tdgeek:

 

@TimA  refer my post at 8-46 am today

 

Ah ok, hanging by a thread then.

DarthKermit:

 

I just heard on the 11am news that the defence headquarters building which was only built four years ago and designed to withstand "anything" (I'm typing this from memory) has damage and may not be usable for a year.

 

WTF is going on? Having our seat of government in Wellington is inherently risky.

 

Time they relocated the Gov to say the Waikato area  where earthquake are less of a risk, volcanic eruptions etc..

I'm seeing more alerts come thru about more buildings in dire straits. This is getting bad. Its becoming not just a huge event in a rural region but akin to a smaller but decent EQ in Welly, as to the end result.

tdgeek:

 

I'm seeing more alerts come thru about more buildings in dire straits. This is getting bad. Its becoming not just a huge event in a rural region but akin to a smaller but decent EQ in Welly, as to the end result.

 

I presume I am not alone in wondering why any building constructed within the last 30 years or so was not done so with earthquakes front and centre in the mind of the architects and engineers?

Surely when building on a known fault where the risk of quakes is perfectly foreseeable, it is nothing short of gross negligence not to have designed and constructed accordingly, regardless of what minimum standards existed at the time were - they are minimum and can (and should) be exceeded where appropriate.

The Stats building is definitely a concern.

The BNZ Harbour Keys building was closed for months following the 2013 earthquake. The building itself performed very well. The problem was that a pipe in the ceiling burst and because of the beautiful open foyers:

the entire building turned into an indoor water feature.

Something similar _seems_ to be happening for many of the other CBD buildings. The buildings themselves performed to specification, and would have been safe if people were inside during an earthquake. However, that's not the same as being in a state where you'd want to return to work - ceiling tiles have fallen, glass has cracked, monitors have fallen over, etc. For some, the buildings simply haven't been checked and given an all clear yet.

In addition, many modern buildings have (this probably isn't the right architectural word) "sacrificial" seismic joints. These are designed to move/shear/crack to absorb the force of an earthquake and need to be repaired/replaced post-quake.

So while some CBD buildings are still not occupied, I'm not sure its fair to describe them as "unsafe" in the sense people would be injured/killed by being in them during an earthquake (certainly not all of them at least - the Stats building is definitely a concern). 

@Dratsab: Just heading back to Welly. Left a few hours after the quake, by road, with a team for a specific job and we're just on the way back now. Looks like everyone down there got smashed pretty heavily. Not liking the reports of more and more buildings being unsafe.

Anyway, we're heading straight down SH1 and it sounds as if, according to stuff, the road between Pukerua Bay and Plimmmerton is down to one lane each each way but that's all. Anyone got any other info which may be useful?

Yep, it's pretty slow going. Latest here:

https://twitter.com/NZTAWgtn/status/798672548439306240

Edit: clickable link

The thing that people need to remember is that buildings are designed to save lives by not collapsing, but that doesn't mean as a result, they don't sustain serious damage. Some are designed to flex more, to absorb the forces, so more superficial damage can appear worse, even though they are structurally sound. As shown by Christchurch, where after inspection, they had to pull down much of the CBD. But from initial looks the buildings looked like they survived fine. These earthquakes were also extreme so it shouldn't be a  surprise that buildings have damage.. I think  new buildings should use the base isolation system, like Te papa and the old Parliament buildings, as that system seems to stand up well. 

MikeB4:

tdgeek:

 

any word on the infrastructure in Welly? Drainage mainly

 

Stuff for a change has really good information and coverage.

Stuff specialises in gutter journalism nowadays. 

frankv:

 

MikeB4:

tdgeek:

 

any word on the infrastructure in Welly? Drainage mainly

 

Stuff for a change has really good information and coverage.

 

Stuff specialises in gutter journalism nowadays. 

 

 

 

normally I agree but their coverage of the Quake has been very good

I really hope we do not get any further significant after shocks. I think we will see a real mess in the capital if this continues.

Geektastic:

 

 

 

I presume I am not alone in wondering why any building constructed within the last 30 years or so was not done so with earthquakes front and centre in the mind of the architects and engineers?

 

It actually goes back 160 years, there's a damned good reason why despite increased fire risk and the use of fires for cooking and heating, wood became a very popular building material in Wgtn after the 1855 quake.

I have no doubt that first hand experience of the Chch quake altered my perception permanently (and made me a bit obsessive  - hence my posts in this thread) but memories fade, especially as since 1855, nothing much has really happened in terms of large-ish quakes in Wgtn.  The largest shakes may have been the Pahiatua M7.2 in 1934, then the Wairarapa I and II M7 and 7.2 quakes in 1942 in Carterton/Masterton area.  I expect how they were in Wgtn may have been comparable to how the M7.1 Chch quake in 2010 felt in Timaru - caused some damage to susceptible properties, but not too bad.

MikeB4:

 

I really hope we do not get any further significant after shocks. I think we will see a real mess in the capital if this continues.

 

Let just hope history doesn't repeat with what happened in Christchurch. The actual deadly Earthquake in chch that caused all the damage, was supposedly an aftershock of the one that occurred at night 6 months prior, which didn't cause as much damage. Wellington seems to have a far higher number of large tall buildings than Christchurch had, so the cost would be huge. Due to the age of many, I would also be concerned about airborne asbestos should any collapse, as it was used widely in building materials. 

Fred99:

 

 

 

 

 

It actually goes back 160 years, there's a damned good reason why despite increased fire risk and the use of fires for cooking and heating, wood became a very popular building material in Wgtn after the 1855 quake.

 

 

 

Bricks should be banned IMO. Although these days they are mainly nonstructural and tied to  framing, but they still crackup.Timber framing has proven to be the best for building houses in earthquake zones. 

joker97: Hope you have insurance

The only thing of mine that broke is bottle of Sesame oil.  The apartment was rented to us fully furnished.  Everything that broke was the landlords.  Probably less than $500 all up a 20 inch TV and some cheap crockery and glassware.  More of a PITA than anything else as we will have to wait for the landlord to replace them all.  If they were mine I would have brought new stuff already.