The Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre's "Community Earthquake Update" bulletin, published on Friday 12 August 2011.
A news item titled, "Parks and Reserves Update September 2011", published on the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre's website on Friday, 23 September 2011.
The "Lyttelton Harbour Review" newsletter for 24 June 2013, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 1 February 2013
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 2 May 2014
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 6 July 2012
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 2 November 2012
This study evaluated and recommended a methodology for undertaking an earthquake risk assessment for Christchurch, incorporating hazard analysis, inventory collection, damage modelling and loss estimation. See Object Overview for background and usage information.
Museums around the world are often affected by major catastrophes, and yet planning for these disasters is an often neglected aspect of museum practice. New Zealand is not immune from these events, as can be seen in the recent series of serious earthquakes in Christchurch in 2010 and 2011. This dissertation considers how prepared the New Zealand museum sector is to handle unexpected events that negatively affect its buildings, staff, operations and treasured collections. The central research question was: What is the overall state of emergency planning in the New Zealand museum sector? There was a significant gap in the literature, especially in the local context, as there has been only one other comparable study conducted in Britain, and nothing locally. This dissertation makes a valuable contribution to the field of museum studies by drawing on theory from relevant areas such as crises management literature and by conducting original empirical research on a topic which has received little attention hitherto. The research employed a number of methods, including a review of background secondary sources, a survey and interviews. After contextualising the study with a number of local examples, Ian online survey was then developed an which enabled precise understanding of the nature of current museum practices and policies around emergency planning. Following this I conducted several interviews with museum professionals from a variety of institutional backgrounds which explored their thoughts and feelings behind the existing practices within the industry. The findings of the research were significant and somewhat alarming: almost 40% of the museum and galleries in New Zealand do not have any emergency plan at all, and only 11% have what they considered ‘complete’ plans. The research revealed a clear picture of the current width and depth of planning, as well as practices around updating the plans and training related to them. Within the industry there is awareness that planning for emergencies is important, but museum staff typically lack the knowledge and guidance needed to conduct effective emergency planning. As a result of the analysis, several practical suggestions are presented aimed at improving emergency planning practices in New Zealand museums. However this study has implications for museum studies and for current museum practice everywhere, as many of the recommendations for resolving the current obstacles and problems are applicable anywhere in the world, suggesting that New Zealand museums could become leaders in this important area.
Timber-based hybrid structures provide a prospective solution for utilizing environmentally friendly timber material in the construction of mid-rise or high-rise structures. This study mainly focuses on structural damage evaluation for a type of timber-steel hybrid structures, which incorporate prefabricated light wood frame shear walls into steel moment-resisting frames (SMRFs). The structural damage of such a hybrid structure was evaluated through shake table tests on a four-story large-scale timber-steel hybrid structure. Four ground motion records (i.e., Wenchuan earthquake, Canterbury earthquake, El-Centro earthquake, and Kobe earthquake) were chosen for the tests, with the consideration of three different probability levels (i.e., minor, moderate and major earthquakes) for each record. During the shake table tests, the hybrid structure performed quite well with visual damage only to wood shear walls. No visual damage in SMRF and the frame-to-wall connections was observed. The correlation of visual damage to seismic intensity, modal-based damage index and inter-story drift was discussed. The reported work provided a basis of knowledge for performance-based seismic design (PBSD) for such timber-based hybrid structures.
USAR codes and a yellow sticker can be seen on the doors of a damaged building. The yellow sticker was part of a building assessment system used following the February earthquake and indicates that this building has limited access and needs further evaluation.
An entry from Ruth Gardner's blog for 22 March 2012 entitled, "Lamenting the Loss".
A building on Victoria Street, housing the Chinwag Eathai restaurant, that has been give a yellow placard. This was a building assessment system used following the February earthquake indicating that there should be limited access and that the building needs further evaluation.
The "Lyttelton Review" newsletter for 5 December 2011, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
The "Lyttelton Harbour Review" newsletter for 5 August 2013, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
The "Lyttelton Review" newsletter for 19 March 2012, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 20 December 2013
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 7 March 2014
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 31 January 2014
The "Lyttelton Harbour Review" newsletter for 17 February 2013, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 14 September 2012
Transcript of Mark Darbyshire's earthquake story, captured by the UC QuakeBox project.
Transcript of Stephen Bourke's earthquake story, captured by the UC QuakeBox project.
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 21 June 2013
The Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre's "Community Earthquake Update" bulletin, published on Friday 23 September 2011.
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 6 June 2014
The "Lyttelton Review" newsletter for 29 October 2012, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
In practice, several competing liquefaction evaluation procedures (LEPs) are used to compute factors of safety against soil liquefaction, often for use within a liquefaction potential index (LPI) framework to assess liquefaction hazard. At present, the influence of the selected LEP on the accuracy of LPI hazard assessment is unknown, and the need for LEP-specific calibrations of the LPI hazard scale has never been thoroughly investigated. Therefore, the aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of three CPT-based LEPs from the literature, operating within the LPI framework, for predicting the severity of liquefaction manifestation. Utilising more than 7000 liquefaction case studies from the 2010–2011 Canterbury (NZ) earthquake sequence, this study found that: (a) the relationship between liquefaction manifestation severity and computed LPI values is LEP-specific; (b) using a calibrated, LEP-specific hazard scale, the performance of the LPI models is essentially equivalent; and (c) the existing LPI framework has inherent limitations, resulting in inconsistent severity predictions against field observations for certain soil profiles, regardless of which LEP is used. It is unlikely that revisions of the LEPs will completely resolve these erroneous assessments. Rather, a revised index which more adequately accounts for the mechanics of liquefaction manifestation is needed.
Designing a structure for higher- than-code seismic performance can result in significant economic and environmental benefits. This higher performance can be achieved using the principles of Performance-Based Design, in which engineers design structures to minimize the probabilistic lifecycle seismic impacts on a building. Although the concept of Performance-Based Design is not particularly new, the initial capital costs associated with designing structures for higher performance have historically hindered the widespread adoption of performance-based design practices. To overcome this roadblock, this research is focused on providing policy makers and stakeholders with evidence-based environmental incentives for designing structures in New Zealand for higher seismic performance. In the first phase of the research, the environmental impacts of demolitions in Christchurch following the Canterbury Earthquakes were quantified to demonstrate the environmental consequences of demolitions following seismic events. That is the focus here. A building data set consisting of 142 concrete buildings that were demolished following the earthquake was used to quantify the environmental impacts of the demolitions in terms of the embodied carbon and energy in the building materials. A reduced set of buildings was used to develop a material takeoff model to estimate material quantities in the entire building set, and a lifecycle assessment tool was used to calculate the embodied carbon and energy in the materials. The results revealed staggering impacts in terms of the embodied carbon and energy in the materials in the demolished buildings. Ongoing work is focused developing an environmental impact framework that incorporates all the complex factors (e.g. construction methodologies, repair methodologies (if applicable), demolition methodologies (if applicable), and waste management) that contribute to the environmental impacts of building repair and demolition following earthquakes.
This paper describes the pounding damage sustained by buildings in the February 2011 Christchurch earthquake. Approximately 6% of buildings in Christchurch CBD were observed to have suffered some form of serious pounding damage. Typical and exceptional examples of building pounding damage are presented and discussed. Almost all building pounding damage occurred in unreinforced masonry buildings, highlighting their vulnerability to this phenomenon. Modern buildings were found to be vulnerable to pounding damage where overly stiff and strong ‘flashing’ components were installed in existing building separations. Soil variability is identified as a key aspect that amplifies the relative movement of buildings, and hence increases the likelihood of pounding damage. Building pounding damage is compared to the predicted critical pounding weaknesses that have been identified in previous analytical research.