nyc new earthquake faults found

huangyhg

nyc new earthquake faults found
i saw this the other day on msnbc.
this is terrible news for all structural engineers in the ne us. i say this because none of them have any experience with seismic and the code bodies are going to modify the maps for sure.
can't wait to see how this affects the entire industry.
rc
all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
    edmund burke

i am wondering when the world trade centers imploded on 9/11 what the impact of that was regarding any newly developed faults. it seems like the nyc bedrock is real solid. thankfully.
i live in missouri - we get a 5 or greater about every 10-15 years and we sit near a major fault that is about 100 miles south.  a few bricks fall off some very old buildings.  but that is about it.
my understanding is that most nuclear plants are designed to take a direct strike from a jet.  a 5.0 is not going to do anything except maybe knock it offline for a few minutes because some one panics and hits the red button.
agree with mike, a 5.0 is not considered a large earthquake but only "moderate".  i've been through a 6.5 and a 7.4 (among numerous other smaller ones) and both within 60 miles of the epicenter.  some broken glass and a few cracks in the chimney and the driveway plus loss of power - otherwise no damage at all.
it depends on the standard of construction.  with a lot of unreinforced masonry buildings, major damage and loss of life can occur in a 5.0 earthquake.  happens all the time in the middle east and china.  i think a 5.0 in nyc could create havoc if it occurred in the right place and at the right level below the surface.  
new york has 6% and 35% of g for 1 second and 0.2 second respectively.  not insignificant, may control depending on soil type.
i wouldn't want to be on the top floor during an earthquake (especially depending on the building type/height).
it depends greatly on the length of time the earthquake lasts, as well as the combination of p & s waves involved.  this has much more to do with the nature of the earthquake and tranmitting strata than the richter scale magnitude.
some of the most damaging earthquakes are lower-scale, but longer duration.
cheers,
ys
b.eng (carleton)
working in new zealand, thinking of my snow covered home...
it's all energy related... time, intensity, materials...
mike mccann
mmc engineering
dead right mike, and richter does little to meaningfully measure the energies which concern us professionally. in my honest opinion, the simple fact is that the richter scale, while useful for laymen and news media, is far less than ideal for engineers.
cheers,
ys
b.eng (carleton)
working in new zealand, thinking of my snow covered home...
a bigger problem would be liquifaction, esp in the south end near the water where structures are piled into fills
unauthorized reproduction or linking forbidden without express written permission.
i saw this the other day on msnbc.
this is terrible news for all structural engineers in the ne us. i say this because none of them have any experience with seismic and the code bodies are going to modify the maps for sure.
can't wait to see how this affects the entire industry.
rc
all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
    edmund burke

i am wondering when the world trade centers imploded on 9/11 what the impact of that was regarding any newly developed faults. it seems like the nyc bedrock is real solid. thankfully.
i live in missouri - we get a 5 or greater about every 10-15 years and we sit near a major fault that is about 100 miles south.  a few bricks fall off some very old buildings.  but that is about it.
my understanding is that most nuclear plants are designed to take a direct strike from a jet.  a 5.0 is not going to do anything except maybe knock it offline for a few minutes because some one panics and hits the red button.
agree with mike, a 5.0 is not considered a large earthquake but only "moderate".  i've been through a 6.5 and a 7.4 (among numerous other smaller ones) and both within 60 miles of the epicenter.  some broken glass and a few cracks in the chimney and the driveway plus loss of power - otherwise no damage at all.
it depends on the standard of construction.  with a lot of unreinforced masonry buildings, major damage and loss of life can occur in a 5.0 earthquake.  happens all the time in the middle east and china.  i think a 5.0 in nyc could create havoc if it occurred in the right place and at the right level below the surface.  
new york has 6% and 35% of g for 1 second and 0.2 second respectively.  not insignificant, may control depending on soil type.
i wouldn't want to be on the top floor during an earthquake (especially depending on the building type/height).
it depends greatly on the length of time the earthquake lasts, as well as the combination of p & s waves involved.  this has much more to do with the nature of the earthquake and tranmitting strata than the richter scale magnitude.
some of the most damaging earthquakes are lower-scale, but longer duration.
cheers,
ys
b.eng (carleton)
working in new zealand, thinking of my snow covered home...
it's all energy related... time, intensity, materials...
mike mccann
mmc engineering
dead right mike, and richter does little to meaningfully measure the energies which concern us professionally. in my honest opinion, the simple fact is that the richter scale, while useful for laymen and news media, is far less than ideal for engineers.
cheers,
ys
b.eng (carleton)
working in new zealand, thinking of my snow covered home...