S ISSN 0967-859X THE SOCIETY FOR EARTHQUAKE AND CIVIL ENGINEERING DYNAMICS … · 2018-06-24 ·...

1SECED Newsletter Vol. 27 No. 3 November 2016 | For updates on forthcoming events go to www.seced.org.uk

ISSN 0967-859XTHE SOCIETY FOR EARTHQUAKE AND

CIVIL ENGINEERING DYNAMICS

NEWSLETTERVolume 27 No 3November 2016

SE

S E C E DED

In this issue

Development of Realistic CFRP Retrofit Schemes for Existing RC Structures 1

Providing Search and Rescue Assistance Pre- and Post-Disaster 7

Forthcoming Events 8

Notable Earthquakes April 2015 – December 2015 9

Development of Realistic CFRP Retrofit Schemes

for Existing RC Structures

The reports of field investigation teams after recent earthquake events have provided evidence for a large number of brittle collapses of reinforced

concrete (RC) structures built before the introduction of seismic design guidelines. The 2009 L’ Aquila earthquake, for instance, has revealed the vulnerability of existing RC structures built before the 1970’s to even moderate earth-quakes (Global Risk Miyamoto, 2009). In particular, the observation of weak-column/strong-beam mechanisms and joint shear failure can be related to structural design

deficiencies and non-compliance to modern capacity de-sign regulations (Ricci et al., 2011). A significant proportion of the European RC building stock consists of structures with inadequate reinforcement detailing, making demo-lition and reconstruction highly uneconomical. Efficient, fast and cost-effective retrofit solutions are hence required and could potentially safe lives and reduce financial losses in future earthquakes.

While traditional retrofit techniques, such as concrete or steel jacketing, are most commonly used, they are

Daniel PohorylesJose MeloTiziana RossettoDina D’AyalaEPICentre, University College London, UK

Humberto VarumFEUP, University of Porto, Portugal

2 For updates on forthcoming events go to www.seced.org uk | SECED Newsletter Vol. 27 No. 3 November 2016

associated with certain shortcomings. In particular, they add weight and stiffness to the retrofitted structure and are susceptible to corrosion. After substantial efforts into developing composite materials for structural strengthen-ing in the past 20 years, fibre reinforced polymers (FRP) are now seen as a viable alternative to traditional retrofit materials. A high strength-to-weight ratio, extended dura-bility due to resistance to corrosion, and reduced labour time are some of the reasons for their increasing popular-ity (Bousselham, 2010). The limitations of FRP materials include their susceptibility to debonding and very low duc-tility of the material, which can however be addressed by adopting appropriate design limits.

At component-level (beam or column), FRP is now com-monly used for the repair and retrofit of concrete struc-tures, in particular in the aftermath of the 2009 L’ Aquila, Italy, and 2011 Christchurch, New Zealand, earthquakes. These retrofits however rarely address the upgrade of beam-column joints, which play a critical role in the cy-clic behaviour of RC structures. For beams and columns to reach their full design capacity, premature failure of joints must be avoided. Moreover, the hierarchy of strength of the framing members needs to be evaluated in accordance with capacity design principles. These retrofit targets have been addressed by a significant number of experimental efforts in the literature. An analysis of 200 published tests on non-seismically designed RC joints retrofitted with FRP has however highlighted that a majority of these tests do

not reflect real conditions, as the specimens have scaled dimensions (in 60% of cases) or do not include slabs or transverse beams in the set-up (in 85%). The omission of slabs means that failure mechanisms observed in the labo-ratory are often not representative of the type of failures seen in the field, which in turn shifts the retrofit targets (Yu et al., 2015). Slabs and transverse beams also represent obstacles to the practical implementation of retrofit solu-tions, that may require drilling or cutting of concrete to ensure the full wrapping of members, continuity of flexu-ral strengthening or anchorage. Furthermore, the scale of specimens has been shown to influence the effectiveness of FRP retrofits (Choudhury et al., 2013). There is hence a need for experimental validation of FRP retrofits for speci-mens with realistic dimensions and geometry to include the practical challenges found in real structures.

Experimental Testing and ResultsIn this study, realistic pre-1970’s full-scale interior beam-column joints with slab and transverse beams are tested under cyclic lateral loading in a set-up representative of real structures in order to propose and assess the effective-ness of new, practical FRP retrofit solutions for seismic ac-tions.

A series of quasi-static cyclic tests are conducted as part of a larger, on-going experimental campaign by University College London and the University of Porto at the Laboratory of Aveiro University (Portugal). The loading

Editor’s note: On 27th April 2016, Daniel Pohoryles and Jose Melo presented their research at a SECED technical talk at the Institution of Civil Engineers. They provided this summary paper of their presentation and research.

Figure 1: Test set-up, prototype structure and sample of loading protocol.


set-up of the tests and specimen geometry are shown in Figure 1. The full-scale specimens presented in this study are three control specimens and three retrofit specimens. The specimens are designed to represent real-scale interior beam-column joints in a four-storey RC frame structure.

Control specimensThe reinforcement detailing adopted in two control and all repair and retrofit specimens aims to reflect common design practice of pre-1970’s reinforced concrete buildings in the Mediterranean (see Pohoryles et al., 2015b). Due to the non-compliance with capacity design principles and common design deficiencies in such structures, brittle failure mechanisms are anticipated. The design deficien-cies include an inappropriate hierarchy of strengths (weak-column/strong-beam) and a low shear capacity of the joint due to the lack of reinforcement in the joint, as well as a lack of confinement in the columns due to inadequate transverse reinforcement spacing.

In order to assess potential failure mechanisms and in-form the design of the FRP retrofit schemes, a full non-linear finite element model of the specimens was created (Pohoryles et al., 2015a). A failure mechanism characterised by a low ductility and moderate strength was anticipated and these results were confirmed by experimental obser-vations (Pohoryles et al., 2015b). As anticipated, failure in the column with rebar buckling was observed (Figure 3a). Moreover, the strong contribution of the slab and asym-metric reinforcement in the beam lead to limited rotation and hence less cracking in the beams. For means of com-parison, a specimen designed to modern seismic design guidelines (Eurocode 8, EC8) was also tested, for which a much larger strength (+96.4%) and ductility (+69.4%) were observed.

FRP retrofit schemesThree retrofit schemes are developed in this study and are designed to address different targets as shown in Figure 2. The proposed retrofit schemes are compliant with current design recommendations (ACI, 2008; CNR, 2013) and the relative capacities of the strengthened members is evalu-ated by their design equations.

The first scheme (RT-A) consists of an FRP retrofit with continuous column strengthening through the slab and confinement along the potential column plastic hinge length (Pohoryles et al., 2015b). It aims to improve the strength of the specimen by (i) increasing the moment capacity and ductility of the deficient column and (ii) increasing the glo-bal displacement capacity of the specimen by connecting the flexural strengthening of the superior and inferior col-umns. The tests on the retrofitted specimen demonstrated that the brittle single-storey failure with column bar buck-ling observed in the control specimen can be avoided. The strengthening of the column leads to a significant increase in strength (+38%) compared to the control specimen. A

reversal of the hierarchy of strengths between column and beams was however not achieved, as significant cracking in the column-slab interface is observed (Figure 3b). This can be explained by the very limited rotation of beams due to a strong contribution of the slab.

The second scheme (RT-A-sw) aims to ensure a ductile beam failure mechanism that follows capacity design prin-ciples (Pohoryles et al., 2016). To improve the displacement ductility of the specimen, selective weakening (SW) of the slab contribution in addition to CFRP strengthening of the column was implemented by cutting the slab reinforcement along the potential plastic hinge zone of the beam. Limited evidence of the effectiveness of selective weakening exists for corner beam-column joints (Akguzel and Pampanin, 2010). As anticipated, this combined retrofit and weaken-ing scheme lead to a reversal of the hierarchy of strength. The cyclic behaviour of the strengthened specimen is char-acterised by a ductile, beam-dominated failure mechanism (Figure 3c). As shown in Figure 4, compared to retrofit RT-A, no significant increase in strength, with only +13.5% compared to control C1 was observed. Moreover, due to the increased beam rotation and selective weakening, some joint damage was noticed at the end of the test.

The final retrofit scheme, RT-B-sw consists of a com-bined CFRP retrofit of columns, beams and joint with se-lective weakening of the floor slab (Pohoryles et al., 2017). The aim of this scheme is to significantly increase the lat-eral capacity of the specimen, reaching a level close to 80% of C-EC8, while ensuring a change in failure mechanism to a ductile beam-sway mechanism with a plastic hinge form-ing in the beams, at one beam-depth from the beam-joint interface. For this effect, selective weakening and retrofit of the beam are applied strategically to cause damage to spread away from the joint. The retrofit was successful in limiting damage to the columns and moving the plas-tic hinge formation to the beam. As shown in Figure 3, damage spread along the length of the beam without any damage observed in the joint. As can be seen from the force-drift envelopes in Figure 4, retrofit B-sw achieved the highest ductility (6.9, +89.6% compared to control C1) and lateral capacity (86.9, +38%) of all retrofit schemes. The strength increase was slightly lower than the target 80% of the specimen designed to modern guidelines. Still the fail-ure mechanism and ductility observed for RT-B-sw (6.9 vs. 6.1 for EC8) are better than the EC8 specimen, for which significant damage in the column was observed (Pohoryles et al., 2017). The yield drift of the RT-B-sw was the high-est amongst all specimens, indicating a reduced need for repairs in the case of moderate earthquakes. Moreover, the post-peak softening behaviour of the retrofitted specimen was also significantly better than all other specimens, sig-nifying a higher residual strength.

