ENG.UOA.0003.

STEELBUILDINGDAMAGEFROMTHECHRISTCHURCHEARTHQUAKESERIESOF2010and2011
CharlesClifton1,MichelBruneau2,GregMacRae3,RobertoLeon4,andAlistairFussell5
SUMMARY
Thispaperpresentspreliminaryfieldobservationsontheperformanceofselectedsteelstructuresin
Christchurchduringtheearthquakeseriesof2010to2011.Thiscomprises6damagingearthquakes,on
4Septemberand26December2010,February22,June6andtwoonJune13,2011.Mostnotableof
thesewasthe4Septemberevent,atMs7.1andMM7(MMasobservedintheChristchurchCBD)and
mostintensewasthe22FebruaryeventatMs6.3andMM910withintheCBD.Focusisonperformance
ofconcentricallybracedframes,eccentricallybracedframes,momentresistingframes,andindustrial
storageracks.Withafewnotableexceptions,steelstructuresperformedwellduringthisearthquake
series,totheextentthatinelasticdeformationswerelessthanwhatwouldhavebeenexpectedgiven
theseverityoftherecordedstrongmotions.Somehypothesesareformulatedtoexplainthis
satisfactoryperformance.
INTRODUCTION
Widespreadfailuresofunreinforcedmasonrybuildings,thecollapseofafewreinforcedconcrete
buildings,andseveresoilliquefactionacrossthecityofChristchurchcontributedtomaketheFebruary
22,2011,earthquakeatragicnationaldisaster.Thescaleofhumancasualtiesandpropertydamage
fromtheFebruary22eventisinsharpcontrasttothe4Septembereventandotherearthquakesinthe
serieswhichdidnotcauselossoflife.The5kmshallowdepthofthatearthquakeshypocentre,atan
horizontaldistanceofroughly10kmfromthecitysCentralBusinessDistrict(CBD)resultedinground
excitationsbetween3and6timeshigherthanthoserecordedduringthe4Septemberfirsteventinthe
series.Detailedanalysesofthecomprehensivesetofstrongmotiondatarecordedshowsthatthe4
Septembereventwasapproximately0.7timestheUltimateLimitState(ULS)designlevelspecifiedby
theNewZealandseismicloadingstandardovertheperiodrangeof0.5to4seconds,the22February
eventwas1.5to2timestheULSandthelargest13Juneearthquake0.9timesULS.
Whilethedurationofstrongshakingofeachearthquakewasshort(around10to15seconds)the
cumulativedurationofstrongshakingwasover60seconds.Cautionwasexpressedfollowingthe
SeptemberandFebruaryearthquakesthattheshortdurationofstrongshakingineacheventmeant
thatdurationrelateddamagemighthavebeensuppressedcomparedwithwhatonecouldhaveseen
fromasingleearthquakeoflongerduration.However,thiscautionislesswarrantedwhenconsidering
thedurationofthetotalearthquakeseries.Furthermore,therewerereportsofdurationdamagesuch

AssociateProfessorinStructuralEngineering,Dept.ofCivilEngineering,UniversityofAuckland,Auckland,New
Zealand
2
Professor,Dept.ofCivil,Structural,andEnvironmentalEngineering,UniversityatBuffalo,Buffalo,NY,USA
3
AssociateProfessorinStructuralEngineering,Dept.ofCivilandNaturalResourcesEngineering,Universityof
Canterbury,Christchurch,NewZealand
4
Professor,SchoolofCivilandEnvironmentalEngineering,GeorgiaTech,Atlanta,GA,USA
5
SeniorStructuralEngineer,SteelConstructionNewZealand,ManukauCity,NewZealand

ENG.UOA.0003.2

aslowcyclefatiguefractureofreinforcingbarandattachmentdetailstocladdingpanelsfollowingthe
June13events.Metallurgically,theextendedperiodofthisearthquakeseriesislikelytohavebeen
moreseverethanasingleeventofcomparableduration,duetostrainageingofthesteelfromthemost
intense22Februaryearthquakeraisingtheyieldstrengthanddecreasingtheductilityofyielded
componentsbeforethesecondstrongesteventof13June.Forthesereasons,theperformanceofsteel
structuresisinstructive,providingauniqueopportunitytogagetheadequacyofthecurrentNew
Zealandseismicdesignprovisionsforsteelstructures.Thisistheobjectiveofthepaper.
SEISMICDEMAND
ThissectionfocusesontheFebruary11eventdemand,whichwasthemostsevereoftheseries.Figure1
showstheCBDultimatelimitstate(ULS)designspectrumandmaximumconsideredevent(MCE)
spectrumforbuildingsofnormalimportance(basedona2500yearreturnperiod),thelargerhorizontal
componentsfromthefourstrongmotionrecordersintheCBDandtheaverageofthesecomponents.
TheaverageisabovetheMCEforperiodsof0.3secondsandabove,exceptfortheperiodrangeof1.8
to2.7seconds,whereitstillremainssubstantiallyabovetheULSlevel.Thecorrespondingearthquake
excitationsfromoneofthestrongmotionrecordingstationsintheCBD,giveninFigure2,show
substantiallygreateraccelerationsrecordedduringtheaftershockcomparedtothemainshock,andalso
highlighttherelativelyshortdurationofstrongmotion,typicallyontheorderof10seconds.
CENTRAL CITY AND NZS1170 SPECTRA
CLASS D DEEP OR SOFT SOIL
Larger Horizontal Components
1.8

1.6

NZS1170 2500-yr Class D

1.4

NZS1170 500-yr Class D Deep or

Soft Soil

1.2

SA(T) (g)

CHHC_MaxH_FEB
1

CCCC_MaxH_FEB

0.8

0.6

CBGS_MaxH_FEB

0.4

REHS_MaxH_FEB
0.2

GM_Larger_FEB
0
0

0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

Period T(s)

Figure
1:NZS1170.5SpectraandLargestHorizontalDirectionRecordedfromtheCBDStrongMotion
Records
NotestoFigure1:
1. ThedottedlineistheULSdesignspectrumfornormalimportancebuildingsforthesoftsoil
type,ClassD,generallyconsideredintheCBD
2. ThesolidblacklineistheMaximumConsideredEventdesignspectrumfornormal
importancebuildingsforClassDsoilintheCBD

