By Evan Kim
Introduction
Earthquakes, being a natural event sparked by a slip within the Earth's crust, are uncontrollable and overall unpredictable. Two large chunks of the Earth itself abruptly slide past each other, creating elastic strain-energy which is then stored up over time, acting almost as a large burden for the Earth to withstand. When that buildup of strain and energy suddenly gets too overwhelming, our planet releases it in the form of seismic waves, which is the intense shaking and convulsing dispersed all throughout the respective area like ripples in a pond (British Geological Survey, 2025).
Not only is this event a strike of fear, but it is an inflictor of destruction that not only takes millions of lives and induces millions of injuries, but it also crushes the infrastructure and stability of homes, buildings, and so on. In an attempt to organize these seismic events, scientists have found ways to measure said earthquakes and categorize them in levels of potency and vigor by using the Richter scale, an instrument created long ago by Charles E. Richter and Beno Gutenberg. Being the primary way of measurement, the Richter scale provides not only the magnitude of earthquakes, but also additional information contributing to new earthquake-resistant technology that can be applied in the world today in hopes of limiting the devastation (Wald, n.d.) (Rafferty, n.d.).
While measuring earthquakes provide a multitude of contributing factors in regard to limiting earthquakes, many buildings do not contain these new findings or new systems that limit an earthquake’s impact. For years, extremely tall buildings or even moderately sized ones in general have been built to withstand lots of vertical pressure in order to hold out against strong wind and gravity, however, an earthquake brings on extreme horizontal pressure, making even some of the strongest-materialed buildings vulnerable to all kinds of earthquakes big or small.
To counteract the threat of earthquakes, scientists and architects have developed several methods of seismic engineering such as base isolation, mass distribution, and structural reinforcements. In some cases, methods of seismic engineering even call back to earlier research, such as the pendulum (BigRentz, 2023) (Herzak, 2025). While each of these systems show key levels of effectiveness, research says that base isolation is the most effective for these reasons: it minimizes overall movement on a superior scale displaying strong reliability, it is cost effective long-term, and it has a variety of versions showing strong versatility (Jahnel, 2022).
Literature Review
The May 12th, 2008 Sichuan Earthquake is an example that displays the need for seismic engineering systems, as it not only revealed the weakness of original infrastructure, but the power of earthquake-proofing as well. The earthquake was the cause of an estimated 374,000 injuries and 68,000 deaths (Bolt, 2024). While these numbers display the devastation from an earthquake that one would assume to have a magnitude of around 8.5 or above, the Richter Scale revealed that it had a magnitude of 7.9. While a 7.9 magnitude earthquake is still extremely deadly and harmful, it usually does not result in a death toll and injury rate that high. This situation was actually the result of deficient architecture. Due to the weak support and lack of infrastructure, many buildings, bridges, and homes collapsed that day, resulting in the surge of casualties. In fact, it was calculated that there are very few occasions where the death toll and injury rate are caused by the earthquake itself. Rather, it’s the collapsed bridges, broken buildings, and towers with a lack of stability that plays the main factor when it comes to fatality during seismic events. In the case of the Sichuan Earthquake, this fact was shown through the nearly 150 billion dollars worth of repairs the city of Sichuan was forced to pay. Knowing this, not only did Sichuan take action, but the country of China as a whole and their government imposed stricter building codes as well in regards to better materials and the reconstruction of core infrastructure. While Sichuan’s earthquake situation is a strong display of how seismic engineering might be needed, it was of course not the only.
Many regions around the world experience this problem countless amounts of times and most have resorted to seismic engineering, like China. A unique and very popular system of seismic engineering is the pendulum swing mechanism. Buildings such as the Taipei 101 utilize this method by suspending a ball-shape figure made up of layers of steel plates all welded together and suspended by hydraulic systems. This figure swings in opposite of the motion of the earthquake allowing relative stability. Not only does this system of engineering display high levels of effectiveness, but it also shows the timelessness of old research, as the concept of the pendulum motion was created long ago by Galileo in 1583 (Britannica, 2024).
Another very simple method of seismic engineering is structural reinforcements. While there are many different variations of structural reinforcements, the basic main idea of them is adding extra pillars and shapes to give better support to a structure or building, some of the most common versions being shear walls, diaphragms, and cross braces (BigRentz, 2023) (Herzak, 2025). Shear walls focus more on the earthquake rather than the building’s stability itself, as it is a strong material that dissipates seismic energy inflicted onto the structure. They are set up mostly in the walls and are complimented by cross bracing. Diaphragms, on the other hand, focuses more on energy transfer as it pushes the seismic energy from the floor up to the structure’s vertical structure in attempts to disperse the energy more and limit the earthquake's impact on the building’s key support areas. While these variations of structural reinforcements are implemented into the core infrastructure of a building, cross bracing can be added onto any area, as it uses simple geometry to add more stability onto a structure in the case of not only an earthquake but any type of movement in general. Overall, these structural reinforcements prevent any crooked warping in the frames of a structure (BigRentz, 2023).
