Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

If I remember correctly, Turkiyé (did I spel it write?) has always had a bunch of rolling heads, after buildings fall down like dominoes, during their frequent quakes.

Doesn't seem to have changed things.

Japan, on the other hand, seems to have a really hard-core construction ethos.

During quakes there, buildings rock around like they are at a rave, and don't fall down.

If we ever have a big quake in New York, we're screwed.




> quake in New York

Fwiw, I just now enjoyed "Local Geology of New York City and Its Effect on Seismic Ground Motions"(2004)[1]. There's also [2], less fun, but 2020, and has a more extensive soil map.

Briefly, NYC area has a moderate earthquake risk (a magnitude 5+ per century, two 6+ per thousand years), but "it is important to keep in mind that NYC buildings prior to 1995 were not designed at all for seismic loads"[2], and NYC surface is mostly class D medium-dense soil with glacial till and human fill.

[1] https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=261... [2] https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Konstantinos-Syngros/pu...


I’m close with someone who does inspections in both US and third world contexts. Apparently, the US pretty much complies with safety related building codes compared to many other places.


Well New York isn’t on an active fault line. I think California would fare pretty well, as much as can be expected after the big one.


I have heard that the issue with New York, is that we have this solid rock substrate, and the buildings are anchored directly to it.

In Japan, I have heard that the buildings actually have some kind of "shock absorber" structure, in their basements, and lots of counterweights.


Active protection systems (big hydraulic dampers (passive and active)) and tuned mass dampers/diagonal dampers.


Yes they are anchored to the schist substrate. The point I’m trying to make is you generally don’t build to account for earthquakes if you’re not on a fault line.


>as much as can be expected after the big one

It blows my mind to think that at some point in history the world's 2nd largest metro center (by GDP) is going to become rubble, and everyone knows about it, and we know it will happen for sure but there's not much that could be done but wait and see.


We don't know it will happen. The release of seismic stress can happen in many ways and we don't know enough to know anything for sure. A series of 7 or 8 quakes over a decade could relieve identified stresses to the point where a 9+ is put off for another 100+ years. After that even if statistically you can expect a major event "at some point" in the future, the damage from that event decreases with time as our building methods improve. Even today buildings are being built (in Tokyo) going up designed to withstand a 9.0 quake.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: