Small, tight-knit communities, are complex to manage from outside during a disaster. The township of Lyttelton, New Zealand, and the communities of Corsair Bay, Cass Bay, and Rapaki to the east, are especially more so difficult due to the terrain that encloses them, which caused them to be cut-off from Christchurch, the largest city in the South Island, barely 10 km away, after the Mw 7.1 Darfield Earthquake and subsequent Canterbury Earthquake Sequence. Lyttelton has a very strong and deep-rooted community spirit that draws people to want to be a part of Lyttelton life. It is predominantly residential on the slopes, with retail space, service and light industry nestled near the harbour. It has heritage buildings stretching back to the very foundation of Canterbury yet hosts the largest, modern deep-water port for the region. This study contains two surveys: one circulated shortly before the Darfield Earthquake and one circulated in July 2011, after the Christchurch and Sumner Earthquakes. An analytical comparison of the participants’ household preparedness for disaster before the Darfield Earthquake and after the Christchurch and Sumner Earthquakes was performed. A population spatiotemporal distribution map was produced that shows the population in three-hourly increments over a week to inform exposure to vulnerability to natural hazards. The study went on to analyse the responses of the participants in the immediate period following the Chrsitchurch and Sumner Earthquakes, including their homeward and subsequent journeys, and the decision to evacuate or stay in their homes. Possible predictors to a decision to evacuate some or all members of the household were tested. The study also asked participants’ views on the events since September 2010 for analysis.
On the second day of teaching for 2011, the University of Canterbury (UC) faced the most significant crisis of its 138-year history. After being shaken severely by a magnitude 7.1 earthquake on 4 September 2010, UC felt it was well along the pathway to getting back to ‘normal’. That all changed at 12:51pm on 22 February 2011, when Christchurch city was hit by an even more devastating event. A magnitude 6.3 (Modified Mercalli intensity ten – MM X) earthquake, just 13km south-east of the Christchurch city centre, caused vertical peak ground accelerations amongst the highest ever recorded in an urban environment, in some places more than twice the acceleration due to gravity. The earthquake caused immediate evacuation of the UC campus and resulted in significant damage to many buildings. Thankfully there were no serious injuries or fatalities on campus, but 185 people died in the city and many more suffered serious injuries. At the time of writing, eighteen months after the first earthquake in September, Christchurch is still experiencing regular earthquakes. Seismologists warn that the region may experience heightened seismicity for a decade or more. While writing this report we have talked with many different people from across the University. People’s experiences are different and we have not managed to talk with everyone, but we hope that by drawing together many different perspectives from across the campus that this report will serve two purposes; to retain our institutional memory of what we have learnt over the past eighteen months, and also to share our learnings with other organisations in New Zealand and around the world who, we hope, will benefit from learning about our experience.
Earthquake Engineering is facing an extraordinarily challenging era, the ultimate target being set at increasingly higher levels by the demanding expectations of our modern society. The renewed challenge is to be able to provide low-cost, thus more widely affordable, high-seismic-performance structures capable of sustaining a design level earthquake with limited or negligible damage, minimum disruption of business (downtime) or, in more general terms, controllable socio-economical losses. The Canterbury earthquakes sequence in 2010-2011 has represented a tough reality check, confirming the current mismatch between societal expectations over the reality of seismic performance of modern buildings. In general, albeit with some unfortunate exceptions, modern multi-storey buildings performed as expected from a technical point of view, in particular when considering the intensity of the shaking (higher than new code design) they were subjected to. As per capacity design principles, plastic hinges formed in discrete regions, allowing the buildings to sway and stand and people to evacuate. Nevertheless, in many cases, these buildings were deemed too expensive to be repaired and were consequently demolished. Targeting life-safety is arguably not enough for our modern society, at least when dealing with new building construction. A paradigm shift towards damage-control design philosophy and technologies is urgently required. This paper and the associated presentation will discuss motivations, issues and, more importantly, cost-effective engineering solutions to design buildings capable of sustaining low-level of damage and thus limited business interruption after a design level earthquake. Focus will be given to the extensive research and developments in jointed ductile connections based upon controlled rocking & dissipating mechanisms for either reinforced concrete and, more recently, laminated timber structures. An overview of recent on-site applications of such systems, featuring some of the latest technical solutions developed in the laboratory and including proposals for the rebuild of Christchurch, will be provided as successful examples of practical implementation of performance-based seismic design theory and technology.
