In order to provide information related to seismic vulnerability of non-ductile reinforced concrete (RC) frame buildings, and as a complementary investigation on innovative feasible retrofit solutions developed in the past six years at the University of Canterbury on pre-19170 reinforced concrete buildings, a frame building representative of older construction practice was tested on the shake table. The specimen, 1/2.5 scale, consists of two 3-storey 2-bay asymmetric frames in parallel, one interior and one exterior, jointed together by transverse beams and floor slabs. The as-built (benchmark) specimen was first tested under increasing ground motion amplitudes using records from Loma Prieta Earthquake (California, 1989) and suffered significant damage at the upper floor, most of it due to lap splices failure. As a consequence, in a second stage, the specimen was repaired and modified by removing the concrete in the lap splice region, welding the column longitudinal bars, replacing the removed concrete with structural mortar, and injecting cracks with epoxy resin. The modified as-built specimen was then tested using data recorded during Darfield (New Zealand, 2010) and Maule (Chile, 2010) Earthquakes, with whom the specimen showed remarkably different responses attributed to the main variation in frequency content and duration. In this contribution, the seismic performance of the three series of experiments are presented and compared.
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.
There is an increasing recognition that the seismic performance of buildings will be affected by the behaviour of both structural and non-structural elements. In light of this, work has been progressing at the University of Canterbury to develop guidelines for the seismic assessment of commercial glazing systems. This paper reviews the seismic assessment guidelines prescribed in Section C10 of the MBIE building assessment guidelines. Subsequently, the C10 approach is used to assess the drift capacity of a number of glazing units recently tested at the University of Canterbury. Comparing the predicted and observed drift capacities, it would appear that the C10 guidelines may lead to nonconservative estimates of drift capacity. Furthermore, the experimental results indicate that watertightness may be lost at very low drift demands, suggesting that guidance for the assessment of serviceability performance would also be beneficial. As such, it is proposed that improved guidance be provided to assist engineers in considering the possible impact that glazing could have on the structural response of a building in a large earthquake.
A photograph of a corner of the Civil Suite at the University of Canterbury after the 4 September 2010 earthquake. The photograph was taken on the day when the staff were allowed to return to the building. One of the ceiling panels has fallen onto a desk below, exposing the insulation underneath.
The flyer for the seminar "Seismic Assessment of Existing Masonry Buildings" presented by Professor Sergio Lagomarsino from the University of Genoa. The seminar demonstrated recent European research into modelling strategies, target performances and acceptance criteria for seismic assessment of masonry buildings.
A photograph of students falling through a bridge into the Avon River, outside the UCSA building. The photograph was taken in 2015 during the annual Civil Engineering Bridge Challenge event.
A photograph of students falling through a bridge into the Avon River, outside the UCSA building. The photograph was taken in 2008 during the annual Civil Engineering Bridge Challenge event.
A photograph of students falling through a bridge into the Avon River, outside the UCSA building. The photograph was taken in 2011 during the annual Civil Engineering Bridge Challenge event.
A photograph of students walking on a bridge across the Avon River, outside the UCSA building. The photograph was taken in 2011 during the annual Civil Engineering Bridge Challenge event.
A photograph of the earthquake damage to the old Registry Building on the corner of Worcester and Montreal Streets. The masonry of the Worcester Street gable has crumbled and is lying on the street in front. Wire fencing has been used to cordon off the building.
