Aftershocks instead of seismic events?
Aftershocks instead of seismic events?
(OP)
Check out this story.
http: //news.yah oo.com/s/l ivescience /20091104/ sc_livesci ence/recen tmidwestqu akescalled aftershock sfrom1800s
Does anyone believe this will have a bearing on seismic design for particular regions of the U.S. and work it's way into the IBC?
http:
Does anyone believe this will have a bearing on seismic design for particular regions of the U.S. and work it's way into the IBC?






RE: Aftershocks instead of seismic events?
RE: Aftershocks instead of seismic events?
Personally, I don't see that this changes anything. It is just someone's opinion and it may change tomorrow.
Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
RE: Aftershocks instead of seismic events?
Quakes are caused by motion of a fault, yet the researcher seems to contradict this in his interview. He seems to imply that aftershocks are not truly earthquakes. I suspect this research will little effect on seismic design in the midwest. USGS published the following fact sheet which seems to dismiss Stein's idea.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2009/3071/
However, the USGS is doing some research that may be more promising.
http:/
http://e
RE: Aftershocks instead of seismic events?
JAE, I did mean do you think this could result in lower seismic intensities to be designed for at some point in the future.
Mike, I agree that a seismic event is not something that can be neatly put into a box. It's all just approximations. As engineers, however, we have to design for something. I was just asking if anyone thought this study might result in that something being a little smaller.
RE: Aftershocks instead of seismic events?
Here's the story I meant to post in the last post. The USGS statement does seem to dismiss this as nonsense!
RE: Aftershocks instead of seismic events?
I think the only "lowering" achieved will be through technology to literally go with the flow of the force.
Resistance is futile...
Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
RE: Aftershocks instead of seismic events?