ConclusionsStudying the use of FRP for the seismic retrofit of RC


Figure 2: Summary of three retrofit schemes and their performance objectives.


structures has revealed that only limited experimental work on the retrofit of realistic beam-column joints can be found in the literature. To address this shortcoming, full-scale interior beam-column joints with slab and transverse beams are hence tested under cyclic loading to provide fur-ther empirical evidence and propose realistic FRP retrofit solutions.

The overarching aim of the three proposed retrofit schemes is to prevent non-ductile single storey failure, which are often reported in earthquake reconnaissance missions. In the first retrofit scheme, RT-A, strengthening of the columns leads to an increased lateral load capacity as column failure is delayed and buckling of the column bars is prevented. Full continuity of the flexural strengthening is achieved using the proposed FRP strands.

RT-A however does not result in a desirable failure mechanism, which highlights the importance of consid-ering the slab when assessing the behaviour of retrofitted beam-column joints. This observation confirms previous work on the significance of slabs on the failure mechanism

of beam-column joints (Park and Mosalam, 2013). The second retrofit, RT-A-sw, aims to address this limi-

tation by including selective weakening of the slab and is found to be successful in reversing the hierarchy of strength between columns and beams. Increased beam rotation and damage demonstrate the effectiveness of selective weaken-ing. Still, the retrofit only achieves a low increase in strength and slight damage in the joint is observed.

For the final retrofit, RT-B-sw, beams and joint are ad-ditionally strengthened and an improved ductile behaviour is obtained with reversal of the hierarchy of strengths and significant strength enhancement compared to the defi-cient specimen.

Overall, the FRP retrofit schemes presented in this study successfully address realistic geometric challenges of a structure and could be practically implemented for real buildings. The combined selective weakening and FRP ap-proach can be seen as a successful intervention even for structures with significant design deficiencies.

Figure 3: Damage in columns for (a) C1 and (b) RT-A, and beams for (c) RT-A-sw and (d) RT-B-sw.

(a) (b) (c) (d)

Figure 4: Force-drift envelope for all specimens.

-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6Drift (%)

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

Late

ral L

oad

(kN)

Force vs. drift envelope

C1C1 RT AC1 RT A swC1 RT B sw

-6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6Drift (%)

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

Late

ral L

oad

(kN)

Force vs. drift envelope

C1C1 RT B sw80% of C EC8


AcknowledgmentsThis study is funded as part of the Challenging RISK project funded by EPSRC (EP/K022377/1). The authors acknowl-edge the staff of the Civil Laboratory at the University of Aveiro for the support during the experimental campaign. The CFRP used in the experiments is kindly provided by S&P reinforcement.

ReferencesACI (2008). ACI 440.2R-08 – Guide for the design and con-struction of externally bonded FRP systems for strength-ening concrete structures. American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich.Akguzel, U., & Pampanin, S. (2010). Effects of varia-tion of axial load and bidirectional loading on seismic performance of GFRP retrofitted reinforced concrete exterior beam-column joints. Journal of Composites for Construction, 14: 94–104.Bousselham, A. (2010). State of research on seismic retro-fit of RC beam-column joints with externally bonded FRP. Journal of Composites for Construction, 14: 49–61.Choudhury, A. M., Deb, S. K., & Dutta, A. (2013). Study on size effect of fibre reinforced polymer retrofitted rein-forced concrete beam–column connections under cyclic loading. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 40: 353–360.CNR (2013). DT 200.R1/2013 – Guide for the Design and Construction of Externally Bonded FRP Systems for Strengthening Existing Structures – Materials, RC and PC structures, masonry structures. CNR.Global Risk Miyamoto (2009). 2009 M6.3 L’ Aquila, Italy,

