Away Rotation Ucla Olive View Maximum
The clinical curriculum is designed to maximize the resident’s education in both inpatient and ambulatory Internal Medicine. Interns are scheduled a maximum of 8 inpatient months.
ICU and Hospitalist rotations require night duties. This provides sufficient time during the intern year for other pursuits, or for starting (and completing) research for residents who are interested in pursuing a competitive fellowship.Feel free to review our curriculum and other information on our.
Faculty Education Coordinators are responsible for designing and maintaining the curriculum of every rotation, and curricula are reviewed by our Curriculum Committee, which includes housestaff members and faculty. ScheduleIn July 2013, the program transitioned to a 4+1 block schedule. This means housestaff rotate on a four-week block and then spend 1 week (“+1”) in the ambulatory clinics.
Olive View – UCLA Medical Center. Olive View – UCLA Medical Center is a 377-bed state-of-the-art hospital that serves much of the San Fernando Valley and the Antelope Valley, with out-patient clinics that provide primary care and hospital services for those who need specialty care or surgery.
All continuity clinics are scheduled during the “+1” week, so housestaff can focus on wards, ICU, and consult rotations without interruption during the other 4 weeks.Prior to starting the intern year, requests for specific rotations and vacation dates are sent to our program manager and program directors, and every attempt is made to honor these requests. Although scheduling is complex, interns almost always get their first or second choices. In fact, we pride ourselves on being a humane “family” program, and we care as much about our residents’ non-academic lives as we do about the high standards of the curriculum and educational program. The chief residents manage the daily schedules of housestaff and publish them in advance. Kakegurui xx episode 12. RotationsThe ward, hospitalist and ICU rotations are busy call rotations, but one day off per week averaged over every four-week period is guaranteed.
The inpatient rotations include. Rotation Schedule Rotations (months per year)PGY-1PGY-2, PGY-3Wards4-52-3ICU/CCU.1-21-2Heme/Onc Wards00.5-1Ambulatory Medicine2.52.5Urgent Care0-0.50-1Hospitalist1-1.51Emergency Medicine00.5-1Geriatrics – SMH or VA01.Consult/Elective/Research1-1.52-3Vacation11. This experience may be at Olive View MICU, UCLA MICU, or UCLA CCU.
Four weeks as a PGY-3 at Santa Monica-UCLA or VA West Los Angeles.The above schedule is based on the standard 13 block annual rotation calendar. Each block is 4 weeks in length.
Sample Medicine Ward Schedule 6:00-8:15 amPre-round8:15-9:00 amInpatient Morning Report9:00-11:30 pmAttending Rounds12:00-1:00 pmNoon Conference and Lunch1:00-5:00 pmPatient Care ActivitiesSample Ambulatory (Outpatient) Schedule 8:00-12:00 pmPrimary care, subspecialty, or urgent care clinic,or Academic half-day for interns on Wednesdays12:00-1:00 pmNoon Conference and Lunch1:00-5:00 pmGeneral medicine, subspecialty, or urgent care clinic.
Time1971-02-09 14:00:41eventUSGS-Local dateFebruary 9, 1971 ( 1971-02-09)Local time06:00:41 PSTDuration12 secondsMagnitude6.5; 6.6Depth8.4 km (5.2 mi)Epicenter:FaultTypeAreas affectedUnited StatesTotal damage505–553 millionMax. IntensityPeak acceleration1.25 g atLandslides1,000+Casualties58–65 dead200–2,000 injuredThe 1971 San Fernando earthquake (also known as the Sylmar earthquake) occurred in the early morning of February 9 in the foothills of the in southern California. The unanticipated thrust earthquake had a magnitude of 6.5 on the scale, and a maximum of XI ( Extreme).
The event was one in a series that affected the Los Angeles area in the late 20th century. Damage was locally severe in the northern and surface faulting was extensive to the south of the epicenter in the mountains, as well as urban settings along city streets and neighborhoods. Uplift and other effects affected private homes and businesses.The event affected a number of health-care facilities in, and other densely populated areas north of central Los Angeles. The and Veterans Hospital both experienced very heavy damage, and buildings collapsed at both sites, causing the majority of deaths that occurred. The buildings at both facilities were constructed with mixed styles, but engineers were unable to thoroughly study the buildings' responses because they were not outfitted with instruments for recording, and this prompted the to later install s at its high-risk sites. Other sites throughout the Los Angeles area had been instrumented as a result of local ordinances, and an extraordinary amount of strong motion data was recorded, more so than any other event up until that time. The success in this area spurred the initiation of California's Strong Motion Instrumentation Program.Transportation around the Los Angeles area was severely afflicted with roadway failures and the partial collapse of several major freeway interchanges.
The near total failure of the Lower Van Norman Dam resulted in the evacuation of tens of thousands of downstream residents, though an earlier decision to maintain the water at a lower level may have contributed to saving the from being overtopped. Schools were affected, as they had been during the, but this time amended construction styles improved the outcome for the thousands of school buildings in the Los Angeles area. Another result of the event involved the hundreds of various types of landslides that were documented in the San Gabriel Mountains.
As had happened following other earthquakes in California, legislation related to building codes was once again revised, with laws that specifically addressed the construction of homes or businesses near known active fault zones. See also:The San Gabriel Mountains are a 37.3 mi (60.0 km) long portion of the and are bordered on the north by the, on the south by the Cucamonga Fault, and on the southwest side by the. The, and are also part of the anomalous east–west trending Transverse Ranges. The domain of the ranges stretches from the offshore, to the, 300 miles (480 km) to the east.
The frontal fault system at the base of the San Gabriel Mountains extends from the in the east to offshore Malibu in the west, and is defined primarily by moderate to shallow north- faults, with a conservative vertical displacement estimated at 4,000–5,000 feet (1,200–1,500 m).evidence has shown that the western Transverse Ranges were formed as the moved northward relative to the. As the shifted to the north, a portion of the that was once parallel with the coast was rotated in a clockwise manner, which left it positioned in its east–west orientation. The Transverse Ranges form the perimeter of a series of basins that begins with the on the west end. Moving eastward, there is the Ventura Basin, the San Fernando Valley, and the San Gabriel Basin, with active (, Red Mountain, Santa Susana, and Sierra Madre) all lining the north boundary. A small number of damaging events have occurred, with three in Santa Barbara (1812, and 1978) and two in the San Fernando Valley (1971 and ), though other faults in the basin that have high slip rates have not produced any large earthquakes. Earthquake. See also:The San Fernando earthquake occurred on February 9 at 6:00:41 am (14:00:41 ) with a duration of about 12 seconds.
The origin of faulting was located five miles north of the San Fernando Valley. Considerable damage was seen in localized portions of the valley and also in the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains above the. The fault that was responsible for the movement was not one that had been considered a threat, and this highlighted the urgency to identify other similar faults in the. The shaking surpassed requirements and exceeded what engineers had prepared for, and although most dwellings in the valley had been built in the prior two decades, even modern earthquake-resistant structures sustained serious damage.Several key attributes of the event were shared with the, considering both were brought about by thrust faults in the mountains north of Los Angeles, and each resulting earthquake being similar in magnitude, though no occurred in 1994. Since both occurred in urban and industrial areas and resulted in significant economic impairment, each event drew critical observation from planning authorities, and has been thoroughly studied in the scientific communities. Surface faulting.
Further information:Prominent surface faulting trending N72°W was observed along the San Fernando Fault Zone from a point south of Sylmar, stretching nearly continuously for 6 miles (9.7 km) east to the Little Tujunga Canyon. Additional breaks occurred farther to the east that were in a more scattered fashion, while the western portion of the most affected area had less pronounced scarps, especially the detached Mission Wells segment. Although the complete had previously been mapped and classified by name into its constituent faults, the clusters of fault breaks provided a natural way to identify and refer to each section. As categorized during the intensive studies immediately following the earthquake, they were labeled the Mission Wells segment, Sylmar segment, Tujunga segment, Foothills area, and the Veterans fault. Ground level and overhead view of the scarp at the Foothill Nursing HomeAll segments shared the common elements of thrust faulting with a component of left-lateral slip, a general east-west and a northward dip, but they were not unified with regard to their connection to the associated underlying.
