
Work to restore one of Christchurch's most recognisable heritage buildings can now begin with the help of a grant from the Earthquake Appeal Trust.
The progressive damage and subsequent demolition of unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings arising from the Canterbury earthquake sequence is reported. A dataset was compiled of all URM buildings located within the Christchurch CBD, including information on location, building characteristics, and damage levels after each major earthquake in this sequence. A general description of the overall damage and the hazard to both building occupants and to nearby pedestrians due to debris falling from URM buildings is presented with several case study buildings used to describe the accumulation of damage over the earthquake sequence. The benefit of seismic improvement techniques that had been installed to URM buildings is shown by the reduced damage ratios reported for increased levels of retrofit. Demolition statistics for URM buildings in the Christchurch CBD are also reported and discussed. VoR - Version of Record
“To settle what seems to be a somewhat vexed question, a representative of the Lyttelton Times yesterday made inquiries among a number of the Pilgrims with regard to the authenticity, or otherwise,…
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.
A sight becoming more common in post-earthquake Christchurch - lifting earthquake-affected buildings to allow their foundations to be replaced and or completely replaced.
Page 3 of Section A of the Christchurch Press, published on Monday 14 July 2014.
Page 4 of Section A of the Christchurch Press, published on Saturday 22 February 2014.
Demolition underway on the old Government Life building on a walk around the city September 7, 2014 Christchurch New Zealand.
Following the devastation of the Canterbury earthquake sequence a unique opportunity exists to rebuild and restructure the city of Christchurch, ensuring that its infrastructure is constructed better than before and is innovative. By installing an integrated grid of modern sensor technologies into concrete structures during the rebuild of the Christchurch CBD, the aim is to develop a network of self-monitored ‘digital buildings’. A diverse range of data will be recorded, potentially including parameters such as concrete stresses, strains, thermal deformations, acoustics and the monitoring of corrosion of reinforcement bars. This procedure will allow an on-going complete assessment of the structure’s performance and service life, both before and after seismic activity. The data generated from the embedded and surface mounted sensors will be analysed to allow an innovative and real-time health monitoring solution where structural integrity is continuously known. This indication of building performance will allow the structure to alert owners, engineers and asset managers of developing problems prior to failure thresholds being reached. A range of potential sensor technologies for monitoring the performance of existing and newly constructed concrete buildings is discussed. A description of monitoring work conducted on existing buildings during the July 2013 Cook Strait earthquake sequence is included, along with details of current work that investigates the performance of sensing technologies for detecting crack formation in concrete specimens. The potential market for managing the real-time health of installed infrastructure is huge. Civil structures all over the world require regular visual inspections in order to determine their structural integrity. The information recorded during the Christchurch rebuild will generate crucial data sets that will be beneficial in understanding the behaviour of concrete over the complete life cycle of the structure, from construction through to operation and building repairs until the time of failure. VoR - Version of Record
Page 23 of Section A of the Christchurch Press, published on Saturday 25 October 2014.
Page 3 of Section A of the Christchurch Press, published on Monday 11 August 2014.
Page 3 of Section C of the Christchurch Press, published on Saturday 25 January 2014.
Page 7 of Section A of the Christchurch Press, published on Friday 21 November 2014.
Page 5 of Section A of the Christchurch Press, published on Friday 5 September 2014.
Page 1 of Section A of the Christchurch Press, published on Thursday 18 September 2014.
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.
The Catholic Cathedral is classified as a category 1 listed heritage building constructed largely of unreinforced stone masonry, and was significantly damaged in the recent Canterbury earthquakes of 2010 and 2011. In the 2010 event the building presented slight to moderta damage, meanwhile in the 2011 one experienced ground shaking in excess of its capacity leading to block failures and partial collapse of parts of the building, which left the building standing but still posing a significant hazard. In this paper we discuss the approach to develop the earthquake analysis of the building by 3D numerical simulations, and the results are compared/calibrated with the observed damage of the 2010 earthquake. Very accurate records were obtained during both earthquakes due to a record station located least than 80 m of distance from the building and used in the simulations. Moreover it is included in the model the soil structure interaction because it was observed that the ground and foundation played an important role on the seismic behavior of the structure. A very good agreement was found between the real observed damage and the nonlinear dynamic simulations described trough inelastic deformation (cracking) and building´s performance.
Page 5 of Section A of the Christchurch Press, published on Monday 31 March 2014.
Page 3 of Section A of the Christchurch Press, published on Monday 14 April 2014.
Page 3 of Section A of the Christchurch Press, published on Thursday 28 August 2014.
Page 1 of Section A of the Christchurch Press, published on Tuesday 15 July 2014.
Page 4 of Section A of the Christchurch Press, published on Friday 7 November 2014.
A video of an address by Scott Noyes, Energy Management Specialist for Schneider Electric NZ, at the 2014 Seismics and the City forum. This talk was part of the Building Connectivity section, and focused on collaborative and innovative initiatives relevant to the rebuild of Greater Christchurch.
Page 1 of Section A of the Christchurch Press, published on Monday 31 March 2014.
The paper presents preliminary findings from comprehensive research studies on the liquefaction-induced damage to buildings and infrastructure in Christchurch during the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquakes. It identifies key factors and mechanisms of damage to road bridges, shallow foundations of CBD buildings and buried pipelines, and highlights the implications of the findings for the seismic analysis and design of these structures.
Page 1 of Section A of the Christchurch Press, published on Tuesday 25 February 2014.
Page 1 of Section C of the Christchurch Press, published on Saturday 1 March 2014.
Page 2 of Section A of the Christchurch Press, published on Wednesday 12 March 2014.
Scavenger Hunt 101 - SH 8 (abandoned building or ruin) The ruins/remains of what was the third highest building in Christchurch, pre earthquakes, the Price Waterhouse Coopers building in Armagh Street. At 76.3 metres ( 21 floors) the demolition has left the basement (now flooded) and these supports. Just one of many photos from Christchurch ...
External stairs on the Forsyth Barr building in Christchurch. Portions of the internal stairwell collapsed during the earthquake of February 22nd 2011, necessitating use of various means of getting people out of the building. Was the fourth highest building in the city pre earthquakes, but it's future is uncertain. Was for sale "as is, where ...