Analysis
Modern geologists know that the types of rock formations similar to that found in San Francisquito Canyon may be unsuitable for supporting a dam and reservoir without special consideration given to their design, but in the 1920s, two of the world's leading geologists at the time, John C. Branner of Stanford University and Carl E. Grunsky, found no fault with the San Francisquito rock. The dam was also built squarely over the San Francisquito fault, although this fault is inactive.
J. David Rogers, a professor of geological engineering at Missouri University of Science and Technology, published a comprehensive account of geologic actions which likely led to the dam's failure. He attributed the failure to three major factors: the instability of the ancient landslide material on which the dam was built, the failure to compensate for the additional height added to the dam's design, and the design and construction being overseen by only one person.
A critique of Rogers' historical analysis of the dam's collapse was published in the journal California History in 2004 by historians Norris Hundley Jr. (Professor Emeritus, UCLA) and Donald C. Jackson (Professor, Lafayette College). While accepting most of Rogers' geological analysis of the failure, the article makes clear how the structure built under Mulholland's direction in San Francisquito Canyon fell somewhat short of the standards for large-scale concrete gravity dams as practiced by other prominent dam engineers in the 1920s.
Read more about this topic: St. Francis Dam
Famous quotes containing the word analysis:
“Analysis as an instrument of enlightenment and civilization is good, in so far as it shatters absurd convictions, acts as a solvent upon natural prejudices, and undermines authority; good, in other words, in that it sets free, refines, humanizes, makes slaves ripe for freedom. But it is bad, very bad, in so far as it stands in the way of action, cannot shape the vital forces, maims life at its roots. Analysis can be a very unappetizing affair, as much so as death.”
—Thomas Mann (1875–1955)
“Whatever else American thinkers do, they psychologize, often brilliantly. The trouble is that psychology only takes us so far. The new interest in families has its merits, but it will have done us all a disservice if it turns us away from public issues to private matters. A vision of things that has no room for the inner life is bankrupt, but a psychology without social analysis or politics is both powerless and very lonely.”
—Joseph Featherstone (20th century)
“Cubism had been an analysis of the object and an attempt to put it before us in its totality; both as analysis and as synthesis, it was a criticism of appearance. Surrealism transmuted the object, and suddenly a canvas became an apparition: a new figuration, a real transfiguration.”
—Octavio Paz (b. 1914)