Relevant bibliographies by topics / 1906 San Francisco earthquake / Journal articles
To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: 1906 San Francisco earthquake.

Journal articles on the topic '1906 San Francisco earthquake'

Author: Grafiati
Published: 4 June 2021
Last updated: 25 January 2023

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles

Select a source type:

Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic '1906 San Francisco earthquake.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.

1

Wald, David J., Hiroo Kanamori, Donald V. Helmberger, and Thomas H. Heaton. "Source study of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 83, no. 4 (August 1, 1993): 981–1019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/bssa0830040981.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract All quality teleseismic recordings of the great 1906 San Francisco earthquake archived in the 1908 Carnegie Report by the State Earthquake Investigation Commission were scanned and digitized. First order results were obtained by comparing complexity and amplitudes of teleseismic waveforms from the 1906 earthquake with well calibrated, similarly located, more recent earthquakes (1979 Coyote Lake, 1984 Morgan Hill, and 1989 Loma Prieta earthquakes) at nearly co-located modern stations. Peak amplitude ratios for calibration events indicated that a localized moment release of about 1 to 1.5 × 1027 dyne-cm was responsible for producing the peak the teleseismic body wave arrivals. At longer periods (50 to 80 sec), we found spectral amplitude ratios of the surface waves require a total moment release between 4 and 6 × 1027 dyne-cm for the 1906 earthquake, comparable to previous geodetic and surface wave estimates (Thatcher, 1975). We then made a more detailed source analysis using Morgan Hill S body waves as empirical Green's Functions in a finite fault subevent summation. The Morgan Hill earthquake was deemed most appropriate for this purpose as its mechanism is that of the 1906 earthquake in the central portion of the rupture. From forward and inverse empirical summations of Morgan Hill Green's functions, we obtained a good fit to the best quality teleseismic waveforms with a relatively simple source model having two regions of localized strong radiation separated spatially by about 110 km. Assuming the 1906 epicenter determined by Bolt (1968), this corresponds with a large asperity (on the order of the Loma Prieta earthquake) in the Golden Gate/San Francisco region and one about three times larger located northwest along strike between Point Reyes and Fort Ross. This model implies that much of the 1906 rupture zone may have occurred with relatively little 10 to 20 sec radiation. Consideration of the amplitude and frequency content of the 1906 teleseismic data allowed us to estimate the scale length of the largest asperity to be less than about 40 km. With rough constraints on the largest asperity (size and magnitude) we produced a suite of estimated synthetic ground velocities assuming a slip distribution similar to that of the Loma Prieta earthquake but with three times as much slip. For purposes of comparison with the recent, abundant Loma Prieta strong motion data set, we “moved” the largest 1906 asperity into Loma Prieta region. Peak ground velocity amplitudes are substantially greater than those recorded during the Loma Prieta earthquake, and are comparable to those predicted by the attenuation relationship of Joyner and Boore (1988) for a magnitude MW = 7.7 earthquake.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

Toppozada, Tousson R., and Glenn Borchardt. "Re-evaluation of the 1836 “Hayward fault” and the 1838 San Andreas fault earthquakes." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 88, no. 1 (February 1, 1998): 140–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/bssa0880010140.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract Current seismic hazard models include two major earthquakes (M ∼ 7) in the San Francisco Bay area that are close in space and time: an 1836 event on the northern Hayward fault and an 1838 event on the peninsula section of the San Andreas fault. Analysis and interpretation of the available historical accounts indicate that the 1836 event occurred east of Monterey Bay, far from the Hayward fault, and was of M ∼ 6¼. Also, the 1838 event was not confined to the 60-km peninsula San Andreas as current models indicate. Instead, faulting probably extended from San Francisco to San Juan Bautista (∼ 140 km), indicating a significantly larger earthquake (M ∼ 7½) than previously thought. Damaging effects of the 1836 earthquake were reported only from Santa Clara to Carmel, and no contemporary effects were reported to the north of Santa Clara or near the Hayward fault. The illusion of an “1836 Hayward earthquake” evolved from a newspaper reminiscence published following the 1868 Hayward earthquake, stating that the 1868 effects in the East Bay were similar to those of an 1836 event. The article describes various strong effects in the East Bay that differ completely from the effects recorded for the 1836 earthquake but are very similar to those documented for the major 1838 San Andreas earthquake that caused extensive damage on both sides of San Francisco Bay. Based on this and other evidence, we conclude that the reminiscence describes the destructive June 1838 effects, but it erroneously indicates the date as June 1836. There is no evidence for any major historical earthquakes in the San Francisco Bay area before the 1838 earthquake, back to the founding of Mission San Francisco Dolores in 1776. During the 1838 San Andreas fault earthquake, the shaking intensity in Monterey was as strong as or stronger than during the great 1906 San Andreas fault earthquake. This suggests that the 1838 San Andreas fault rupture may have extended to San Juan Bautista as it did in 1906. Numerous probable aftershocks were felt in the area south of San Juan Bautista. These damaged Carmel and Santa Cruz in 1840, and Alisal, 16 km west of the San Andreas fault, in 1841. The northern end of the 1838 faulting was previously assumed to be 25 km south of San Francisco. However, Mission San Francisco Dolores was damaged in 1838 but not in 1906, suggesting that the 1838 faulting extended to San Francisco. Also, the 1838 aftershocks were felt in Oakland as frequently and violently as those following the major 1868 Hayward earthquake, suggesting that the 1838 faulting on the San Andreas extended to the latitude of Oakland. The 1838 fault segment ruptured again 68 years later as part of the overlapping 1906 San Andreas fault rupture. This, and similar evidence from southern California, indicates that M ∼ 7½ San Andreas fault earthquakes can recur at intervals of 68 years or less when they are followed by M ∼ 8 earthquakes on overlapping segments of the fault.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
3