Earthquake Field Investigation Report.Park, S., & Mosalam, K. M. (2013). Experimental investi-gation of nonductile RC corner beam-column joints with floor slabs. Journal of Structural Engineering, 139: 1–14.Pohoryles, D. A., Melo, J., & Rossetto, T. (2015a). Numerical modelling of FRP-strengthened RC beam-column joints. Proceedings of the 2015 SECED Conference, Cambridge, UK.Pohoryles, D. A., Melo, J., Rossetto, T., Varum, H., & D’Ayala, D. (2017). A realistic full CFRP retrofit of RC beam-column joints compared to seismically designed specimens. Proceedings of the 16th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Santiago, Chile.Pohoryles, D. A., Rossetto, T., Melo, J., & Varum, H. (2016). A combined FRP and selective weakening retro-fit for realistic pre-1970’s RC structures. 1st International Conference on Natural Hazards and Infrastructure: Protection, Design, Rehabilitation, Chania, Greece.Pohoryles, D., Melo, J., Rossetto, T., & Varum, H. (2015b). Experimental investigation on the seismic FRP retrofit of full-scale RC beam-column joints. Improving the Seismic Performance of Existing Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE, San Francisco, California, 619–631.Ricci, P., De Luca, F., & Verderame, G. M. (2011). 6th April 2009 L’ Aquila earthquake, Italy: reinforced concrete building performance. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 9: 285–305.Yu, J., Shang, X., & Lu, Z. (2015). Efficiency of externally bonded L-shaped FRP laminates in strengthening rein-forced-concrete interior beam-column joints. Journal of Composites for Construction, 20.

SECEDSECED, The Society for Earthquake and Civil Engineering Dynamics, is the UK national section of the International and European Associations for Earthquake Engineering and is an Associated Society of the Institution of Civil Engineers. It is also sponsored by the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, the Institution of Structural Engineers, and the Geological Society. The Society is also closely associated with the UK Earthquake Engineering Field Investigation Team. The objective of the Society is to promote co-operation in the advancement of knowledge in the fields of earthquake engineering and civil engineering dynamics including blast, impact and other vibration problems.

For further information about SECED contact:

The SecretarySECEDInstitution of Civil EngineersOne Great George StreetLondon, SW1P 3AA, UK

Or visit the SECED website:http://www.seced.org.uk

SECED NewsletterThe SECED Newsletter is published quarterly. All contribu-tions of relevance to the members of the Society are wel-come. Manuscripts should be sent by email. Diagrams, pic-tures and text should be attached in separate electronic files. Hand-drawn diagrams should be scanned in high resolution so as to be suitable for digital reproduction. Photographs should likewise be submitted in high resolution. Colour im-ages are welcome.

Please contact the Editor of the Newsletter, Damian Grant, for further details.

[email protected]

PostEditor SECED Newsletterc/o The SecretarySECEDInstitution of Civil EngineersOne Great George StreetLondon, SW1P 3AAUnited Kingdom


Providing Search and Rescue Assistance Pre- and Post-Disaster

Mark ScorerAtkins and SARAID

Search and Rescue Assistance in Disasters, or SARAID, is a British charity and non-governmental organisa-tion (NGO) dedicated to trying to save the lives of

innocent victims of disaster, as well as relieving human suf-fering around the world regardless of colour, creed, religion and political persuasion. SARAID is registered with the United Nations International Search and Rescue Advisory Group (UN INSARAG). INSARAG is a global network of more than 80 countries and organisations under the United Nations umbrella. INSARAG deals with urban search and rescue (USAR) related issues, aiming to establish minimum international standards for USAR teams and methodol-ogy for international coordination in earthquake response based on the INSARAG Guidelines endorsed by the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 57/150 of 2002, on “Strengthening the Effectiveness and Coordination of International Urban Search and Rescue Assistance”

SARAID is a Disaster Assistance Response Team that specialises in Urban Search and Rescue which covers the location and extraction of survivors trapped in collapsed buildings or structures normally following an earthquake or other natural or man-made disaster. SARAID is also able

to provide teams to assist in flood response/rescue, UN co-ordination, building damage and needs assessments and are one of the only teams in the UK that are trained by Bristol City Council to erect and deploy its specialist flood barrier system. SARAID also works closely with the International Office for Migration (IOM). SARAID’s members are a team of dedicated, highly trained unpaid volunteers from all walks of life that are on standby 24/7, every single day of the year. Team members do not receive a penny from the organisation in the form of wages or expenses, do not receive government funding and rely on public donations. SARAID team members carry out a number of differ-ent roles including: USAR Technicians, USAR Structural Engineers, USAR Medics as well as team management, HazMat and logistical support

SARAID not only provides a response team once a dis-aster has happened but are also working with countries to provide advice and training on how to cope in the initial 24 hours of the disaster, disaster risk reduction and ca-pacity building. These projects have included Macedonia, Nepal and Thailand with potential work in Moldova and Philippines later in 2016/7.

Editor’s note: On 30th September 2015, the Institution of Civil Engineers hosted a SECED technical evening talk from Gary Francis of SARAID. SECED Committee member and SARAID

team member, Mark Scorer, provided the following summary of SARAID’s activities.

SARAID members on the site of a collapsed five storey building in Nepal, 2015


SARAID members on the site of a collapsed five storey building in Nepal, 2015

SARAID’s members have a wealth of experience and have carried out operational deployments to earthquakes in Turkey 1999, India 2001, Algeria 2003, Iran 2003, Pakistan 2005, Indonesia 2009, Haiti 2010, Nepal 2015 and most re-cently, to Ecuador 2016. Other deployments have included flood response work in Mozambique 2000, Mexico 2007,

UK 2014 and Sri Lanka 2004 following Indian Ocean tsu-nami.

SARAID continues to train, fund raise and work closely with communities to improve disaster resilience and be ready to respond when needed.

Date Venue Title People

30/11/2016 at 18:00

Institution of Civil Engi-neers, 1 Great George St, London

The Link between Resilience to Climate Change and Earth-quake Preparedness

Speakers: Barnali Ghosh and David Viner (Mott MacDonald) Organiser: Tiziana Rossetto (UCL)

5–6/12/2016 All day

Croydon Park Hotel, Croydon, London CR9 5AA

ASRANet Ltd Course: Engineer-ing Structures Under Fire & Blast*

Organisers: ASRANet Ltd, Glasgow

12/12/2016 at 18:00

The University of Leeds,Leeds LS2 9JT

Seismic Resistant Design of Connections with the Use of Perforated Beams

Speaker: Konstantinos Tsav-daridis (Leeds University)Organiser: IStructE Yorkshire

16–17/1/2017 All day

ASRANet Ltd, Glasgow G1 2DH

ASRANet Ltd Course: Nuclear Power Plant and Structural Response*


25–26/1/2017 All day

Croydon Park Hotel, Croydon, London CR9 5AA

ASRANet Ltd Course: Design of Earthquake Resistant Struc-tures*


Forthcoming Events

*For details of courses organised by ASRANet Ltd, consult their website: http://asranet.co.uk/Courses. Note that SECED members received a 15% discount on course fees.

For up-to-date details of SECED events, visit the website: www.seced.org.uk


Notable Earthquakes April 2015 – December 2015Reported by British Geological SurveyIssued by: Davie Galloway, British Geological Survey, May 2016.Non British Earthquake Data supplied by The United States Geological Survey.

Year Day MonTime

Lat LonDep Magnitude

LocationUTC km ML Mb Mw

2015 02 APR 16:50 56.79N 5.57W 11 2.2 STRONTIAN, HIGHLANDFelt Duror of Appin and Scotstown, Highland (2 EMS).2015 03 APR 06:26 52.47N 0.18W 8 2.2 PETERBOROUGH, CAMBSFelt Peterborough, Leverington and Whittlesey (Cambridgeshire), Oakham and Lyddington (Rutland) and Bourne (Lincolnshire) (3 EMS).2015 04 APR 13:56 59.21N 1.05W 10 1.7 NORTHERN NORTH SEA2015 07 APR 19:03 60.30N 1.81E 11 2.2 NORTHERN NORTH SEA2015 09 APR 23:48 53.70N 1.12W 1 1.2 HENSALL, NORTH YORKSHIREFelt Hensall (2 EMS)2015 17 APR 15:52 15.88S 178.60W 10 6.5 FIJI ISLANDS REGION2015 20 APR 01:42 24.20N 122.32E 29 6.4 OFFSHORE TAIWANOne person killed, a few others injured and several buildings damaged in Hsinchuang District, New Taipei.2015 23 APR 18:19 51.65N 0.68E 7 1.9 NORTH FAMBRIDGE, ESSEX2015 25 APR 06:11 28.23N 84.73E 8 7.8 NEPALSome 8,776 people killed (with 388 still reported missing), over 19,000 people injured and over 750,000 houses either destroyed or severely damaged in Nepal, India, China and Bangladesh. Damage estimated to exceed $US 5billion.2015 25 APR 06:45 28.22N 84.82E 10 6.6 NEPAL2015 26 APR 07:09 27.77N 86.02E 22 6.7 NEPAL2015 30 APR 10:45 5.38S 151.77E 31 6.7 PAPUA NEW GUINEA2015 01 MAY 08:06 5.20S 151.78E 44 6.8 PAPUA NEW GUINEA2015 05 MAY 01:44 5.46S 151.88E 55 7.5 PAPUA NEW GUINEA2015 07 MAY 07:10 7.22S 154.56E 10 7.1 SOLOMON ISLANDS2015 11 MAY 18:55 54.15N 2.91W 2 1.7 KENTS BANK, CUMBRIA2015 12 MAY 07:05 27.81N 86.07E 15 7.3 NEPALAt least 153 people were killed in Nepal, 62 were killed in India, two in Bangladesh and one in Tibet. 2015 12 MAY 21:12 38.91N 142.03E 35 6.8 OFFSHORE HONSHU, JAPAN2015 19 MAY 15:25 54.33S 132.16W 7 6.7 PACIFIC/ANTARCTIC RIDGE2015 20 MAY 22:48 10.88S 164.17E 11 6.8 SOLOMON ISLANDS2015 22 MAY 01:52 51.30N 1.44E 12 4.2 RAMSGATE, KENTOver 1,800 reports from an automatic online questionnaire were received from members of the public who felt the earthquake, almost all coming from a 75km radius of the epicentre, and covering Ramsgate, Margate and their surrounding hamlets, as far as Dover and Folkestone (20–30km SW of the epicentre), Canterbury (25km west of the epicentre) and Herne Bay (20km NW of the epicentre). Further afield, reports were re-ceived from the Faversham, Chatham, Basildon and Southend-on-Sea areas. The most distant reports were from Cromer (175km to the north), Leicester (220km to the NW), Bicester (190km to the WNW) and Andover (200km to the WSW). (Max Intensity 5 EMS).2015 22 MAY 21:45 11.06S 163.70E 11 6.9 SOLOMON ISLANDS2015 22 MAY 23:59 11.11S 163.22E 10 6.8 SOLOMON ISLANDS


