| c2R |
23rd September 2002 22:22 |
Quote:
Originally posted by Xerxes
A large part of the "percieved" strongness of a quake is what your structure is built on- solid rock does well, saturated sand and particle materials react terrible- think of shaking dirt in a bowl compared to a one large piece of rock. I dont know what All of england is built on, but I would imagine that a lot of their older brick architecture combined with the earthquake rarity is what got people so worked up.
|
Yes, most of the south-east of England and the Midlands is sand, gravel, or clay - there's very little solid rock about.
Also, earthquakes of any magnitude (read earthquakes that you can actually notice) are incredibly rare - one every two or three decades. Add to this practically all building outside the centres of big cities (where steel, glass, and concrete skyscrapers prevail) are of brick construction.
Think of an analogy where people in California get a light dusting of snow one winter - something to perhaps get excited about - but Scandinavians or Canadians wouldn't bat an eyelid. |