ODELL, KERRY A., and MARC D. WEIDENMIER. "Real Shock, Monetary Aftershock: The 1906 San Francisco Earthquake and the Panic of 1907." Journal of Economic History 64, no. 4 (December 2004): 1002–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0022050704043062.

Full text
Abstract:
In April 1906 the San Francisco earthquake and fire caused damage equal to more than 1 percent of GNP. Although the real effect of this shock was localized, it had an international financial impact: large amounts of gold flowed into the country in autumn 1906 as foreign insurers paid claims on their San Francisco policies out of home funds. This outflow prompted the Bank of England to discriminate against American finance bills and, along with other European central banks, to raise interest rates. These policies pushed the United States into recession and set the stage for the Panic of 1907.San Francisco's $200,000,000 “ash heap” involves complications which will be felt on all financial markets for many months to come [and] the payment of losses sustained … represents a financial undertaking of far-reaching magnitude….The Financial Times [London], 6 July 1906
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
4

Scawthorn, C., T. D. O'Rourke, and F. T. Blackburn. "The 1906 San Francisco Earthquake and Fire—Enduring Lessons for Fire Protection and Water Supply." Earthquake Spectra 22, no. 2_suppl (April 2006): 135–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1193/1.2186678.

Full text
Abstract:
Prior to 18 April 1906 the San Francisco Fire Department and knowledgeable persons in the insurance industry regarded a conflagration in San Francisco as inevitable. The 1906 San Francisco earthquake and ensuing fire is the greatest single fire loss in U.S. history, with 492 city blocks destroyed and life loss now estimated at more than 3,000. This paper describes fire protection practices in the United States prior to 1906; the conditions in San Francisco on the eve of the disaster; ignitions, spread, and convergence of fires that generated the 1906 conflagration; and damage to the water supply system in 1906 that gave impetus to construction of the largest high-pressure water distribution network ever built—San Francisco's Auxiliary Water Supply System (AWSS). In the 1980s hydraulic network and fire simulation modeling identified weaknesses in the fire protection of San Francisco—problems mitigated by an innovative Portable Water Supply System (PWSS), which transports water long distances and helped extinguish the Marina fire during the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. The AWSS and PWSS concepts have been extended to other communities and provide many lessons, paramount of which is that communities need to develop an integrated disaster preparedness and response capability and be constantly vigilant in maintaining that capability. This lesson is especially relevant to highly seismic regions with large wood building inventories such as the western United States and Japan, which are at great risk of conflagration following an earthquake.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
5

Dean, Dennis R. "The San Francisco earthquake of 1906." Annals of Science 50, no. 6 (November 1993): 501–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00033799300200371.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
6

Harris, Ruth A. "Forecasts of the 1989 Loma Prieta, California, earthquake." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 88, no. 4 (August 1, 1998): 898–916. http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/bssa0880040898.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract The magnitude (Mw) 6.9 Loma Prieta earthquake struck the San Francisco Bay area of central California at 5:04 p.m. local time on 17 October 1989, killing 62 people and generating billions of dollars in property damage. Scientists were not surprised by the occurrence of a destructive earthquake in this region and had in fact been attempting to forecast the location of the next large earthquake in the San Francisco Bay area for decades. This article summarizes more than 20 scientifically based predictions made before the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake for a large earthquake that might occur in the Loma Prieta region. The predictions geographically closest to the actual earthquake primarily specified slip on the San Andreas fault northwest of San Juan Bautista. A number of the predictions did encompass the magnitude of the actual earthquake and at least one approximately encompassed the along-strike rupture length. Post-Loma Prieta studies of the 1906 San Francisco, California, earthquake in the Loma Prieta region of the San Andreas fault zone show the Loma Prieta and 1906 events with different senses of slip and fault-plane dip. Therefore, some have argued that the 1989 earthquake was not foreseen, even though (1) this earthquake appears to have released much of the horizontal strain accumulated since 1906, and (2) not all of the forecasts were based on 1906 behavior.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
7

Holzer, Thomas L., J. Luke Blair, Thomas E. Noce, and Michael J. Bennett. "Predicted Liquefaction of East Bay Fills during a Repeat of the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake." Earthquake Spectra 22, no. 2_suppl (April 2006): 261–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1193/1.2188018.