Year Day MonTime



2015 26 MAY 15:41 53.12N 4.36W 9 3.0 CAERNARFON, GWYNEDDFelt throughout Anglesey and also felt in Gwynedd (mostly to the north of the County), on the Lleyn Penin-sula and by people in Conwy (Max Intensity 3 EMS).2015 29 MAY 07:00 56.59N 156.43W 72 6.7 ALASKA PENINSULA2015 30 MAY 11:23 27.84N 140.49E 664 7.8 BONIN ISLANDS, JAPANTwelve people injured in Tokyo.2015 30 MAY 18:09 53.99N 1.88W 7 1.7 SKIPTON, NORTH YORKSHIRE2015 30 MAY 19:20 54.33N 1.86W 11 2.6 BELLERBY, NORTH YORKSHIREFelt Crackpot (2 EMS).2015 04 JUN 23:15 5.99N 116.54E 10 6.0 BORNEO, MALAYSIAAt least eighteen people killed, several others injured and many hostels, schools and public buildings dam-aged in the Kundasang-Ranau area, Sabah, Borneo.2015 10 JUN 13:03 51.06N 4.71W 23 2.0 BRISTOL CHANNEL2015 12 JUN 09:38 51.71N 4.16W 6 1.8 LLANELLI, CARMARTHENSHIRE2015 16 JUN 16:02 53.56N 1.66W 11 1.8 PENISTONE, SOUTH YORKSHIRE2015 17 JUN 12:51 35.36S 17.16W 10 7.0 SOUTHERN MID-ATLANTIC RIDGE2015 23 JUN 12:18 27.74N 139.73E 460 6.5 BONIN ISLANDS, JAPAN2015 26 JUN 11:55 53.32N 3.33W 5 1.9 HOLYWELL, FLINTSHIRE2015 30 JUN 07:59 53.32N 2.60E 18 2.9 SOUTHERN NORTH SEA2015 03 JUL 01:07 37.46N 78.15E 20 6.4 SOUTHWEST XINJIANGThree people killed, over 250 others injured and around 3,000 homes destroyed in the Hotan area.2015 06 JUL 07:59 56.96N 7.20E 29 2.5 EASTERN NORTH SEA2015 08 JUL 14:32 57.25N 6.70E 27 3.1 EASTERN NORTH SEA2015 09 JUL 05:12 55.98N 11.89W 21 1.9 ATLANTIC, NW OF IRELAND2015 10 JUL 04:12 9.31S 158.40E 12 6.7 SOLOMON ISLANDS2015 10 JUL 22:40 62.73N 2.23E 26 3.2 NORTHERN NORTH SEA2015 12 JUL 03:49 49.25N 1.684W 4 1.3 JERSEY, CHANNEL ISLANDSFelt Jersey (2 EMS).2015 16 JUL 15:16 13.87N 58.55W 20 6.5 WINDWARD ISLANDS2015 17 JUL 09:58 54.70N 3.04W 5 1.6 CALDBECK, CUMBRIA2015 18 JUL 02:27 10.40S 165.14E 11 7.0 SOLOMON ISLANDS2015 20 JUL 22:36 56.66N 5.21W 10 1.3 BALLACHULISH, HIGHLANDFelt Ballachulish (2 EMS).2015 22 JUL 19:12 50.06N 0.51W 5 1.9 ENGLISH CHANNEL2015 24 JUL 20:59 33.86N 73.19E 17 5.1 PAKISTANThree people killed and one injured in Abottabad.2015 27 JUL 04:49 52.38N 169.45W 29 6.9 ALEUTIAN ISLANDS2015 27 JUL 21:41 2.63S 138.53E 48 7.0 PAPUA NEW GUINEAOne person killed, eight buildings destroyed, several other buildings damaged and many roads damaged in Kasonawejo and Mamberamo.2015 31 JUL 15:38 53.00N 5.35W 10 1.8 IRISH SEA2015 06 AUG 15:03 53.18N 2.17E 4 4.1 SOUTHERN NORTH SEAFelt Sheringham and Hickling on the Norfolk coast and also felt on nearby oil platforms in the Laman Alpha field (3 EMS).


