Search

found 2646 results

Images for document; more images...

Research papers, The University of Auckland Library

During the Christchurch earthquake of February 2011, several midrise buildings of Reinforced Concrete Masonry (RCM) construction achieved performance levels in the range of life safety to near collapse levels. These buildings were subjected to seismic demands higher than the building code requirements of the time and higher than the current New Zealand Loadings Standard (NZS-1170.5:2004). Structural damage to these buildings has been documented and is currently being studied to establish lessons to be learned from their performance and how to incorporate these lessons into future RCM design and construction practices. This paper presents a case study of a six story RCM building deemed to have reached the near collapse performance level. The RCM walls on the 2nd floor failed due to toe crushing reducing the building’s lateral resistance in the east-west direction. A nonlinear dynamic analysis on a 3D model was conducted to simulate the development of the governing failure mechanism. Preliminary analysis results show that the damaged walls were initially under large compression forces from gravity loads which caused increase in their lateral strength and reduced their ductility. After toe crushing failure developed, axial instability of the model was prevented by a redistribution of gravity loads.

Research papers, The University of Auckland Library

Ingham and Biggs were in Christchurch during the M6.3, 22 February 2011 earthquake and Moon arrived the next day. They were enlisted by officials to provide rapid assessment of buildings within the Central Business District (CBD). In addition, they were asked to: 1) provide a rapid assessment of the numbers and types of buildings that had been damaged, and 2) identify indicator buildings that represent classes of structures that can be used to monitor changing conditions for each class following continuing aftershocks and subsequent damage. This paper explains how transect methodology was incorporated into the rapid damage assessment that was performed 48 hours after the earthquake. Approximately 300 buildings were assessed using exterior Level 1 reporting techniques. That data was used to draw conclusions on the condition of the entire CBD of approximately 4400 buildings. In the context of a disaster investigation, a transect involves traveling a selected path assessing the condition of the buildings and documenting the class of each building, and using the results in conjunction with prior knowledge relating to the overall population of buildings affected in the area of the study. Read More: http://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/9780784412640.033

Research papers, The University of Auckland Library

As part of the ‘Project Masonry’ Recovery Project funded by the New Zealand Natural Hazards Research Platform, commencing in March 2011, an international team of researchers was deployed to document and interpret the observed earthquake damage to masonry buildings and to churches as a result of the 22nd February 2011 Christchurch earthquake. The study focused on investigating commonly encountered failure patterns and collapse mechanisms. A brief summary of activities undertaken is presented, detailing the observations that were made on the performance of and the deficiencies that contributed to the damage to approximately 650 inspected unreinforced clay brick masonry (URM) buildings, to 90 unreinforced stone masonry buildings, to 342 reinforced concrete masonry (RCM) buildings, to 112 churches in the Canterbury region, and to just under 1100 residential dwellings having external masonry veneer cladding. Also, details are provided of retrofit techniques that were implemented within relevant Christchurch URM buildings prior to the 22nd February earthquake. In addition to presenting a summary of Project Masonry, the broader research activity at the University of Auckland pertaining to the seismic assessment and improvement of unreinforced masonry buildings is outlined. The purpose of this outline is to provide an overview and bibliography of published literature and to communicate on-going research activity that has not yet been reported in a complete form. http://sesoc.org.nz/conference/programme.pdf

Research papers, The University of Auckland Library

Following the 22 February 2011 Christchurch earthquake a comprehensive damage survey of the unreinforced masonry (URM) building stock of Christchurch city, New Zealand was undertaken. Because of the large number of aftershocks associated with both the 2011 Christchurch earthquake and the earlier 4 September 2010 Darfield earthquake, and the close proximity of their epicentres to Christchurch city, this earthquake sequence presented a unique opportunity to assess the performance of URM buildings and the various strengthening methods used in New Zealand to increase the performance of these buildings in earthquakes. Because of the extent of data that was collected, a decision was made to initially focus exclusively on the earthquake performance of URM buildings located in the central business district (CBD) of Christchurch city. The main objectives of the data collection exercise were to document building characteristics and any seismic strengthening methods encountered, and correlate these attributes with observed earthquake damage. In total 370 URM buildings in the CBD were surveyed. Of the surveyed buildings, 62% of all URM buildings had received some form of earthquake strengthening and there was clear evidence that installed earthquake strengthening techniques in general had led to reduced damage levels. The procedure used to collect and process information associated with earthquake damage, general analysis and interpretation of the available survey data for the 370 URM buildings, the performance of earthquake strengthening techniques, and the influence of earthquake strengthening levels on observed damage are reported within. http://15ibmac.com/home/

