Seismic risk and design criteria

This paper describes and discusses a practical approach to formulating rational and economic procedures for the seismic design of industrial plants and of petrochemical plants in particular, on the basis of the current New Zealand Loadings Code for Buildings, NZS 4203:1976. The authors' firm was engaged as consultants for the seismic design (inter alia) of the Ammonia and Urea Plants and offsites for the Kapuni Fertiliser Complex. This paper is a result of that work. and will also be published in ‘Transactions of the Institution of Professional Engineers New Zealand’.

The seismic design of industrial plants

Evison¹,

Mowat²

1982

Seismic design of pallet racking systems

Brown¹

1983

Modern industrial pallet racking systems in use in  New Zealand are adaptions of overseas design, using thin  walled cold formed sections. These sections are not generally considered suitable for plastic deformations, or resistance to seismically induced loadings. This paper reviews full scale shaking table tests reported by Rack Manufacturers Institute, Pittsburg, (R.M.I.) in 1980, and comments on the applicability of the results to the seismic design philosophy embodied in  NZS 4203. Seismic performance criteria (not strictly the same as for building structures) are proposed, and design approaches suggested that will enable the capacity design requirements of NZS 4203 to be considered, while keeping with the cold formed sections traditionally used for pallet rack construction.

Earthquake fault movement and town planning

Hopkins¹

1987

This paper is an edited version of a submission made to the Lower Hutt City Council Town Planning Hearings Committee in August 1986. The submission was made in support of an objection by the Lower Hutt City Council to a proposed ordinance which prohibited building adjacent to the section of the Wellington fault in Lower Hutt City. The inadequacies of the proposed ordinance are examined and the issues analysed with particular reference to the protection of life and property, and the risks involved. Earthquake risks are further analysed and the risk of damage due to shaking compared with those due to fault movement. Comparisons of earthquake risk with other risks accepted by the community are made. The conclusion drawn is that the additional risk of earthquake damage in a potential fault zone is sufficient to warrant constraints to development, but not so large, in the context of overall risks, to justify prohibition of all development in a fault zone. Comment and recommendation is made as to appropriate constraints to building development in such zones.