ML20151H240

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Effects of Past Earthquakes in Puget Sound Area, Presented at 880412-15 Meeting in Olympia,Wa
ML20151H240
Person / Time
Site: Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png
Issue date: 04/12/1988
From: Hopper M
AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:
Shared Package
ML20151H012 List:
References
NUDOCS 8808010197
Download: ML20151H240 (16)
v • d • e


Text

-__..

Effects of Past Eaf thquakes An earthqi.au with lo-Ix af. AI. in is72 to the east of the Puget Sound basin caused only !=VI level damage

(

in the Puget Sound Afea within the buin.

The rapidity of intensity attenuation away from the epicetiter of an earthquake determines the extent of By vuious levels of damage for a given earthquake. The rate of intensity attenuaticn vujes in different parts Margaret G. Hopper of the country; for example, earthquakes on the eut cout of the United States have much lower intensity Abstrect attenuation (and therefore much larger felt ueu) than v

earthquaku in California for the ume magnitude. Fig.

l Historic eeethqules h the Puget Sound sees here tossed ute 2 (a) shows how intensity dimished with distance j

hienshnes op to the leni of struttveel demate (Medi6ed Met.

from the epicenter for the 1905 Seattle earthquake.

selb intensier Villi. The les leepest such eeeth vales escuered From this graph it is evident that the attenuation of r

t In 1949 and 1945 and peedeced their highest lents of dem-intensity is dependent or more than just distance from the epicenter, since many intensitin are possible at a e tre ae as et a red in st tile dve e the 166 given distance, la fact, many thlege induence the ac.

(

doch.

tualintensity resulting at a speci6c site, things plated to the movement causing the earthquake, to the path in add;tlen to shaking damage, damage due to ground fat-i mMt mPortant of tbn (bngs is th bcal gelogy tres la temmen during large Puget Sound orthquales. Creund fallutes from historic Puget Sound shocks include landsides.

'I

"'I Y " " ' " *

  • slumps. latsval spreads, minee ground tracking. and Egvefac.

A m

y to r dan th intendty at a site on rock, even if the rock site is much nearer the epicenter than the alluvium site. Figure 2 (b) shows a subset of the data in 6gure 2 (a) containing only then sites on normally consolidated materials, la this cue it i

l INTRODUCTION le much more apparent that for a given distance range i

there is a predominant intensity with some intensities j

both higher and lower ouvring also.

j i

)

The two latensity Vill shocks will be discussed in.

1 j

dividually, followed by a short discunion of the shocks

(

The niemicity of the Puget Sound buin and sur.

large enough to caun architectural damage (l=Vil).

j rounding region is shown in Egers 1. Only earthquakes large enough to cause damage (that is, having hiu.

imum biodi6ed hiercalli intensity lo2VI) are shown.

1949 EARTHQUAKE I

(A copy of the hfodi6ed hfercalli iritensity scale is ap.

peeded to this report.) Notice that there are only two shocks within the Puget Sound buln large enough to cause structual damage (12 Vill hi.ht.): the 1949 euth*

The 1949 earthquake had its epicenter between t

quake near Olympia and the 1965 earthquake at Seattle, Tacoma and Olympia and caund intensity Vill Jam.

I age from north of Seattle to Longview (6 ure 3). Inten.

{

j sities within the city of Seattle (6 ure 4) range from IV TABLE 1.1949 eed 1965 f eethquehe Dele to Vll. Additional data not shown on Egure 4 euggut i

intensitin as high na Vll VIllon !! artes Island and the harbor area.

D Af g WaC b AngAt otrTHS LotAt60N in Tacoma (8sure 3), closer to the epicenter, in.

tensities also range from IV to VII. The higher intensi-

[

i 1949 April 13 7.1 VIII 388,000 70 Olympla ties are mostly la the centralput of the city. Additional 1965 Aptl129 6.5 Ylli 337,cc0 59 Seattle data not shown on Egere 5 suggest one or two scattued i

Telt area la im.

Vill's within the city.

8 8

8 Tocal depth la km.

Olympia (6:ure 6), the closest large city to the i

epleenter, hu structural damage lates.sities (Vill) in M7 esosoto297 88061s PDR ADock 05000344 P

PDC

i I

the area of the state capitol where eight of the capi.

tol buildings were damaged to the extent of two million than the 1949 and 1905 shocks, or as large or larger, i

(

dollars (Murphy and Ulrich,1951). Additional data for important for any study of the area because they can but farther away from the Puget Sound basin, are also I

this map also show a few more Vill's.

cause locally high damage within their epicentral areas.

