Members of the public in Cranmer Square, the meeting point for many businesses after the 22 February 2011 earthquake. Two people at the front of the photo are wearing dressing gowns and wheeling luggage.
Cracking around the lamp post at the north end of Cranmer Square. In the background, crowds of people are standing around the square, where they evacuated to after the 22 February 2011 earthquake.
People gathering in the Botanic Gardens after the 22 February 2011 earthquake. For many nearby businesses and organisations, the gardens were the meeting point during an emergency. To the right, the Peacock Fountain can just be seen with scaffolding around it.
This poster provides a summary of the development of a 3D shallow (z<40m) shear wave velocity (Vs) model for the urban Christchurch, New Zealand region. The model is based on a recently developed Christchurch-specific empirical correlation between Vs and cone penetration test (CPT) data (McGann et al. 2014a,b) and the large high-density database of CPT logs in the greater Christchurch urban area (> 15,000 logs as of 01/01/2014). In particular, the 3D model provides shear wave velocities for the surficial Springston Formation, Christchurch Formation, and Riccarton gravel layers which generally comprise the upper 40m in the Christchurch urban area. Point-estimates are provided on a 200m-by- 200m grid from which interpolation to other locations can be performed. This model has applications for future site characterization and numerical modeling efforts via maps of timeaveraged Vs over specific depths (e.g. Vs30, Vs10) and via the identification of typical Vs profiles for different regions and soil behaviour types within Christchurch. In addition, the Vs model can be used to constrain the near-surface velocities for the 3D seismic velocity model of the Canterbury basin (Lee et al. 2014) currently being developed for the purpose of broadband ground motion simulation.
BRENDAN HORAN to the Minister for State Owned Enterprises: Is he satisfied with all aspects of the KiwiRail Turnaround Plan? GRANT ROBERTSON to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement in relation to Hon John Banks, “The law may be very loose as I’ve said before, and the law may well need reforming and that’s something we’ll consider in due course but I’m comfortable with what he’s done”? JOHN HAYES to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the international economic situation and its impact on New Zealand? Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement regarding migration to Australia “What’s the point of standing in the airport crying about it?”; if so, are the numbers of people leaving New Zealand from the regions being replaced by people moving into the regions from elsewhere in New Zealand or overseas? Hon TARIANA TURIA to the Minister of Finance: Did the Minister of Māori Affairs discuss with him how the Crown would meet its Treaty obligation with respect to the Mixed Ownership Model? EUGENIE SAGE to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: What advice, if any, has he received on the potential sale of Christchurch City Council assets to help pay for the rebuild of Christchurch? JONATHAN YOUNG to the Minister of Energy and Resources: What reports has he received on renewable electricity generation in New Zealand? JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister for Social Development: What was discussed at the three meetings she has had with Australian company Taylor Fry, known for its actuary services to the insurance industry? Dr PAUL HUTCHISON to the Minister of Health: What investments are planned for improving health facilities in Wairoa? Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister for State Owned Enterprises: Does he agree with the Minister of Finance that “The asset sales programme remains on track”? LOUISE UPSTON to the Minister of Labour: What advice has she received regarding the implementation of the new adventure activities regulations? Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister of Housing: What recent reports has he received on housing in the Aranui area of Christchurch?
Since the early 1980s seismic hazard assessment in New Zealand has been based on Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA). The most recent version of the New Zealand National Seismic Hazard Model, a PSHA model, was published by Stirling et al, in 2012. This model follows standard PSHA principals and combines a nation-wide model of active faults with a gridded point-source model based on the earthquake catalogue since 1840. These models are coupled with the ground-motion prediction equation of McVerry et al (2006). Additionally, we have developed a time-dependent clustering-based PSHA model for the Canterbury region (Gerstenberger et al, 2014) in response to the Canterbury earthquake sequence. We are now in the process of revising that national model. In this process we are investigating several of the fundamental assumptions in traditional PSHA and in how we modelled hazard in the past. For this project, we have three main focuses: 1) how do we design an optimal combination of multiple sources of information to produce the best forecast of earthquake rates in the next 50 years: can we improve upon a simple hybrid of fault sources and background sources, and can we better handle the uncertainties in the data and models (e.g., fault segmentation, frequency-magnitude distributions, time-dependence & clustering, low strain-rate areas, and subduction zone modelling)? 2) developing revised and new ground-motion predictions models including better capturing of epistemic uncertainty – a key focus in this work is developing a new strong ground motion catalogue for model development; and 3) how can we best quantify if changes we have made in our modelling are truly improvements? Throughout this process we are working toward incorporating numerical modelling results from physics based synthetic seismicity and ground-motion models.