also obvious that the latter two loss forms (i.e. downtime and death/injury) are related to the extent of damage; which, in a building, will not just be constrained to the load bearing (i.e. structural) elements. As observed in recent earthquakes, even the secondary building components (such as ceilings, partitions, facades, windows parapets, chimneys, canopies) and contents can undergo substantial damage, which can lead to all three forms of loss (Dhakal 2010b). Hence, if financial losses are to be minimised during earthquakes, not only the structural systems, but also the non-structural elements (such as partitions, ceilings, glazing, windows etc.) should be designed for earthquake resistance, and valuable contents should be protected against damage during earthquakes. Several innovative building technologies have been (and are being) developed to reduce building damage during earthquakes (Buchanan et. al. 2011). Most of these developments are aimed at reducing damage to the buildings’ structural systems without due attention to their effects on non-structural systems and building contents. For example, the PRESSS system or Damage Avoidance Design concept aims to enable a building’s structural system to meet the required displacement demand by rocking without the structural elements having to deform inelastically; thereby avoiding damage to these elements. However, as this concept does not necessarily reduce the interstory drift or floor acceleration demands, the damage to non-structural elements and contents can still be high. Similarly, the concept of externally bracing/damping building frames reduces the drift demand (and consequently reduces the structural damage and drift sensitive non-structural damage). Nevertheless, the acceleration sensitive non-structural elements and contents will still be very vulnerable to damage as the floor accelerations are not reduced (arguably increased). Therefore, these concepts may not be able to substantially reduce the total financial losses in all types of buildings. Among the emerging building technologies, base isolation looks very promising as it seems to reduce both inter-storey drifts and floor accelerations, thereby reducing the damage to the structural/non-structural components of a building and its contents. Undoubtedly, a base isolated building will incur substantially reduced loss of all three forms (dollars, downtime, death/injury), even during severe earthquakes. However, base isolating a building or applying any other beneficial technology may incur additional initial costs. In order to provide incentives for builders/owners to adopt these loss-minimising technologies, real-estate and insurance industries will have to acknowledge the reduced risk posed by (and enhanced resilience of) such buildings in setting their rental/sale prices and insurance premiums.

Audio, Radio New Zealand

Questions to Ministers 1. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Justice: Is it his view that the justice system should provide rehabilitation and give people the chance to change? 2. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Is he satisfied with progress on the recovery from the Canterbury earthquake so far? 3. DAVID BENNETT to the Minister of Broadcasting: What recent announcements have been made regarding digital switchover? 4. SUE MORONEY to the Minister of Education: What policy initiatives has she developed for early childhood education? 5. AARON GILMORE to the Minister of Civil Defence: What is the update on the Canterbury Civil Defence states of emergency? 6. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: Did the Treasury evaluate the net effect on South Canterbury Finance's position of the February 2010 acquisition of Helicopters (NZ) Ltd and Scales Corporation shares, including the effect of the transaction on the recoverability or impairment of South Canterbury Finance's $75 million loan to its parent company, Southbury Group Ltd? 7. LOUISE UPSTON to the Minister of Energy and Resources: Will Cantabrians whose chimneys have been significantly damaged by the recent earthquake be covered by the Earthquake Commission to replace their old log burners or open fires with new efficient heaters? 8. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Minister of Education: What support will be available in 2011 to schools that have very poor numeracy national standards results in 2010? 9. SANDRA GOUDIE to the Minister of Corrections: What support is the Corrections Department offering to Canterbury community groups and individuals to help with earthquake recovery? 10. DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Does she stand by her statement to the House on 14 September 2010 that the 90-day trial provisions "do not take away rights"? 11. CHESTER BORROWS to the Minister of Housing: What is the Government doing to assist people whose homes are not habitable following the Canterbury earthquake? 12. PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister of Local Government: When he said in the House yesterday that the Auckland Transition Agency "ran a tender to deliver an enterprise resource planning system" was he referring to merely the $14.3 million contract for the implementation of the Enterprise Resource Planning system or was he referring to the full contract of $53.8 million to deliver the Enterprise Resource Planning system? Questions to Members 1. DARIEN FENTON to the Chairperson of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2)?