After the earthquake.
deduced from the fact the breaks appeared new and others damaged around it.
During the 2010 - 2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence, extensive liquefaction was observed in many areas of Christchurch city and its surroundings, causing widespread damage to buildings and infrastructure. While existing simplified methods were found to work well in some areas of the city, there were also large areas where these methods did not perform satisfactorily. In some of these cases, researchers have proposed that layers of fine grained material within the soil profile may be responsible for preventing the manifestation of liquefaction. This paper presents preliminary findings on the mechanisms at play when pressure differentials exist across a clay layer. It is found that if the clay layer is unable to distort, then pore fluid is unable to break-through the layer even with relatively high pressures, resulting in dissipation of excess pore pressures by seepage. If the layers are however able to distort, then it is possible for the pore fluid to break through the clay layer, potentially resulting in adverse effects in terms of the severity of liquefaction.
An archaeological report compiled for NZHPT under the Historical Places Act 1993.
Dominion Post 22-Feb-2012 section: B, page 2
Dominion Post 22-Feb-2012 section: B, page 1
Dominion Post 22-Feb-2012 section: B, page 4
Dominion Post 22-Feb-2012 section: B, page 5
Dominion Post 22-Feb-2012 section: B, page 8
Dominion Post 22-Feb-2012 section: B, page 6
Dominion Post 22-Feb-2012 section: B, page 7
Page 24 of Section B of the Christchurch Press, published on Thursday 23 September 2010.
Page 21 of Section B of the Christchurch Press, published on Wednesday 29 September 2010.
Page 19 of section B of the Christchurch Press, published on Friday 17 September 2010.
Page 4 of Section B of the Christchurch Press, published on Thursday 16 September 2010.
Page 2 of Section B of the Christchurch Press, published on Thursday 16 September 2010.
Page 6 of section B of the Christchurch Press, published on Friday 17 September 2010.
Page 4 of section B of the Christchurch Press, published on Friday 17 September 2010.
Page 21 of Section B of the Christchurch Press, published on Wednesday 15 September 2010.
Page 17 of Section B of the Christchurch Press, published on Wednesday 15 September 2010.
Page 14 of Section B of the Christchurch Press, published on Wednesday 15 September 2010.
Page 23 of Section B of the Christchurch Press, published on Wednesday 15 September 2010.
Page 12 of section B of the Christchurch Press, published on Friday 17 September 2010.
Page 11 of section B of the Christchurch Press, published on Friday 17 September 2010.
Page 10 of section B of the Christchurch Press, published on Friday 17 September 2010.
Page 7 of Section B of the Christchurch Press, published on Monday 27 September 2010.
Page 18 of Section B of the Christchurch Press, published on Friday 24 September 2010.
Page 14 of Section B of the Christchurch Press, published on Friday 24 September 2010.
Page 11 of Section B of the Christchurch Press, published on Friday 24 September 2010.
Page 16 of Section B of the Christchurch Press, published on Thursday 16 September 2010.