Audio, Radio New Zealand

DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement “My expectations are that this will be a busy, hard three years’ work and we will need to deliver results for New Zealanders”? Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that “we don’t favour one group over another”? PAUL GOLDSMITH to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on housing affordability? GRANT ROBERTSON to the Prime Minister: When his office had a “quick look at the matters involved” with regard to the funding of the Mackenzie Sustainable Futures Trust, whom did they speak to and what documents did they look at to arrive at their conclusion that “we did not find anything that raised concerns to us”? MELISSA LEE to the Minister for Social Development: What initiatives has the Government put in place to better protect children? ANDREW WILLIAMS to the Minister of Finance: Does the Government still intend to achieve a budget surplus by 2014/15; if so, how? GARETH HUGHES to the Minister of Energy and Resources: Does he stand by his statement on the Campbell Live 9 February programme on fracking that, “In Taranaki, it’s actually been done very, very well. There’s been no effect on the environment whatsoever”? Dr JIAN YANG to the Minister of Health: What progress has been made in providing improved child health services? Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement regarding migration to Australia “What’s the point of standing in the airport crying about it?”; if so, how many of the 158,167 people that have migrated to Australia since November 2008, as reported by Statistics NZ, are from 18 to 30 years of age in number and percentage terms? COLIN KING to the Minister of Science and Innovation: How will the Advanced Technology Institute boost business-led research and development? Hon LIANNE DALZIEL to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Why did he use section 27 of the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act 2011 to amend the Canterbury Regional Policy Statement instead of using the Order in Council provisions of the Act or developing the recovery strategy or a recovery plan? SHANE ARDERN to the Minister for Primary Industries: What recent announcements has he made to further improve New Zealand’s biosecurity system?

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

In the period between September 2010 and December 2011, Christchurch (New Zealand) and its surroundings were hit by a series of strong earthquakes including six significant events, all generated by local faults in proximity to the city: 4 September 2010 (Mw=7.1), 22 February 2011 (Mw=6.2), 13 June 2011 (Mw=5.3 and Mw=6.0) and 23 December 2011 (M=5.8 and (M=5.9) earthquakes. As shown in Figure 1, the causative faults of the earthquakes were very close to or within the city boundaries thus generating very strong ground motions and causing tremendous damage throughout the city. Christchurch is shown as a lighter colour area, and its Central Business District (CBD) is marked with a white square area in the figure. Note that the sequence of earthquakes started to the west of the city and then propagated to the south, south-east and east of the city through a set of separate but apparently interacting faults. Because of their strength and proximity to the city, the earthquakes caused tremendous physical damage and impacts on the people, natural and built environments of Christchurch. The 22 February 2011 earthquake was particularly devastating. The ground motions generated by this earthquake were intense and in many parts of Christchurch substantially above the ground motions used to design the buildings in Christchurch. The earthquake caused 182 fatalities, collapse of two multi-storey reinforced concrete buildings, collapse or partial collapse of many unreinforced masonry structures including the historic Christchurch Cathedral. The Central Business District (CBD) of Christchurch, which is the central heart of the city just east of Hagley Park, was practically lost with majority of its 3,000 buildings being damaged beyond repair. Widespread liquefaction in the suburbs of Christchurch, as well as rock falls and slope/cliff instabilities in the Port Hills affected tens of thousands of residential buildings and properties, and shattered the lifelines and infrastructure over approximately one third of the city area. The total economic loss caused by the 2010-2011 Christchurch earthquakes is currently estimated to be in the range between 25 and 30 billion NZ dollars (or 15% to 18% of New Zealand’s GDP). After each major earthquake, comprehensive field investigations and inspections were conducted to document the liquefaction-induced land damage, lateral spreading displacements and their impacts on buildings and infrastructure. In addition, the ground motions produced by the earthquakes were recorded by approximately 15 strong motion stations within (close to) the city boundaries providing and impressive wealth of data, records and observations of the performance of ground and various types of structures during this unusual sequence of strong local earthquakes affecting a city. This paper discusses the liquefaction in residential areas and focuses on its impacts on dwellings (residential houses) and potable water system in the Christchurch suburbs. The ground conditions of Christchurch including the depositional history of soils, their composition, age and groundwater regime are first discussed. Detailed liquefaction maps illustrating the extent and severity of liquefaction across Christchurch triggered by the sequence of earthquakes including multiple episodes of severe re-liquefaction are next presented. Characteristic liquefaction-induced damage to residential houses is then described focussing on the performance of typical house foundations in areas affected by liquefaction. Liquefaction impacts on the potable water system of Christchurch is also briefly summarized including correlation between the damage to the system, liquefaction severity, and the performance of different pipe materials. Finally, the characteristics of Christchurch liquefaction and its impacts on built environment are discussed in relation to the liquefaction-induced damage in Japan during the 11 March 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake.