Search

found 780 results

Images for Seismicity; more images...

Videos, UC QuakeStudies

A video of a presentation by Hugh Cowan, General Manager of Reinsurance, Research and Education at EQC, during a panel at the 2016 Seismics in the City Conference. The panel has three themes:A City on the Move: Collaboration and Regeneration: "'Christchurch is now moving rapidly from the recovery phase into a regeneration stage with Central and Local Government working with the wider community, including the business community to ensure we get optimal outcomes for greater Christchurch' (CECC)."Looking Back: Remembering and Learning: "What are the milestones? What are the millstones? What have we learnt? What have we applied?"Looking Forward: Visioning and Building: "What do we aspire to? What are the roadblocks? What is the way forward?"

Videos, UC QuakeStudies

A video of a presentation by Peter Townsend, CEO of the Canterbury Employers' Chamber of Commerce, during a panel at the 2016 Seismics in the City Conference. The panel has three themes:A City on the Move: Collaboration and Regeneration: "'Christchurch is now moving rapidly from the recovery phase into a regeneration stage with Central and Local Government working with the wider community, including the business community to ensure we get optimal outcomes for greater Christchurch' (CECC)."Looking Back: Remembering and Learning: "What are the milestones? What are the millstones? What have we learnt? What have we applied?"Looking Forward: Visioning and Building: "What do we aspire to? What are the roadblocks? What is the way forward?"

Videos, UC QuakeStudies

A video of a presentation by Hon. Lianne Dalziel, Mayor of Christchurch, during a panel at the 2016 Seismics in the City Conference. The panel has three themes:A City on the Move: Collaboration and Regeneration: "'Christchurch is now moving rapidly from the recovery phase into a regeneration stage with Central and Local Government working with the wider community, including the business community to ensure we get optimal outcomes for greater Christchurch' (CECC)."Looking Back: Remembering and Learning: "What are the milestones? What are the millstones? What have we learnt? What have we applied?"Looking Forward: Visioning and Building: "What do we aspire to? What are the roadblocks? What is the way forward?"

Videos, UC QuakeStudies

A video of a presentation by Hon. Nicky Wagner, Associate Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery, during a panel at the 2016 Seismics in the City Conference. The panel has three themes:A City on the Move: Collaboration and Regeneration: "'Christchurch is now moving rapidly from the recovery phase into a regeneration stage with Central and Local Government working with the wider community, including the business community to ensure we get optimal outcomes for greater Christchurch' (CECC)."Looking Back: Remembering and Learning: "What are the milestones? What are the millstones? What have we learnt? What have we applied?"Looking Forward: Visioning and Building: "What do we aspire to? What are the roadblocks? What is the way forward?"

Videos, UC QuakeStudies

A video of an address by Alex Cutler, CEO of the New Zealand Green Building Council, at the 2014 Seismics and the City forum. This talk was part of the Building Communities section and explored the extent to which the new city core will be a 'government-flavoured doughnut', the key issues with this concept, and the possible solutions.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

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.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

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.

Audio, Radio New Zealand

A new office building in central Christchurch has multiple flaws in its earthquake design that the city council was warned about almost two years ago. Construction of the seven-storey building above the busy shopping precinct at 230 High Street, continued even after those warnings in December 2017. Three leading engineering firms have found critical faults - the latest are detailed in a Government-ordered report that's been leaked to RNZ. Phil Pennington joins Corin Dann with the details.

Videos, UC QuakeStudies

A video of André Lovatt, Chair of Regenerate Christchurch, Hugh Cowan, General Manager of Reinsurance, Research and Education at EQC, and developer Antony Gough responding to questions from the floor during a panel at the 2016 Seismics in the City Conference. The panel has three themes:A City on the Move: Collaboration and Regeneration: "'Christchurch is now moving rapidly from the recovery phase into a regeneration stage with Central and Local Government working with the wider community, including the business community to ensure we get optimal outcomes for greater Christchurch' (CECC)."Looking Back: Remembering and Learning: "What are the milestones? What are the millstones? What have we learnt? What have we applied?"Looking Forward: Visioning and Building: "What do we aspire to? What are the roadblocks? What is the way forward?"

Videos, UC QuakeStudies

A video of Hon. Nicky Wagner, Associate Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery, Hon. Lianne Dalziel, Mayor of Christchurch, and Peter Townsend, CEO of the Canterbury Employers' Chamber of Commerce, responding to questions from the floor during a panel at the 2016 Seismics in the City Conference. The panel has three themes:A City on the Move: Collaboration and Regeneration: "'Christchurch is now moving rapidly from the recovery phase into a regeneration stage with Central and Local Government working with the wider community, including the business community to ensure we get optimal outcomes for greater Christchurch' (CECC)."Looking Back: Remembering and Learning: "What are the milestones? What are the millstones? What have we learnt? What have we applied?"Looking Forward: Visioning and Building: "What do we aspire to? What are the roadblocks? What is the way forward?"

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

There is a relationship between inelastic deformation and energy dissipation in structures that are subjected to earthquake ground motions. Thus, if seismic energy dissipation can be achieved by means of a separate non-load bearing supplementary damping system, the load bearing structure can remain elastic with continuing serviceability following the design level earthquake. This research was carried out to investigate the advantages of using added damping in structures. The control system consists of passive friction dampers called ring spring dampers installed in the ground floor of the structure using a tendon to transmit the forces to the other parts of the structure. The ring springs dampers are friction devices consisting of inner and outer ring elements assembled to form a spring stack. External load applied to the spring produces sliding action across mating ring interfaces. The damping forces generated by the dampers and transferred in the supplemental system to the structure by the tendon and horizontal links oppose the internal loads. A four storey-two bay steel frame structure was used in the study. Experimental and analytical studies to investigate the effectiveness of a supplemental control system are presented. The model was subjected to a series of earthquake simulations on the shaking table in the Structural Laboratory of the Civil Engineering Department, at the University of Canterbury. The earthquake simulation tests have been performed on the structure both with and without the supplemental control system. The earthquake simulations were a series of gradually increasing intensity replications of two commonly used earthquake records. This thesis includes detailed description of the structural model, the supplemental control system, the ring springs dampers and the data obtained during the testing. Analyses were then carried out on a twelve storey framed structure to investigate the possible tendon arrangements and the size and type of dampers required to control the response of a real building. Guidelines for determining the appropriateness of including a supplemental damping system have been investigated. The main features of the supplemental control system adopted in this research are: • It is a passive control system with extreme reliability and having no dependence on external power sources to effect the control action. These power sources may not be available during a major earthquake. • Ring springs are steel friction devices capable of absorbing large amounts of input energy. No liquid leakage can occur and minimal maintenance is required for the ring spring dampers. • With a damper-tendon system, the distribution of the dampers throughout the structure is not so critical. Only one or two dampers are used to produce the damping forces needed, and forces are then transferred to the rest of the building by the tendon system. • It is a relatively inexpensive control system with a long useful life.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

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.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Seismic behaviour of typical unreinforced masonry (URM) brick houses, that were common in early last century in New Zealand and still common in many developing countries, is experimentally investigated at University of Canterbury, New Zealand in this research. A one halfscale model URM house is constructed and tested under earthquake ground motions on a shaking table. The model structure with aspect ratio of 1.5:1 in plan was initially tested in the longitudinal direction for several earthquakes with peak ground acceleration (PGA) up to 0.5g. Toppling of end gables (above the eaves line) and minor to moderate cracking around window and door piers was observed in this phase. The structure was then rotated 90º and tested in the transverse (short) direction for ground motions with PGA up to 0.8g. Partial out-of-plane failure of the face loaded walls in the second storey and global rocking of the model was observed in this phase. A finite element analysis and a mechanism analysis are conducted to assess the dynamic properties and lateral strength of the model house. Seismic fragility function of URM houses is developed based on the experimental results. Damping at different phases of the response is estimated using an amplitude dependent equivalent viscous damping model. Financial risk of similar URM houses is then estimated in term of expected annual loss (EAL) following a probabilistic financial risk assessment framework. Risks posed by different levels of damage and by earthquakes of different frequencies are then examined.

Research papers, Victoria University of Wellington

The Mѡ=7.1 Darfield (Canterbury) earthquake struck on 4 September 2010, approximately 45 km west of Christchurch, New Zealand. It revealed a previously unknown fault (the Greendale fault) and caused billions of dollars of damage due to high peak ground velocities and extensive liquefaction. It also triggered the Mw=6.3 Christchurch earthquake on 22 February 2011, which caused further damage and the loss of 185 lives. The objective of this research was to determine the relationship between stress and seismic properties in a seismically active region using manually-picked P and S wave arrival times from the aftershock sequence between 8 September 2010-13 January 2011 to estimate shear-wave splitting (SWS) parameters, VP =VS-ratios, anisotropy (delay-time tomography), focal mechanisms, and tectonic stress on the Canterbury plains. The maximum horizontal stress direction was highly consistent in the plains, with an average value of SHmax=116 18 . However, the estimates showed variation in SHmax near the fault, with one estimate rotating by as much as 30° counter-clockwise. This suggests heterogeneity of stress at the fault, though the cause remains unclear. Orientations of the principal stresses predominantly indicate a strike-slip regime, but there are possible thrust regimes to the west and north/east of the fault. The SWS fast directions (ø) on the plains show alignment with SHmax at the majority of stations, indicating stress controlled anisotropy. However, structural effects appear more dominant in the neighbouring regions of the Southern Alps and Banks Peninsula.