Search

found 230 results

Images for earthquake 2011; more images...

Images, Canterbury Museum

One landscape colour digital photograph taken on 26 May 2013 on the corner of Norwich Quay and Canterbury Street, Lyttelton. The photograph shows the Mitre Hotel surrounded by temporary fencing. Three years after the 2010-2011 earthquakes there are still many uncertainties about which buildings can or will be retained. These buildings, or parts...

Images, Canterbury Museum

One landscape colour digital photograph taken on 26 May 2013 of Lyttelton Main School. The photograph is taken from St Davids Street looking northwest. One of the broader consequences of the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquakes has been the Ministry of Education’s Shaping Education – Future Direction Review of Schools in the Greater Christchurch Ar...

Other, National Library of New Zealand

Official site of the New Zealand Ministry of Education, in association with the Tertiary Education Commission (TEC) on education renewal in greater Christchurch in the wake of the earthquakes of 2010 and 2011.

Other, National Library of New Zealand

Christchurch City Council website on the infrastructure rebuild of Christchurch following the 2010 and 2011 earthquakes. Includes news; information on SMART building; projects related to rebuilding of facilities, transport, suburban centres and the central city.

Images, Canterbury Museum

One landscape colour digital photograph taken on 26 May 2013 showing the southern cliffs of Godley Head, taken from the middle of the shipping channel. Some earthquake damage to the cliffs is visible. There were several major rock falls along the coastal cliffs near Christchurch and Lyttelton Harbour. At Godley Head these caused damage to the ...

Images, Canterbury Museum

One landscape colour digital photograph taken on 27 May 2013 of London Street in Lyttelton. Taken from Sumner Road looking west across the intersection of London and Oxford Streets. The photograph shows several empty sections and the remaining buildings. The Lyttelton streetscape has changed dramatically from its pre-earthquake appearance and w...

Images, Canterbury Museum

One landscape colour digital photograph taken on 27 May 2013 of a retaining wall in Sumner Road which was replaced due to earthquake damage. The original wall was created using red volcanic rock. Many walls like this were built using the Hard Labour Gang from the Lyttelton Gaol. The replacement wall has a small section of stone installed to sho...

Images, Canterbury Museum

One landscape colour digital photograph taken on 27 May 2013 of a retaining wall in Sumner Road which was replaced due to earthquake damage. The original wall was created using red volcanic rock. Many walls like this were built using the Hard Labour Gang from the Lyttelton Gaol. The replacement wall has a small section of stone installed to sho...

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

This poster provides a comparison between the strong ground motions observed in the 22 February 2011 Mw6.3 Christchurch earthquake with those observed in Tokyo during the 11 March 2011 Mw9.0 Tohoku earthquake. The destuction resulting from both of these events has been well documented, although tsunami was the principal cause of damage in the latter event, and less attention has been devoted to the impact of earthquake-induced ground motions. Despite Tokyo being located over 100km from the nearest part of the causative rupture, the ground motions observed from the Tohoku earthquake were significant enough to cause structural damage and also significant liquefaction to loose reclaimed soils in Tokyo Bay. The author was fortunate enough (from the perspective of an earthquake engineer) to experience first-hand both of these events. Following the Tohoku event, the athor conducted various ground motion analyses and reconniassance of the Urayasu region in Tokyo Bay affected by liquefaction in collaboration with Prof. Kenji Ishihara. This conference is therefore a fitting opportunity in which to discuss some of authors insights obtained as a result of this first hand knowledge. Figure 1 illustrates the ground motions recorded in the Christchurch CBD in the 22 February 2011 and 4 September 2010 earthquakes, with that recorded in Tokyo Bay in the 11 March 2011 Tohoku earthquake. It is evident that these three ground motions vary widely in their amplitude and duration. The CBGS ground motion from the 22 February 2011 event has a very large amplitude (nearly 0.6g) and short duration (approx. 10s of intense shaking), as a result of the causal Mw6.3 rupture at short distance (Rrup=4km). The CBGS ground motion from the 4 September 2010 earthquake has a longer duration (approx. 30s of intense shaking), but reduced acceleration amplitude, as a result of the causal Mw7.1 rupture at a short-to-moderate distance (Rrup=14km). Finally, the Urayasu ground motion in Tokyo bay during the 11 March 2011 Tohoku earthquake exhibits an acceleration amplitude similar to the 4 September 2010 CBGS ground motion, but a significantly larger duration (approx 150s of intense shaking). Clearly, these three different ground motions will affect structures and soils in different ways depending on the vibration characteristics of the structures/soil, and the potential for strength and stiffness degradation due to cumulative effects. Figure 2 provides a comparison between the arias intensities of the several ground motion records from the three different events. It can be seen that the arias intensities of the ground motions in the Christchurch CBD from the 22 February 2011 earthquake (which is on average AI=2.5m/s) is approximately twice that from the 4 September 2010 earthquake (average AI≈1.25). This is consistent with a factor of approximately 1.6 obtained by Cubrinovski et al. (2011) using the stress-based (i.e.PGA-MSF) approach of liquefaction triggering. It can also be seen that the arias intensity of the ground motions recorded in Tokyo during the 2011 Tohoku earthquake are larger than ground motions in the Christchurch CBD from the 4 September 2011 earthquake, but smaller than those of the 22 February 2011 earthquake. Based on the arias intensity liquefaction triggering approach it can therefore be concluded that the ground motion severity, in terms of liquefaction potential, for the Tokyo ground motions is between those ground motions in Christchurch CBD from the 4 September 2010 and 22 February 2011 events.

Videos, UC QuakeStudies

A video of an interview with James Jameson about the lack of access to his apartment in the Victoria Apartments. Many of Jameson's possessions have been trapped in the building since the 22 February 2011 earthquake, including irreplaceable art and book collections. After the earthquake, Jameson was given a couple of hours to retrieve his computer and other essentials, but he has not been allowed in since. Jameson talks about the lack of communication from the authorities , the likelihood that his possessions have been ruined, and his inability to make an insurance claim until he knows he definitely cannot retrieve his possessions.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

This report examines and compares case studies of labour market policy responses in APEC economies to natural disasters. It first reviews the policies and practice within APEC economies and internationally in managing the labour market effects of natural disasters. By using comparative case studies, the report then compares recent disaster events in the Asia-Pacific region, including: - the June 2013 Southern Alberta floods in Canada; - the 2010 and 2011 Queensland floods in Australia; - the 2010 and 2011 Canterbury earthquakes in New Zealand; - the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami in Japan; and - the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake in China.

Research papers, The University of Auckland Library

Following the 2010/2011 Canterbury, New Zealand earthquakes, a detailed door-to-door survey was conducted in the Christchurch region to establish the earthquake performance of lightweight timber-framed residential dwellings with a masonry veneer external cladding system. The post-earthquake survey involved documenting the condition of dwellings in areas that had experienced different levels of earthquake shaking, allowing comparison between the performance of different veneer systems and different shaking intensities. In total, just fewer than 1,100 residential dwellings were inspected throughout the wider Christchurch area. The survey included parameters such as level of veneer damage, type of veneer damage, observed crack widths, and level of repair required. It is concluded that based on observed earthquake performance at the shaking intensities matching or exceeding ultimate limit state loading, the post-1996 veneer fixing details performed satisfactorily and continued use of the detail is recommended without further modification. AM - Accepted Manuscript