The initial surveyors of the extensive faulting in the valley, foothills, and mountains reported only tectonic faulting, while excluding fissures and other features that arose from the effects of compaction and landsliding. In the vicinity of the Sylmar Fault segment, there was a low possibility of landslides due to a lack of elevation change, but in the foothills and mountainous area a large amount of landsliding occurred and more work was necessary to eliminate the possibility of misidentifying a feature. Along the hill fronts of the Tujunga segment some ambiguous formations were present because some scarps may have had influence from downhill motion, but for the most part they were tectonic in nature.In repeated measurements of the different fault breaks, the results remained consistent, leading to the belief that most of the slip had occurred during the mainshock. While lateral, transverse, and vertical motions were all observed, the largest individual component of movement was 5 ft 3 in (1.60 m) of left lateral slip near the middle of the Sylmar segment.
The largest cumulative amount of slip of 6 feet 7 inches (2.01 m) occurred along the Sylmar and Tujunga segments. The overall fault displacement was summarized by geologist and others as 'nearly equal amounts of north–south compression, vertical uplift (north side up), and left lateral slip and hence may be described as a thrusting of a northern block to the southwest over a southern block, along a fault surface dipping about 45° north.'
Aftershocks A three-week inspection of the activity was undertaken that included events that were recorded by an array of permanent stations that were operated by the, a USGS instrument stationed at, and seismometers at Pyramid Springs and Cedar Springs. Temporary seismometers that were set up in response to the mainshock were up and running from as soon as several hours to several days after the main event and provided additional data until March 1.
The catalog of items was mostly complete and included 200 shocks of magnitude 3.0 or greater and four shocks of magnitude 5.0 or greater. During the first hour of activity, the larger aftershocks were overshadowing the smaller events. Main shock Mercalli intensitiesLocationsXI ( Extreme)X ( Extreme)IX ( Violent)VIII ( Severe),VII ( Very strong),VI ( Strong),V ( Moderate),IV ( Light),III ( Weak),The overall pattern of aftershock activity appeared in the shape of a symmetrical inverted 'U' but with slightly more concentrated activity on the southwest flank. Several of the smaller shocks approached the area of surface faulting, but for the most part, the area that experienced the heaviest shaking and damage (as a result of the mainshock) lacked aftershock activity. The, with its unusually high peak ground acceleration reading, laid very close to the center of that aftershock-free zone. Landslides.
See also:The USGS commissioned a private company and the to take over 97 sq mi (250 km 2) of the mountainous areas north of the San Fernando Valley. Analysis revealed that the earthquake triggered over 1,000 landslides. Highly shattered rock was also documented along the ridge tops, and rockfalls (which continued for several days) were the result of both the initial shock and the aftershocks. Few of the slides that were logged from the air were also observed from the ground. The greatest number of slides were centered to the southwest of the mainshock epicenter and close to the areas where surface faulting took place.
The slides ranged from 49–984 feet (15–300 m) in length, and could be further categorized as, soil falls, debris slides, avalanches,. The most frequently-encountered type of slide was the surficial (less than 3 feet (0.91 m) thick) debris slides and were most often encountered on terrain consisting of.
Strong motion In early 1971, the San Fernando Valley was the scene of a dense network of strong-motion seismometers, which provided a total of 241. This made the earthquake the most documented event, at the time, in terms of strong-motion; by comparison, the did not provide any strong motion records.
Part of the reason there were so many stations to capture the event was a 1965 that required newly constructed buildings in and Los Angeles over six stories in height to be outfitted with three of the instruments. This stipulation ultimately found its way into the as an appendix several years later. One hundred seventy-five of the recordings came from these buildings, another 30 were on, and the remainder were from ground-based installations near faults, including an array of the units across the.The instrument that was installed at the recorded a of 1.25 g, a value that was twice as large as anything ever seen from an earthquake. The extraordinarily high acceleration was just one part of the picture, considering that duration and frequency of shaking also play a role in how much damage can occur. The was mounted on a concrete platform on a ridge just above one of the 's abutments.
Cracks formed in the rocks and a rock slide came within 15 feet (4.6 m) of the apparatus, and the foundation remained undamaged, but a small (half-degree) tilt of the unit was discovered that was apparently responsible for closing the horizontal pendulum contacts. As a result of what was considered a fortunate accident, the machine kept recording for six minutes (until it ran out of paper) and provided scientists with additional data on 30 of the initial aftershocks. See also: andThe areas that were affected by the strongest shaking were the outlying communities north of that are bounded by the northern edge of the San Fernando Valley at the base of the San Gabriel Mountains. The unincorporated districts of, and Solemint Junction had moderate damage, even to newer buildings. The area where the heaviest effects were present was limited by geographical features on the three remaining margins, with the on the west, the and the to the south, and along the to the east. Loss of life that was directly attributable to the earthquake amounted to 58 (a number of heart attack and other health-related deaths were not included in this figure).
Most deaths occurred at the Veterans and Olive View hospital complexes, and the rest were located at private residences, the highway overpass collapses, and a ceiling collapse at the in downtown Los Angeles. Partly detached staircase and severely damaged buildings at the Olive View HospitalThe damage was greatest near and well north of the surface faulting, and at the foot of the mountains. The hospital buildings, the freeway overpasses, and the Sylmar Juvenile Hall were on coarse that overlay thousands of feet of loosely consolidated sedimentary material. In the city of San Fernando, underground water, sewer, and gas systems suffered breaks too numerous to count, and some sections were so badly damaged that they were abandoned.
Ground displacement damaged sidewalks and roads, with cracks in the more rigid asphalt and concrete often exceeding the width of the shift in the underlying soil. Accentuated damage near alluvium had been documented during the investigation of the effects of the. A band of similarly intense damage further away near at the southern end of the valley was also identified as having been related to.Federal, county, and suffered varying degrees of damage, with four major facilities in the San Fernando Valley suffering structural damage, and two of those collapsing. The Indian Hills Medical Center, the Foothill Medical Building, and the Pacoima Lutheran Professional building were heavily damaged. Nursing homes also were affected. The one-story Foothill Nursing Home sat very close to a section of the fault that broke the surface and was raised up three feet higher than the street. Scarps ran along the sidewalk and across the property.
The building was not in use and remained standing. Though the reinforced structure was afflicted by the shock and uplift, the relatively good performance was in stark contrast to that of the Olive View and Veterans Hospital complexes. Olive View Hospital. Main article:Most of the buildings at the –owned, 880-bed hospital complex had been built before the adoption of new construction techniques that had been put in place after the. The group of one-story structures 300 feet west of the new facility, and some other buildings, were not damaged.
The damaged buildings variously were wood-frame and masonry structures. The five-story, reinforced-concrete Medical Treatment and Care Building was one of three new additions to the complex (all three of which sustained damage), was assembled with techniques, and was completed in December, 1970. The hospital was staffed by 98 employees and had 606 patients at the time of the earthquake; all three deaths that occurred at the Olive View complex were in this building. Two were due to power failure of life-support systems and one, that of an employee who was struck by part of the collapsing building as he or she tried to exit the building, was a direct result of the destruction. Fallen stair towers and damaged basement at the Olive View HospitalThe Medical Treatment and Care Building included a that was exposed (above grade) on the east and south sides, mixed (above and below grade) on the west side, and below grade on the north side of the building, the variation being due to the shallow slope at the site.
The complete structure, including the four external staircases, could be considered five separate buildings, because the stair towers were detached from the main building by about four inches. Earthquake bracing used in the building's second through fifth floors consisted of, but a rarely used technique used with the concrete walls at the first floor kept them from being part of that system. Damage to the building, including ceiling tiles, telephone equipment, and elevator doors, was excessive at the basement and the first floor, with little damage further up.
Ucla Olive View Emergency Medicine
The difference in rigidity at the second floor was proposed as a cause of the considerable damage to the lower levels. Because the first floor almost collapsed, the building was leaning to the north by almost two feet, and three of the four concrete stair towers fell away from the main building.On the grounds, there were cracks in the pavement and soil, but no surface faulting. In addition to the collapse of the stairways, the elevators were out of commission. Electrical power and communications failed at the hospital at the time of the earthquake, but very few people occupied the lower floors and the stairways at the early hour.
Casualties in these highly affected areas might have increased had the shock occurred later in the day. The duration of strong ground motion at that location was probably similar to the 12 seconds observed at the Pacoima Dam, and another few seconds' shaking is thought to have been enough to bring the building to collapse. Collapse of four buildings at the Veterans Hospital complexThe Veterans Administration Hospital entered into service as a tuberculosis hospital in 1926 and became a general hospital in the 1960s. By 1971, the facility comprised 45 individual buildings, all lying within 5 km (3.1 mi) of the fault rupture in Sylmar, but the structural damage was found to have occurred as a result of the shaking and not from ground displacement or faulting. Twenty-six buildings that were built prior to 1933 had been constructed following the local building codes and did not require seismic-resistant designs. These buildings suffered the most damage, with four buildings totally collapsing, which resulted in a large loss of life at the facility. Most of the masonry and reinforced concrete buildings constructed after 1933 withstood the shaking and most did not collapse, but in 1972 a resolution came forth to abandon the site and the remaining structures were later demolished, the site becoming a city park.Few installations were present outside of the western United States prior to the San Fernando earthquake but, upon a recommendation by the Earthquake and Wind Forces Committee, the entered into an agreement with the Seismological Field Service (then associated with ) to install the instruments at all VA sites in zones two and three.
It had been established that these zones had a higher likelihood of experiencing strong ground acceleration, and the plan was made to furnish the selected VA hospitals with two instruments. One unit would be installed within the structure and the second would be set up as a free-field unit located a short distance away from the facility. As of 1973, a few of the highest risk (26 were completed in zone 3 alone) sites that had been completed were in,. Van Norman Dam. See also: andBoth the Upper and Lower Van Norman dams were severely damaged as a result of the earthquake. The lower dam was very close to breaching, and approximately 80,000 people were evacuated for four days while the water level in the reservoir was lowered.
This was done as a precaution to accommodate further collapse due to a strong aftershock. Some canals in the area of the dams were damaged and not usable, and dikes experienced slumping but these did not present a hazard. The damage at the lower dam consisted of a landslide that dislocated a section of the embankment.
The earthen lip of the dam fell into the reservoir and brought with it the concrete lining, while what remained of the dam was just 5 feet (1.5 m) above the water level. The upper lake 3 feet (0.91 m) and was displaced about 5 feet (1.5 m) as a result of the ground movement, and the dam's concrete lining cracked and slumped.The upper dam was constructed in 1921 with the process, three years after the larger lower dam, which was fabricated using the same style. An inspection of the lower dam in 1964 paved the way towards an arrangement between the and the that would maintain the reservoir's water level that was reduced 10 feet lower than was typical. Since the collapse of the dam lowered its overall height, the decision to reduce its capacity proved to be a valuable bit of insurance.Differential ground motion and strong shaking (MMI VIII ( Severe)) were responsible for serious damage to the Sylmar Juvenile Hall facility and the (both located close to the Upper Van Norman lake). The, as well as the County of Los Angeles, investigated and verified that local soil conditions contributed to the ground displacement and resulting destruction.
The area of surface breaks on the ground at the site was 900 ft (270 m) (at its widest) and stretched 4,000 ft (1,200 m) down a 1% grade slope towards the southwest. As much as 5 ft (1.5 m) of lateral motion was observed on either end of the slide, and trenches that were excavated during the examination at the site revealed that some of the cracks were up to 15 ft (4.6 m) deep. The two facilities, located near Grapevine and Weldon canyons that channel water and debris off the Sierra Madre Mountains, are lined by steep ridges and have formed at their mouths. The narrow band of ground disturbances were found to have been the result of settling of the soft soil in a downhill motion.
Played a role within confined areas of the slide, but it was not responsible for all the motion at the site, and tectonic slip of faults in the area was also excluded as a cause. See also:Substantial disruption to about 10 miles of freeways in the northern San Fernando Valley took place, with most of the damage occurring at the Foothill Freeway / Golden State Freeway interchange, and along a five-mile stretch of. On Interstate 5, the most significant damage was between the Newhall Pass interchange on the north end and the / interchange in the south, where subsidence at the bridge approaches and cracking and buckling of the roadway made it unusable.
Several landslides occurred between and, but the most significant damage occurred at the two major interchanges. The Antelope Valley Freeway had damage from Newhall Pass to the northeast, primarily from settling and alignment issues, as well as splintering and cracking at the and Solemint bridges. Golden State Freeway – Antelope Valley Freeway Interchange. Main article:While the Newhall Pass interchange was still under construction at the time of the earthquake, the requisite components of the overpass were complete. Vibration caused two of the bridge's 191-foot sections to fall from a maximum height of 140 ft (43 m), along with one of the supporting pillars. The spans slipped off of their supports at either end due to lack of proper ties and insufficient space (a 14 in (360 mm) seat was provided) on the support columns.
Ground displacement at the site was ruled out as a major cause of the failure, and in addition to the fallen sections and a crane that was struck during the collapse, other portions of the overpass were also damaged. Shear cracking occurred at the column closest to the western abutment, and the ground at the same column's base exhibited evidence of rotation.
Golden State Freeway – Foothill Freeway Interchange. Main articles: andThis interchange is a broad complex of overpasses and bridges that was nearly complete at the time of the earthquake and not all portions were open to traffic. Several instances of failure or collapse at the site took place and two men were killed while driving in a as a result. The westbound I-210 to southbound I-5, which was complete except for paving at the ramp section, collapsed to the north, likely because of vibration that moved the overpass off its supports due to an inadequate seat. Unlike the situation at the Antelope Valley Interchange, permanent ground movement (defined as several inches of left-lateral displacement with possibly an element of thrusting) was observed in the area. The movement contributed to heavy damage at the Sylmar Juvenile Hall facility, Sylmar Converter Station, and the Metropolitan Water District Treatment Plant, but its effects on the interchange was not completely understood as of a 1971 report from the. See also:;;; andThe large number of public school buildings in the Los Angeles area displayed mixed responses to the shaking, and those that were built after the enforcement of the clearly showed the results of the reformed construction styles.
The Field Act was put into effect just one month following the destructive March 1933 Long Beach earthquake that damaged many public school buildings in Long Beach,. The had 660 schools consisting of 9,200 buildings at the time of the earthquake, with 110 buildings that had not been reinforced to meet the new standards. More than 400 and 53 pre-Field Act buildings were also in use.
See also:Following many of California's major earthquakes, lawmakers have acted quickly to develop legislation related to seismic safety. After the M6.4 the Field Act was passed the following month, and after the, the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act and Senate Bill 1953 (hospital safety requirements) were established.
Following the San Fernando event, earthquake engineers and seismologists from established scientific organizations, as well as the newly formed Los Angeles County Earthquake Commission, stated their recommendations that were based on the lessons learned. The list of items needing improvements included building codes, dams and bridges being made more earthquake resistant, hospitals that are designed to remain operational, and the restriction of development near known fault zones. New legislation included the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act and the development of the Strong Motion Instrumentation Program.Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act. See also:Introduced as Senate Bill 520 and signed into law in December 1972, this legislation was originally known as the, and had the goal of reducing damage and losses due to surface fault ruptures.
The act restricts construction of buildings designed for human occupancy across potentially. Since it is presumed that surface rupture will likely take place where past surface displacement has occurred, the state geologist was given the responsibility for evaluating and mapping faults that had evidence of rupture, and creating regulatory zones around them called Earthquake Fault Zones. State and local agencies (as well as the property owner) were then responsible for enforcing or complying with the building restrictions.California Strong Motion Instrumentation ProgramPrior to the San Fernando earthquake, some structural engineers had already believed that the existing groundwork for seismic design required enhancement. Although instruments had recorded a force of.33 g during the, building codes only required structures to withstand a lateral force of.1 g as late as the 1960s. Even at that time, engineers were against the idea of constructing buildings to resist the high forces that were seen in the El Centro shock, but after a 1966 earthquake peaked at.5 g, and a maximum of 1.25 g was observed at the during the San Fernando event, debate began as to whether that low requirement was sufficient.Despite the compelling seismogram from the 1940 event in El Centro, strong-motion seismology was not explicitly sought until later events occurred—the San Fernando earthquake made evident the need for more data for earthquake engineering applications.
The California Strong Motion Instrumentation Program was initiated in 1971 with the goal of maximizing the volume of data by furnishing and maintaining instruments at selected lifeline structures, buildings, and ground response stations. By the late 1980s, the program had instrumented more than 450 structures, bridges, dams, and power plants. The and were presented as gainful events that were recorded during that period, because both produced valuable data that increased knowledge of how moderate events affect buildings. The success of the Imperial Valley event was especially pronounced because of a recently constructed and fully instrumented government building that was shaken to the point of failure. See also. P.; Cloud, W. (1971), The San Fernando, California, earthquake of February 9, 1971; a preliminary report published jointly by the U.S.