Year Day MonTime



2015 07 AUG 01:25 2.14S 28.90E 11 5.8 SOUTH KIVU, CONGOAt least two people killed in Katana.2015 10 AUG 04:12 9.34S 158.05E 22 6.6 SOLOMON ISLANDS2015 12 AUG 18:49 9.33S 157.88E 6 6.5 SOLOMON ISLANDS2015 16 AUG 14:54 57.49N 5.26W 11 1.6 ACHNASHEEN, HIGHLAND2015 20 AUG 05:25 48.92N 9.60W 5 2.6 CELTIC SEA2015 26 AUG 17:29 59.05N 1.78E 10 2.2 NORTHERN NORTH SEA2015 12 SEP 02:00 53.15N 4.47W 7 1.7 CAERNARFON BAY, GWYNEDDFelt Rhosneigr, Tregarth, Llangefni, Brynsiencyn, Gwalchmai, Llanllechid and Waunfawr, North Wales (3 EMS).2015 13 SEP 08:14 24.91N 109.62W 10 6.7 GULF OF CALIFORNIA2015 16 SEP 22:54 31.57S 71.67W 22 8.3 COQUIMBO, CHILEAt least fifteen people killed, four still missing (presumed dead), over 35 others were injured and over 2,800 houses destroyed or damaged from the earthquake and resultant tsunami in Coquimbo, Valparaiso and San-tiago Metropolitana regions. The Pacific-wide tsunami which was generated had a maximum wave height of 4.75m, recorded at Coquimbo, Chile.2015 16 SEP 23:18 31.56S 71.43W 28 7.0 COQUIMBO, CHILE2015 17 SEP 03:55 31.42S 71.69W 27 6.5 COQUIMBO, CHILE2015 17 SEP 04:10 31.52S 71.80W 23 6.7 COQUIMBO, CHILE2015 21 SEP 17:40 31.73S 71.38W 21 6.6 COQUIMBO, CHILE2015 22 SEP 21:40 52.70N 0.72W 3 2.8 OAKHAM, RUTLANDOver 800 reports from an automatic online macroseismic questionnaire were received from members of the public who felt the earthquake, almost all within a 20km radius of the epicentre, and mainly from Oakham and the surrounding area. There were a number of reports received from locations further afield, the ex-tremes being from near Burton-upon-Trent (60km west of the epicentre), Northampton (50km to the south) and Wisbech (55km to the east). (Max Intensity 3 EMS).2015 24 SEP 15:53 0.62S 131.26E 18 6.6 WEST PAPUA, INDONESIAAt least 62 people injured and 260 houses damaged in Kabupaten Sorong.2015 08 OCT 22:04 55.13N 3.89W 4 1.2 MONIAIVE, D & GFelt Moniaive, Dunscore, Loch Urr and Lochfoot (3 EMS).2015 11 OCT 02:46 53.57N 2.20E 6 2.1 SOUTHERN NORTH SEA2015 17 OCT 11:33 25.47S 64.48W 17 5.8 ARGENTINATwo people killed, 30 others injured and 22 homes destroyed in El Galpon.2015 20 OCT 21:52 14.86S 167.30E 135 7.1 VANUATU2015 27 OCT 09:09 36.52N 70.37E 231 7.5 HINDU KUSH, AFGHANISTANAt least 395 people killed, over 2,000 others injured and over 100,000 homes/buildings destroyed or dam-aged in Jalalabad, Afghanistan and in northern Pakistan (mainly in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa).2015 30 OCT 22:56 56.71N 6.43W 2 1.6 COLL, ARGYLL & BUTE2015 04 NOV 03:44 8.34S 124.86E 20 6.5 KEPULAUAN ALOR, INDONESIAMany buildings and homes damaged on Pulau Alor and Timor.2015 07 NOV 06:58 8.47N 71.40W 15 5.6 VENEZUELAOne person killed and four others injured by a rockfall in Merida.2015 07 NOV 07:31 30.88S 71.45W 46 6.8 COQUIMBO, CHILE2015 08 NOV 16:47 6.84N 94.65E 10 6.6 SUMATRA, INDONESIA2015 09 NOV 16:03 51.64N 173.08W 15 6.5 ALEUTIAN ISLANDS2015 11 NOV 01:54 29.51S 72.01W 12 6.9 COQUIMBO, CHILE


