Earthquake prone buildings in Christchurch are to be strengthened to new, higher standards. The new code was passed at an extraordinary council meeting today.
The Earthquake Commission says it's had to dismiss assessors who've not met its standards when dealing with Canterbury claimants.
Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "A steady stream of customers queue for Christchurch Press' earthquake book".
Christchurch Mayor Bob Parker, New standards for earthquake prone buildings in Christchurch, Some schools reopen, while others face permanent closure, PM says Defence Force's role to check CV, Plans to burn the Koran on hold not cancelled, Chances of magnitude aftershock hitting rapidly decreasing.
Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "Pupils at St James School with their coin trail, created to raise money for St James Catholic School in Christchurch affected by the earthquake".
Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "Pupils at St James School with their coin trail, created to raise money for St James Catholic School in Christchurch affected by the earthquake".
Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "Christchurch CBD was 'yarn-bombed' during the weekend using yarn and fabric pieces to brighten public areas and earthquake-affected spaces. Hope sign at Hereford and Manchester Streets".
Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "Civil Defence Centre has now moved from the Christchurch Art Gallery to the new civil offices in Hereford Street. Invercargill Mayor Tim Shadbolt has been working on the phones for the last two days".
This paper presents site-specific and spatially-distributed ground-motion intensity estimates which have been utilized in the aftermath of the 2010-2011 Canterbury, New Zealand earthquakes. The methodology underpinning the ground motion intensity estimation makes use of both prediction models for ground motion intensity and its within-event spatial correlation. A key benefit of the methodology is that the estimated ground motion intensity at a given location is not a single value but a distribution of values. The distribution is comprised of both a mean and standard deviation, with the standard deviation being a function of the distance to nearby observations at strong motion stations. The methodology is illustrated for two applications. Firstly, maps of conditional peak ground acceleration (PGA) have been developed for the major events in the Canterbury earthquake sequence, which among other things, have been utilized for assessing liquefaction triggering susceptibility of land in residential areas. Secondly, the conditional distribution of response spectral ordinates is obtained at the location of the Canterbury Television building (CTV), which catastrophically collapsed in the 22 February 2011 earthquake. The conditional response spectra provide insight for the selection of ground motion records for use in forensic seismic response analyses of important structures at locations where direct recordings are absent.
Research Report No.2010-03Ground motion prediction equations (GMPEs) for geometric-mean pseudo-spectral acceleration amplitudes from New Zealand (NZ) earthquakes are developed. A database of 2437 three-component ground motion records is developed by applying stringent quality criteria to the historically recorded events in NZ. Despite the large number of records, the database is deficient in empirical records from large magnitude events recorded at close distances to the fault rupture plane. As a result, the basis for the NZ-specific GMPE development is to examine the applicability of foreign GMPEs for similar tectonic regions and then modify the most applicable GMPEs based on both theoretical and statistically significant empirically-driven arguments. For active shallow crustal events, five different GMPEs are considered. It was found that the McVerry et al. (2006) model, which is the current model upon which seismic design guidelines and site-specific seismic hazard analyses in NZ are based, provided the worst fit to the NZ database, and that the Chiou et al. (2010) (C10) modification of the Chiou and Youngs (2008) model was the most applicable. Discrepancies between the C10 model and the NZ database that were empirically identified and theoretically justified were used to modify the C10 model for: (i) small magnitude scaling; (ii) scaling of short period ground motion from normal faulting events in volcanic crust; (iii) scaling of ground motions on very hard rock sites; (iv) anelastic attenuation in the NZ crust; and (v) consideration of the increased anelastic attenuation in the Taupo Volcanic Zone (TVZ). For subduction slab events, initially three models were considered. It was found that all of the models had some significant biases with respect to applicability for NZ. The Zhao et al. (2006) (Z06) model was selected because of the rigorous database upon which it was developed and modified by: (i) NZ-specific scaling at small magnitudes; (ii) path scaling at large distances; (iii) consideration of the increased TVZ attenuation; and (iv) revision of the standard deviation model. Based on these modifications the developed model showed no bias of the inter- and intra-event residuals as a function of various predictor variables. The standard deviation of the residuals using the revised standard deviation model also indicated that the model has an adequate precision. Three GMPEs were considered for subduction interface events. The Zhao et al. (2006) (Z06) model was the best performing model with only bias exhibited in the site response model, and possible over-prediction of large magnitude events. The Z06 interface model was modified to account for site response and magnitude scaling using the same functional forms as those of the developed active shallow crustal and subduction slab models. The developed model showed no bias of the inter- and intra-event residuals as a function of various predictor variables. The developed GMPEs include specific features as evident in the NZ database; consistent scaling for parameters not well constrained by the NZ database; and pseudo-spectral amplitudes for vibration periods from 0.01 to 10 seconds. Hence, these models represent a significant advance in the state-of-the art for empirical ground motion prediction in NZ.
