[143981] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: East Coast Earthquake 8-23-2011
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Roy)
Thu Aug 25 01:55:16 2011
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 22:53:41 -0700
From: Roy <r.engehausen@gmail.com>
CC: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.GSO.2.00.1108242149220.20903@clifden.donelan.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 8/24/2011 7:18 PM, Sean Donelan wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2011, Leigh Porter wrote:
>> Indeed, we are not going to be building earthquake proof buildings in
>> London for example.
>
> Of course there is no such thing as earthquake proof. The Earth is
> still a single point of failure :-)
>
> Essential facilty design usally takes the "standard" design
> probabilities for various hazards (heat, cold, wind, rain, earthquake,
> etc) and multiplies it by a larger safety factor. It doesn't mean
> designing for
> the most extreme situation possible anywhere. You've got to rely on the
> geologists and structual engineers to know their stuff.
>
> In any case, its still just a probability. No matter how small the
> probability, any facility can still have a failure. Have a backup plan
> somewhere else with a different set of hazards.
>
>
Many years ago I was taught that "earthquake proof" means the building
doesn't kill the occupants and not that the structure survives
unscathed.. As examples, they used a hospital that was damaged in the
magnitude 6.6 Sylmar quake of 1971 The building was basically destroyed
but only four people were killed.