Full text
Abstract:
Predicted conditional probabilities of surface manifestations of liquefaction during a repeat of the 1906 San Francisco (M7.8) earthquake range from 0.54 to 0.79 in the area underlain by the sandy artificial fills along the eastern shore of San Francisco Bay near Oakland, California. Despite widespread liquefaction in 1906 of sandy fills in San Francisco, most of the East Bay fills were emplaced after 1906 without soil improvement to increase their liquefaction resistance. They have yet to be shaken strongly. Probabilities are based on the liquefaction potential index computed from 82 CPT soundings using median (50 th percentile) estimates of PGA based on a ground-motion prediction equation. Shaking estimates consider both distance from the San Andreas Fault and local site conditions. The high probabilities indicate extensive and damaging liquefaction will occur in East Bay fills during the next M∼7.8 earthquake on the northern San Andreas Fault.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
8

Otani, Shunsuke. "A Japanese View of the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake Disaster." Earthquake Spectra 22, no. 2_suppl (April 2006): 183–205. http://dx.doi.org/10.1193/1.2185647.

Full text
Abstract:
During the period from 20 May to 26 June 1906, Professor Toshikata Sano of the Imperial University of Tokyo investigated the building damage caused by the 1906 San Francisco earthquake and fire disaster. The main findings of Sano's investigation were (1) the number of casualties was deliberately reported smaller than it was known to be by the local government, (2) the fire disaster was extensive in San Francisco, (3) the damage to buildings in San Francisco was more severe in the reclaimed land than on the hills, (4) the intensity of ground shaking was estimated to be 0.1 g on the hills and 0.25 g in the reclaimed land in San Francisco, (5) the performance of steel structures was generally good under shaking, (6) the performance of the two reinforced concrete buildings in San Francisco was good, and (7) the failure of brick and masonry construction was attributed to poor material quality and workmanship.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
9

Canton, Lucien G. "San Francisco 1906 and 2006: An Emergency Management Perspective." Earthquake Spectra 22, no. 2_suppl (April 2006): 159–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1193/1.2181467.

Full text
Abstract:
Despite a distance of 100 years the Great San Francisco Earthquake and Fire still has much to teach the emergency managers of 2006. The response to the 1906 disaster foreshadows many modern emergency management techniques and sounds a cautionary note about areas where work still needs to be done. By comparing the city's response in 1906 with modern emergency plans, this paper examines how San Francisco might deal with a similar event in 2006. While many issues that marred the 1906 response have been resolved and much has been done to build resiliency, San Francisco in 2006 is in many ways still very similar in attitude to the San Francisco of 1906. Further, the recent example of Hurricane Katrina suggests that some of the more critical issues that arose in 1906 have still not been fully resolved.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
10

Boatwright, John, Howard Bundock, and Linda C. Seekins. "Using Modified Mercalli Intensities to Estimate Acceleration Response Spectra for the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake." Earthquake Spectra 22, no. 2_suppl (April 2006): 279–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1193/1.2186348.

Full text
Abstract:
We derive and test relations between the Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) and the pseudo-acceleration response spectra at 1.0 and 0.3 s— SA(1.0 s) and SA(0.3 s)—in order to map response spectral ordinates for the 1906 San Francisco earthquake. Recent analyses of intensity have shown that MMI ≥ 6 correlates both with peak ground velocity and with response spectra for periods from 0.5 to 3.0 s. We use these recent results to derive a linear relation between MMI and log SA(1.0 s), and we refine this relation by comparing the SA(1.0 s) estimated from Boatwright and Bundock's (2005) MMI map for the 1906 earthquake to the SA(1.0 s) calculated from recordings of the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. South of San Jose, the intensity distributions for the 1906 and 1989 earthquakes are remarkably similar, despite the difference in magnitude and rupture extent between the two events. We use recent strong motion regressions to derive a relation between SA(1.0 s) and SA(0.3 s) for a M7.8 strike-slip earthquake that depends on soil type, acceleration level, and source distance. We test this relation by comparing SA(0.3 s) estimated for the 1906 earthquake to SA(0.3 s) calculated from recordings of both the 1989 Loma Prieta and 1994 Northridge earthquakes, as functions of distance from the fault.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
11

Leikam, Susanne. "American Studies, Sound Studies, and Cultural Memory." JAAAS: Journal of the Austrian Association for American Studies 1, no. 2 (December 30, 2020): 231–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.47060/jaaas.v1i2.56.

Full text
Abstract:
Each year on April 18, the city of San Francisco commemorates the devastating 1906 earthquake and fire with a series of elaborate and tightly scripted ceremonies. As one of the key events, the ceremony at Lotta's Fountain features, among others, commemorative speeches, the hanging of a memorial wreath, and the ceremonial wailing of fire sirens, followed by a minute of silence for the victims. The acoustic tension building up between the sirens' piercing warning sounds and the ensuing collective gesture of mournful quietude is subsequently resolved by the communal sing-along of the upbeat theme song "San Francisco" from the eponymous Academy Award-winning 1936 musical film. This performance seems to stand in stark contrast to the other events at the ceremony, which are painstakingly staged to appear historically accurate. Nonetheless, the anachronistic inclusion of the triumphant "San Francisco," written three decades after the earthquake and released in the context of a purely fictional narrative, fits the purpose of memorializing the 1906 earthquake, since it sonically embodies the "new" city's founding myth. San Francisco, especially its theme song, this article argues, memorializes the 1906 disaster as a social equalizer and a patriotic affirmation of American resilience by portraying the pre-earthquake city as a loud, decadent, and disorderly soundscape that only the earthquake could unite, refine, and ultimately Americanize.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
12

Bruneau, Michel. "Preliminary report of structural damage from the Loma Prieta (San Francisco) earthquake of 1989 and pertinence to Canadian structural engineering practice." Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 17, no. 2 (April 1, 1990): 198–208. http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/l90-025.

Full text
Abstract:
The Richter magnitude 7.1 October 17, 1989 Loma Prieta (San Francisco) earthquake is the largest to occur near a major North American urban center since the historical 1906 San Francisco magnitude 8.3 earthquake. As earthquakes of at least similar strength are expected to occur in most of eastern and western Canada, and since the amount of structural damage that occurred is considerable, the study of the effects of this earthquake is of particular significance to Canada. This paper reports on the major structures and types of structures that were most heavily damaged by this earthquake, and presents preliminary findings as to the causes of failures or collapses. The pertinence of this earthquake is reviewed in a Canadian perspective. Key words: earthquake, structures, damage, failure, collapse, buildings, bridges, heritage buildings, emergency preparedness.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
13

O'Rourke, T. D., A. L. Bonneau, J. W. Pease, P. Shi, and Y. Wang. "Liquefaction and Ground Failures in San Francisco." Earthquake Spectra 22, no. 2_suppl (April 2006): 91–112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1193/1.2185686.

Full text
Abstract:
This paper examines the liquefaction and ground failures observed in San Francisco after the 1906 earthquake. It summarizes soil conditions, land development, and local seismic intensities within the city. Earthquake damage of the San Francisco water distribution system is discussed, and an account is provided of how city planners used the water supply damage to map locations of “infirm ground,” which are used today in the design and operation of the city fire protection system. Maps are presented that show subsurface conditions, current street system, permanent ground deformation, and infrastructure damage in 1906. With the use of approximately 500 soil borings and soundings compiled in a geographical information system (GIS), liquefaction hazard maps are generated for the Mission Creek and South of Market areas of the city.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
14

Arnold, Jeffrey L. "The 1906 San Francisco Earthquake: A Centennial Contemplation." Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 21, no. 3 (June 2006): 133–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1049023x00003563.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
15

Kenner, Shelley J., and Paul Segall. "Postseismic deformation following the 1906 San Francisco earthquake." Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth 105, B6 (June 10, 2000): 13195–209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2000jb900076.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
16

Potter, Sean. "April 18, 1906: The Great San Francisco Earthquake." Weatherwise 61, no. 2 (March 2008): 14–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/wewi.61.2.14-15.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
17

Agnew, Duncan Carr. "Celebrity Earthquakes." Seismological Research Letters 92, no. 1 (November 11, 2020): 599–602. http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/0220200329.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract I discuss how much attention different earthquakes get in the scientific and nonscientific literature. For the former, all earthquakes above magnitude 7.5 appear in a scientific article, and the number of articles tends to increase with magnitude. For the latter, most shocks, even if damaging, become largely forgotten in a few decades, though some, such as the 1906 San Francisco earthquake, live on in popular memory.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
18

Steeples, Don W., and Dan D. Steeples. "Far-field aftershocks of the 1906 earthquake." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 86, no. 4 (August 1, 1996): 921–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/bssa0860040921.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract During the 24 hr following the great San Francisco, California, earthquake of 18 April 1906, separate seismic events were felt at Paisley, Oregon; Phoenix, Arizona; Los Angeles, California; and Brawley, California (MMIX). Using probability theory, we show that the occurrence of felt earthquakes in each of these widespread locations on the same day would constitute a rare event. Rates of felt-earthquake occurrences over a 9-yr period from 1897 to 1906 were determined for the four different regions that experienced earthquakes within 24 hr after the 1906 event. We modeled the likelihood of occurrence of these aftershocks in the spirit of the “ball-in-the-box” probability problem, and the results indicated a very high probability that the aftershock zone of the great earthquake extended at least 500 km beyond the extent of ground breakage, implying a disturbance of the stress field over an area at least two to three times longer than the fault break itself.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
19

Kircher, Charles A., Hope A. Seligson, Jawhar Bouabid, and Guy C. Morrow. "When the Big One Strikes Again—Estimated Losses due to a Repeat of the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake." Earthquake Spectra 22, no. 2_suppl (April 2006): 297–339. http://dx.doi.org/10.1193/1.2187067.

Full text
Abstract:
This paper presents interim results of an ongoing study of building damage and losses likely to occur due to a repeat of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake, using the HAZUS technology. Recent work by Boatwright et. al. (2006) provides MMI-based ShakeMap estimates of spectral response accelerations derived from observations of intensities in the 1906 San Francisco earthquake. This paper calculates damage and loss estimates using those estimated ground motions, then compares the resulting estimates with those calculated using a method parallel with that of current seismic provisions of building codes for a magnitude M7.9 event on the San Andreas Fault, and contrasts differences in damage and loss patterns for these two scenarios. The study region of interest comprises 19 counties of the greater San Francisco Bay Area and adjacent areas of Northern California, covering 24,000 square miles, with a population of more than ten million people and about $1.5 trillion of building and contents exposure. The majority of this property and population is within 40 km (25 miles) of the San Andreas Fault. The current population of this Northern California region is about ten times what it was in 1906, and the replacement value of buildings is about 500 times greater. Despite improvements in building codes and construction practices, the growth of the region over the past 100 years causes the range of estimated fatalities, approximately 800–3,400 depending on time of day and other variables, to be comparable to what it was in 1906. The forecast property loss to buildings for a repeat of the 1906 earthquake is in the range of approximately $90–120 billion; 7,000–10,000 commercial buildings in the region are estimated to be closed due to serious damage; and about 160,000–250,000 households calculated to be displaced from damaged residences. Losses due to fire following earthquake, as well as losses to utility and transportation systems, would be in addition to these estimates.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
20

Bakun, William H. "Seismic activity of the San Francisco Bay region." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 89, no. 3 (June 1, 1999): 764–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/bssa0890030764.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract Moment magnitude M with objective confidence-level uncertainties are estimated for felt San Francisco Bay region earthquakes using Bakun and Went-worth's (1997) analysis strategy for seismic intensity observations. The frequency-magnitude distribution is well described for M ≧ 5.5 events since 1850 by a Gutenberg-Richter relation with a b-value of 0.90. The seismic moment rate ΣM0/yr since 1836 is 2.68 × 1018 N-m/yr (95% confidence range = 1.29 × 1018 N-m/yr to 4.07 × 1018 N-m/yr); the seismic moment rate since 1850 is nearly the same. ΣM0/yr in the 56 years before 1906 is about 10 times that in the 70 years after 1906. In contrast, ΣM0/yr since 1977 is about equal that in the 56 years before 1906. 80% (1σ = 14%) of the plate-motion moment accumulation rate is available for release in earthquakes. The historical ΣM0/yr and the portion of the plate-motion moment accumulation rate available for release in earthquakes are used in a seismic cycle model to estimate the rate of seismic activity in the twenty-first century. High and low rates of future seismic activity are both permissible given the range of possible seismic-cycle recurrence times T and the uncertainties in the historical ΣM0 and in the percentage of plate motion available for release in earthquakes. If the historical seismic moment rate is not greater than the estimated 2.68 × 1018 N-m/yr and the percentage of the plate-motion moment accumulation available for release in earthquakes is not less than the estimated 80%, then for all T, the rate of seismic moment release from now until the next 1906-sized shock will be comparable to the rate from 1836 to 1905 when M 6 1/2 shocks occurred every 15 to 20 years.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
21

Song, S. G., G. C. Beroza, and P. Segall. "A Unified Source Model for the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 98, no. 2 (April 1, 2008): 823–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/0120060402.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
22

Chourasia, Amit, Steve Cutchin, and Brad Aagaard. "Visualizing the ground motions of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake." Computers & Geosciences 34, no. 12 (December 2008): 1798–805. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2008.01.012.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
23

Wyss, Max. "Return Times of Large Earthquakes Cannot Be Estimated Correctly from Seismicity Rates: 1906 San Francisco and 1717 Alpine Fault Ruptures." Seismological Research Letters 91, no. 4 (May 13, 2020): 2163–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/0220200008.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract The unproven assumption that the Gutenberg–Richter (GR) relationship can be extrapolated to estimate the return time, Tr (1/probability of occurrence), of major and large earthquakes has been shown to be incorrect along 196 faults, so far. Here, two more examples of great, well-known faults that do not produce enough earthquakes to fulfill the hypothesis are analyzed. The 300 km section of the San Andreas fault, California, United States, that ruptured in 1906 in the M 8 San Francisco earthquake, produced 200 earthquakes with M≥2 in the last 52 yr, when about 250,000 such events are expected according to the hypothesis. Along a 250 km section that broke in an M 7.9 earthquake in 1717 along the Alpine fault, New Zealand, the number of reported M≥3.6 earthquakes during the last 34 yr was 100, when about 6000 would be expected, based on the hypothesis. Extrapolating the GR relationships for these two fault segments, one estimates Tr of mainshocks of M 8 to be about 10,000 and 100,000 for the 1717 and 1906 ruptures, respectively. Regardless of choice of analysis parameters, this is by factors of 10–400 larger than estimates based on paleogeology, tectonics, and geodesy. In addition, second catalogs for each case yield estimates of probabilities for M 8 earthquakes along the 1717 and 1906 rupture segments that differ by factors of about 2 and 80 (between 5000 and 98,000 yr) from the first respective catalogs. It follows that the probability of large earthquakes cannot be estimated correctly based on local seismicity rates along major faults.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
24

Anderson, Douglas Firth. "“A True Revival of Religion”: Protestants and the San Francisco Graft Prosecutions, 1906–1909." Religion and American Culture: A Journal of Interpretation 4, no. 1 (1994): 25–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/rac.1994.4.1.03a00020.

Full text
Abstract:
Almost a year after the great earthquake and fire of April 1906, San Francisco clergyman William Rader declared, “We are having a true revival of religion.” Writing in the San Francisco-based Congregationalist weekly Pacific, Rader was not referring to the visit of a mass evangelist; rather, he meant the graft prosecutions officially launched in October 1906 against the Union Labor party administration of the city. He compared Rudolph Spreckels, a reform-minded member of the city's financial elite who was helping to fund the prosecution, and Francis J. Heney, the lead prosecuting attorney, to the late-nineteenth-century revival team of Dwight L. Moody and Ira D. Sankey. “God is moving the city,” Rader asserted, “and when a number of our Supervisors and other officials are sent to prison we will be more free…. Thank God the Christ spirit is not dead; it lives.”
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
25

Anooshehpoor, Abdolrasool, Thomas H. Heaton, Baoping Shi, and James N. Brune. "Estimates of the ground accelerations at Point Reyes Station during the 1906 San Francisco earthquake." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 89, no. 4 (August 1, 1999): 845–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/bssa0890040845.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract We have developed an analytical solution for the rocking and overturning response of a two-dimensional, symmetric rigid block subject to a full sine wave of horizontal ground acceleration. We use this solution to provide lower-bound estimates of the peak ground acceleration at Point Reyes Station, California, during the 1906 San Francisco earthquake that toppled the San Francisco-bound train. Our results, for a 3% damping ratio, indicate that for a single cycle of a sine wave the minimum toppling accelerations at 1, 1.5, and 2 Hz are 0.35g, 0.5g, and 1.05g, respectively. For more realistic accelerograms the toppling accelerations are about 1.1g (complex synthetic) and 0.76g (Lucerne record of the 1992 Landers earthquake).
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
26

Tobriner, Stephen. "An EERI Reconnaissance Report: Damage to San Francisco in the 1906 Earthquake—A Centennial Perspective." Earthquake Spectra 22, no. 2_suppl (April 2006): 11–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1193/1.2186693.

Full text
Abstract:
This paper presents an EERI reconnaissance report for building damage in the 1906 earthquake in San Francisco before the fire began. It is therefore synthetic and “virtual.” Using the evidence that has survived in the form of engineering reports and photographs, the paper presents a modern interpretation of the past in the format of a contemporary report. The paper is a synthesis of past observations and judgments leavened with the hindsight of a hundred years. For the first time in decades earthquake damage is surveyed and discussed through the lens of a professional report rather than being seen as a spectacular disaster. The report presented here is a condensed version of a chapter in a larger textural and photographic study entitled Bracing for Disaster; Earthquake-Resistant Architecture and Engineering in San Francisco, 1838-1933 (Berkeley: The Bancroft Library and Heyday Books, March 2006).
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
27

Bush, Elizabeth. "The Earth Dragon Awakes: The San Francisco Earthquake of 1906 (review)." Bulletin of the Center for Children's Books 59, no. 10 (2006): 477. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/bcc.2006.0394.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
28

PAILER, GABY. "Seismische Erschütterungen und female empowerment: Erdbeben-Narrative und Gender vom 18. bis zum frühen 20. Jahrhundert." Zeitschrift für Germanistik 29, no. 3 (January 1, 2019): 553–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.3726/92165_553.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract Der Beitrag untersucht Erdbeben-Narrative, d. h. seismische Erschütterungen als Motiv, Metapher, Agens und Medium in literarischen Texten variabler Genres vom 18. bis zum frühen 20. Jahrhundert. Er konzentriert sich auf die historisch desaströsen Ereignisse von Lissabon 1755, Messina 1783, Guadeloupe 1843 und San Francisco 1906 und ihre Diskurs- und Mediengeschichte. Die Ausführungen basieren auf theoretischen Überlegungen zu Vorstellungen von Anthropozän, Aufklärung und gender.This article examines earthquake narratives, i.e. seismic upheavals as motif, metaphor, agent, and medium within literary texts of various genres, from the 18th to the early 20th century. It is focused on the historical disastrous events of Lisbon 1755, Messina 1783, Guadeloupe 1843, and San Francisco 1906, and their discourse and media histories. The argument is based on theoretical considerations regarding notions of anthropocene, enlightenment, and gender.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
29

Catchings, Rufus D., Michael J. Rymer, and Mark R. Goldman. "San Andreas Fault Exploration Using Refraction Tomography and S-Wave-Type and Fϕ-Mode Guided Waves." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 110, no. 6 (July 21, 2020): 3088–102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/0120200136.