Deconstruction, at the end of the useful life of a building, produces a considerable amount of materials which must be disposed of, or be recycled / reused. At present, in New Zealand, most timber construction and demolition (C&D) material, particularly treated timber, is simply waste and is placed in landfills. For both technical and economic reasons (and despite the increasing cost of landfills), this position is unlikely to change in the next 10 – 15 years unless legislation dictates otherwise. Careful deconstruction, as opposed to demolition, can provide some timber materials which can be immediately re-used (eg. doors and windows), or further processed into other components (eg. beams or walls) or recycled (‘cascaded’) into other timber or composite products (e.g. fibre-board). This reusing / recycling of materials is being driven slowly in NZ by legislation, the ‘greening’ of the construction industry and public pressure. However, the recovery of useful material can be expensive and uneconomic (as opposed to land-filling). In NZ, there are few facilities which are able to sort and separate timber materials from other waste, although the soon-to-be commissioned Burwood Resource Recovery Park in Christchurch will attempt to deal with significant quantities of demolition waste from the recent earthquakes. The success (or otherwise) of this operation should provide good information as to how future C&D waste will be managed in NZ. In NZ, there are only a few, small scale facilities which are able to burn waste wood for energy recovery (e.g. timber mills), and none are known to be able to handle large quantities of treated timber. Such facilities, with constantly improving technology, are being commissioned in Europe (often with Government subsidies) and this indicates that similar bio-energy (co)generation will be established in NZ in the future. However, at present, the NZ Government provides little assistance to the bio-energy industry and the emergence worldwide of shale-gas reserves is likely to push the economic viability of bio-energy further into the future. The behaviour of timber materials placed in landfills is complex and poorly understood. Degrading timber in landfills has the potential to generate methane, a potent greenhouse gas, which can escape to the atmosphere and cancel out the significant benefits of carbon sequestration during tree growth. Improving security of landfills and more effective and efficient collection and utilisation of methane from landfills in NZ will significantly reduce the potential for leakage of methane to the atmosphere, acting as an offset to the continuing use of underground fossil fuels. Life cycle assessment (LCA), an increasingly important methodology for quantifying the environmental impacts of building materials (particularly energy, and global warming potential (GWP)), will soon be incorporated into the NZ Green Building Council Greenstar rating tools. Such LCA studies must provide a level playing field for all building materials and consider the whole life cycle. Whilst the end-of-life treatment of timber by LCA may establish a present-day base scenario, any analysis must also present a realistic end-of-life scenario for the future deconstruction of any 6 new building, as any building built today will be deconstructed many years in the future, when very different technologies will be available to deal with construction waste. At present, LCA practitioners in NZ and Australia place much value on a single research document on the degradation of timber in landfills (Ximenes et al., 2008). This leads to an end-of-life base scenario for timber which many in the industry consider to be an overestimation of the potential negative effects of methane generation. In Europe, the base scenario for wood disposal is cascading timber products and then burning for energy recovery, which normally significantly reduces any negative effects of the end-of-life for timber. LCA studies in NZ should always provide a sensitivity analysis for the end-of-life of timber and strongly and confidently argue that alternative future scenarios are realistic disposal options for buildings deconstructed in the future. Data-sets for environmental impacts (such as GWP) of building materials in NZ are limited and based on few research studies. The compilation of comprehensive data-sets with country-specific information for all building materials is considered a priority, preferably accounting for end-of-life options. The NZ timber industry should continue to ‘champion’ the environmental credentials of timber, over and above those of the other major building materials (concrete and steel). End-of-life should not be considered the ‘Achilles heel’ of the timber story.
A photograph of a earthquake-damaged building on Moorhouse Avenue. The front gable of the building has crumbled, exposing the inside.
The Royal Commission into the Canterbury earthquakes has been told illegal building techniques are being used in the Christchurch rebuild because the engineering profession is in crisis.
Damage to ceiling systems resulted in a substantial financial loss to building owners in the Canterbury earthquakes. In some buildings, collapse of ceilings could easily have resulted in severe injury to occupants. This paper summarizes the types of ceiling damage observed in the Canterbury earthquakes, and draws useful lessons from the observed performance of different types of ceiling systems. Existing ceiling manufacturing and installing practices/regulations in New Zealand are critically scrutinized to identify deficiencies, and measures are suggested to improve the practice so that the damage to ceilings and the resulting loss are minimized in future earthquakes.
Twelve years after the CTV building collapsed during the Christchurch earthquake, families of the victims killed inside have told an engineering disciplinary hearing they want justice and accountability. 115 people died when the six-storey building came down in February 2011. A complaint against an engineer whose firm designed the building is being heard by an Engineering New Zealand disciplinary committee. Dr Alan Reay lost a High Court bid to stop the hearing. Anna Sargent reports.
