Search

found 4534 results

Images for Canterbury; more images...

Articles, UC QuakeStudies

A PDF copy of a media release titled "What makes Canterbury feel all right? Look at a bus shelter!" in which All Right? Campaign Manager Sue Turner discusses the All Right? bus shelter adverts. These were part of phase 3 of the All Right? campaign. The media release also includes examples of the adverts, and is dated 17 May 2013.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

The University of Canterbury's E-Learning team's temporary office in the James Hight building. The photographer comments, "First looks at our new temporary (maybe) office space. Our group will stay here until April or May 2011, then will move to another floor in the Central Library. House bar. This reception desk is not used now. A small kitchen is at the right".

Images, UC QuakeStudies

A photograph of a paste-up depicting Roger Sutton, the CEO of CERA, with a band-aid over his mouth; Warwick Isaacs, the Deputy Chief Executive of CERA, with hearing protection over his ears; and Jerry Brownlee, Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery, with a blindfold over his eyes. The paste-up has been stuck on a sign board attached to a cordon fence.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

An image of an email signature from All Right?'s 'Take a Breather' campaign. The design depicts a plethora of everyday items and activities, including traffic, roadworks, work and leisure activities, and images from phase 2 of the All Right? campaign. In the centre are the words, "Take a breather... Canterbury's a busy place. What could you do to recharge?".

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Students sit outside the InTentCity 6.3 Cafe, which was set up in a tent in the Law car park while University of Canterbury buildings were closed for structural testing. The photographer comments, "The University restarts its teaching, and the techies in e-learning move out of NZi3. The cafe has an outside seating area under the trees".

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Alan Hoskin, a member of the University of Canterbury's E-Learning team, in their temporary office in the James Hight building. The photographer comments, "First looks at our new temporary (maybe) office space. Our group will stay here until April or May 2011, then will move to another floor in the Central Library. Bean bag. Alan wanted the beanbag but Jess said no".

Videos, UC QuakeStudies

A video of a presentation by Professor David Johnston during the fourth plenary of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. Johnston is a Senior Scientist at GNS Science and Director of the Joint Centre for Disaster Research in the School of Psychology at Massey University. The presentation is titled, "Understanding Immediate Human Behaviour to the 2010-2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence, Implications for injury prevention and risk communication".The abstract for the presentation reads as follows: The 2010 and 2011 Canterbury earthquake sequences have given us a unique opportunity to better understand human behaviour during and immediately after an earthquake. On 4 September 2010, a magnitude 7.1 earthquake occurred near Darfield in the Canterbury region of New Zealand. There were no deaths, but several thousand people sustained injuries and sought medical assistance. Less than 6 months later, a magnitude 6.2 earthquake occurred under Christchurch City at 12:51 p.m. on 22 February 2011. A total of 182 people were killed in the first 24 hours and over 7,000 people injured overall. To reduce earthquake casualties in future events, it is important to understand how people behaved during and immediately after the shaking, and how their behaviour exposed them to risk of death or injury. Most previous studies have relied on an analysis of medical records and/or reflective interviews and questionnaire studies. In Canterbury we were able to combine a range of methods to explore earthquake shaking behaviours and the causes of injuries. In New Zealand, the Accident Compensation Corporation (a national health payment scheme run by the government) allowed researchers to access injury data from over 9,500 people from the Darfield (4 September 2010) and Christchurch (22 February 2011 ) earthquakes. The total injury burden was analysed for demography, context of injury, causes of injury, and injury type. From the injury data inferences into human behaviour were derived. We were able to classify the injury context as direct (immediate shaking of the primary earthquake or aftershocks causing unavoidable injuries), and secondary (cause of injury after shaking ceased). A second study examined people's immediate responses to earthquakes in Christchurch New Zealand and compared responses to the 2011 earthquake in Hitachi, Japan. A further study has developed a systematic process and coding scheme to analyse earthquake video footage of human behaviour during strong earthquake shaking. From these studies a number of recommendations for injury prevention and risk communication can be made. In general, improved building codes, strengthening buildings, and securing fittings will reduce future earthquake deaths and injuries. However, the high rate of injuries incurred from undertaking an inappropriate action (e.g. moving around) during or immediately after an earthquake suggests that further education is needed to promote appropriate actions during and after earthquakes. In New Zealand - as in US and worldwide - public education efforts such as the 'Shakeout' exercise are trying to address the behavioural aspects of injury prevention.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Geospatial liquefaction models aim to predict liquefaction using data that is free and readily-available. This data includes (i) common ground-motion intensity measures; and (ii) geospatial parameters (e.g., among many, distance to rivers, distance to coast, and Vs30 estimated from topography) which are used to infer characteristics of the subsurface without in-situ testing. Since their recent inception, such models have been used to predict geohazard impacts throughout New Zealand (e.g., in conjunction with regional ground-motion simulations). While past studies have demonstrated that geospatial liquefaction-models show great promise, the resolution and accuracy of the geospatial data underlying these models is notably poor. As an example, mapped rivers and coastlines often plot hundreds of meters from their actual locations. This stems from the fact that geospatial models aim to rapidly predict liquefaction anywhere in the world and thus utilize the lowest common denominator of available geospatial data, even though higher quality data is often available (e.g., in New Zealand). Accordingly, this study investigates whether the performance of geospatial models can be improved using higher-quality input data. This analysis is performed using (i) 15,101 liquefaction case studies compiled from the 2010-2016 Canterbury Earthquakes; and (ii) geospatial data readily available in New Zealand. In particular, we utilize alternative, higher-quality data to estimate: locations of rivers and streams; location of coastline; depth to ground water; Vs30; and PGV. Most notably, a region-specific Vs30 model improves performance (Figs. 3-4), while other data variants generally have little-to-no effect, even when the “standard” and “high-quality” values differ significantly (Fig. 2). This finding is consistent with the greater sensitivity of geospatial models to Vs30, relative to any other input (Fig. 5), and has implications for modeling in locales worldwide where high quality geospatial data is available.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

A photograph of the wall of a street football arena built by Student Volunteer Army volunteers. The wall has a sign attached acknowledging the support of Resene, and is painted with the words, 'Red zone timber'.

Images, eqnz.chch.2010

The magnitude 7.1 Christchurch earthquake broke off an enormous chunk of Castle Rock in the Port Hills which has tumbled down towards the Lyttelton tunnel. View from Morgan's Valley (-43.578037° 172.714828°).