Chile earthquake: 8.3-magnitude quake strikes off coast

  • metta

    Posts: 39107

    Sep 17, 2015 1:08 AM GMT
    Chile earthquake: 8.3-magnitude quake strikes off coast


    http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/16/americas/chile-earthquake/
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14348

    Sep 17, 2015 12:45 PM GMT
    It is the Pacific ring of fire so earthquakes are part of living anywhere near the Pacific Ocean. Like Alaska, California, Japan, and New Zealand, Chile is ridden with active fault lines. I wonder if Santiago is ready for a big one since that city has been building a lot of towering skyscrapers. Are those new skyscrapers designed and built to withstand violent tremorsicon_question.gif Santiago successfully dodged a bullet when the last violent earthquake rocked Chile.
  • metta

    Posts: 39107

    Sep 17, 2015 3:59 PM GMT
    Small Tsunami Waves Reach California, Hawaii After Deadly Magnitude-8.3 Earthquake Rocks Chile


    http://www.weather.com/news/news/chile-major-earthquake-tsunami-warning
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4864

    Sep 19, 2015 7:39 AM GMT
    Has Pat Robertson said anything about the cause of the earthquake?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 19, 2015 9:45 AM GMT
    I remember some councillor from Surrey (Vancouver BC) being interviewed as to how Surrey would cope with its sandy subsoil being turned to jello (as seismologists have suggested it will) when the 'big one' strikes. She, very fatalistically, replied there was little that could be done in such an event. Those on the North Shore may fare better, as their foundations tend to be built on bedrock.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14348

    Sep 19, 2015 12:07 PM GMT
    mountain_view saidThe topic had already been posted.

    Did you hear the tsunami wave ??? (see below)

    In the last Chilean quake, many skyscrapers collapsed. The country has standards but they have not been enforced in recent years.

    Seattle and Portland are expected to have skyscrapers collapse in the next quake off the coast. Neither Washington or Oregon or Nevada have any building codes, unlike California.

    However, older, unreinforced buildings in metro LA are highly vulnerable.

    LA will also have skyscrapers collapse from the San Andreas Fault if it is a very large 7.X +

    The picturesque Loma Linda Medical Tower (photo below) would collapse (5 miles from the fault). That's why the medical center has a Vision 2020 project to build a quake safe tower in the parking lot next to it. The old tower will be presumably reinforced, and become faculty offices.

    Same with Irvine, Newport Beach (which apparently have skyscrapers, unlike Scottsdale - see related threads on the Mirage of Arizona LOL) - I don't know if they are newer than those in L.A., and if so, whether they meet the newer standards to meet a 7.5+ quake that could occur from the Newport - Englewood Fault. There would be thousands of deaths from 1960's era condos on the coast such as Laguna Beach.

    Wow. Irvine, such a beautiful and thriving city to have a major catastrophe. For Scottsdale, Phoenix, and Tempe to collapse, that would just be dust in the wind, there's nothing here but a bunch of rich snobs. Most ASU students are quite wealthy with apartments up to $1700 a month LOL icon_biggrin.gif No significantly active faults within 240 miles of Scottsdale it is safe, but if you're bi- or just want to know your neighbors, the girls are all slutty cokeheads or heroin junkies.icon_redface.gificon_eek.gif

    previous,
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/4113965/

    Now, Rob, before you see the cross on the tower and go after bible thumpers icon_biggrin.gif note that the 7th day adventists who run Loma Linda are not this way, they like the LDS are some of the finest and most decent people within the Christian faiths - The Southern Baptists are to be feared in Arizona; they have taken over Arizona from the Mormons and do not allow gays to worship in their Churches. They are the most rude, nastiest drivers on the Arizona freeways, and they are rich, greedy, wealthy, and spend all their money on coke and heroin.

    llumc.jpg
    I think that there should have been a strict 35 story height limit for both Los Angeles and Santiago since both massive cities are facing grave uncertainties regarding future earthquakes.
  • Apparition

    Posts: 3525

    Sep 19, 2015 1:13 PM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 saidI remember some councillor from Surrey (Vancouver BC) being interviewed as to how Surrey would cope with its sandy subsoil being turned to jello (as seismologists have suggested it will) when the 'big one' strikes. She, very fatalistically, replied there was little that could be done in such an event. Those on the North Shore may fare better, as their foundations tend to be built on bedrock.


    Surrey will be a sad tragedy. The modelling i have seen is liquifaction and burial of most areas. Meaning the buildings just sink into the ground like water. There will be few survivors and there will be nothing to save as it will all be buried.
  • metta

    Posts: 39107

    Sep 19, 2015 3:26 PM GMT
    All of the tall buildings in LA had to take earthquakes into consideration when they were designed and built.

    Actually, I'm pretty sure that every new building needs to take that into consideration. I know that they took it into consideration in building my home. The foundation has steel bands that criss-cross in opposite directions so that in a major earthquake, the entire home moves together.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 19, 2015 7:41 PM GMT
    The Really Big One
    An earthquake will destroy a sizable portion of the coastal Northwest. The question is when.

    Kenneth Murphy, who directs FEMA’s Region X, the division responsible for Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and Alaska, says, “Our operating assumption is that everything west of Interstate 5 will be toast.”



    http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big-one
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4864

    Sep 19, 2015 8:45 PM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 saidI remember some councillor from Surrey (Vancouver BC) being interviewed as to how Surrey would cope with its sandy subsoil being turned to jello (as seismologists have suggested it will) when the 'big one' strikes. She, very fatalistically, replied there was little that could be done in such an event. Those on the North Shore may fare better, as their foundations tend to be built on bedrock.