Table 2 lists shocks of inanimum intensity Vil within 1965 EARTHQUAKE the buin plus larger, more distant shocks. Isoseismals for six of thue shocks are shown in 6gure 12. Detter information is anded for moet of then earthquakes in I

The Leoniemal map for the 1965 earthquake is order to better en the intensity attenuation patterns, shown in 6gure 7. The rewmblance to the 1949 atten.

Some patterns do appear consistently in these maps, untion pattern is striking. Both shocks have elongated In particular, the felt areas of the 1945 and 1946 earth.

north-south interior konismals and have felt areu es.

quaku (6:ure 12 (d) and (e)) show the same eatension tending futhest toward the eut acrou northern Idaho to the northeut that occurred in the 1949 and 1905 and northwatern Montana.

earthquakes. Some of the *isonismal maps shown in j

6 ure 12 are only maps of the overall felt area. Th Se Although both the 1949 and 1905 earthquakes need to be much more detailed to understand t1. c h.

have inaximum intensities of Vl!!, the 1965 earthquake tribution of the intensities.

h the smalkr of the two. Its magnitude and felt area ue l

both slightly smaller than in 1949 (ne tabh 1). Abo, l

wh'ereu the 1949 euthquake caused enough damage (tE 2. Othu Large Earthquehu in the Puget sound at the intensity Villlevel for there to be an Vl!! iso.

nismal, in 1965 there were only a few scattered VI!!'s I

within a Vllisonisnral.

8 Y g Alt to toCAftoN j

Numerous data y.rfints within the city of Seattle (6 ure 8) make it possible lo look at the distribution of 3

l 1872 IX Cucade Mountales, central Wuhington

[

intensities on a city. wide buis. Imensities within Seat.

IIII YII ICilI*hd tle range from IV to Vill with the Vill's mostly clus.

fff,' ""

f tered in West Seattle. Because the most serious damage e

g9og y3.y132 seemed tb be in West Seattle, a survey was done there Victoria, Brit. Col.

M9 VII Northwnt Wuhlagten i

utilising damaged chimneys to determine relative den.

1920 VII Northwest Wuhington age on a block by. block buis (6gure 9). The percentge Tolt Nur, Sultan

[

1932 Vl-Vil8 of downed chimneys in a block wu often u high as 80%- $h T

l 200%, although most of the blocks surveyed had from

,"k North Nd I

1946 Vit Near Tacoma 40% to 60% of their chimneys down. An interesting 1946 V111 Georsla Stralt Drlt. Cel.

l f

question to be addrnud during the studies in progress 1949 X

Queen Charlotte Islands, Brit. Col.

is w h/ West Seattle wu so hard hit when other areas M2 Y11 Vancount, Washington t

of Seattle with apparently similar geology (for eaample, 1

Magnoha and Queen Anne Ilill) were not.

Mulmum latensity. H;ghnt b frem catalegs searched.

l 3 Maximum latensity act well estah!Ished.

. Tacoma ($gure 10) had holsted intensities as high i

t as Yll, but the predominant damage level wu VI.

Olympia 6gure 11), farther from the focus than I

Tacoma, never(thelen had far more damage at the C O N Ct.U SIO N S intensity.Vll level than did Tacoma. As in 1949, the highest damage wu clustered primuity around the state capitol. liowner, Olympia had no structural The nismic history of the Puget Sound buin goes damage in 1965 u it did in 1949.

back only a little over a century. In that time there have been two shocks large enough to cause structural d mage (intensity Vill) whhin the buin and one of OTHER LARGE EARTHQUAKES Intensity IX in the adjacent Cucade Mountains. The two luger shocks within the buin have both been rel.

A knowkdge of the seismic history of the Puget stively dup (60-70 km) and have had corrupondingly Sound buin is ewential to an undentanding of the pie.

large damage areas and felt areu. It b reuonabh to u.

(

mic hasard. A number of earthquaku, either amaihr sume that such earthquaku can occur agala and, more.

over, that a slightly larger earthquale is pouible, even

l I

though it hu not yet happened during the short histor-flopper, M. G.,1981, A study ofliquefaction and other ital record. An euthquake similar to the 1949 or 1905 types of earthquake-induced ground failures in the

(

shocks, but with magnitude 7.5 and mulmum intensity Puget Sound, Washington, region: Virginia Poly.

of IX, cou'd cause widopread structural damage over technic Institute and State Univenity muters the-a denuly populated area. Such an earthquake, if it oc.

sis,130 p, j

curred during rush hour, could leave over 2,000 people j

l dead, ovn 8,000 injured, and perhape 23,000 homeless llopper, bl. G., Langer, C. J., Spence, W. J., Rogers, (liopper and other,1975). Landslides and liquefaction A. M., Algumissen, S, T., Olun, B. C., Lagorio, i

in susceptible ateu would block transportation systems

11. J., and Steinbrugge, K. V.,1975, A study of and hinder relief and recovery efforts.

earthquah lones in the Puget Sound, Washington, area: U.S. Geological Survey Open. File Report 75-375,208 p.

set.ECTED REFERENCES Lander, J. F.,1964, United States euthquakes,1902.

U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey,114 p.

4 Keefer, D. K.,1983, Landslidu, eoil hquefaction, and Algnminen, S. T., and liarding, S. T.,1905, Prelim-related ground failurn in Puget Sound earth-laary seismological report, in The Puget Sound, quabs, in Yount, J. C., and Cronen, R. S., edi-

.Wuhington earthquake of April 29, 1965: U.S.

ton, Proceedings of Workshop XIV-Earthquake

  • Cout and Geodule Survey, p.1-26.

hasards of the Puget Sound region, Wuhington:

U.S. Geological Survey Open F'le Report 83-19, l

Bodle, R. ll., and Murphy, L. M.,1947, United States p 280-299-earthquaku,1945: U.S. Cout and Geodetic Sut*

vey, urial no. 699,38 p.

Murphy, L. M., and Ulrich, F. P.,1951, United Statu i

euthquaku,1949: U.S. Cout and Geodetic Sur.

Bodle, R.*ll., and Murphy, L. M.,1943, United States vey, urial no. 748,64 p.

1

, earthquabs,1946: U.S. Cout and Geodetic Sur' l

Nuttli, O. W,,1952, The western Wuhington earth-vey, urial no 714,48 P-quah of April 13,1949: Bulletin of the Seismolog-(

i Bradford, D. C., and Waten, A. C.,1934, The Tolt ical Society of America, v. 42, p. 21-28.

Rivee earthquah and its bearing on tb structure l

of the Cucade range: Sulletin of the Seismological Thenhaus, Paul C.,1978, A study of the October 12, l

7 Society of America, v. 24, p. 51-62.

1877 Oregon earthquakes: U.S. Geological Survey Open. File Report 75-375,298 p.

l Bradford, D. C., and Waters, A. C.,1935, Seismie hib tory of the Puget Sound buin: Bulletin of tb Seib Thorun, G. W., compiln,1956, The Puget Lowland mological Society of America, v. 25, p.133-153, euthquabs of 1949 and 1965-41eproductions of l

niected articlo dentibing damage: Wuhin gton Coffman, J. L., von llake, C. A., and Stoser, C. W.,

Division of Geology and Earth Resources Infm e

)

1992, Earthquah history of the United Stato, R,.

tbn Circular 81,113 p.

(

i vind with supplement: U.S. National Ouanic and Atmospleric Administration and U.S. Geological U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers,1349, Report on damage i

resulting from euthquah of 13 April 1949: Seat.

l Survey Publication 41-1,258 p.

tie, Wuh., U.S. Army Corps of Enginun,60 p.

{

Edwuds, 11. 11., 1949, Lenons in structural safety Ulrich, F. P.,1949 Reporting the northwest earth.

learned from the 1949 North =nt euthquake:

quake: From the nienti6c point of view: Buildir g l

(

i l

Western Construction, v,26, no. 2, p. 70-74; no. 3,

p. 85-88; no. 4, p. 90-92.

Standards Monthl>, v.18, no. 6, p. 8-11,16.

Wood, H. O., and Neumann, Frank,1931 Modi 6ed Edw ards, 11. 11., 1950, Dinuuion of damsge caund Mercalliintensity scale of 1931 Seismolegical So-

{

i by the Paci6c Northwut euthquah of 1.pril 13,

}

1949, and recommendations of meuvree to reduce ciety of America Bulloin, v. 21 no. 4, p. 277-253.

l l

proputy damage and public hasards due to future Wooley, J. K.,1950, Earthquake of April 13,1949, af-l earthquakes: Amnican Society Civil Enginnrs, re-futing principally watern portion of the State of port to Seattle nction,30 p.

Wuhingten: Seattle, Wuh., Wuhington Survey-

)

I llodgson, E. A.,1946 British Columbia earthquah, l

Ing and Rating Bunau,13 p.

June 23,1946: Royal AstronomicalSocu, ty Canada von lish, C. A., and Cloud, W. K.,1967, United Statu Journal, v. 40, no. 8, p.184-319.

euthwakes,1965: U.S. Cout and Geodetic Sur-4

,,y, 93 p, i

i

i 125 124 123 122 121 120 119

(

'(

50 l

so N

VJ f

1 l

% 1920 49 49 (7

=

i isoe

%f.

t l

i...

-~m

,1. u 4.

4.

18 7 2 k. i l

i j.

r j

e*

e s

0 f

J ye L

e 1840 1

1944 1965 I

193 6 <

4 47

~

47

((

le4s e

e a s

e i

i e

r e

1893 I

Il

\\

g l

48

[

~

46 i

rgM f

  • tes j

f

=

i e

i

}

45 45 i

}

/

124 123 122 121 120 l

t b,

8" EU##ETI8 4

r I

Figure 1. Puget Sound regionalseismicity. The arabic numbere show rnaalmum Modi 6ed Mercalliintensities (lo) and epiantral locations. Wars are noted for sheds with lo2Vi! M.M. Maximum intensities shown on

.1 this inap ue the highest given in any of the catalogs searched.

i 1

1 L

i j

t

\\

]

l 4

l i

I

t IX i

i i

1

..J h J....

t.

Vlli t.

'idda I.mla.k....

yll l t...::.

.t

i..L.a1

.. s

.h 5 y,

.a-.sm W m &.mmz ae e) a.a...

as o

4. 6 l..s.a a J.u.

I vdLilla.A y

4 i

t

. inst.1 kl..

jy 4

l j

0.5 1.0 10.0 100.0 500.0 1

Distance x(km) l i

IX i

i i

l i

Vill l.

s.

l.

L.6.. I Vil

..A

..i. = 8 x..

lE.

1 a

g

.. f.

& Qa..

yl r

.L

_O g

6

,C, y

g.. a a.. e s g.

ts l

ly A.

s...

t.

\\

i a

I I

I I

I 0.5 1.0 10.0 100.0 500.0 l

Distance x(km) l Figure 2. Plot of intensity attenuation with distance from the epicenter. Each dot represents a reported site latensity during the 1965 earthquake. (a) All the data for the 2005 earthquake. (b) Data for sites d

on normally consolidated materials only for the 1965 euthquake. The two pointers on each line show the 4

range eldistances within which 80% of the data lie. The two lines approximate the attenuatica of the lower and upper sets of pointers, that is of the near. minimum and near masimum distances at which a puticular intensity was reporW (Ilopper and others.1975).

l l

t-j q 9 -. f.

(,....f..

- l.

}' %\\

I f_

j & ~p-l..' '.f.ll. l\\

....cn+

y. 3, l-t-

{

  • T.

{

s s

,), 3.,,

Y y*n u i

....i.e 0

-. g),.,. e w

NJ i,.

[l.

,.g...,,

-(

s t d..

+

.b:' ~.

m r

. '. ns Y

s HV u,

n- N p.

y, f' I I

4 q,

e 4

T'M *1'y

... '........ )

" ~ ' ~

f 1

?:s p f f

,Jk~5 j

g

~-.

~

a

.0 c

g,

,c

. e

.o.

e o'

.s.

z j

7 I

- *W b

v s.

(

/ lu

,' Lt utt ct rggy aggg

(

/'

o g

t

.y 1

i" - /........

t i

ISOSEISMAL MAP g

EARTHQUAKE (3 APRIL 1949 ls G

j i

is $$. est r

f.... - M M

~ 3 *,%

1 4.

l.

J

.t i

t..

i l

Figure 3. Isoseismal map for the 190 earthquake near 01 mpia (Ulrich,1940).

3 1

l 1

(

l

f d

i I

l(

f

    • ' =

l

.y.. m#

/.::*.,

4

[

c

\\

"J.T=

i g"

O

).r/

t

}

o i

/

J I

~*

f

:C" -

t

++

i i

as='

a

~

N bee' i

=%

3 y=

6 e

3 Mk E<

~

i

.. r w..

~

i

==

1

/..g.

=.

\\

'n' l s.=

e m

g 3

i j

j e/

T..

,- Q.

3 46 yV a

f uMI '

/,

  • g i

\\

.\\ {

\\..

k.

b 1

i j

._ 4.,

,a s

i e

.N y

W N

6

[

y a

\\

g t

i u..

l J

ET!.

i

[ U f

O

5,2 h

~

y

" Y 1

l L

se

.$ \\=. -

n

.a...

i 5 '"".*l,*., e)

]

s.*:*- W l

P a

t j

l l

~

i l

~ ~ ~~ N'5 f 7'

~

~'

3

}

Figwe 4, Intenalties la the city of Seutle due to the ;949 euthquake. Data me from an unpublished intensity l

servey by the Valverelty of Washlagton.

I 1(

I a

1 i

I i

i 1

i

v~

y nm.o.,

.n

.__e i

a e

.e,..,e.,

s

,7. -

. ~ ~. -

/

y

<* /

/,

p

/

//

't I,

t

/

l

  1. x,

/

w...

-l TAcouN?,' -

y l

q

~J

?

,., /

{

3 - z].,

i

^ oua.a u r.

an~.

Ivt t

Q' rar _

recarst o

j q

i; N s.

I t

I t

. u m.,

['

[

l t

i)'....

l 1

J f

srtucoou ro., u.

O

'L

\\

O O

\\

I

/

O p

y we em Font LEn 4

,./*/

AMFO*Cl 4418 O

~ ~.

O 00 y

i i

i I

Figure 5.

Intensittee in the city of Tacoma due to the 1949 earthquake. Data are from an napublished intensity survey by the University of Waehington.

a r

I t

i l

l t

1 i

j j

t

~lk-i g

I A

/

I J

/

g r

'*' 8 '

Q

{

i

\\

!?

I 1

1.

{

E I*

1

=

j i

1 i

f u~1 E.

L

"" ;s- ) s e "

7

,.y, J,$,./

1

[ curra P:

N

..A.

TI bd I

l t

l

{

n r

\\L

=

]

i e....,

)

i i

av.imu,,

d._

{

i 4

t

\\

O

{

I l

)

i p: /

.....y....I l

\\

1 1.

Ojf

\\=--.:111 tit 7y i

h,

^

i e

I e

i ws I

l l

Hgure 6. Intineiti.: la the city cf Olyinpla due to the 1919 earthquake. Data a.re frorn an unpublished intensity survey ky the University of Washington.

i 1

, (

l l

(

il..

iir

./,

i '..

ii..

s (1.g o

.BR I T I SH COLUMB i A l

$f

\\

in A..

u-....,.i.....

(

j u

N.

v[Y

/

(

e P.nisis.

... -. 7

.. y 9

e 41,b,,{,

  • i.

.' = c'

.i t

k.*

-tv /. I'...':,.h. o.

i.,,i

[ h.

s' v

i.,

s, e.

... vi 2

..,..s,. s...... s

/; _ v>y...i.

..... I,

.(

4 l

' g '.. /.,..

' t, g

,.. '.,,. -. p,1, s...

u b?* *.* *,

/.,

.W.. A * *

,H

.l '. N G...T.

  • O N I,

'\\'

ID A H O 4

'd l'...

.....c J

~

. 4-)

,,, i.sv

,t w-

t. e.,;., (. *.. g. > m%

. r. 4i...

1

.i.. y s,

-/

E-G' O. -

Nf

.*r.. O R

7, f

l e

WC01010 etB;&ltiIHit%5ity mar J

5" p[

i...e.w..u.....

...... 6.

-... t. J.

  • 1 e.

4.ase.ie.,

l

.o I. rv e n e vm @

v 4 n *

T_' '_ _ i s.