Full text
Abstract:
ABSTRACT Surface ruptures from the 18 April 1906 M∼7.9 San Francisco earthquake were distributed over an ∼35-meter-wide zone at San Andreas Lake on the San Francisco Peninsula in California (Schussler, 1906). Since ∼1906, the surface ruptures have been largely covered by water, but with water levels at near-historic low levels in 2008–2011, we observed that the 1906 surface ruptures were no longer visible. As a fault imaging test, we acquired refraction tomography and guided-wave data across the 1906 surface ruptures in 2011. We found that individual fault traces, as mapped by Schussler (1906), can be identified on the basis of discrete low-velocity zones (VS and VP, reduced ∼40% and ∼34%, respectively) and high-amplitude guided waves. Guided waves have traditionally been observed as large-amplitude waveforms over wide (hundreds of meters to kilometers) zones of faulting, but we demonstrate that by evaluating guided waves (including Rayleigh/Love- and P/SV-types) in terms of peak ground velocity (PGV), individual near-surface fault traces within a fault zone can be precisely located, even more than 100 yr after the surface ruptures. Such precise exploration can be used to focus paleoseismic trenching efforts and to identify or exclude faulting at specific sites. We evaluated PGV of both S-wave-type and Fϕ-mode-type guided waves and found that both wave types can be used to identify subsurface fault traces. At San Andreas Lake (main fault), S-wave-type guided waves travel up to 18% slower than S body waves, and Fϕ-mode guided waves travel ∼60% slower than P body waves but ∼15% faster than S body waves. We found that guided-wave amplitudes vary with frequency but are up to five times higher than those of body waves, including the S wave. Our data are consistent with the concept that guided waves can be a strong-shaking hazard during large-magnitude earthquakes.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
30

Eidinger, John, Lota de Castro, and Dennis Ma. "The 1906 Earthquake Impacts on the San Francisco and Santa Clara Water Systems—What we Learned, and What we are doing about It." Earthquake Spectra 22, no. 2_suppl (April 2006): 113–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1193/1.2186986.

Full text
Abstract:
This paper describes what happened to San Francisco's water transmission and the city of Santa Clara's water distribution systems in the 1906 and the 1989 earthquakes. These two earthquakes showed that many of our existing transmission and distribution pipelines are susceptible to damage, and some of our older water treatment plants, tanks, and pump stations need to be upgraded. Accordingly, seismic upgrade programs are being undertaken to reduce the vulnerability of the regional water transmission and distribution systems. In developing a cost effective seismic upgrade program, both the transmission system operator (San Francisco Public Utilities Commission) (SFPUC) and distribution system operator (Santa Clara) consider what the weaknesses are of both systems, so that the maximum amount of seismic upgrade can be achieved at the lowest overall cost.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
31

Prentice, C. S., and L. Gee. "The 1906 San Francisco Earthquake and Its Significance to the Scientific Community." Seismological Research Letters 75, no. 4 (July 1, 2004): 521–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.75.4.521.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
32

Ma, Kuo-Fong, Kenji Satake, and Hiroo Kanamori. "The origin of the tsunami excited by the 1906 San Francisco earthquake." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 81, no. 4 (August 1, 1991): 1396–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/bssa0810041396.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
33

Snyder, Thomas L. "The Military Medical Response to the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake and Fire." Military Medicine 181, no. 11 (November 2016): 1399–400. http://dx.doi.org/10.7205/milmed-d-16-00211.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
34

Bray, Jonathan D., and Keith I. Kelson. "Observations of Surface Fault Rupture from the 1906 Earthquake in the Context of Current Practice." Earthquake Spectra 22, no. 2_suppl (April 2006): 69–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1193/1.2181487.

Full text
Abstract:
Many important insights are embedded in the detailed observations of surface rupture of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake, during which surface faulting interacted with pipelines, earth embankments, and buildings. Lessons gleaned from the 1906 rupture, combined with parallel and new insights from recent earthquakes, illustrate how various geologic conditions alter the surface expression of faulting and how surface fault rupture interacts with engineered systems. Geologic and engineering procedures can be employed to evaluate the hazards associated with surface faulting and to develop sound designs. Illustrative examples are used to demonstrate how the hazards associated with surface fault rupture can be addressed. Effective design measures include constructing earth fills to partially absorb underlying ground movements; isolating foundations from the underlying ground movements; and designing strong, ductile foundations that can accommodate some deformation without compromising the functionality of the structure.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
35

Brune, Richard, John G. Anderson, and James N. Brune. "Unexpected Directionality of Failures in the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake near Point Reyes Station." Seismological Research Letters 93, no. 1 (November 3, 2021): 91–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/0220210062.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract This study investigates the directions of structural failures and toppling near Point Reyes Station during the 1906 San Francisco earthquake (Mw 7.9). We examined archives of the Jack Mason Museum of West Marin History and other historical sources for photographs and other evidence relevant to the dynamics of the 1906 rupture in this area. Using historical maps, site investigations, and previously unpublished photographs, we determined the precise locations and orientations of several structures, including a correction to the orientation of the train that was the subject of previous studies. Based on the photographic evidence and written accounts, we estimate the direction of toppling or collapse of each structure. Nearly all objects found were thrown in a direction approximately parallel to the right-lateral San Andreas fault, and in the same direction as the static ground displacement. This suggests that fault-parallel accelerations may have been stronger than fault-normal accelerations, and that the slip on the fault may have begun slowly and stopped more suddenly.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
36

Hamburger, Ronald O., and John D. Meyer. "The Performance of Steel-Frame Buildings with Infill Masonry Walls in the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake." Earthquake Spectra 22, no. 2_suppl (April 2006): 43–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1193/1.2185656.

Full text
Abstract:
Following the great 1906 San Francisco earthquake and fire, engineers recognized the superior performance of buildings with complete vertical load–carrying steel frames and infill masonry walls. These buildings were noteworthy in their ability to survive both the ground shaking and fire, many remaining in service today. Observation of this superior performance led many California structural engineers to believe that steel frames were the best structural system for resisting earthquake damage, in turn, leading to a proliferation of steel-frame construction in California cities. Not until the 1994 Northridge earthquake did many California engineers recognize that steel-frame structures can and do experience severe earthquake damage. The performance capability of early steel-frame buildings with infill masonry walls, however, remains unclear, despite improved understanding of their structural response characteristics.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
37

Aagaard, B. T., and G. C. Beroza. "The 1906 San Francisco Earthquake a Century Later: Introduction to the Special Section." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 98, no. 2 (April 1, 2008): 817–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/0120060401.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
38

Geist, Eric L., and Mary Lou Zoback. "Analysis of the tsunami generated by the Mw 7.8 1906 San Francisco earthquake." Geology 27, no. 1 (1999): 15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1130/0091-7613(1999)027<0015:aottgb>2.3.co;2.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
39

Bolton, Marie. "An Endless Cycle of Crises? Housing in Post-Earthquake San Francisco, 1906-1915." Revue Française d'Etudes Américaines 64, no. 1 (1995): 289–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.3406/rfea.1995.1585.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
40

Ager, Philipp, Katherine Eriksson, Casper Worm Hansen, and Lars Lønstrup. "How the 1906 San Francisco earthquake shaped economic activity in the American West." Explorations in Economic History 77 (July 2020): 101342. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eeh.2020.101342.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
41

Cherny, R. W. "The Great Earthquake and Firestorms of 1906: How San Francisco Nearly Destroyed Itself." Journal of American History 92, no. 4 (March 1, 2006): 1460. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/4485964.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
42

Starr, Kevin. "The Great Earthquake and Firestorms of 1906: How San Francisco Nearly Destroyed Itself." California History 83, no. 3 (January 1, 2006): 45–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/25161821.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
43

Rawls, James J. "The Great Earthquake and Firestorms of 1906: How San Francisco Nearly Destroyed Itself." Western Historical Quarterly 38, no. 1 (February 2007): 97.1–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/whq/38.1.97.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
44

Aagaard, B. T., T. M. Brocher, D. Dolenc, D. Dreger, R. W. Graves, S. Harmsen, S. Hartzell, et al. "Ground-Motion Modeling of the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake, Part II: Ground-Motion Estimates for the 1906 Earthquake and Scenario Events." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 98, no. 2 (April 1, 2008): 1012–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/0120060410.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
45

Boatwright, J., and H. Bundock. "The Distribution of Modified Mercalli Intensity in the 18 April 1906 San Francisco Earthquake." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 98, no. 2 (April 1, 2008): 890–900. http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/0120060404.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
46

Shostak, N. C. "A High-Resolution Intensity Study for the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake in the Vicinity of San Jose, California." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 98, no. 2 (April 1, 2008): 901–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/0120060413.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
47

Aagaard, B. T., T. M. Brocher, D. Dolenc, D. Dreger, R. W. Graves, S. Harmsen, S. Hartzell, S. Larsen, and M. L. Zoback. "Ground-Motion Modeling of the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake, Part I: Validation Using the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 98, no. 2 (April 1, 2008): 989–1011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/0120060409.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
48

Ikegami, Yasushi, Kazuki Koketsu, Takeshi Kimura, and Hiroe Miyake. "Finite-element simulations of long-period ground motions: Japanese subduction-zone earthquakes and the 1906 San Francisco earthquake." Journal of Seismology 12, no. 2 (January 31, 2008): 161–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10950-008-9091-5.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
49

Howell, Junia. "Recovering Inequality: Hurricane Katrina, the San Francisco Earthquake of 1906, and the Aftermath of Disaster." Social Forces 98, no. 2 (April 20, 2019): 1–3. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/sf/soz031.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
50

Elliott, James R. "Recovering Inequality: Hurricane Katrina, the San Francisco Earthquake of 1906, and the Aftermath of Disaster." Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews 48, no. 6 (October 30, 2019): 666–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0094306119880196r.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
You might also be interested in the bibliographies on the topic '1906 San Francisco earthquake' for other source types:
Books
We offer discounts on all premium plans for authors whose works are included in thematic literature selections. Contact us to get a unique promo code!

To the bibliography