ENG.UOA.0003.3

3. Thesolidredlineistheaveragefromthe5recordingstations

Figure2HorizontalandVerticalSpectrafromtheCanterburyCollegeStrongMotionRecorder
NoteCCCC=ChristchurchCathedralCollege

STEELSTRUCTURESINTHECHRISTCHURCHAREA
ThenumberofsteelstructuresisrelativelylowintheChristchurcharea.Thisisattributedtoboththe
historicalavailabilityofcheapconcreteaggregatesdepositedinriverbedsfloodedbytheseasonal
meltinginthemountainrangeandglacierswestofChristchurch(leavingtheriverbedmostlydryand
accessibletherestoftheyear),andlabourdisputesinthe1970sthatcrippledthesteelindustryinNew
Zealanduntilthe1990s.ConstructionofmodernsteelbuildingsinChristchurchstartedtoreceivedue
considerationfollowingtheendoftheearly1990srecession.Hence,mostofthesteelbuildingsinthe
Christchurchareaarerecentanddesignedtothelatestseismicprovisions.Themarketshareforsteel
framedstructuresnationallyhasincreasedconsiderablyinthelastfewyearstobeclosetothatof
reinforced/precastconcretestructures.Inparticular,afewnotablebuildingshavingsteelframes
openedlessthanthreeyearspriortotheFebruary2011earthquake.Table1providesalistingofthe
multistoreysteelframedbuildingsintheCBDandsomeinthesuburbs.Thereareasimilarnumberof
lowerrisemodernsteelframedbuildingsinthesuburbsthatarenotlistedinthistable.Inaddition,a
numberofprincipallyconcreteframedbuildingsbuiltinthelastdecadeincludepartgravitysteelframes
and/orpartseismicresistingsystems.Mostoftheselaterstructuresarenotlistedinthistable.

ENG.UOA.0003.4

Table1.MultiStoreySteelFramedBuildingsofSignificanceinChristchurchCBDandSuburbs

Noof
Storeys

SeismicResisting
System

FloorSystem

Year
Completed

22

EBFsandMRFs

CompositeDeckandSteelBeams

2010

12

EBFsandMRFs

CompositeDeckandSteelBeams

2009

ShearWallsandCBFs

CompositeDeckandSteelBeams

1985

PerimeterMRFs

CompositeDeckandSteelBeams

1989

MRFs

CompositeDeckandSteelBeams

2010

EBFs

CompositeDeckandSteelBeams

2008

3+Note1

EBFs

Precastcolumnsandhollowcoreunitswithtopping

2003

EBFs

Precastcolumnsandhollowcoreunitswithtopping

2010

Notes:
1. Currently3storeys;withprovisionforadditional1storey
SEISMICPERFORMANCEOFMULTISTORYECCENTRICALLYBRACEDFRAMES
TworecentlydesignedandbuiltmultistorybuildingsintheCBDhadeccentricallybracedframesaspart
oftheirlateralloadresistingsystem.The22storeyPacificResidentialTowerinChristchurchs
CBD,completedin2010,andtheClubTowerbuilding,completedin2009.Bothweregreentagged
followingtheearthquake,indicatingthattheyweresafetooccupybutwouldrequiresomeminor
repairs.
TheClubTowerBuilding(Figure3a)haseccentricallybracedframeslocatedonthreesidesofanelevator
coreeccentricallylocatedclosertothewestsideofthebuilding,andaductilemomentresistingframe
(DMRF)alongtheeastfaade.Thesteelframeissupportedonaconcretepedestalfromthebasement
tothe1ststory,andfoundationsconsistofa1.6mthickraftslab.OnlytheEBFsontheeastsideofthat
corecouldbevisuallyinspectedwithoutremovalofthearchitecturalfinishes(Figure3d),howevermore
detailedinvestigationwasmadeoftheSouthsideactivelinksthroughremovalofceilingtilesto
ascertainthemostsignificantlyyieldedbraces.Figure3cshowsalinkatlevel3ontheSouthsidewhich
hasthegreatestobservedinelasticdemand.Estimatesofthepeakinelasticdemandinthatbracewere
madebytwoindependentmeans.Firstwasthroughassessmentofthevisiblestateofthemetalinthe
yieldedweboftheactivelinkandsecondlythroughestimateofthepeakinterstoreydrift.Bothmethods
gaveapeakshearstrainofbetween3%and4%.Thelinkswerefreeofvisibleresidualdistortions.
Assessmentofdamageaccumulationinthesteelatapeakshearstrainof4%overanestimatedtwo
completecyclesofloadingusingthedamagecriteriondevelopedby(Seal,2009)andchangein

