12-01-2011, 06:18 PM
|
#11 (permalink)
|
|
Track Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: (.)(.)
Posts: 931
Drives: 8====D
Rep Power: 18
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spikuh
For example, and people please correct me if I am wrong beacuse I am going from memory, the Japanese reactors that failed and melted down were built and designed to stand up to a magnitude 6 earthquake. The one they experienced was a magnitude 9 and they didn't fail. It was not until their backup generators responsible for operating the cooling system (unwisely put in the basements) got flooded from the tsunami that the reactors blew up.
But how many people actually know that? How many people realize that the reactors themselves were mostly fine and would have faired much better had the backup generators been placed in an area that couldn't flood?
|
You are right in that the tsunami was what caused the total failure.
Buildings aren't really designed based on magnitudes though. Magnitude is just a measurement of how much energy the earthquake released. Buildings are designed based on how much ground acceleration the earthquake causes. In the Japan earthquake, even though the magnitude was one of the highest ever, the acceleration was pretty low (~0.5g). California tends to get higher accelerations though (Northridge >1.0g) which causes alot of building damage. I'd be more concerned about eathquake damage to nuclear plants in California.
__________________
|
|
|
Similar Threads
Threaded Mode