Year Day MonTime



2015 11 NOV 02:46 29.51S 72.06W 10 6.9 COQUIMBO, CHILE2015 13 NOV 20:51 31.00N 128.87E 12 6.7 KYUSHU, JAPAN2015 17 NOV 07:10 38.67N 20.60E 11 6.5 LEFKADA, GREECETwo people killed, four injured and extensive damage occurred on Lefkada.2015 18 NOV 18:31 8.90S 158.42E 13 6.8 SOLOMON ISLANDS2015 19 NOV 09:24 53.24N 1.20W 5 1.8 WARSOP, NOTTINGHAMSHIRE2015 19 NOV 10:31 53.24N 1.20W 6 1.7 WARSOP, NOTTINGHAMSHIRE2015 19 NOV 14:18 56.86N 7.46E 10 3.7 EASTERN NORTH SEA2015 20 NOV 21:48 53.24N 1.12W 5 1.7 WARSOP, NOTTINGHAMSHIRE2015 21 NOV 00:55 53.25N 1.12W 5 1.8 WARSOP, NOTTINGHAMSHIRE2015 22 NOV 18:16 36.43N 71.42E 102 5.7 HINDU KUSH, AFGHANISTANOne person killed, one person injured and one house damaged in Dandukai, Pakistan.2015 22 NOV 20:38 8.52N 71.39W 10 5.1 VENEZUELAOne person killed (by a landslide), three people injured and six homes damaged in Merida.2015 24 NOV 22:45 10.54S 70.94W 606 7.6 PERU2015 24 NOV 22:50 10.06S 71.02W 620 7.6 PERU2015 25 NOV 20:30 53.26N 1.12W 5 1.9 WARSOP, NOTTINGHAMSHIRE2015 25 NOV 22:38 53.25N 1.12W 5 1.6 WARSOP, NOTTINGHAMSHIRE2015 26 NOV 02:10 53.25N 1.12W 5 2.1 WARSOP, NOTTINGHAMSHIREFelt Clumber Park (2 EMS).2015 26 NOV 05:45 9.18S 71.26W 602 6.7 BRAZIL2015 27 NOV 11:42 53.25N 1.12W 5 2.2 WARSOP, NOTTINGHAMSHIREFelt Meden Vale and Carburton (2 EMS).2015 04 DEC 22:25 47.62S 85.09E 35 7.1 SOUTHEAST INDIAN RIDGE2015 07 DEC 07:50 38.21N 72.78E 22 7.2 TAJIKISTANTwo people killed, at least 13 others injured (mainly from landslides and rockfalls) and over 1,500 buildings destroyed or damaged in Kuhistoni Badakhshon.2015 09 DEC 10:21 4.11S 129.51E 21 6.9 BANDA SEA2015 11 DEC 07:20 61.84N 4.30E 10 3.8 NORWEGIAN COAST2015 13 DEC 05:28 51.65N 3.21W 5 2.4 BLACKWOOD, CAERPHILLY2015 17 DEC 19:49 15.80N 93.63W 85 6.5 CHIAPAS, MEXICOTwo people killed in Cocotitlan.2015 21 DEC 10:31 56.97N 7.01E 17 4.0 EASTERN NORTH SEA2015 24 DEC 01:59 52.80S 2.82W 13 1.5 LLANFACHRETH, GWYNEDDFelt Upper Corris (2 EMS).2015 25 DEC 19:14 36.49N 71.13E 206 6.3 HINDU KUSH, AFGHANISTANFour people killed, several others injured and scores of houses destroyed in Gilgit-Baltisan, Pakistan and in northeast Afghanistan.2015 27 DEC 14:33 51.67N 3.18W 11 1.8 BLACKWOOD, CAERPHILLY2015 27 DEC 21:54 51.66N 3.18W 9 1.8 BLACKWOOD, CAERPHILLY2015 28 DEC 22:11 51.66N 3.17W 10 1.6 BLACKWOOD, CAERPHILLY2015 30 DEC 01:03 51.66N 3.16W 11 1.9 BLACKWOOD, CAERPHILLYFelt Crosskeys (2 EMS).

Date post:	13-Jan-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

S ISSN 0967-859X THE SOCIETY FOR EARTHQUAKE AND CIVIL ENGINEERING DYNAMICS … · 2018-06-24 ·...

Documents