ENG.UOA.0003.5

transitiontemperaturebasedontheworkof(Hyland,2006)showedthattheyieldedactivelinkshave
sufficientlyrobustmetallurgicalpropertiestobeleftinplace.Previouslyreportedslabcracking(Bruneau
etal.2010)couldnotbedetectedastheconcretefloorslabwascoveredbyfloorcarpeting,exceptat
onelocationatthefixedendofasegmentofthefloorcantileveringononesideofthebuilding(a
featurepresentonlyovertwostoriesforarchitecturaleffect).CrackwidthsafterFebruary22,2011
appearedsimilartowhathadbeenobservedafterSeptember4,2010,beinglocalisedonly.Substantial
shearcrackingofthegypsumplasterboard(sheetrock)finishontheexteriorwallofthatcantilevering
partofthefloorwasalsoobserved(Figure3b);onlyhairlinecrackingofgypsumplasterboardfinishes
wasobservedelsewherethroughoutthebuilding,supportingpostearthquakesurveymeasurements
showingthatthebuildinghasapostearthquakeresidualdriftofonly0.1%.Onenonstructuralmasonry
blockwallinstalledforsoundproofingpurposesadjacenttomechanicalunitsonthepedestalroof
sufferedminorshearcracking,whereithadbeenplacedhardagainstacantileveringfloorbeam.
Giventhemagnitudeoftheearthquakeexcitations,withdemandsabovetheULSdesignlevel,
substantialyieldingoftheEBFlinkswouldhavebeenexpected.EBFsdesignedincompliancewiththe
NZS3404(SNZ,1997/2001/2007)provisionsaretypicallysizedconsideringaductilityfactor(,
equivalenttoRinUSpractice)ofupto4,correspondingtoaleveloflinkdeformationsthatwould
correspondtosignificantsheardistortionsofthelinks.Yet,yieldingwasbelowthatdetermined
necessaryinsubsequentdetailedassessmenttorequirestructuralreplacementoftheEBFactivelinks.
Beyondtheusualfactorscontributingtooverstrengthinsteelframes(e.g.expectedyieldstrength
exceedingnominalvalues,modellingassumptions,etc.),anumberofadditionalfactorscanexplain
behaviourinthisparticularcase,includingstrengthofthecompositefloorslabaction(neglectedin
design),mobilizationofthesolidnonstructuralwallconcretecladdingadjacenttothestaircase,elastic
stiffnessofthegravityframeespeciallythecolumnsandtherelativelyshortdurationofearthquake
excitation.
TheductileMRFalongtheeastwalldidnotshowanyevidenceofyielding.Itsdesignhadbeen
governedbytheneedtolimitdrift,particularlyundertorsionalresponseduetotheeccentricityofthe
core,anditscorrespondingeffectiveductilityfactor()waslowat1.25.
Overall,thebuildingwasdesignedforaslightlylowerlevelofstructuralductilitydemandthanistypical
foranEBF,duetoitsheightandplandimensions,andperformedwellduringtheearthquake.No
structuralrepairswererequired;nonstructuralremedialworkconsistedofminordrywallcrackrepair
andrealignmentoftheliftguiderails.ThebuildingwasopenandfullyreoccupiedinJuly2011,
becomingthefirstnormalimportancehighrisebuildinginChristchurchtobereturnedtousefollowing
theearthquakeseries.

ENG.UOA.0003.6

Figure3:ClubTower[PhotosbyM.BruneauandCClifton]:(a)Globalview;(b)crackingofpartitionin
cantileveringportionofstory;(c)paintflakingofpartiallyhiddenEBFlink;(d)globalviewofEBFbraces
obstructedbyvariousutilityruns.

ENG.UOA.0003.7

AsanewlandmarkandthetallestbuildingontheChristchurchskyline6,the22storeyPacificTower
consistsofperimeterEBFsuptothesixthflooronthewesternsideanduptotheeleventhflooronthe
northsideofthebuilding,shiftingtojointheotherEBFsaroundtheelevatorcoreabovethoselevels.,
withtransferslabsdesignedtohorizontallydistributetheseismicloadsatthosetransitionpoints.
SeveralsectionsoftheEBFsatlevelsbelowthelevel6transferslabwerevisible,apartfromatthetopof
theperimetersystem,astheselevelshousedamechanicalmultilevelparkingelevatorsystem.The
separatebracingsystemofthatmechanicaldeviceconsistedofflatplatesconnectedwithturnbuckles
andhooks.Someofthosedetailsfailedasthebarsunhookedwhenreturningintocompressionafter
tensionyieldingexcursionsthatelongatedthebraces.TheEBFsatintermediatelocations(ontheNW
frame)werenotintegralwiththefloorslabandsodidnotbenefitfromthestrengthincreaseprovided
bythatintegralactionthroughouttherestofthebuilding.Arangeofviewsforthisstructurearegivenin
Figure4.
PaintflakingandresiduallinksheardeformationswereobservedintheEBFlinksatthoselevels.Design
oftheEBFsinthatbuildingwasgovernedbytheneedtolimitdrift,withacorrespondingresulting
designductilityfactor()of1.5(eventhoughupto4.0ispermittedforEBFsystems,asmentioned
earlier).ThisistypicalofEBFsintallbuildingsinNewZealandsmoderatetolowseismiczones;
Christchurchismoderateinaccordancewiththeearthquakeloadingsstandard,NZS1170.5andamore
typicaldesignductilitylevelfactorrangeforsuchbuildingsis2to3.Whentheinitialinternalinspections
wereundertaken,therewasanabsenceofsignificantdamagetoarchitecturalandothernonstructural
finishingsexceptatlevel6whereafewofthehotelroomdoorsalongthecorridorcouldnotbeclosed,
suggestinggreaterresidualdeformationsatthatlevel.Thislevelwasthefirstinwhichadetailed
evaluationwasundertaken.OnefracturedEBFactivelinkwasdiscovered(Figure4e)inthetoplevel
(undersideofLevel6)oftheEBFsystemattheNorthWesterncornerofthebuilding.Theframesits
behindthelouvresystemnearestthecamerainFigure4a.Thislinkhadundergoneatleastonefullcycle
ofwebpanelyieldingpriortoafracturepropagatingfromonetopcorneracrosstheactivelinkregion
andresultinginsignificantresidualdeformation.Temporarystrapcrossbracingwasweldedtothe
activelinkframetoprovidelateralloadresistancewhilearepairstrategywasimplemented,which
comprisedcuttingoutthedamagedlink,weldingonanendplatesystemtoeachcollectorbeam/brace
faceandreplacingwithasiteboltedendplateactivelink.Thereplacementisscheduledforearly
October2011andistheonlyrepairtothestructuralframerequiredforthisbuilding.Adetailed
evaluationwasundertakenofallactivelinksintheadjacentstoreysandthroughoutthebuilding,with
thefrequencyofinspectionreducedasnofurtherexamplesrequiringreplacementwerefound.This
inspectionrequiredremovalofarchitecturalfinishes.
ThistypeoffailurehasnotbeenreportedineitherEBFstestedinthelaboratoryorfromdamagereports
fromotherearthquakes;thereasonsforthislinkfracturearenotcurrentlyclearanditistobethe
subjectofadetailedmetallurgicalandstructuralevaluationonceremoved..

