The Star 12 October 2011
Articles, UC QuakeStudies
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Wednesday 12 October 2011.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Wednesday 12 October 2011.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Friday 14 October 2011.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Saturday 23 July 2011.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Wednesday 25 July 2012.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Wednesday 5 September 2012.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Wednesday 15 February 2012.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Friday 29 June 2012.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Friday 6 July 2012.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Wednesday 11 July 2012.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Wednesday 28 November 2012.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Wednesday 27 June 2012.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Wednesday 4 July 2012.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Friday 21 September 2012.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Friday 3 August 2012.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Wednesday 1 August 2012.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Wednesday 19 October 2011.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Friday 7 September 2012.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Wednesday 8 August 2012.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Wednesday 7 March 2012.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Friday 13 July 2012.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Friday 10 August 2012.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Wednesday 27 March 2013.
A PDF copy of The Star newspaper, published on Friday 9 March 2012.
A poster created by Empowered Christchurch to advertise their submission to the CERA Draft Transition Recovery Plan on social media.The poster reads, "Submission, CERA Draft Transition Recovery Plan. Seismic Risk. One thing we can learn from the past is that seismic risk in Canterbury has been underestimated before the earthquakes struck. This is confirmed in a report for EQC in 1991 (paper 2005). It is also the conclusion of the Royal Commission in the CTV report. A number of recommendations have been made but not followed. For example, neither the AS/NZS 1170.5 standard nor the New Zealand Geotechnical Society guidelines have been updated. Yet another recovery instrument is the Earthquake Prone Building Act, which is still to be passed by Parliament. As the emergency response part of the recovery is now behind us, we need to ensure sustainability for what lies ahead. We need a city that is driven by the people that live in it, and enabled by a bureaucracy that accepts and mitigates risks, rather than transferring them to the most vulnerable residents."
Buildings subject to earthquake shaking will tend to move not only horizontally but also rotate in plan. In-plan rotation is known as “building torsion” and it may occur for a variety of reasons, including stiffness and strength eccentricity and/or torsional effects from ground motions. Methods to consider torsion in structural design standards generally involve analysis of the structure in its elastic state. This is despite the fact that the structural elements can yield, thereby significantly altering the building response and the structural element demands. If demands become too large, the structure may collapse. While a number of studies have been conducted into the behavior of structures considering inelastic building torsion, there appears to be no consensus that one method is better than another and as a result, provisions within current design standards have not adopted recent proposals in the literature. However, the Canterbury Earthquakes Royal Commission recently made the recommendation that provisions to account for inelastic torsional response of buildings be introduced within New Zealand building standards. Consequently, this study examines how and to what extent the torsional response due to system eccentricity may affect the seismic performance of a building and considers what a simple design method should account for. It is concluded that new methods should be simple, be applicable to both the elastic and inelastic range of response, consider bidirectional excitation and include guidance for multi-story systems.
Following the 2010–2011 Canterbury earthquakes, a renewed focus has been directed across New Zealand to the hazard posed by the country‘s earthquake-vulnerable buildings, namely unreinforced masonry (URM) and reinforced concrete (RC) buildings with potentially nonductile components that have historically performed poorly in large earthquakes. The research reported herein was pursued with the intention of addressing several recommendations made by the Canterbury Earthquakes Royal Commission of Inquiry which were classified into the following general categories: Identification and provisional vulnerability assessment of URM and RC buildings and building components; Testing, assessment, and retrofitting of URM walls loaded out-of-plane, with a particular focus on highly vulnerable URM cavity walls; Testing and assessment of RC frame components, especially those with presumably non-ductile reinforcement detailing; Portfolio management considering risks, regulations, and potential costs for a portfolio that includes several potentially earthquake-vulnerable buildings; and Ongoing investigations and proposed research needs. While the findings from the reported research have implications for seismic assessments of buildings across New Zealand and elsewhere, an emphasis was placed on Auckland given this research program‘s partnership with the Auckland Council, the Auckland region accounting for about a third each of the country‘s population and economic production, and the number and variety of buildings within the Auckland building stock. An additional evaluation of a historic building stock was carried out for select buildings located in Hawke‘s Bay, and additional experimental testing was carried out for select buildings located in Hawke‘s Bay and Christchurch.