Seismic design of buildings: Looking towards the future

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.

Invertebrate Responses to Large-Scale Change : Impacts of Eutrophication a…

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Environmental stress and disturbance can affect the structure and functioning of marine ecosystems by altering their physical, chemical and biological features. In estuaries, benthic invertebrate communities play important roles in structuring sediments, influencing primary production and biogeochemical flux, and occupying key food web positions. Stress and disturbance can reduce species diversity, richness and abundance, with ecological theory predicting that biodiversity will be at its lowest soon after a disturbance with assemblages dominated by opportunistic species. The Avon-Heathcote Estuary in Christchurch New Zealand has provided a novel opportunity to examine the effects of stress, in the form of eutrophication, and disturbance, in the form of cataclysmic earthquake events, on the structure and functioning of an estuarine ecosystem. For more than 50 years, large quantities (up to 500,000m3/day) of treated wastewater were released into this estuary but in March 2010 this was diverted to an ocean outfall, thereby reducing the nutrient loading by around 90% to the estuary. This study was therefore initially focussed on the reversal of eutrophication and consequent effects on food web structure in the estuary as it responded to lower nutrients. In 2011, however, Christchurch was struck with a series of large earthquakes that greatly changed the estuary. Massive amounts of liquefied sediments, covering up to 65% of the estuary floor, were forced up from deep below the estuary, the estuary was tilted by up to a 50cm rise on one side and a corresponding drop on the other, and large quantities of raw sewage from broken wastewater infrastructure entered the estuary for up to nine months. This study was therefore a test of the potentially synergistic effects of nutrient reduction and earthquake disturbance on invertebrate communities, associated habitats and food web dynamics. Because there was considerable site-to-site heterogeneity in the estuary, the sites in this study were selected to represent a eutrophication gradient from relatively “clean” (where the influence of tidal flows was high) to highly impacted (near the historical discharge site). The study was structured around these sites, with components before the wastewater diversion, after the diversion but before the earthquakes, and after the earthquakes. The eutrophication gradient was reflected in the composition and isotopic chemistry of primary producer and invertebrate communities and the characteristics of sediments across the sample sites. Sites closest to the former wastewater discharge pipe were the most eutrophic and had cohesive organic -rich, fine sediments and relatively depauperate communities dominated by the opportunistic taxa Capitellidae. The less-impacted sites had coarser, sandier sediments with fewer pollutants and far less organic matter than at the eutrophic sites, relatively high diversity and lower abundances of micro- and macro-algae. Sewage-derived nitrogen had became incorporated into the estuarine food web at the eutrophic sites, starting at the base of the food chain with benthic microalgae (BMA), which were found to use mostly sediment-derived nitrogen. Stable isotopic analysis showed that δ13C and δ15N values of most food sources and consumers varied spatially, temporally and in relation to the diversion of wastewater, whereas the earthquakes did not appear to affect the overall estuarine food web structure. This was seen particularly at the most eutrophic site, where isotopic signatures became more similar to the cleaner sites over two-and-a-half years after the diversion. New sediments (liquefaction) produced by the earthquakes were found to be coarser, have lower concentrations of heavy metals and less organic matter than old (existing) sediments. They also had fewer macroinvertebrate inhabitants initially after the earthquakes but most areas recovered to pre-earthquake abundance and diversity within two years. Field experiments showed that there were higher amounts of primary production and lower amounts of nutrient efflux from new sediments at the eutrophic sites after the earthquakes. Primary production was highest in new sediments due to the increased photosynthetic efficiency of BMA resulting from the increased permeability of new sediments allowing increased light penetration, enhanced vertical migration of BMA and the enhanced transport of oxygen and nutrients. The reduced efflux of NH4-N in new sediments indicated that the capping of a large portion of eutrophic old sediments with new sediments had reduced the release of legacy nutrients (originating from the historical discharge) from the sediments to the overlying water. Laboratory experiments using an array of species and old and new sediments showed that invertebrates altered levels of primary production and nutrient flux but effects varied among species. The mud snail Amphibola crenata and mud crab Austrohelice crassa were found to reduce primary production and BMA biomass through the consumption of BMA (both species) and its burial from bioturbation and the construction of burrows (Austrohelice). In contrast, the cockle Austrovenus stutchburyi did not significantly affect primary production and BMA biomass. These results show that changes in the structure of invertebrate communities resulting from disturbances can also have consequences for the functioning of the system. The major conclusions of this study were that the wastewater diversion had a major effect on food web dynamics and that the large quantities of clean and unpolluted new sediments introduced to the estuary during the earthquakes altered the recovery trajectory of the estuary, accelerating it at least throughout the duration of this study. This was largely through the ‘capping’ effect of the new liquefied, coarser-grained sediments as they dissipated across the estuary and covered much of the old organic-rich eutrophic sediments. For all aspects of this study, the largest changes occurred at the most eutrophic sites; however, the surrounding habitats were important as they provided the context for recovery of the estuary, particularly because of the very strong influence of sediments, their biogeochemistry, microalgal and macroalgal dynamics. There have been few studies documenting system level responses to eutrophication amelioration and to the best on my knowledge there are no other published studies examining the impacts of large earthquakes on benthic communities in an estuarine ecosystem. This research gives valuable insight and advancements in the scientific understanding of the effects that eutrophication recovery and large-scale disturbances can have on the ecology of a soft-sediment ecosystem.