TheGrandChancellorHotelis85metres,thePriceWaterhouseCooperbuildingis76.3metres,andtheC1
Building(a.k.a.thePacificTower)standsat73metres,istoppedbya13metresspire,foratotalof86metres.

ENG.UOA.0003.8

AswithClubTower,somerepairofdrywallcrackingandrealignmentofliftshaftguiderailsistheonly
otherworkrequiredandtheintentionistohavethiscompletedintimeforthebuildingtobefully
openedwhenpublicaccessisrestoredintothisarea.Itisalsoworthnotingthatthisislikelytobethe
onlyoneofthesixhighrisebuildingsinChristchurchthatwillbereturnedtoservice.
Itisnotedthathavingthelateralloadresistingsystemhiddenbyarchitecturalelementsisahindrance
topostearthquakeinspection,makingitoftenonlypossibletoinferthepresenceofstructuraldamage
fromthecrackingofnonstructuralfinishesandotherevidenceoflargeinterstorydriftsuntilthelinings
areremoved.Whilethismayworkwellinmanycases,experiencefollowingtheNorthridgeearthquake
suggeststhatmajorfracturesofstructuralelementsmayremainhiddenforyearsifonlynonstructural
damageisrelieduponasanindicatorofpossibleproblemswiththelateralloadresistingstructure.
Futurebuildingcodecommitteesmayconsiderthemeritofrequiringthatbuildingsbedesigntoprovide
easyinspectionofkeystructuralelementsandcriticalnonstructuralelementsfollowingsevere
earthquakes.

ENG.UOA.0003.9

Figure4PacificTower[PhotosbyM.BruneauandCClifton]:(a)Globalview;(b)FlakedpaintonEBF
activelink;(c)and(d)Multistorymechanicalgaragestackerfailedbraces;(e)FracturedEBFactivelink
intoplevelofEBFsysteminfrontfaceofatrium;(e)ResidualsheardeformationsofEBFlinkincar
stackertower.

SEISMICPERFORMANCEOFECCENTRICALLYBRACEDFRAMESINPARKINGGARAGES
ThetwolowriseparkinggarageshavingeccentricallybracedframesdescribedinBruneauetal.(2010)
wereinspectedfollowingtheFebruary22event.
TheEBFsinathreelevelparkinggarageofashoppingmallwestoftheCBDdidnotexhibitinelastic
deformations(Figure5a),howevertherewasevidenceofveryminormovementoftheboltedsplice
connectionsinthebraces.ThebasicallyelasticresponseoftheEBFsisnotsurprisinginthiscase,given
thattheseframeshadbeendesignedtoaccommodatethreeadditionalparkinglevelstobeaddedata
latertimeandtheintensityofshakingwaslowerthanintheCBD.Liveloadpresentatthetimeofthe
earthquakemayalsohavebeenlessthanconsideredindesign,althoughitwashigherthaninthe
Septemberearthquakewhentheshoppingmallwasnotoccupied.Movementofprecastunits

ENG.UOA.0003.10

previouslyreportedwasobservedtohaveintensified.Thisresultedinfractureofthespandrel
panelsbesidetheepoxymasticconnectionbetweenpanels,presumablyindicatingthattheepoxymastic
wasstrongerthantheprecastpanelsintension(Figure5b).Thesefracturesoccurredinallpanelsover
theheightofthestructure.Thesespandrelpanelswerealsodesignedtocarrygravityloadsinthe
parkingstructuresotheirfracturecompromisedtheserviceabilityofthebuilding.Nofurtherdamageis
reportedfromthethreeJuneearthquakes.

Figure5:ShoppingmallonDilworthStandClarenceSt,Christchurch[PhotosbyG.MacRae];(a)View
fromtheEast,(b)FractureofPrecastSpandrelBeamsonSouthside

TheEBFsinahospitalparkinggarageclosertotheepicentre(Bruneauetal.2010)alsoperformedwell,
althoughsomelinkfractureswereobservedintwobracedbays(Figure6).NotethatatleastsixEBF
frameswereusedateachlevelineachofthebuildingsprincipaldirections,andthatthissignificant
redundancycontributedtomaintainsatisfactoryseismicperformanceofthebuildinginspiteofthose
significantfailures.Residualdriftsoftheparkingstructureordamagetothegravityloadcarryingsystem
werenotvisuallynoticeable,whichsuggeststhatthesefractureswouldhavenothavebeendiscovered
ifhiddenbynonstructuralfinishes.
Notethatthisparkingstructurewasalsodesignedtoaccommodatetwoadditionalfloors.Yet,someof
thelinksatthefirststoryshowedpaintflakingasevidenceofinelasticdeformations.Evidenceofsoil
liquefactionwasalsoobservedoverpartsoftheslabongrade.Dependingonthefoundationtype,
liquefiedsoilscanactasasortofbaseisolationorasamethodtolengthentheperiod.Thisgenerally
resultsinaloweryieldaccelerationandlowerstructuraldemands.Assuch,itispossiblethatthis
parkinggaragewasnotsubjectedtogroundmotionsassevereasthoseshowninFigure1,inspiteof
beingonly1.5kmsawayfromstationCCCCinFigure2.However,becausetheseEBFswerenotdrift
dominatedtheyweredesignedforthemaximum=4ductilitydemand.Alsotheseactivelinkswere
addedasfinishedcomponentsintothelargelyprecastconcretestructureandsowerenottiedintothe
floorslabwithshearstudsastheywereforthetallerbuildingspreviouslydiscussed.Thismeantthat

ENG.UOA.0003.11

theydidnothavethesamestrengthenhancementduetoresistancetooutofplanedeformationofthe
floorslabasthetallerbuildingshad.
Thefractures,asshownincloseupinFigure6(c),wereofparticularconcernasthesewerethefirst
fracturesrecordedinEBFsworldwide(thePacificTowerfractureasmentionedabovewasdiscovered
later).Furtherpuzzlementwasaddedbythefactthatthefractureplane,showninFigure6(c),indicated
aductileoverloadfailureratherthanabrittlefracture.However,thelikelyexplanationliesintheoffset
ofthebraceflangefromthestiffener.ThisoffsetisshowninFigure6(c)andmeansthat,whenthebrace
wasloadedintension,theaxialtensionforceinthebracefedintotheactivelink/collectorbeampanel
zonethroughaflexiblebeamflangeratherthandirectlyintothestiffener.Thismeantthatthejunction
betweentheunstiffenedbeamflangeandthebeamwebwasseverelyoverloaded,leadingtofracture
betweenthesetwosurfacesandthisfracturespreadingacrossthebeamflangeandthroughtheweb.
Evidenceinsupportofthisisfromthefollowing:

wheretheflangesofthebracelineupwiththestiffeners,asintherighthandsideoftheactive
linkshowninFigure6(b)orthepanelzoneshowninFigure6(e),therewasnodamagetothis
panelzoneregion
thedamagetothepanelzoneregionisdirectlyproportionaltotheeccentricitybetweenthe
braceflangeandtheactivelinkendstiffener

Thisshowsthatloadpaththroughtheasconstructeddetailisparticularlyimportantwheninelastic
demandisrequiredfromthesystem.
Also,therampatthetoplevel,builtinanticipationoffutureadditionalstories,suffereddamageasthe
onlyEBFontheuppersegmentoftherampwaslocatedattheeastendofthatramp,inducingtorsional
responseandshearfailureofthecolumnsinmomentframeactionatthewestendoftherampthese
shearfailureshadnotbeenrepairedbythetimeoftheaftershockandexhibitedmoresignificant
damage(temporarylateralbracingwereinstalledtopreventfurtherswaymotions).Steelangles,
originallyaddedattheexpansionjointomeetthedesignrequirementforsupportlengthofhollowcore
slabpreventedunseatingoftheramp.TheEBFlinkattheramplevelitselfexhibitedsubstantialinelastic
distortions.
ThelateralbracingoftheactivelinksinthebuildingshowninFigure6wasonlyintheformofa
confiningangleeachsideofthetopflange,asshowninFigure6(d)and6(e).Nolateralmovementor
twistingoftheendsoftheactivelinkswasobserved,indicatingthatthelateralrestraintprovisionshad
beenadequateinpractice,despiteonlybeingappliedtothetopflangeandforEBFsnotintegralwith
theslababovealsobeingnoncompliantwithNZS3404.

ENG.UOA.0003.12

ENG.UOA.0003.13

Figure6:ParkinggarageonStAsaphStandAntiguaSt,Christchurch[PhotosbyM.Bruneau];(a)
RedundancyprovidedbymultipleEBFbays;(b)EvidenceofEBFlinkyielding;(c)Fracturedlinkatlower
levelEBF;(d)EvidenceofinelasticdeformationsattoplevelEBF;(e)Closeupviewofsame;(f)
Displacementatexpansionjoint,topramp.

Asofmid2011,thefracturedactivelinkshavebeencutoutandarebeingreplacedtobringthebuilding
backintoserviceinadvanceofwhenpublicaccessisrestoredtothisarea.
CONNECTIONS
Connectionsinmodernsteelframesperformedverywellandasexpected.Figure7(a)showsa
brace/beam/columnconnectioninwhichthegussetplateisweldedtothebeamandboltedtothe
columnwithaflexibleendplateconnection,whichisdesignedanddetailedtoberigidforverticalload
transferandflexibleinthehorizontaldirection,toaccommodatechangeintheanglebetweenbeam
andcolumnduringtheearthquake.Thisflexibleendplatehasundergonelimitedoutofplaneyielding,
protectingthegussetplatefrominelasticdemand.Figure7(b)showsaflushendplatespliceinaMRF
beamthathasperformedwell.
Inamomentendplateconnectioninaportalframebuildinginastronglyshakenregiononsoftground
nearthefault,tensilefailureofarowofboltswasobserved.Theconnectionhadnotopenedupduring
theearthquakeandwasrapidlyrepaired.
Nodamagewasevidentfromabriefinternalinspectiontotheweldedbeamtocolumnconnectionsin
the7storeyperimetermomentframebuildingmentionedbelowandshowninFigure10.These
connectionswillrequiredetailedevaluationaspartoftheassessmentofthisbuildingasanylocal
fractures,e.g.betweenthebeamflangeandcolumnflangeinasimilarmannerasoccurredinthe1994
Northridgeearthquake,wouldbehiddenbythepassivefireprotectionandonlythreejointswere
lookedatindetailduringthevisitinwhichthosepicturesweretaken.

ENG.UOA.0003.14

Figure7:ConnectionsinClubTowerBuilding,Christchurch[PhotosbyGCClifton];(a)
Brace/beam/columnconnectionshowingoutofplaneyieldinginendplatebutnoinelasticdemandin
gussetplate;(b)Flushmomentendplatespliceconnection

CBFBUILDINGS
Asinglesuspendedlevelparkinggaragewithconcentricallybracedframe(CBF)wasfoundtohave
performedpoorly(Figure8).Thegaragehadsolidprecastpanelwallsonthreesides,andtwo
individualCBFbaysalongthefourthside(onebayoneachsideofthegaragedoor).Whilethecolumns
ofthewesternmostCBFtiedtoasteelbeamattheirtop,theeasternmostCBFwasnotsimilarlyaligned
withasteelbeam.Anonductilereinforcedconcreteextensionframingintoaconcretebeamatthetop
performedpoorly.Theotherbraceofthatframefailedattheweldsundertensionloads;thesewelds
didnotappeartobedesignedtodevelopthetensioncapacityofthebraceaccordingtothecapacity
designprinciplesofNZS3404.ThewesternmostCBFperformedbetter,withoutfracturesandwith
properattachmenttothesupportedflooratbothcolumns,withvisiblepostearthquakeresidual
bucklingasaconsequenceofbraceelongation.

ENG.UOA.0003.15

ENG.UOA.0003.16

Figure8:LowriseCBFparkinggarage[PhotosbyM.Bruneau]:(a)Poorcolumnconnectiondetail;(b)
Buckledbrace;(c)and(d)Fracturednonductilebracetocolumnconnection.