.=

t _,,,,y, te

.-_._..-...-_ty ns L_y. ie l

s y.*

< s,r.

m

}

4 Hgure 7 Isoseismal for the 2005 tuthquake nea Seattle (Algermissen and lluding,2005).

l l

1 (

a i

a I

J l

Ro 31"*

g s.,

.u.

n g

Lv

. y/4

" q' A*

\\.

)

"L':"

j

' [).r.

o

~4 ts E

.a:--

....) v.9.. _**

  • n...L.,( g, v

+

's. 9 t ;'

-.4.""** t g.

. p*

A

,,........ r A

. =n.7..

. Y'"

MTYN

'etr,, N._C

% 'l'.S.. 4,,\\ ~ Y, At;=

g i~

<., r.' : -

y-

.Cv.f.,h J d7 d.J * %

s.

  • amEy, s\\ ~p
  • k,*.

.. /

I#

.A v.

., 1 w

I s

- c.

.I j' Il

'y "la

,g

--\\.$ \\

... p,t.,.fy w '.

l s'.rt.

6

  • 7 J'l - ' '

' N..

3

\\

y

  • ' ' - ~

_Y 1

1

  • D* A h.w,+ phi i

r;;..

,e P. *..

~'

.r NL

{

T.* 7

).

M'.

    • *T i

Figwee 8. Intensities in the city of Seattle due to the 1965 earthquake. Data are from an unpublishe3 intensity survey by the University of Wuhington.

t

k

(

x i > r'n.

l 3 3 4 nil i

I

's o.

r#

s'6 es,.i, r#' '

M','.,,,,f

, e,. 'V N

e n

  • ... i. o.,,,,,,

. J i

m

.-n-

'g.

/,

i A."ti i i "t!!.

-n..,,

4 i

..,n o

(

3

  • o~

..k

)

i

o " ~'

i', y, l

)

eis ii,ie n,.,

~e

.ein....

j i

i

/

i I

~

'{

n 8

s 5

/

i

'?

I s

3, k

j i

4 s

w.

S i

f a.,

3 a e

j,

(>

,i...,u...,a wi.......

.... 4

. - =

.u...,.......i...

....u...,.

4 ser _,

  • em Det _., p* " ' '

6

_ a _ ;. ' *** '" _

i Figwe 9. Percent thimneys damaged (times 10%)la We.t Suttle det to the IM5 es,thgveke (Algerminen

)

i l

and Harding, IMS).

i i

1 i.

l 1

\\

T V

N

.. s.

(

w s

J

~

x t

s j,e etesteciment ea r

'tI'::::

'/g usu

  • \\

r/

f

/

/

\\; } \\

j/

l x...

l p/

W ', um a. (

TA COMA,

~.

/'

.....\\

]

q y

,.>m

)

\\

'g..amew d 7 8

aJ.:n

)

en.(Af 8T(.s...

.j eve g.

_ a w = s..

O

[t --.~ d

/

E t

i

}

1 3rESA C00at n=..=w A18 Q

ase essono AM f U seis Amropet 8454 QQ 9

s i

,i Fiswa 10. Intensities in the city of Tacoma due to th619C5 earthquake. Data are from an unpublished intensity survey by the University of Washington.

i i

i

.i I

E

)

/

i

/

i em 8"' ' T

\\

' s

\\.

k

(

n;

\\.

(,

1 p:

h,'

g m

j.

i.

h w. y... q,

m

.- c

..,,, 4 e

t

. cantos

  1. =

.d a

1

'(

l i.

t n

t M*:

.g

..., 0 *\\

  • I\\

V /

.,.',
.......)_ l s

)

/

'h, t.

\\

0 /f i

t s

..... * =

./l

,f i

astaa Fistsee 11. Intensities in the city of Olyrnpla due to the 1965 earthqua... Data are from an unpubhshed intensity survey by the University of Washington.

\\

- ~.

I I

I I

.m.kg *h

,. o s >.o.a, i, o u o.g

,4

.(,

'$-hQ-g.

(,

a

-/.

\\

s Q

e,,i 3..

t 5%

ii e' l f

h

{}{

t yl.

f y

.... p; - -,

  • 1 y

\\

.. q.,

j

.q...,

(..

..n.

y'

.,Le y

,, /

, y;p.

I.

w,

.s M/.

  • I f. [ss}

.,9 e

a

(

e

.=.,g 4

.I g

I

\\

g Offufl#ff W 4-

_ (

~;.

g :.

/

y s

1 s.

j

. L, j

f

'i. t -

?*' t**1= r (b)

(e) 1 l6 i.-

f., ~; 4.:. %u e m.. y....)

-r m M.F n

l Q

J-

'a, 7.^ ;,'_'.;...y.m_.. -.

r T..:

v s

q

- 4.-,. u,- l g, c r a

n. -.

~. rr,

4,.

n m. > u1

.~..Jh

~

s

. g I f.ir.: 9l -

~ -

- j m-

.s p.t

. ' g -.y Q)e, T-

)W

~.'

(~-

w m

e.

4.$,2~

-- 1-. w n: Y.'*>l t r

!~

I. x i

V

.s. :.h_6 T

(

. "- Lo, =.tb C. r N.

I-G,'

i au u,.

e

.w

- s p.

(d)

...... u.

(C) j rt..,

171' jfr 123' l i t-tin i*

w[.

i

,\\,! _,_. ; ' _ _

w a'

9 I.

Ie f g 7 ] th 4.. g 9...

aw p

1 9

.. x J., tim,..

a er 4 L,"

er M %3

. M n

t. d-

-l

.. r,ir ie i, Q,. r.

.l

!(.

%3.

D 4

~

..y 7 %.:

{

i

[

s "H.34 C

...I'****'.*..

44' i-O 4r

.'s. . ;. '*. ' ' l,,.,,. - -

Kg l ** -

D

-..L. ' -.

T.h /

... :i l'.....

J ec}tys,. e a.. ; e ler

<v

.. '~~--

^

vis yo s

m-ur ur or n r-Ri J es (e)

(t)

Heute 12. Isoseismals for six other shoch afecting the Puget Sound area. (a) 1872, (b) 1877 (Thenhaus, 1978), (c) 1932 (Bradfort and Waters,1934), (d) 1945 (Bodle and Murphy,1947), (e) 194c (Bodle and 4

Murphy,1948), and (f) ;142 (Lander,1904).

(

l L

ea4 h

1.

y T.

(

p' i o

, t

, pi

' f _

i i

'11 1ii d v.]

h;li 1 Lf 4ld!j l1l ipjiij))?.i { !!i.'

ClIli 1<!

1 g

i

.1 illf

,, li ! i isfi siltyi:lpp.l.j!

1

.f: 1i

4 b.

/]i}y ti u m u ow..1,.

i.u.

i

.c n (12

  • J:

!j i

g 1

,i f E ffli l Jl J j:I;lilli!11'1iij I!.

Ili l' 1 I I

i

] ? 1 ' ljf 911L ! 9. h'

'y1r1L h

1 1

Il

'Jh,gji(11l'1]1 1i tit n t

j

' f,' jl jjf.j

?

J:i riilti ll!I1 'j l{l!1;l [j{k I

ll il l

l1.81c'j!

f1 n isid;-.1,ij i

lpj jb' I },

'N f

i fl[3h I l

]

fy 4

y j$

.2

[

(

s J (k 8

{

4' 8 1i b'!}ilte'1.,353>!jffI'! 3 i

I I

l

)I,p 1

I 1

4 2 i,-

I 3

i 4

Jbf,il;i!j.ia,,jJ'l'!?.I'g IJ !

I l'

i ge ! ci> a.: 1 i 1

i a p!.u f.[fp,1 j!

3 i j i s i :,,w

. l jg nf I!lii ii i ijunli juI l

>c Ll))jii:l0 b

r ifI.

IUj !

,ih,c h:! !

j9t hs;di v l19 1

i j

ai i

u e

i,

. il!. jo

< h i !J.

} } }h !, 'l lll l i 1 l

.u:

6 i

5 r

i I

I

'l

{

}

f I!

l]$l

[f5 h

I ' )1 '.

3 j

fl.!<(r

}

f:hr I'

a i

E il f j

j I;ij

. 'i i

. o.

i., j,

s i

i s,i lkq!!

1 )h i!p p

>d ; :,l i ! c> 'L ji'I

,j jj ' 1 i

rti julij J

t i

,3 73,4.f>7[p+!

m

(

)

7 3.....m..

I 1a

=

n

)

-

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20151H240&oldid=4157242"