    Such fatalism can be fatal. Either they should not build on sandy soil or they should sink pilings down to bedrock.
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4864

    Sep 19, 2015 8:48 PM GMT
    Apparition said
    Ex_Mil8 saidI remember some councillor from Surrey (Vancouver BC) being interviewed as to how Surrey would cope with its sandy subsoil being turned to jello (as seismologists have suggested it will) when the 'big one' strikes. She, very fatalistically, replied there was little that could be done in such an event. Those on the North Shore may fare better, as their foundations tend to be built on bedrock.


    Surrey will be a sad tragedy. The modelling i have seen is liquifaction and burial of most areas. Meaning the buildings just sink into the ground like water. There will be few survivors and there will be nothing to save as it will all be buried.


    Not quite.

    There is no reason to suppose that they will sink straight down as if they were an elevator. Many will sink more on one side than the other and fall over. In any case, it is not a good situation.

    Retrofit may be possible if they can sink pilings down to bedrock and use them to support buildings.
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4864

    Sep 19, 2015 8:50 PM GMT
    metta saidAll of the tall buildings in LA had to take earthquakes into consideration when they were designed and built.

    Actually, I'm pretty sure that every new building needs to take that into consideration. I know that they took it into consideration in building my home. The foundation has steel bands that criss-cross in opposite directions so that in a major earthquake, the entire home moves together.


    But if they are build on soil that liquifies, the criss-cross braces which are common in California will not keep them from sinking or tipping over.
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4864

    Sep 26, 2015 7:31 AM GMT
    whitewater said
    FRE0 said
    Ex_Mil8 saidI remember some councillor from Surrey (Vancouver BC) being interviewed as to how Surrey would cope with its sandy subsoil being turned to jello (as seismologists have suggested it will) when the 'big one' strikes. She, very fatalistically, replied there was little that could be done in such an event. Those on the North Shore may fare better, as their foundations tend to be built on bedrock.


    Such fatalism can be fatal. Either they should not build on sandy soil or they should sink pilings down to bedrock.


    I don't know about Vancouver Canada, but sadly, much of Seattle has been built on fill dirt. Sedimentary strata, bedrock, would be very deep, so skyscrapers would collapse. Plus, Washington, Oregon, and Nevada have no seismic standards. I don't know if Canada has standards.

    Freo, does Albuquerque have standards, there's a giant rift zone, and Rio Rancho is built on sand....


    I'm not aware of any earthquake standards here in Albuquerque. I have not noticed any cross-bracing of the type that is common and often quite visible in California. When I lived in San Diego there were minor tremors from time to time but I have not felt even one here in Albuquerque.
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4864

    Sep 26, 2015 7:36 AM GMT
    whitewater said
    FRE0 said
    metta saidAll of the tall buildings in LA had to take earthquakes into consideration when they were designed and built.

    Actually, I'm pretty sure that every new building needs to take that into consideration. I know that they took it into consideration in building my home. The foundation has steel bands that criss-cross in opposite directions so that in a major earthquake, the entire home moves together.


    But if they are build on soil that liquifies, the criss-cross braces which are common in California will not keep them from sinking or tipping over.


    Liquifaction would be severe in Palm Springs and Joshua tree which are all sand, since they are ancient seabed.

    New homes are designed to keep you alive in these areas, since they would not collapse, but could sustain such major damage that they could be condemned until they are rebuilt.

    The new whole foods in Palm desert, I watched that go up. Lots of metal. It will not collapse but the concrete blocks and stucco will have major structural and cosmetic damage.

    Freo......how many deaths would you estimate in the coachella valley, Seattle, and Vancouver.....


    I won't even attempt to make such an estimate; I do not feel qualified to do so.

    One technique not mentioned here is to isolate buildings from the ground so the ground can shake horizontally while the building is affected very little. A google search on "earthquake isolators" will provide good information. Of course that would not prevent buildings from sinking or tipping over if they are built on something which liquifies.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 27, 2015 11:52 AM GMT
    I do love these Forums, that go round and round like a stuck record. The Chilean Earthquake happened over two weeks ago. The Tsunami generated was roughly two storey's high or 16ft. Here's a tip, before you reply to a Forum Post that depicts recent news or politics. Please check the date and Google for more facts. I can just imagine next year this time, this Forum will start afresh 'even though old and stale', someone will blow new life into it. Oh, why I bother? If I rather had a big Penis in my mouth, it would be a mouthful worth it.
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4864

    Sep 27, 2015 6:39 PM GMT
    whitewater said^^^^^^

    Great info, thanks, here's rubber bearings under this building --

    http://www.seismicisolation.com/

    Lots of great photos of this on Google Images,

    [url]https://www.google.com/search?site=&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1366&bih=657&q=%22earthquake+isolators%22&oq=%22earthquake+isolators%22&gs_l=img.3..0i30j0i8i30.816.4730.0.4990.22.22.0.0.0.0.125.1846.21j1.22.0....0...1ac.1.64.img..1.21.1767.SEh-usrnHeI[/url]

    Instead of Palm Springs, CA spending millions on revitilizing the downtown and building the 7 story hotel, I'd like to see them spend money on retrofitting existing apartments, i.e. Deepwell with its underground garage, and, the Marquee, Andalucia, and Mojave Blue 3 story towers built at least 30 years ago.

    As a former resident there, I felt that the City Council was not keeping me safe from property crimes and earthquakes. They are not like LA which has more codes.


    Rubber may have a limited life, but perhaps the rubber bearings can be replaced periodically. I'd expect the metal roller bearings to have a longer life.