Research Report: 2010-02The objective in writing this report is to provide a guide to structural engineers on how to assess the potential seismic performance of existing hollow-core floors in buildings and the steps involved in the design of new floors. Hollow-core units in New Zealand do not contain stirrups within the precast concrete section. This is due to the way that they are manufactured. The only reinforcement in the great majority of hollow-core units consists of pretensioned strands that are located close to the soffit. A consequence of this is that hollow-core units have a number of potential brittle failure modes that can occur when adverse structural actions are induced in the units. These adverse actions can be induced in a major earthquake due to the relative vertical, horizontal and rotational displacements that occur between hollow-core units and adjacent structural elements, such as beams or structural walls. A number of large scale structural tests backed up by analytical research has shown that extensive interaction occurs between floors containing prestressed precast units and other structural elements, such as walls and beams. The constraint that prestressed units in a floor can apply to adjacent beams can result in an increase in strength of the beams to a considerably greater strength than that indicated in editions of the New Zealand Structural Concrete Standard published prior to 2006. The extent of this increase is such that it could in some cases result in the development of a non-ductile failure mechanism instead of the ductile failure mechanism assumed in the design. Prestressed floor units tie the floor bays together leaving a weak section where the floor joins to supporting structural elements. The restraint provided by the prestress restricts the opening of cracks within the bay. In the event of an earthquake this restraint can result in wide cracks developing at some of the boundaries to floor bays. These cracks may have a significant influence on the performance of the floor when it acts as a diaphragm to transfer seismic forces to the lateral force resisting structural elements in the building. The report contains details of; 1. The different failure modes, which may be induced in hollow-core floors, and the failure modes that may develop in a buildings due to the presence of hollow-core units in the floors; 2. Criteria that may be used to assess the magnitude of the design earthquake which may be safely resisted by a hollow-core floor in a building; 3. Details of how construction practice related to the use of hollow-core floors in New Zealand has changed over the last five decades. This highlights particular aspects that need to be considered in carrying out an assessment of existing hollow-core floors; 4. Information on how a new hollow-core floor may be designed to be consistent with the Earthquake Actions Standard, NZS1170.5: 2004 and the Structural Concrete Standard, NZS3101: 2006 (plus Amendment 2); 5. A review of the research findings relevant to the behaviour of New Zealand hollow-core floors under earthquake conditions. Research that was used to develop the assessment and design criteria is described together with details of how the different criteria were developed from this work.
1. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Trade: Does he still consider that the United States will benefit from being part of the Trans-Pacific Partnership; if so, how? 2. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: Does he believe that all persons who have served as Ministers in his Government have met the requirement of the Cabinet Manual to behave in a way that upholds, and is seen to uphold, the highest ethical standards in their ministerial capacity, their political capacity and their personal capacity; if so, why? 3. CRAIG FOSS to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the Government's financial position? 4. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister of Tourism: How many full-time permanent jobs has his cycleway project created? 5. JONATHAN YOUNG to the Minister for Communications and Information Technology: What progress has been made on the Ultra-fast broadband initiative? 6. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Minister of Education: Which ministers, if any, did she personally consult with on the question of removing the requirement for police checks for employees of limited attendance early childhood centres before she introduced the Education Amendment Bill (No 2)? 7. AARON GILMORE to the Minister of Revenue: What examples can he give of families claiming social assistance for which they are not entitled and what has this Government done to stop this abuse? 8. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: How much lower will the growth forecast be for the year to March 2011 in the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update compared with the Budget 2010 forecast? 9. SHANE ARDERN to the Minister of Agriculture: What recent actions has the Government taken to improve the welfare of pigs in New Zealand? 10. Hon RUTH DYSON to the Minister of Health: Will he act to prevent closure of health services in Taihape? 11. AMY ADAMS to the Minister for Land Information: What steps has Land Information New Zealand taken to help in the rebuilding of Canterbury following the 4 September earthquake? 12. Hon DARREN HUGHES to the Minister of Transport: Which project has the higher benefit cost ratio: the Auckland CBD rail loop or the Puhoi to Wellsford Road of National Significance?
Questions to Ministers 1. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Justice: Is it his view that the justice system should provide rehabilitation and give people the chance to change? 2. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Is he satisfied with progress on the recovery from the Canterbury earthquake so far? 3. DAVID BENNETT to the Minister of Broadcasting: What recent announcements have been made regarding digital switchover? 4. SUE MORONEY to the Minister of Education: What policy initiatives has she developed for early childhood education? 5. AARON GILMORE to the Minister of Civil Defence: What is the update on the Canterbury Civil Defence states of emergency? 6. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: Did the Treasury evaluate the net effect on South Canterbury Finance's position of the February 2010 acquisition of Helicopters (NZ) Ltd and Scales Corporation shares, including the effect of the transaction on the recoverability or impairment of South Canterbury Finance's $75 million loan to its parent company, Southbury Group Ltd? 7. LOUISE UPSTON to the Minister of Energy and Resources: Will Cantabrians whose chimneys have been significantly damaged by the recent earthquake be covered by the Earthquake Commission to replace their old log burners or open fires with new efficient heaters? 8. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Minister of Education: What support will be available in 2011 to schools that have very poor numeracy national standards results in 2010? 9. SANDRA GOUDIE to the Minister of Corrections: What support is the Corrections Department offering to Canterbury community groups and individuals to help with earthquake recovery? 10. DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Does she stand by her statement to the House on 14 September 2010 that the 90-day trial provisions "do not take away rights"? 11. CHESTER BORROWS to the Minister of Housing: What is the Government doing to assist people whose homes are not habitable following the Canterbury earthquake? 12. PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister of Local Government: When he said in the House yesterday that the Auckland Transition Agency "ran a tender to deliver an enterprise resource planning system" was he referring to merely the $14.3 million contract for the implementation of the Enterprise Resource Planning system or was he referring to the full contract of $53.8 million to deliver the Enterprise Resource Planning system? Questions to Members 1. DARIEN FENTON to the Chairperson of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2)?