Validating dynamic responses of engineered systems subjected to simulated ground motions is essential in scrutinising the applicability of simulated ground motions for engineering demand analyses. This paper compares the responses of two 3D building models subjected to recorded and simulated ground motions scaled to the NZS1170.5 design response spectrum, in order to evaluate the applicability of simulated ground motions for use in conventional engineering practice in New Zealand. The buildings were designed according to the NZS1170.5 and physically constructed in Christchurch prior to the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquakes. 40 recorded ground motions from the 22 February 2011 Christchurch earthquake, along with the simulated ground motions for this event from Razafindrakoto et al. (2018) are considered. The seismic responses of the structures are principally quantified via the peak floor acceleration and maximum inter-storey drift ratio. Overall, the results indicate a general agreement in seismic demands obtained using the recorded and simulated ensembles of ground motions and provide further evidence that simulated ground motions using state-of-the-art methods can be used in code-based structural performance assessments inplace of, or in combination with, ensembles of recorded ground motions.
Drywalls are the typical infill or partitions used in new structures. They are usually located within structural frames and/or between upper and lower floor slabs in buildings. Due to the materials used in their construction, unlike masonry blocks, they can be considered as light non-structural infill/partition walls. These types of walls are especially popular in New Zealand and the USA. In spite of their popularity, little is known about their in-plane cyclic behaviour when infilled within a structural frame. The cause of this lack of knowledge can be attributed to the typical assumption that they are weak non-structural elements and are not expected to interact with the surrounding structural system significantly. However, recent earthquakes have repeatedly shown that drywalls interact with the structure and suffer severe damage at very low drift levels. In this paper, experimental test results of two typical drywall types (steel and timber framed) are reported in order to gather further information on; i) their reverse cyclic behaviour, ii) inter-storey drift levels at which they suffer different levels of damage, iii) the level of interaction with the surrounding structural frame system. The drywall specimens were tested using quasi-static reverse cyclic testing protocols within a full scale precast RC frame at the Structures Laboratory of the University of Canterbury.
La pericolosità associata ad un dato fenomeno costituisce uno dei fattori più importanti e difficili da quantificare nelle analisi di rischio, a maggior ragione quando si tratta di fenomeni complessi come nel caso della liquefazione sismica. Il presente lavoro illustra sinteticamente uno studio della pericolosità indotta al suolo da liquefazione basato su un caso campione statistico particolarmente significativo, il terremoto (Mw 6.2) che ha colpito Christchurch, Nuova Zelanda, del 2011. La notevole mole di dati disponibili, relativi alle caratteristiche geotecniche del sottosuolo, unitamente al rilievo dei danni ha consentito innanzitutto di caratterizzare la suscettibilità a liquefazione dell’area, indipendentemente dall’evento sismico, quindi di correlare statisticamente le diverse grandezze e di derivare delle curve di vulnerabilità del suolo.
This article presents a quantitative case study on the site amplification effect observed at Heathcote Valley, New Zealand, during the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence for 10 events that produced notable ground acceleration amplitudes up to 1.4g and 2.2g in the horizontal and vertical directions, respectively. We performed finite element analyses of the dynamic response of the valley, accounting for the realistic basin geometry and the soil non-linear response. The site-specific simulations performed significantly better than both empirical ground motion models and physics based regional-scale ground motion simulations (which empirically accounts for the site effects), reducing the spectral acceleration prediction bias by a factor of two in short vibration periods. However, our validation exercise demonstrated that it was necessary to quantify the level of uncertainty in the estimated bedrock motion using multiple recorded events, to understand how much the simplistic model can over- or under-estimate the ground motion intensities. Inferences from the analyses suggest that the Rayleigh waves generated near the basin edge contributed significantly to the observed high frequency (f>3Hz) amplification, in addition to the amplification caused by the strong soil-rock impedance contrast at the site fundamental frequency. Models with and without considering soil non-linear response illustrate, as expected, that the linear elastic assumption severely overestimates ground motions in high frequencies for strong earthquakes, especially when the contribution of basin edge-generated Rayleigh waves becomes significant. Our analyses also demonstrate that the effect of pressure-dependent soil velocities on the high frequency ground motions is as significant as the amplification caused by the basin edge-generated Rayleigh waves.
Predicting building collapse due to seismic motion is critical in design and more so after a major event. Damaged structures can appear sound, but collapse under following major events. There can thus be significant risk in decision making after a major seismic event concerning the safe occupation of a building or surrounding areas, versus the unknown impact of unknown major aftershocks. Model-based pushover analyses are effective if the structural properties are well understood, which is not valid post-event when this risk information is most useful. This research combines Hysteresis Loop Analysis (HLA) structural health monitoring (SHM) and Incremental Dynamic Analysis (IDA) methods to determine collapse capacity and probability of collapse for a specific structure, at any time, a range of earthquake excitations to ensure robustness. The nonlinear dynamic analysis method presented enables constant updating of building performance predictions using post-event SHM results. The resulting combined methods provide near real-time updating of collapse fragility curves as events progress, quantifying the change of collapse probability or seismic induced losses for decision-making - a novel, higher resolution risk analysis than previously available. The methods are not computationally expensive and there is no requirement for a validated numerical model. Results show significant potential benefits and a clear evolution of risk. They also show clear need for extending SHM toward creating improved predictive models for analysis of subsequent events, where the Christchurch series of 2010-2011 had significant post-event aftershocks after each main event. Finally, the overall method is generalisable to any typical engineering demand parameter.
The performance of buildings in recent New Zealand earthquakes (Canterbury, Seddon and Kaikōura), delivered stark lessons on seismic resilience. Most of our buildings, with a few notable exceptions, performed as our Codes intended them to, that is, to safeguard people from injury. Many buildings only suffered minor structural damage but were unable to be reused and occupied for significant periods of time due to the damage and failure of non-structural elements. This resulted in substantial economic losses and major disruptions to our businesses and communities. Research has attributed the damage to poor overall design coordination, inadequate or lack of seismic restraints for non structural elements and insufficient clearances between building components to cater for the interaction of non structural elements under seismic actions. Investigations have found a clear connection between the poor performance of non-structural elements and the issues causing pain in the industry (procurement methods, risk aversion, the lack of clear understanding of design and inspection responsibility and the need for better alignment of the design codes to enable a consistent integrated design approach). The challenge to improve the seismic performance of non structural elements in New Zealand is a complex one that cuts across a diverse construction industry. Adopting the key steps as recommended in this paper is expected to have significant co-benefits to the New Zealand construction industry, with improvements in productivity alongside reductions in costs and waste, as the rework which plagues the industry decreases.
Ground motion observations from the most significant 10 events in the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence at near-source sites are utilized to scrutinize New Zealand (NZ)-specific pseudo-spectral acceleration (SA) empirical ground motion prediction equations (GMPE) (Bradley 2010, Bradley 2013, McVerry et al. 2006). Region-specific modification factors based on relaxing the conventional ergodic assumption in GMPE development were developed for the Bradley (2010) model. Because of the observed biases with magnitude and source-to-site distance for the McVerry et al. (2006) model it is not possible to develop region-specific modification factors in a reliable manner. The theory of non-ergodic empirical ground motion prediction is then outlined, and applied to this 10 event dataset to determine systematic effects in the between- and within-event residuals which lead to modifications in the predicted median and standard deviation of the GMPE. By examining these systematic effects over sub-regions containing a total of 20 strong motion stations within the Canterbury area, modification factors for use in region-specific ground motion prediction are proposed. These modification factors, in particular, are suggested for use with the Bradley et al. (2010) model in Canterbury-specific probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) to develop revised design response, particularly for long vibration periods.
This paper concerns the explicit consideration of near-fault directivity in conventional ground motion prediction models, and its implication for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) in New Zealand. The proposed approach utilises recently developed models by Shahi & Baker (2011), which account for both the 'narrowband' nature of the directivity pulse on spectral ordinates, and the probability of pulse occurrence at the site of interest. Furthermore, in order to correctly consider directivity, distributed seismicity sources are considered as finite-faults, as opposed to their (incorrect) conventional treatment as point-sources. The significance of directivity on hazard analysis results is illustrated for various vibration periods at generic sites located in Christchurch and Otira, two locations whose seismic hazard is comprised of notably different seismic sources. When compared to the PSHA results considering directivity and distributed seismicity as finite faults, it is shown that the NZS1170.5:2004 directivity factor is notably unconservative for all vibration periods in Otira (i.e. high seismic hazard region); and unconservative for Christchurch at short-to-moderate vibration periods ( < 3s); but conservative at long periods ( > 4s).
The abundance of cone penetration test (CPT) data from subsurface explorations in Christchurch and the surrounding areas provides a useful source of information for a characterization of the near surface shear wave velocity ( ) profile for the region. A portion of the investigations were conducted using seismic CPT, enabling the comparison of measured shear wave velocity with CPT data, and subsequently the evaluation of existing CPT- correlations for applicability to Canterbury-specific soils. The existing correlations are shown to be biased, generally over-predicting the observed with depth, thus demonstrating the need for a Canterbury-specific CPT- correlation.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of a workshop in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of a workshop in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.
A photograph of an office in the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake.