File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Should we design buildings for lower-probability earthquake motion?

TitleShould we design buildings for lower-probability earthquake motion?
Authors
KeywordsEarth sciences
Hydrogeology
Geophysics and Geodesy
Geotechnical Engineering
Civil Engineering
Environmental Management
Issue Date2011
PublisherSpringer Netherlands
Citation
Natural Hazards, 2011, v. 58, n. 3, p. 853-857 How to Cite?
AbstractOn February 22, 2011, an earthquake of magnitude 6. 3 occurred very near to the city of Christchurch, New Zealand. The consequence came as a shock to many seismologists and earthquake engineers as New Zealand is known as the homeland of modern earthquake-resistant design techniques. After the earthquake, the focus of discussion has been on the collapse of buildings, while few queried the adequacy of design requirements. Importantly, similar "inadequacy" seems to repeat all around the world more frequently than expected. Hence, the question statement in the title concerns not only Christchurch, but anywhere in the world. © 2011 The Author(s).
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/145090
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 1.746
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.851
ISI Accession Number ID
References

Chandler AM (1997) Engineering design lessons from Kobe. Nature 387:227–229 doi: 10.1038/387227a0

Stirling MW, McVerry GH, Berryman KR (2002) A new seismic hazard model for New Zealand. Bull Seismol Soc Am 92:1878–1903 doi: 10.1785/0120010156

Tsang HH, Chandler AM (2006) Site-specific probabilistic seismic-hazard assessment: direct amplitude-based approach. Bull Seismol Soc Am 96:392–403 doi: 10.1785/0120050027

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorTsang, HH-
dc.date.accessioned2012-02-21T05:43:48Z-
dc.date.available2012-02-21T05:43:48Z-
dc.date.issued2011en_US
dc.identifier.citationNatural Hazards, 2011, v. 58, n. 3, p. 853-857en_US
dc.identifier.issn0921-030Xen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/145090-
dc.description.abstractOn February 22, 2011, an earthquake of magnitude 6. 3 occurred very near to the city of Christchurch, New Zealand. The consequence came as a shock to many seismologists and earthquake engineers as New Zealand is known as the homeland of modern earthquake-resistant design techniques. After the earthquake, the focus of discussion has been on the collapse of buildings, while few queried the adequacy of design requirements. Importantly, similar "inadequacy" seems to repeat all around the world more frequently than expected. Hence, the question statement in the title concerns not only Christchurch, but anywhere in the world. © 2011 The Author(s).en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherSpringer Netherlandsen_US
dc.relation.ispartofNatural Hazardsen_US
dc.rightsThe Author(s)en_US
dc.rightsCreative Commons: Attribution 3.0 Hong Kong Licenseen_US
dc.subjectEarth sciencesen_US
dc.subjectHydrogeologyen_US
dc.subjectGeophysics and Geodesyen_US
dc.subjectGeotechnical Engineeringen_US
dc.subjectCivil Engineeringen_US
dc.subjectEnvironmental Managementen_US
dc.titleShould we design buildings for lower-probability earthquake motion?en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4551/resserv?sid=springerlink&genre=article&atitle=Should we design buildings for lower-probability earthquake motion?&title=Natural Hazards&issn=0921030X&date=2011-09-01&volume=58&issue=3& spage=853&authors=Hing-Ho Tsangen_US
dc.description.naturepublished_or_final_versionen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s11069-011-9802-zen_US
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-79961025732en_US
dc.relation.referencesChandler AM (1997) Engineering design lessons from Kobe. Nature 387:227–229en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1038/387227a0en_US
dc.relation.referencesStirling MW, McVerry GH, Berryman KR (2002) A new seismic hazard model for New Zealand. Bull Seismol Soc Am 92:1878–1903en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1785/0120010156en_US
dc.relation.referencesTsang HH, Chandler AM (2006) Site-specific probabilistic seismic-hazard assessment: direct amplitude-based approach. Bull Seismol Soc Am 96:392–403en_US
dc.relation.referencesdoi: 10.1785/0120050027en_US
dc.relation.referencesCode for Seismic Design of Buildings. GB 50011–2001 (2001) Ministry of Construction of the People’s Republic of China, China Architecture and Building Press, Beijing, Chinaen_US
dc.relation.referencesTsang HH, Yaghmaei-Sabegh S, Anbazhagan P, Sheikh MN (2010) A checking method for probabilistic seismic-hazard assessment: case studies on three cities. Natural Hazards [Accessible online: 03 November 2010]en_US
dc.relation.referencesStructural Design Actions Part 5: Earthquake Actions–New Zealand NZS 1170.5:2004 (2004a) Standards New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealanden_US
dc.relation.referencesStructural Design Actions Part 5: Earthquake Actions–New Zealand Commentary (Supplement to NZS 1170.5:2004). NZS 1170.5 Supp 1: 2004 (2004b) Standards New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealanden_US
dc.identifier.volume58en_US
dc.identifier.issue3en_US
dc.identifier.spage853en_US
dc.identifier.epage857en_US
dc.identifier.eissn1573-0840en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000293406800003-
dc.description.otherSpringer Open Choice, 21 Feb 2012en_US
dc.identifier.citeulike9122499-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats