This is an interim report from the research study performed within the NHRP Research Project “Impacts of soil liquefaction on land, buildings and buried pipe networks: geotechnical evaluation and design, Project 3: Seismic assessment and design of pipe networks in liquefiable soils”. The work presented herein is a continuation of the comprehensive study on the impacts of Christchurch earthquakes on the buried pipe networks presented in Cubrinovski et al. (2011). This report summarises the performance of Christchurch City’s potable water, waste water and road networks through the 2010-2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES), and particularly focuses on the potable water network. It combines evidence based on comprehensive and well-documented data on the damage to the water network, detailed observations and interpretation of liquefaction-induced land damage, records and interpretations of ground motion characteristics induced by the Canterbury earthquakes, for a network analysis and pipeline performance evaluation using a GIS platform. The study addresses a range of issues relevant in the assessment of buried networks in areas affected by strong earthquakes and soil liquefaction. It discusses performance of different pipe materials (modern flexible pipelines and older brittle pipelines) including effects of pipe diameters, fittings and pipeline components/details, trench backfill characteristics, and severity of liquefaction. Detailed breakdown of key factors contributing to the damage to buried pipes is given with reference to the above and other relevant parameters. Particular attention is given to the interpretation, analysis and modelling of liquefaction effects on the damage and performance of the buried pipe networks. Clear link between liquefaction severity and damage rate for the pipeline has been observed with an increasing damage rate seen with increasing liquefaction severity. The approach taken here was to correlate the pipeline damage to LRI (Liquefaction Resistance Index, newly developed parameter in Cubrinovski et al., 2011) which represents a direct measure for the soil resistance to liquefaction while accounting for the seismic demand through PGA. Key quality of the adopted approach is that it provides a general methodology that in conjunction with conventional methods for liquefaction evaluation can be applied elsewhere in New Zealand and internationally. Preliminary correlations between pipeline damage (breaks km-1), liquefaction resistance (LRI) and seismic demand (PGA) have been developed for AC pipes, as an example. Such correlations can be directly used in the design and assessment of pipes in seismic areas both in liquefiable and non-liquefiable areas. Preliminary findings on the key factors for the damage to the potable water pipe network and established empirical correlations are presented including an overview of the damage to the waste water and road networks but with substantially less detail. A comprehensive summary of the damage data on the buried pipelines is given in a series of appendices.
Research Report No.2010-03 Ground motion prediction equations (GMPEs) for geometric-mean pseudo-spectral acceleration amplitudes from New Zealand (NZ) earthquakes are developed. A database of 2437 three-component ground motion records is developed by applying stringent quality criteria to the historically recorded events in NZ. Despite the large number of records, the database is deficient in empirical records from large magnitude events recorded at close distances to the fault rupture plane. As a result, the basis for the NZ-specific GMPE development is to examine the applicability of foreign GMPEs for similar tectonic regions and then modify the most applicable GMPEs based on both theoretical and statistically significant empirically-driven arguments. For active shallow crustal events, five different GMPEs are considered. It was found that the McVerry et al. (2006) model, which is the current model upon which seismic design guidelines and site-specific seismic hazard analyses in NZ are based, provided the worst fit to the NZ database, and that the Chiou et al. (2010) (C10) modification of the Chiou and Youngs (2008) model was the most applicable. Discrepancies between the C10 model and the NZ database that were empirically identified and theoretically justified were used to modify the C10 model for: (i) small magnitude scaling; (ii) scaling of short period ground motion from normal faulting events in volcanic crust; (iii) scaling of ground motions on very hard rock sites; (iv) anelastic attenuation in the NZ crust; and (v) consideration of the increased anelastic attenuation in the Taupo Volcanic Zone (TVZ). For subduction slab events, initially three models were considered. It was found that all of the models had some significant biases with respect to applicability for NZ. The Zhao et al. (2006) (Z06) model was selected because of the rigorous database upon which it was developed and modified by: (i) NZ-specific scaling at small magnitudes; (ii) path scaling at large distances; (iii) consideration of the increased TVZ attenuation; and (iv) revision of the standard deviation model. Based on these modifications the developed model showed no bias of the inter- and intra-event residuals as a function of various predictor variables. The standard deviation of the residuals using the revised standard deviation model also indicated that the model has an adequate precision. Three GMPEs were considered for subduction interface events. The Zhao et al. (2006) (Z06) model was the best performing model with only bias exhibited in the site response model, and possible over-prediction of large magnitude events. The Z06 interface model was modified to account for site response and magnitude scaling using the same functional forms as those of the developed active shallow crustal and subduction slab models. The developed model showed no bias of the inter- and intra-event residuals as a function of various predictor variables. The developed GMPEs include specific features as evident in the NZ database; consistent scaling for parameters not well constrained by the NZ database; and pseudo-spectral amplitudes for vibration periods from 0.01 to 10 seconds. Hence, these models represent a significant advance in the state-of-the art for empirical ground motion prediction in NZ.
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.
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.
Field trips are one of the most critical pieces of learning for students in sciences like geology, biology, and geography. Virtual field trips (VFT) are being increasingly considered as sophisticated and effective forms of teaching, especially with the rise of new technologies and the growing demand for more inclusive classroom environments. This research developed a virtual field trip for Tertiary students in an introductory-level geology course (GEOL 113: Environmental Geohazards) at the University of Canterbury. This initiative was in partnership with LEARNZ – a highly esteemed virtual fieldtrip team run by CORE Education that creates successful VFTs for Primary and Secondary students in New Zealand. Key components of the Tertiary VFT include a student acting as the virtual field trip teacher interviewing experts and leading the field trip, web-based background material, online assessment, and photos. In two successive academic years, students participated in the VFT during lectures and as pre class assignments prior to a one-day earthquake hazards workshop. In 2016, the virtual field trip used the LEARNZ web platform and occurred synchronously with the class; in 2017 the virtual fieldtrip reused the video, images and word documents from the previous year with the addition of a Google Earth component and with no reliance on the LEARNZ web platform. The goals of the trip were designed to prepare students for the earthquake hazards workshop, in which students analysed earthquake impacts over varying timescales and then applied that knowledge to develop strategies for the recovery of three crucial industries (dairy, mining, or tourism) on the West Coast of New Zealand’s South Island. In both years, number of clicks data showed that students interacted with online material far more during this week of the course than any other. Following the synchronous version in 2016, the students who were surveyed reported (1) they enjoyed the trip, (2) they found background material useful for preparation for the trip and the workshop, and (3) the additional work was at the appropriate level. Despite predominantly positive responses from the students, we experienced some negative feedback from participating staff mainly associated with stress and technical difficulties in running the synchronous VFT. With the asynchronous trip in 2017, staff reported a highly positive overall experience, with a perceived enhanced interaction with class during lecture time, and an increased and enhanced engagement with course material outside of class. The student survey again showed that the majority of students surveyed enjoyed the virtual fieldtrip, and that it was useful preparation for the workshop. Additionally, they reported an improved link between earth processes and society, which was a key overarching aim for the course. We propose that the synchronous version poses more excitement and immersion in the field environment, whereas the reuse of the asynchronous version increases the utility (and hence value for money) of the trip, and minimises technical difficulties and lecturer stress. Additionally, re-using the material in the asynchronous version offered opportunities to improve and supplement the past content, such as the incorporation of following an annotated trip path in Google Earth. As recommendations for others interested in developing virtual fieldtrips, we report that the design of a virtual fieldtrip should include (1) Goal-aligned content and assessment for both practice and marks, (2) a student and instructor experience that is authentic and flexible to both the people and the place. We suggest that these aims can be achieved whatever the budget or timeframe and make our material freely available at https://serc.carleton.edu/index.html.
One of the most controversial issues highlighted by the 2010-2011 Christchurch earthquake series and more recently the 2016 Kaikoura earthquake, has been the evident difficulty and lack of knowledge and guidelines for: a) evaluation of the residual capacity damaged buildings to sustain future aftershocks; b) selection and implementation of a series of reliable repairing techniques to bring back the structure to a condition substantially the same as prior to the earthquake; and c) predicting the cost (or cost-effectiveness) of such repair intervention, when compared to fully replacement costs while accounting for potential aftershocks in the near future. As a result of such complexity and uncertainty (i.e., risk), in combination with the possibility (unique in New Zealand when compared to most of the seismic-prone countries) to rely on financial support from the insurance companies, many modern buildings, in a number exceeding typical expectations from past experiences at an international level, have ended up being demolished. This has resulted in additional time and indirect losses prior to the full reconstruction, as well as in an increase in uncertainty on the actual relocation of the investment. This research project provides the main end-users and stakeholders (practitioner engineers, owners, local and government authorities, insurers, and regulatory agencies) with comprehensive evidence-based information to assess the residual capacity of damage reinforced concrete buildings, and to evaluate the feasibility of repairing techniques, in order to support their delicate decision-making process of repair vs. demolition or replacement. Literature review on effectiveness of epoxy injection repairs, as well as experimental tests on full-scale beam-column joints shows that repaired specimens have a reduced initial stiffness compared with the undamaged specimen, with no apparent strength reduction, sometimes exhibiting higher displacement ductility capacities. Although the bond between the steel and concrete is only partially restored, it still allows the repaired specimen to dissipate at least the same amount of hysteretic energy. Experimental tests on buildings subjected to earthquake loading demonstrate that even for severe damage levels, the ability of the epoxy injection to restore the initial stiffness of the structure is significant. Literature review on damage assessment and repair guidelines suggests that there is consensus within the international community that concrete elements with cracks less than 0.2 mm wide only require cosmetic repairs; epoxy injection repairs of cracks less and 2.0 mm wide and concrete patching of spalled cover concrete (i.e., minor to moderate damage) is an appropiate repair strategy; and for severe damaged components (e.g., cracks greater than 2.0 mm wide, crushing of the concrete core, buckling of the longitudinal reinforcement) local replacement of steel and/or concrete in addition to epoxy crack injection is more appropriate. In terms of expected cracking patterns, non-linear finite element investigations on well-designed reinforced concrete beam-to-column joints, have shown that lower number of cracks but with wider openings are expected to occur for larger compressive concrete strength, f’c, and lower reinforcement content, ρs. It was also observed that the tensile concrete strength, ft, strongly affects the expected cracking pattern in the beam-column joints, the latter being more uniformly distributed for lower ft values. Strain rate effects do not seem to play an important role on the cracking pattern. However, small variations in the cracking pattern were observed for low reinforcement content as it approaches to the minimum required as per NZS 3101:2006. Simple equations are proposed in this research project to relate the maximum and residual crack widths with the steel strain at peak displacement, with or without axial load. A literature review on fracture of reinforcing steel due to low-cycle fatigue, including recent research using steel manufactured per New Zealand standards is also presented. Experimental results describing the influence of the cyclic effect on the ultimate strain capacity of the steel are also discussed, and preliminary equations to account for that effect are proposed. A literature review on the current practice to assess the seismic residual capacity of structures is also presented. The various factors affecting the residual fatigue life at a component level (i.e., plastic hinge) of well-designed reinforced concrete frames are discussed, and equations to quantify each of them are proposed, as well as a methodology to incorporate them into a full displacement-based procedure for pre-earthquake and post-earthquake seismic assessment.
The purpose of this thesis is to conduct a detailed examination of the forward-directivity characteristics of near-fault ground motions produced in the 2010-11 Canterbury earthquakes, including evaluating the efficacy of several existing empirical models which form the basis of frameworks for considering directivity in seismic hazard assessment. A wavelet-based pulse classification algorithm developed by Baker (2007) is firstly used to identify and characterise ground motions which demonstrate evidence of forward-directivity effects from significant events in the Canterbury earthquake sequence. The algorithm fails to classify a large number of ground motions which clearly exhibit an early-arriving directivity pulse due to: (i) incorrect pulse extraction resulting from the presence of pulse-like features caused by other physical phenomena; and (ii) inadequacy of the pulse indicator score used to carry out binary pulse-like/non-pulse-like classification. An alternative ‘manual’ approach is proposed to ensure 'correct' pulse extraction and the classification process is also guided by examination of the horizontal velocity trajectory plots and source-to-site geometry. Based on the above analysis, 59 pulse-like ground motions are identified from the Canterbury earthquakes , which in the author's opinion, are caused by forward-directivity effects. The pulses are also characterised in terms of their period and amplitude. A revised version of the B07 algorithm developed by Shahi (2013) is also subsequently utilised but without observing any notable improvement in the pulse classification results. A series of three chapters are dedicated to assess the predictive capabilities of empirical models to predict the: (i) probability of pulse occurrence; (ii) response spectrum amplification caused by the directivity pulse; (iii) period and amplitude (peak ground velocity, PGV) of the directivity pulse using observations from four significant events in the Canterbury earthquakes. Based on the results of logistic regression analysis, it is found that the pulse probability model of Shahi (2013) provides the most improved predictions in comparison to its predecessors. Pulse probability contour maps are developed to scrutinise observations of pulses/non-pulses with predicted probabilities. A direct comparison of the observed and predicted directivity amplification of acceleration response spectra reveals the inadequacy of broadband directivity models, which form the basis of the near-fault factor in the New Zealand loadings standard, NZS1170.5:2004. In contrast, a recently developed narrowband model by Shahi & Baker (2011) provides significantly improved predictions by amplifying the response spectra within a small range of periods. The significant positive bias demonstrated by the residuals associated with all models at longer vibration periods (in the Mw7.1 Darfield and Mw6.2 Christchurch earthquakes) is likely due to the influence of basin-induced surface waves and non-linear soil response. Empirical models for the pulse period notably under-predict observations from the Darfield and Christchurch earthquakes, inferred as being a result of both the effect of nonlinear site response and influence of the Canterbury basin. In contrast, observed pulse periods from the smaller magnitude June (Mw6.0) and December (Mw5.9) 2011 earthquakes are in good agreement with predictions. Models for the pulse amplitude generally provide accurate estimates of the observations at source-to-site distances between 1 km and 10 km. At longer distances, observed PGVs are significantly under-predicted due to their slower apparent attenuation. Mixed-effects regression is employed to develop revised models for both parameters using the latest NGA-West2 pulse-like ground motion database. A pulse period relationship which accounts for the effect of faulting mechanism using rake angle as a continuous predictor variable is developed. The use of a larger database in model development, however does not result in improved predictions of pulse period for the Darfield and Christchurch earthquakes. In contrast, the revised model for PGV provides a more appropriate attenuation of the pulse amplitude with distance, and does not exhibit the bias associated with previous models. Finally, the effects of near-fault directivity are explicitly included in NZ-specific probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) using the narrowband directivity model of Shahi & Baker (2011). Seismic hazard analyses are conducted with and without considering directivity for typical sites in Christchurch and Otira. The inadequacy of the near-fault factor in the NZS1170.5: 2004 is apparent based on a comparison with the directivity amplification obtained from PSHA.
This dissertation addresses several fundamental and applied aspects of ground motion selection for seismic response analyses. In particular, the following topics are addressed: the theory and application of ground motion selection for scenario earthquake ruptures; the consideration of causal parameter bounds in ground motion selection; ground motion selection in the near-fault region where directivity effect is significant; and methodologies for epistemic uncertainty consideration and propagation in the context of ground motion selection and seismic performance assessment. The paragraphs below outline each contribution in more detail. A scenario-based ground motion selection method is presented which considers the joint distribution of multiple intensity measure (IM) types based on the generalised conditional intensity measure (GCIM) methodology (Bradley, 2010b, 2012c). The ground motion selection algorithm is based on generating realisations of the considered IM distributions for a specific rupture scenario and then finding the prospective ground motions which best fit the realisations using an optimal amplitude scaling factor. In addition, using different rupture scenarios and site conditions, two important aspects of the GCIM methodology are scrutinised: (i) different weight vectors for the various IMs considered; and (ii) quantifying the importance of replicate selections for ensembles with different numbers of desired ground motions. As an application of the developed scenario-based ground motion selection method, ground motion ensembles are selected to represent several major earthquake scenarios in New Zealand that pose a significant seismic hazard, namely, Alpine, Hope and Porters Pass ruptures for Christchurch city; and Wellington, Ohariu, and Wairarapa ruptures for Wellington city. A rigorous basis is developed, and sensitivity analyses performed, for the consideration of bounds on causal parameters (e.g., magnitude, source-to-site distance, and site condition) for ground motion selection. The effect of causal parameter bound selection on both the number of available prospective ground motions from an initial empirical as-recorded database, and the statistical properties of IMs of selected ground motions are examined. It is also demonstrated that using causal parameter bounds is not a reliable approach to implicitly account for ground motion duration and cumulative effects when selection is based on only spectral acceleration (SA) ordinates. Specific causal parameter bounding criteria are recommended for general use as a ‘default’ bounding criterion with possible adjustments from the analyst based on problem-specific preferences. An approach is presented to consider the forward directivity effects in seismic hazard analysis, which does not separate the hazard calculations for pulse-like and non-pulse-like ground motions. Also, the ability of ground motion selection methods to appropriately select records containing forward directivity pulse motions in the near-fault region is examined. Particular attention is given to ground motion selection which is explicitly based on ground motion IMs, including SA, duration, and cumulative measures; rather than a focus on implicit parameters (i.e., distance, and pulse or non-pulse classifications) that are conventionally used to heuristically distinguish between the near-fault and far-field records. No ad hoc criteria, in terms of the number of directivity ground motions and their pulse periods, are enforced for selecting pulse-like records. Example applications are presented with different rupture characteristics, source-to-site geometry, and site conditions. It is advocated that the selection of ground motions in the near-fault region based on IM properties alone is preferred to that in which the proportion of pulse-like motions and their pulse periods are specified a priori as strict criteria for ground motion selection. Three methods are presented to propagate the effect of seismic hazard and ground motion selection epistemic uncertainties to seismic performance metrics. These methods differ in their level of rigor considered to propagate the epistemic uncertainty in the conditional distribution of IMs utilised in ground motion selection, selected ground motion ensembles, and the number of nonlinear response history analyses performed to obtain the distribution of engineering demand parameters. These methods are compared for an example site where it is observed that, for seismic demand levels below the collapse limit, epistemic uncertainty in ground motion selection is a smaller uncertainty contributor relative to the uncertainty in the seismic hazard itself. In contrast, uncertainty in ground motion selection process increases the uncertainty in the seismic demand hazard for near-collapse demand levels.
Reinforced concrete structures designed in pre-1970s are vulnerable under earthquakes due to lack of seismic detailing to provide adequate ductility. Typical deficiencies of pre-1970s reinforced concrete structures are (a) use of plain bars as longitudinal reinforcement, (b) inadequate anchorage of beam longitudinal reinforcement in the column (particularly exterior column), (c) lack of joint transverse reinforcement if any, (d) lapped splices located just above joint, and (e) low concrete strength. Furthermore, the use of infill walls is a controversial issue because it can help to provide additional stiffness to the structure on the positive side and on the negative side it can increase the possibility of soft-storey mechanisms if it is distributed irregularly. Experimental research to investigate the possible seismic behaviour of pre-1970s reinforced concrete structures have been carried out in the past. However, there is still an absence of experimental tests on the 3-D response of existing beam-column joints under bi-directional cyclic loading, such as corner joints. As part of the research work herein presented, a series of experimental tests on beam-column subassemblies with typical detailing of pre-1970s buildings has been carried out to investigate the behaviour of existing reinforced concrete structures. Six two-third scale plane frame exterior beam-column joint subassemblies were constructed and tested under quasi-static cyclic loading in the Structural Laboratory of the University of Canterbury. The reinforcement detailing and beam dimension were varied to investigate their effect on the seismic behaviour. Four specimens were conventional deep beam-column joint, with two of them using deformed longitudinal bars and beam bars bent in to the joint and the two others using plain round longitudinal bars and beam bars with end hooks. The other two specimens were shallow beam-column joint, one with deformed longitudinal bars and beam bars bent in to the joint, the other with plain round longitudinal bars and beam bars with end hooks. All units had one transverse reinforcement in the joint. The results of the experimental tests indicated that conventional exterior beam-column joint with typical detailing of pre-1970s building would experience serious diagonal tension cracking in the joint panel under earthquake. The use of plain round bars with end hooks for beam longitudinal reinforcement results in more severe damage in the joint core when compared to the use of deformed bars for beam longitudinal reinforcement bent in to the joint, due to the combination of bar slips and concrete crushing. One interesting outcome is that the use of shallow beam in the exterior beam-column joint could avoid the joint cracking due to the beam size although the strength provided lower when compared with the use of deep beam with equal moment capacity. Therefore, taking into account the low strength and stiffness, shallow beam can be reintroduced as an alternative solution in design process. In addition, the presence of single transverse reinforcement in the joint core can provide additional confinement after the first crack occurred, thus delaying the strength degradation of the structure. Three two-third scale space frame corner beam-column joint subassemblies were also constructed to investigate the biaxial loading effect. Two specimens were deep-deep beam-corner column joint specimens and the other one was deep-shallow beam-corner column joint specimen. One deep-deep beam-corner column joint specimen was not using any transverse reinforcement in the joint core while the two other specimens were using one transverse reinforcement in the joint core. Plain round longitudinal bars were used for all units with hook anchorage for the beam bars. Results from the tests confirmed the evidences from earthquake damage observations with the exterior 3-D (corner) beam-column joint subjected to biaxial loading would have less strength and suffer higher damage in the joint area under earthquake. Furthermore, the joint shear relation in the two directions is calibrated from the results to provide better analysis. An analytical model was used to simulate the seismic behaviour of the joints with the help of Ruaumoko software. Alternative strength degradation curves corresponding to different reinforcement detailing of beam-column joint unit were proposed based on the test results.
This thesis is concerned with modelling rockfall parameters associated with cliff collapse debris and the resultant “ramp” that formed following the high peak ground acceleration (PGA) events of 22 February 2011 and 13 June 2011. The Christchurch suburb of Redcliffs, located at the base of the Port Hills on the northern side of Banks Peninsula, New Zealand, is comprised of Miocene-age volcanics with valley-floor infilling marine sediments. The area is dominated by basaltic lava flows of the Mt Pleasant Formation, which is a suite of rocks forming part of the Lyttelton Volcanic Group that were erupted 11.0-10.0Ma. Fresh exposure enabled the identification of a basaltic ignimbrite unit at the study site overlying an orange tuff unit that forms a marker horizon spanning the length of the field area. Prior to this thesis, basaltic ignimbrite on Banks Peninsula has not been recorded, so descriptions and interpretations of this unit are the first presented. Mapping of the cliff face by remote observation, and analysis of hand samples collected from the base of the debris slopes, has identified a very strong (>200MPa), columnar-jointed, welded unit, and a very weak (<5MPa), massive, so-called brecciated unit that together represent the end-member components of the basaltic ignimbrite. Geochemical analysis shows the welded unit is picrite basalt, and the brecciated unit is hawaiite, making both clearly distinguishable from the underlying trachyandesite tuff. RocFall™ 4.0 was used to model future rockfalls at Redcliffs. RocFall™ is a two-dimensional (2D), hybrid, probabilistic modelling programme for which topographical profile data is used to generate slope profiles. GNS Science collected the data used for slope profile input in March 2011. An initial sensitivity analysis proved the Terrestrial Laser Scan (TLS)-derived slope to be too detailed to show any results when the slope roughness parameter was tested. A simplified slope profile enabled slope roughness to be varied, however the resulting model did not correlate with field observations as well. By using slope profile data from March 2011, modelled rockfall behaviour has been calibrated with observed rockfall runout at Redcliffs in the 13 June 2011 event to create a more accurate rockfall model. The rockfall model was developed on a single slope profile (Section E), with the chosen model then applied to four other section lines (A-D) to test the accuracy of the model, and to assess future rockfall runout across a wider area. Results from Section Lines A, B, and E correlate very well with field observations, with <=5% runout exceeding the modelled slope, and maximum bounce height at the toe of the slope <=1m. This is considered to lie within observed limits given the expectation that talus slopes will act as a ramp on which modelled rocks travel further downslope. Section Lines C and D produced higher runout percentage values than the other three section lines (23% and 85% exceeding the base of the slope, respectively). Section D also has a much higher maximum bounce height at the toe of the slope (~8.0m above the slope compared to <=1.0m for the other four sections). Results from modelling of all sections shows the significance of the ratio between total cliff height (H) and horizontal slope distance (x), and of maximum drop height to the top of the talus (H*) and horizontal slope distance (x). H/x can be applied to the horizontal to vertical ratio (H:V) as used commonly to identify potential slope instability. Using the maximum value from modelling at Redcliffs, the future runout limit can be identified by applying a 1.4H:1V ratio to the remainder of the cliff face. Additionally, the H*/x parameter shows that when H*/x >=0.6, the percentage of rock runout passing the toe of the slope will exceed 5%. When H*/x >=0.75, the maximum bounce height at the toe of the slope can be far greater than when H*/x is below this threshold. Both of these parameters can be easily obtained, and can contribute valuable guideline data to inform future land-use planning decisions. This thesis project has demonstrated the applicability of a 2D probabilistic-based model (RocFall™ 4.0) to evaluate rockfall runout on the talus slope (or ramp) at the base of ~35-70m high cliff with a basaltic ignimbrite source. Limitations of the modelling programme have been identified, in particular difficulties with adjusting modelled roughness of the slope profile and the inability to consider fragmentation. The runout profile using RocFall™ has been successfully calibrated against actual profiles and some anomalous results have been identified.
In the last century, seismic design has undergone significant advancements. Starting from the initial concept of designing structures to perform elastically during an earthquake, the modern seismic design philosophy allows structures to respond to ground excitations in an inelastic manner, thereby allowing damage in earthquakes that are significantly less intense than the largest possible ground motion at the site of the structure. Current performance-based multi-objective seismic design methods aim to ensure life-safety in large and rare earthquakes, and to limit structural damage in frequent and moderate earthquakes. As a result, not many recently built buildings have collapsed and very few people have been killed in 21st century buildings even in large earthquakes. Nevertheless, the financial losses to the community arising from damage and downtime in these earthquakes have been unacceptably high (for example; reported to be in excess of 40 billion dollars in the recent Canterbury earthquakes). In the aftermath of the huge financial losses incurred in recent earthquakes, public has unabashedly shown their dissatisfaction over the seismic performance of the built infrastructure. As the current capacity design based seismic design approach relies on inelastic response (i.e. ductility) in pre-identified plastic hinges, it encourages structures to damage (and inadvertently to incur loss in the form of repair and downtime). It has now been widely accepted that while designing ductile structural systems according to the modern seismic design concept can largely ensure life-safety during earthquakes, this also causes buildings to undergo substantial damage (and significant financial loss) in moderate earthquakes. In a quest to match the seismic design objectives with public expectations, researchers are exploring how financial loss can be brought into the decision making process of seismic design. This has facilitated conceptual development of loss optimisation seismic design (LOSD), which involves estimating likely financial losses in design level earthquakes and comparing against acceptable levels of loss to make design decisions (Dhakal 2010a). Adoption of loss based approach in seismic design standards will be a big paradigm shift in earthquake engineering, but it is still a long term dream as the quantification of the interrelationships between earthquake intensity, engineering demand parameters, damage measures, and different forms of losses for different types of buildings (and more importantly the simplification of the interrelationship into design friendly forms) will require a long time. Dissecting the cost of modern buildings suggests that the structural components constitute only a minor portion of the total building cost (Taghavi and Miranda 2003). Moreover, recent research on seismic loss assessment has shown that the damage to non-structural elements and building contents contribute dominantly to the total building loss (Bradley et. al. 2009). In an earthquake, buildings can incur losses of three different forms (damage, downtime, and death/injury commonly referred as 3Ds); but all three forms of seismic loss can be expressed in terms of dollars. It is also obvious that the latter two loss forms (i.e. downtime and death/injury) are related to the extent of damage; which, in a building, will not just be constrained to the load bearing (i.e. structural) elements. As observed in recent earthquakes, even the secondary building components (such as ceilings, partitions, facades, windows parapets, chimneys, canopies) and contents can undergo substantial damage, which can lead to all three forms of loss (Dhakal 2010b). Hence, if financial losses are to be minimised during earthquakes, not only the structural systems, but also the non-structural elements (such as partitions, ceilings, glazing, windows etc.) should be designed for earthquake resistance, and valuable contents should be protected against damage during earthquakes. Several innovative building technologies have been (and are being) developed to reduce building damage during earthquakes (Buchanan et. al. 2011). Most of these developments are aimed at reducing damage to the buildings’ structural systems without due attention to their effects on non-structural systems and building contents. For example, the PRESSS system or Damage Avoidance Design concept aims to enable a building’s structural system to meet the required displacement demand by rocking without the structural elements having to deform inelastically; thereby avoiding damage to these elements. However, as this concept does not necessarily reduce the interstory drift or floor acceleration demands, the damage to non-structural elements and contents can still be high. Similarly, the concept of externally bracing/damping building frames reduces the drift demand (and consequently reduces the structural damage and drift sensitive non-structural damage). Nevertheless, the acceleration sensitive non-structural elements and contents will still be very vulnerable to damage as the floor accelerations are not reduced (arguably increased). Therefore, these concepts may not be able to substantially reduce the total financial losses in all types of buildings. Among the emerging building technologies, base isolation looks very promising as it seems to reduce both inter-storey drifts and floor accelerations, thereby reducing the damage to the structural/non-structural components of a building and its contents. Undoubtedly, a base isolated building will incur substantially reduced loss of all three forms (dollars, downtime, death/injury), even during severe earthquakes. However, base isolating a building or applying any other beneficial technology may incur additional initial costs. In order to provide incentives for builders/owners to adopt these loss-minimising technologies, real-estate and insurance industries will have to acknowledge the reduced risk posed by (and enhanced resilience of) such buildings in setting their rental/sale prices and insurance premiums.
