Chile Presentation Hanping Hong

8/10/2019 Chile Presentation Hanping Hong

1/42

Some Observations from Recent

Dept. of Civil & Environmental Eng.

University of Western Ontario

, ,

[email protected]


2/42

e ven : e ear qua e

Date: February 27, 2010=

Epicenter: 35.909oS 72.733oW at a depthof about 35 km.

Location: Offshore Maule, in a subductionzone in which the Nazca late asseseastward and downward beneath theSouth American plate, with a rate ofconvergence o a out 7 mm year.


3/42

Seismicity

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/20

10/02/27/world/americas/0227-chile-

quake-map.html


4/42

Seismicity

http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/eq_depot/2010/eq

_100227_tfan/neic_tfan_c.html


5/42

Possible available ground motion records


6/42

n orma on romInformation based on preliminary report by Boroschek et al.

(2010) using records from RENADIC.

Peak vertical

ground

acceleration

Peak hor izontal

ground

accelerationStation

Peak vertical

ground

acceleration

Peak hor izontal

ground

accelerationStation

Estacion Metro Mirador

0.140.17

Universidad de Chile, Dept. Ing.

Civil (interior Edificio) Sandiago

Estacion Metro Mirador

0.140.17

Universidad de Chile, Dept. Ing.

Civil (interior Edificio) Sandiago

0.130.27Hosp. Sotero de Rio RM

0.280.30Hosp. Tisner RM

0.240.56CRS Maipu RM

..

0.130.27Hosp. Sotero de Rio RM

0.280.30Hosp. Tisner RM

0.240.56CRS Maipu RM

..

0.260.35Vina del Mar (Marga Marga)

0.050.14Hosp. Valdiv ia

0.200.47Hosp. Curico

0.260.35Vina del Mar (Marga Marga)

0.050.14Hosp. Valdiv ia

0.200.47Hosp. Curico

.. ..


7/42

Ground motion records at Estacion Metro Mirador Santiago.

Boroschek et al. (2010). Digital records is sti ll not widely available.


8/42

Response Spectra for Estacion Metro Mirador Santiago (Boroschek et al. 2010).


9/42

, ,

although the terminals are closed and a temporary tent and laptops are used by

off icers (March 8, 2010). Certainly, there is business interrupt ion costassociated with it.


10/42

A building in Concepcion


11/42


12/42

A building in Concepcion: Interstory collapse and will be demolished.


13/42


14/42


15/42


16/42

Examples of buildings that survived this earthquake


17/42

Partial damage. Possible consequences


18/42

A damaged building in Chillan


19/42

Twin build ings: the damage in one

is more signi ficant then the other

Chillan)


20/42


21/42


22/42


23/42

Adobe constructions


24/42


25/42

A street view in Talco


26/42


27/42

Brid esThe Llacoln Bridge in

Concepcin was constructed in

.

traffic and pedestrian access to

downtown Concepcin)

The Llacoln bridge in Concepcin (Report of the NSF Sponsored GEER

Association Team, Edited by J. Bray and D. Frost


28/42


29/42

Deck unseating at Llacoln bridge


30/42


31/42

This is a old bridge and it was not in service for several years.


32/42

Juan Pablo II bridge connects the cities of Concepcin and San Pedro de laPaz. It opened to the public in 1974. The bridge consists of 70 spans (L = 33m, W = 21.9 m) each one composed of 7 reinforced concrete girders and aconcrete slab. The se ments sit on reinforced concrete bents with drilled ierSupports. (Report of the NSF Sponsored GEER Association Team, Edited by J.Bray and D. Frost


33/42


34/42


35/42


36/42

A damaged highway bridge


37/42

A damaged highway overpass


38/42

Effect of tsunami

in Talcahuano


39/42

In

Pelluhue


40/42

Some observed non-en ineered re air


41/42


42/42

Unreinforced adobe houses should not be used orstrengthened in the seismic region to minimizethe seismic vulnerability.

an new s ruc ures can e vu nera e ur ngan earthquake

Emer enc education and ractice for naturaldisasters contributes to the safety of locals, butis not effective for visitors or tourists.

e rus o non-eng neere repa r re roshould be highly discouraged, even though thereis a need to restore normal life.

Chile Presentation Hanping Hong

Documents