Geological Survey and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Geological Survey Professional Paper 733, p. 163. Event. Event. Event. ^ USGS (September 4, 2009), Version 200806.1,.
Reich, Kenneth (February 4, 1996). Stover, C. W.; Coffman, J. (1993), p. 92., pp. 278, 287.
Morton, D. M.; Baird, A. (1975), San Fernando, California, earthquake of 9 February 1971, Bulletin 196, pp. 3, 5. Yeats, R. (2012), pp. 111–114,. Steinbrugge, K. V.; Schader, E.
E.; Bigglestone, H. C.; Weers, C. Pacific Fire Rating Bureau.
Archived from on January 2, 2014. Retrieved May 20, 2013.
Bolt, B. (2005), Earthquakes: 2006 Centennial Update – The 1906 Big One (Fifth ed.), pp. 106–107,. ^, pp. 41–43. U.S Geological Survey Staff (1971), The San Fernando, California, earthquake of February 9, 1971; a preliminary report published jointly by the U.S.
Geological Survey and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Geological Survey Professional Paper 733, p. 57., p. 44. ^ Allen, C. R.; Engren, G. R.; Hanks, T. C.; Nordquist, J.
M.; Thatcher, W. (1971), The San Fernando, California, earthquake of February 9, 1971; a preliminary report published jointly by the U.S. Geological Survey and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Geological Survey Professional Paper 733, pp. 17–19. Morton, D. (1971b), The San Fernando, California, earthquake of February 9, 1971; a preliminary report published jointly by the U.S. Geological Survey and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Geological Survey Professional Paper 733, p. 99. ^, pp. 273, 277, 287., pp. 323–325., pp. 350–353.
^, pp. 341–346. ^; Johnston, R. G.; Lefter, J.; Sozen, M. (1975), Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 65 (4): 937, 938, 943–945. ^; Olsen, H. (1971), The San Fernando, California, earthquake of February 9, 1971; a preliminary report published jointly by the U.S. Geological Survey and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Geological Survey Professional Paper 733, pp. 126–129.
Smith, J. L.; Fallgren, R. (1975), San Fernando, California, earthquake of 9 February 1971, Bulletin 196, pp. 157–158, 163. California Division of Highways (1975), San Fernando, California, earthquake of 9 February 1971, Bulletin 196, p. 369. ^ Jennings, P. (1971), Engineering features of the San Fernando earthquake of February 9, 1971, pp. 366–385. ^ Meehan, J.
(1975), San Fernando, California, earthquake of 9 February 1971, Bulletin 196, pp. 355, 356, 359–364. ^ Geschwind, C. Eos Transactions. Pp. 166, 170, 171.
^ Bryant, W. Environmental & Engineering Geoscience.
XVI (1): 7–10. Lee, W. (2002), International Handbook of Earthquake & Engineering Seismology, Part A, Volume 81A (First ed.), p. 273,. Shakal, A. F.; Huang, M.; Ventura, C.
From the 9th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Tokoyo, Japan, August 2–9, 1988., Comprehensive Catalog, U.S. Geological Survey. Thatcham, United Kingdom,.;; Whitcomb, J. (1975), San Fernando, California, earthquake of 9 February 1971, Bulletin 196, pp. 257–262. Cloud, W.
K.; Hudson, D. (1975), San Fernando, California, earthquake of 9 February 1971, Bulletin 196, pp. 273–303.; Silver, L.
Ucla
T.; Abrams, M. J.; Carter, B. A.;; Minister, J.
(1971), The San Fernando, California, earthquake of February 9, 1971; a preliminary report published jointly by the U.S. Geological Survey and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Geological Survey Professional Paper 733, pp. 41–54. Steinbrugge, K. V.; Schader, E. E.; Moran, D.
(1975), San Fernando, California, earthquake of 9 February 1971, Bulletin 196, pp. 323–353.External links. –.
Away Rotation Ucla Olive View Maximum 2017
–. –. The has a and/or for this event. –.