Impact between structures of bridge sections can play a major, unexpected role in seismic structural damage. Linear and non-linear models are developed to analyze structural impact and response of two single-degree-of-freedom structures, representing adjacent buildings or bridge sections. The analyses presented assess probability of impact, displacement change due to impact, and the probability of increased displacement due to impact. These are assessed over a matrix of structural periods for each degree-of-freedom, different impact coefficients of restitution, and a probabilistically scaled suite of earthquake events. Linear versus non-linear effects are assessed using a Ramberg-Osgood non-linear model for column inelasticity. The normalized distance, or gap-ratio (GR), defined as a percentage of the summed spectral displacements, is used to create probabilistic design requirements. Increasing GR and structural periods that are similar (T2/T1~0.8-1.25) significantly decrease the likelihood of impact, and vice-versa. Including column inelasticity and decreasing coefficient of restitution decrease displacement increases due to impact and thus reduce potential damage. A minimum GR~0.5-0.9 ensures that any displacement increases will be less than 10% for 90% of ground motions over all structural period combinations (0.2-5.0sec). These results enable probabilistic design guidelines to manage undesirable effects of impact– an important factor during the recent Canterbury, New Zealand Earthquakes.
The connections between walls of unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings and flexible timber diaphragms are critical building components that must perform adequately before desirable earthquake response of URM buildings may be achieved. Field observations made during the initial reconnaissance and the subsequent damage surveys of clay brick URM buildings following the 2010/2011 Canterbury, New Zealand, earthquakes revealed numerous cases where anchor connections joining masonry walls or parapets with roof or floor diaphragms appeared to have failed prematurely. These observations were more frequent for adhesive anchor connections than for through-bolt connections (i.e., anchorages having plates on the exterior facade of the masonry walls). Subsequently, an in-field test program was undertaken in an attempt to evaluate the performance of adhesive anchor connections between unreinforced clay brick URM walls and roof or floor diaphragm. The study consisted of a total of almost 400 anchor tests conducted in eleven existing URM buildings located in Christchurch, Whanganui and Auckland. Specific objectives of the study included the identification of failure modes of adhesive anchors in existing URM walls and the influence of the following variables on anchor load-displacement response: adhesive type, strength of the masonry materials (brick and mortar), anchor embedment depth, anchor rod diameter, overburden level, anchor rod type, quality of installation, and the use of metal mesh sleeves. In addition, the comparative performance of bent anchors (installed at an angle of minimum 22.5° to the perpendicular projection from the wall surface) and anchors positioned horizontally was investigated. Observations on the performance of wall-to-diaphragm connections in the 2010/2011 Canterbury earthquakes, a summary of the performed experimental program and test results, and a proposed pull-out capacity relationship for adhesive anchors installed into multi-leaf clay brick masonry are presented herein. AM - Accepted Manuscript
A photograph of a student standing on a bridge across the Avon River, outside the UCSA building. The photograph was taken in 2011 during the annual Civil Engineering Bridge Challenge event.
A photograph of two students walking on a bridge across the Avon River, outside the UCSA building. The photograph was taken in 2015 during the annual Civil Engineering Bridge Challenge event.
A photograph of three students standing on a bridge across the Avon River, outside the UCSA building. The photograph was taken in 2015 during the annual Civil Engineering Bridge Challenge event.
A photograph of a student falling through a bridge into the Avon River, outside the UCSA building. The photograph was taken in 2015 during the annual Civil Engineering Bridge Challenge event.
A photograph of two students walking on a bridge across the Avon River, outside the UCSA building. The photograph was taken in 2015 during the annual Civil Engineering Bridge Challenge event.
A photograph of a student walking on a bridge across the Avon River, outside the UCSA building. The photograph was taken in 2015 during the annual Civil Engineering Bridge Challenge event.
A photograph of two students walking on a bridge across the Avon River, outside the UCSA building. The photograph was taken in 2015 during the annual Civil Engineering Bridge Challenge event.
A photograph of a student walking on a bridge across the Avon River, outside the UCSA building. The photograph was taken in 2015 during the annual Civil Engineering Bridge Challenge event.
A photograph of two students walking on a bridge across the Avon River, outside the UCSA building. The photograph was taken in 2015 during the annual Civil Engineering Bridge Challenge event.
