Apr 7, 2009 #21 dik Structural Apr 13, 2001 26,069 They had an aftershock of approx 5.6 this afternoon. Dik
Apr 7, 2009 #22 cvg Civil/Environmental Dec 16, 1999 6,868 damage is relative to the built environment, but size is well defined - 6.3 is just above moderate - moderately strong.
damage is relative to the built environment, but size is well defined - 6.3 is just above moderate - moderately strong.
Apr 8, 2009 #23 msquared48 Structural Aug 7, 2007 14,745 When Cascadia ruptures, it's going to be over a 9. Currently, our codes only design to somewhere around a 7 from what I recall. Bottom line is that in some time in the future, local engineers here are going to have a lot of work. So will the undertakers. Mike McCann MMC Engineering
When Cascadia ruptures, it's going to be over a 9. Currently, our codes only design to somewhere around a 7 from what I recall. Bottom line is that in some time in the future, local engineers here are going to have a lot of work. So will the undertakers. Mike McCann MMC Engineering
May 16, 2009 #24 hokie66 Structural Jul 19, 2006 23,228 Recent article in ENR about the Italian earthquake. http://enr.construction.com/buildings/construction_methods/2009/0515-ItalianQuake.asp
Recent article in ENR about the Italian earthquake. http://enr.construction.com/buildings/construction_methods/2009/0515-ItalianQuake.asp
May 17, 2009 Thread starter #25 JAE Structural Jun 27, 2000 15,611 So from that it appears that the basic things we do today in seismic codes do make a difference.