AsevenstoreysteelframedhotelbuildingwithacombinationshearwallsinonedirectionandCBFsin
theotherdirection,couldnotbeinspectedbecauseofitsimmediateproximitytothe22storeyGrand
ChancellorHotelwhichwasconsideredtobeinastateofimminentcollapsefollowingthe22February
earthquake.Itishopedtovisitthisbuilding,ifitisstillintact,oncetheGrandChancellorhasbeen
demolished.Thereisnoindicationofdamagefromthestreet.

MULTISTOREYMRFBUILDINGS
Anewparkinggarage(constructioncompletedaftertheSeptember2010earthquake)appearedtohave
performedverywell,withnovisiblesignofinelasticdeformationatthebeamtocolumnconnections
(Figure9)orinanyotherpartofthestructure.However,thisassessmentcouldonlybedonefromthe
groundbelowasacollapsedconcretecarparkingbuildingnextdoorprecludedaccessintothebuilding.
AlowriseMRFbuildingintheCBD,whichhousedagymnasium,wasinspectedindetailinternallyand
externallyandhadnostructuraldamage.
Finallya7storeybuildinglocatedintheregionoftheCBDthatexhibitedsignificantgroundinstability
wasinspectedinsideandout.Thestructurecomprisesaperimetermomentresistingframealongall4
sides,withanonstructuralstairandservicescoreandcompositefloor.Inspectionofthesteelframe
andfloorshowednovisibledamage,howevertheperimeterframehadsunkanoticeableamountin
relationtothecore(Figure10b)andhadactedaspinnedbase,causingsignificantinterstoreydriftwhich
hassubsequentlysignificantlydamagedstairs(Figure10d)andnonstructuralcomponents.Theextent
ofgroundmovementaroundthebuildingwasconsiderableanditislikelythatsignificantfoundation
movementhasoccurred.Thequestionofwhattodowiththisbuildingwillrestonwhathashappened
belowground.

ENG.UOA.0003.17

Figure9:LowriseMRFparkinggarage[PhotosbyM.Bruneau]:(a)Globalview;(b)and(c)Typical
momentconnections.

ENG.UOA.0003.18

Figure10:SevenstoreyPMRFbuilding[PhotosbyCClifton]:(a)Internalviewofpartiallystrippedfloor;
(b)Crackingroundfloorslabwhereperimeter(totherightofthecrack)hasmoveddownwardsrelative
tothecore;(c)Typicalbeamtocolumnconnectionwithfireprotectionpartiallyremovedforinspection;
(d)Gapopeninginstairatlandingduetolateralmovement(stairshadindependentstructuralsupport).

HISTORICALBUILDINGS

ENG.UOA.0003.19

PartialoutofplanefailurearoundthedomeatthetopoftheRegentTheatre)Buildingrevealedthata
bracedsteelframehadbeenusedthere(Figure11).Althoughsubsequentinspectionwillberequiredto
verifytheintegrityoftheconnections,itappearedtobeingoodconditionfromadistance.Thebuilding
wasbuiltbefore1910andthescenewasreminiscentofpicturesofsimilarbuildingsfollowingthe1906
SanFranciscoearthquake.However,theCBFsappearedtobeweldedconstruction(tobeverified)which
meanstheyarelikelytobenewerthantherestofthebuildingandhadbeenaddedinasubsequent
retrofit.

Figure11:BraceddomeattopofRegentonWorchesterBuilding[PhotosbyM.Bruneau]:(a)Global
view;(b)Closeupview.

Steelbracedframesweresometimesusedtoretrofitunreinforcedmasonrystructures(e.g.Figure12).
Driftlimitstopreventfailureoftheunreinforcedmasonrytypicallygoverndesigninthoseinstances,
whichexplainthesignificantmembersizesoftheseframesproportionaltothereactivemass,andtheir
elasticresponse.

ENG.UOA.0003.20

Figure12:Bracedframeasaretrofittounreinforcedmasonrybuilding[PhotosbyM.BruneauandC
Clifton]:(a)Closeupview;(b)Globalview.

BuildingsintheCBDthathadbeenstrengthenedpriortotheSeptember2010earthquaketypically
sufferedminimaltonodamageinthatevent.TheywerenotsofortunateinthemuchstrongerFebruary
2011event.Figure13showsonegroupofthreebuildings,with(a)showingthesefollowingthe
September2010eventand(b)showing(fromadifferentvantagepoint)thethreefollowingthe
February2010event.Noteespeciallythestrengthenedbuildingonthecornerhascollapsed

Figure13:StrengthenedURMbuildings[PhotosbyCClifton]:(a)isfollowingtheSeptember2010event
and(b)followingtheFebruary2011event,takenfromaslightlydifferentviewpoint.

ENG.UOA.0003.21

Finally,notethattheheritagestructuredescribedinBruneauetal.(2010)atthecornerofManchester
andHerefordstreets,severelydamagedbytheSeptember2010earthquake,hadbeendemolishedby
itsownerpriortotheFebruaryaftershock.
INDUSTRIALandEDUCATIONALFACILITIES
Manywarehousesclosetotheepicentresufferedlimiteddamage.Theseindustrialfacilitiestypically
havelightroofsandaredesignedtoresisthighwindforces;lightrodbracesaretypicallyusedforthis
purpose.Followingtheearthquakes,steelfabricatorsinspectedmultiplewarehouses,andretightened
saggingbracesthathadstretchedduetoyieldingduringtheearthquake.
AswasthecasefollowingtheSeptember2010Darfieldearthquake,aproprietarysystemoftenusedin
thesewarehouses(soldasakit)whichusedaparticularbananaendfitting,sufferedsomebrittlefailures
ofthecaststeelconnectors(asshowninFigure14).Theseoccurredinanewwarehousewhenthe
fittingfelltothegroundfollowingtheshearingofthepinretainingclip.Giventhattheseconnectorsare
ratedforearthquakeloadingbasedonstatictestsconductedbythemanufacturer,inlightofthefew
fracturesreportedfollowingthetwoearthquakes,someengineershaveexpressedconcernsregarding
theirpotentialbrittleness.Performanceofthisandsimilarsystemsneedstobevalidatedundera
dynamictestregimemorerepresentativeoftheirexpectedseismicdemands,particularlysimulatingthe
impactforcesappliedwhenpreviouslybuckledbracesretightenduringearthquakeexcitations.

Figure14:Exampleoffracturedbananaendofproprietarybraceconnectorintheroofplaneofalong
spansteelportalframebuilding[PhotosbyM.Bruneau]:(a)Globalview;(b)Closeupview.

Extensivefailureofsteelstoragerackswasobservedinindustrialfacilities,insomecasesinspiteof
additionalmeasurestakenfollowingtheSeptemberearthquake.Forexample,onefacilityownerwho
hadracksstacked6palletlevelshighthatcollapsedduringtheSeptember2010earthquake,purchased
newracksdesignedtoresistMagnitude7earthquakesofthetypeexpectedin[themostactiveseismic

ENG.UOA.0003.22

zoneof]Wellingtonandrestructuredhisoperationstolimitstackingtothreelevels.Inspiteofthose
measures,allracksexperiencedtotalcollapse,asshowninFigure15.Whileracksthatfailedinthe
transversedirectioncouldhavebeenpushedduetospillingofthepalletsandpilingupoftheproducts
intotheaisles,thiswasnotafactorinthelongitudinalrackfailuresthatexhibitedacombinationof
overloadedandfracturedbeamtocolumnconnections,andcolumnlocalbuckling.Itappearedthatthe
semirigidbeamtocolumnconnectionsinthelongitudinaldirectionweretooweakfortheintensityof
shakinganddesigngravityloads.

ENG.UOA.0003.23

Figure15:Exampleofcollapsedindustrialstorageracks[PhotosbyM.BruneauandGCClifton]:

Anecdotally,inanotherfacility,existingrackshadbeenretrofittedbycouplingtworacksbacktoback
withflatbarbraces(Figure16).Thesebarsshowedevidenceofelongationandresidualbuckling,but
didnotcollapse,inspiteoffloormovementsduetoliquefaction,whereastheonlyrackthatwasnot
retrofitted(foritwasnotadjacenttoasecondracktowhichitcouldhavebeentied)collapsed.The
rackshasalsobeenallegedlytiedtotherafterstopreventlongitudinalfailures,butsuchtiescouldnot
beidentified.
Theseaboveselectedexampleshighlightthefactthatperformanceofindustrialstorageracksisamajor
issuethatremainstobesatisfactorilyaddressed;howevertheirperformancehastobeconsideredin
lightoftheveryhighintensityofshaking.

ENG.UOA.0003.24

Figure16:Industrialstorageracksthatsurvived,withevidenceofsoilliquefaction[PhotosbyM.
Bruneau];(a)Globalview;(b)Closeupofbuckledbrace.

Multipleexamplesoftiltuppanelmovementsduetogroundliquefactionwereobserved,sometimes
leadingtofractureofnonductilebracesunabletoaccommodatetheimposeddeformations.Onesuch
exampleisshowninFigure17,showingafracturedbraceanditscounterpartbuckledbrace.

Figure17:Industrialfacilityroofbracing[PhotosbyM.Bruneau];(a)Globalview,showingbuckledbrace

ENG.UOA.0003.25

andfracturedbrace;(b)Closeupviewoffracturesweldoftensionbrace.

Anchorageoftiltupwallstosteelstructuresalsofailedinafewinstances.Figure18showsroofbeams
buckledincompressionbytheinwardmovementofthetiltuppanels,andfailureoftheanchorsdueto
theiroutwardmovement(i.e.awayfromthebuilding).Giventhatthishappenedinmodern
construction,andbecausetiltupwallsofgreaterslendernesshaveprogressivelybeenimplementedin
NewZealand,acarefulreassessmentoftheirseismicdesignprovisionsmaybedesirable.

Figure18:Failureoftiltuppanelconnections[PhotosbyM.Bruneau];(a)Globalview;(b)Closeup
viewoffracturesconnection;(c)Globalviewofbuckledbeams;(d)Localviewofonesuchbeam.

Figure19showsthesteelstructurestandingwhentheroofinghascollapsed.Thisshowsverygood
performanceofthesteelmembers,butpoorperformanceoftheroofing/connections.

ENG.UOA.0003.26

Figure19:FailureofroofandwallsinolderindustrialfacilityonSalisburyStreet[PhotosbyMacRae];

AtHeathcoteValleyPrimarySchoolsomeofthemostextremeshakingduringtheeventwasrecorded.
TherewasonenewsinglestoreybuildingwithasteelmomentframeandblockwallsasshowninFigure
20a.Aftertheearthquakethewallwasleaningtotheeastatthesouthernend,andtothewestatthe
northernend.Theconcretebaseplatewasblownoutonthesoutheastsideofthebuildingasshownin
Figure20b.

(a) OverallViewfromtheSouth
(b)BaseplateboltatSEcornerofthebuilding
Figure20.HeathcoteValleyPrimarySchoolSteelMomentFramebuilding(Photos:MacRae)

AsteelframedwallwithabrickfaadewaserectedinasmallparkasshowninFigure21,inapartof
townthatwheresignificantoveralstructuraldamageoccurred.Thewallwasplacedthereafterthe
September2010earthquakeasstatesRebuild,BrickbyBrick.Thewallsufferednodamageduringthe

ENG.UOA.0003.27

subsequentearthquakesandthebricktiesbetweenthesteelframingandthebricksshowdnosignsof
distress.

(a) OverallViewofWall

(b)BackViewofWall
Figure21.September2010RebuildingStandConsistingofBricksSupportedbySteelFrame(Photos:
MacRae)

LIGHTSTEELFRAMEDHOUSES
Thereisasmallnumberoflightsteelframedhousesintheaffectedarea.Preliminaryreportsarethat
damagetoframing,brickworkandliningswaslessthanfromtheSeptemberearthquake,discounting
damageresultingfromsoilliquefactionandlateralspreading.
Inonehousewithbrickveneer,afewbricksonthetopcourseandadjacenttowindowopeningshad
beenloosened,butnotdislodged.
Thisbehaviourisconsistentwiththeverygoodperformanceofbrickveneeronsteelframinginaseries
ofshakingtabletestsattheUniversityofMelbournein2009(PatonColeetal,2009)
BRIDGES
TherearerelativelyfewsteelbridgesintheChristchurcharea.ApedestrianarchbridgeattheAntigua
BoatshedsandoneatVictoriaSquareshowednovisibledamage(Figure22).

ENG.UOA.0003.28

Figure22UndamagedoldersteelpedestrianbridgesontheAvonRoverneartheCBD(Leon)
AlthoughsubstantialliquefactionoccurredalongtheAvonRiverneartheCBD,theonlyoldersteel
bridgeinthisareaonlyshowedspectacularbucklingofitsfasciaarches;theactualbridge,supportedon
straightrivetedgirdersappearedundamagedeventhoughlargesettlementshadoccurredatthe
abutments(Figure23).TheoldrailbridgeovertheWaimakariririverbehavedwelleventhoughitwas
clearthatthepierhadmovedover100mmtowardtheriverandbackduringthisshake(Figure24a).The
oldroadbridgesufferedsomelongitudinalbucklingofthelowerflangeofonebeam(Figure24b)aswell
assomespallingofconcreteonthewestsideoftheabutment.Theonlymajormodernsteelbridgeat
thePortofLyttleton,athreespancontinuousplategirder,hadonlyminordamageattheabutment
(Figure25).

ENG.UOA.0003.29

Figure23ColomboStreetbridge(a)Slumpingofriverbankclosetobridge;(b)Bucklingoffascia
arches;(c)Slumpingofabutmentsatendofbridge;(d)Undamagedstraightrivetedgirders.(Leon)

Figure24WaimakaririBridges,Southend(a)OldRailBridge,(b)Oldroadbridge(MacRae)

Figure25LyttletonPortBridge(a)PlateGirder(b)AbutmentSpalling(MacRae)

ENG.UOA.0003.30

ThefootbridgesshowninFigure26weredamagedintheSeptember2010earthquakeandhadnotbeen
repairedatthetimeoftheFebruary22event.Duetofurtherlateralspreadingandslumpingof
abutments,theywereevenmoredamagedinthisshaking.

Figure26Footbridges(a)TrussbridgeoverAvonRiver,(b)SuspensionbridgewithtimberdeckOver
Kaiapoiriver,(c)SuspensionbridgeatGroynes(MacRae)
CONCLUSIONS
SteelstructuresgenerallyperformedwellduringtheChristchurchearthquakeseries,comprising6
damagingeventsfrom4September2010to13June2011,withintensityupto2xULSdesignleveland
cumulativedurationofstronggroundshakinginexcessof60seconds.However,afeweccentrically
bracedframesdevelopedlinkfractures,CBFbracefractureswereobservedinconnectionsunableto
developthebracegrosssectionyieldstrength,andmultipleindustrialsteelstoragerackscollapsed.
Thediscoveryofafracturedactivelinkina22storeybuilding,inwhichallotherlinksperformedwell,is
unexplainedatthetimeofwritingthispaper,anditwillbeaprioritytodeterminethecauseofthat
fracturewhenthedamagedlinkisremovedandaccessibleforcloseinspection.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
ThisworkwasfundedinpartbytheFoundationforResearchinScienceandTechnologythroughthe
EngineeringthemeoftheNaturalHazardsPlatformofNewZealand,theUniversityofAuckland,the
UniversityofCanterbury,theErskineVisitingFellowshipprogramattheUniversityofCanterbury.
ParticipationofMichelBruneautothisearthquakereconnaissancestudywasfundedbyMCEER
(UniversityatBuffalo).RonDeVall(ReadJonesChristoffersenLtd,Vancouver,Canada)isalsothanked
forsharinginsightsonthebehaviourofEBFs.However,anyopinions,findings,conclusions,and
recommendationspresentedinthispaperarethoseofthewritersanddonotnecessarilyreflectthe
viewsofthesponsors.
REFERENCES

ENG.UOA.0003.31

Bruneau,M.,Anagnostopoulou,M.,MacRae,G.,Clifton,C.,Fussell,A.,PRELIMINARYREPORTONSTEEL
BUILDINGDAMAGEFROMTHEDARFIELDEARTHQUAKEOFSEPTEMBER4,2010,BulletinoftheNew
ZealandSocietyforEarthquakeEngineering,Vol.43,No.4,pp.351359.
HayesGetal,THE09/03/2010DARFIELDEARTHQUAKEANDITSAFTERSHOCKS,INCLUDINGTHE
02/21/2011CHRISTCHURCHEVENT,EducationalSlides,USGeologicalSurvey,NationalEarthquake
InformationCenter,2011.
HylandCandFergussonWG,AFRACTUREMECHANICSBASEDAPPROACHTOTHEASSESSMENTOF
SESIMICRESISTINGSTEELSTRUCTURESKeyEngineeringMaterials312(2006)8994
PatonCole,V.P;Gad,E.F;Clifton,G.C;Heath,D.J;Davies,C;Hicks,S;Lam,N.SEISMICPERFORMANCE
OFABRICKVENEERSTEELFRAMEDHOUSE,AEES2009,Proceedingsofthe2009Conferenceofthe
AustralianEarthquakeEngineeringSociety,Newcastle,Australia,2009
Seal,C,PLASTICITYOFSTEELUNDERSESIMICLOADCONDITIONSPhDThesisreport,Facultyof
Engineering,TheUniversityofAuckland,2009
StandardsNewZealand,NZS1170Part5:2004'EARTHQUAKEACTIONSNEWZEALAND'partoftheJoint
AustralasianLoadingsStandardsetAS/NZS1170'StructuralDesignActions'.
StandardsNewZealand,NZS3404:1997incorporatingAmendmentNo1:2001andAmendmentNo2:
2007,STEELSTRUCTURESSTANDARD,Wellington,NewZealand
GNS,CHRISTCHURCHCENTRALBUSINESSDISTRICTSPECTRA,25/02/2011