A photograph of a student walking on a bridge across the Avon River, outside the UCSA building. The photograph was taken in 2015 during the annual Civil Engineering Bridge Challenge event.
A photograph of two students walking on a bridge across the Avon River, outside the UCSA building. The photograph was taken in 2015 during the annual Civil Engineering Bridge Challenge event.
This report presents the simplified seismic assessment of a case study reinforced concrete (RC) building following the newly developed and refined NZSEE/MBIE guidelines on seismic assessment (NZSEE/MBIE, semi-final draft 26 October 2016). After an overview of the step-by-step ‘diagnostic’ process, including an holistic and qualitative description of the expected vulnerabilities and of the assessment strategy/methodology, focus is given, whilst not limited, to the implementation of a Detailed Seismic Assessment (DSA) (NZSEE/MBIE, 2016c). The DSA is intended to provide a more reliable and consistent outcome than what can be provided by an initial seismic assessment (ISA). In fact, while the Initial Seismic Assessment (ISA), of which the Initial Evaluation Procedure is only a part of, is the more natural and still recommended first step in the overall assessment process, it is mostly intended to be a coarse evaluation involving as few resources as reasonably possible. It is thus expected that an ISA will be followed by a Detailed Seismic Assessment (DSA) not only where the threshold of 33%NBS is not achieved but also where important decisions are intended that are reliant on the seismic status of the building. The use of %NBS (% New Building Standard) as a capacity/demand ratio to describe the result of the seismic assessment at all levels of assessment procedure (ISA through to DSA) is deliberate by the NZSEE/MBIE guidelines (Part A) (NZSEE/MBIE 2016a). The rating for the building needs only be based on the lowest level of assessment that is warranted for the particular circumstances. Discussion on how the %NBS rating is to be determined can be found in Section A3.3 (NZSEE/MBIE 2016a), and, more specifically, in Part B for the ISA (NZSEE/MBIE 2016b) and Part C for the DSA (NZSEE/MBIE 2016c). As per other international approaches, the DSA can be based on several analysis procedures to assess the structural behaviour (linear, nonlinear, static or dynamic, force or displacement-based). The significantly revamped NZSEE 2016 Seismic Assessment Guidelines strongly recommend the use of an analytical (basically ‘by hand’) method, referred to the Simple Lateral Mechanism Analysis (SLaMA) as a first phase of any other numerically-based analysis method. Significant effort has thus been dedicated to provide within the NZSEE 2016 guidelines (NZSEE/MBIE 2016c) a step-by-step description of the procedure, either in general terms (Chapter 2) or with specific reference to Reinforced Concrete Buildings (Chapter 5). More specifically, extract from the guidelines, NZSEE “recommend using the Simple Lateral Mechanism Analysis (SLaMA) procedure as a first step in any assessment. While SLaMA is essentially an analysis technique, it enables assessors to investigate (and present in a simple form) the potential contribution and interaction of a number of structural elements and their likely effect on the building’s global capacity. In some cases, the results of a SLaMA will only be indicative. However, it is expected that its use should help assessors achieve a more reliable outcome than if they only carried out a detailed analysis, especially if that analysis is limited to the elastic range For complex structural systems, a 3D dynamic analysis may be necessary to supplement the simplified nonlinear Simple Lateral Mechanism Analysis (SLaMA).” This report presents the development of a full design example for the the implementation of the SLaMA method on a case study buildings and a validation/comparison with a non-linear static (pushover) analysis. The step-by-step-procedure, summarized in Figure 1, will be herein demonstrated from a component level (beams, columns, wall elements) to a subassembly level (hierarchy of strength in a beam-column joint) and to a system level (frame, C-Wall) assuming initially a 2D behaviour of the key structural system, and then incorporating a by-hand 3D behaviour (torsional effects).
A video of the seminar "Seismic Assessment of Existing Masonry Buildings" presented by Professor Sergio Lagomarsino from the University of Genoa on 27 February 2014 at the University of Canterbury. The seminar demonstrated recent European research into modelling strategies, target performances and acceptance criteria for seismic assessment of masonry buildings.