In addition to the previous two systems, base isolation is almost always mentioned as well due to its high popularity. Base isolation, hence the title, uses materials like rubber, steel, and lead to create isolators that disengage the foundation of a structure to the ground (Science Learning Hub, 2007). This process allows the base isolators to move with the motion of the earthquake, allowing the structure itself to stand with limited motion vertically. In other words, the base isolators vibrate while the building stays steady. (Herzak, 2025) (Shareef, 2021).
Using all of this information and implementing it into real life, a recent study done in 2022 found that architectural design can significantly impact the destruction caused by an earthquake by studying eight different structures based on their seismic locations. Some buildings were the Shard in London, the O-14 Tower in Dubai, and the Akashi Bridge in Japan. It was found that many solution techniques were used in these buildings to greatly reduce the impact of earthquakes, portrayed through a checklist displaying some techniques like mass distribution, openings, and rooftop structures. This study was also able to emphasize the importance of the role played by architects, and the influence they have on the buildings they design. This is especially if the clients or contractors are attempting to reach earthquake-proof properties (Shareef, 2021) Putting it into a broader picture, the world today is run on these very buildings. Without the core additions of architecture, the world as a whole would not be even close to what it is now, as architecture and systems such as seismic engineering are essentially the infrastructure of today’s lifestyle, whether it is a home, a place you work, the bank, the airport, and most, if not all other staples or daily activities. By far the most important result of seismic engineering however is not just the fact that it preserves daily necessities and provisions, but it also saves the lives of many.
Body
While only three methods of seismic engineering were mentioned, there are actually many more. Despite this, base isolation has stood out to be one of the, if not the most effective way of earthquake-proofing among the large range of methods, having benefits such as reliability, long term sustainability cost-wise, and durability (Wang & Qu, 2025, #)(Ringfeeder, 2022). A study within ScienceDirect’s program was done to evaluate the reliability of a base-isolated structure compared to a control, non-isolated counterpart. This was done by employing the probability density evolution method with local time grid refinement. By using PDEM properties and the method listed above, it was found that the base isolators used in the experiment dissipated the seismic energy heavily, while the non-isolated counterpart performed at a poorer level (Wang & Qu, 2025, #). This study was able to display the reliability of base isolation by displaying its necessity and its high effectiveness, which is always crucial for a system that could end up possibly saving many lives. However, on top of its reliability, base isolation is an overall sustainable method. With the topic of sustainability on the rise, having a cost-effective system, especially for something as important as seismic engineering, is extremely focused on as of recent.
While the upfront cost can be pricey, the long term effect of having a system such as base isolation has proven worth it. In addition to doing the standard of protecting a building, base isolation is also extremely durable and is not deteriorated after just one earthquake. Base isolation has proven to be sustainable over several seismic events and shows high worth in places such as the Ring of Fire with an intense amount of seismic activity. Not only is this shown by the two previous studies, but can also be seen in regions such as New Zealand, more specifically the William Clayton Building which was the first building to utilize lead rubber bearings, and was completed in 1981. Having been built so long ago shows how base isolators can sustain heavy seismic pressure over a long period of time. In this case, around 45 years. In addition to this building, there are several road bridges in the Foothill Community Law and Justice Center that also utilize these bearings (Makris, 2018). All of these structures act as not only examples of strong base isolation but also can be portrayed as evidence of how systems of seismic isolation have been sustainable over time. Additionally, these are, of course, not the only structures that use said systems, as not only are there tens of thousands of more road bridges, there are even sky scrapers and crucial office buildings that still utilize the same systems even after many years.
In addition to being both reliable and cost-effective, base isolation has shown strong versatility through the large range of versions or types of systems. From a small elementary school in northern Macedonia to a seismic isolation revolution in New Zealand. And now, nearly everywhere around the world, base isolation is being utilized. Not only this, but several implementations and interpretations of this core system have arisen, such as early seismic retrofits, sliding isolation systems, elastomeric bearings, and many more. A stronger variety of systems allows a more tailored fit to whatever situation a structure or client may be in when discovering options for building sustainability, therefore, providing another reason why base isolation and its variations are among the best options for seismic engineering. A system perfectly tailored for a specific situation is crucial for the effectiveness of not only base isolation but seismic engineering as a whole. (Makris, 2018).
Counterarguments and Limitations
While this study and research opportunity not only taught new things and allowed immersion into true interests, there was a lot more to learn and because of the fact that there are so many types of architecture and seismic engineering, not all could be explained in the most extreme detail. Additionally, there being so many variations and systems, there was definitely a solid argument going against the claim mentioned in this paper. One could argue that structural reinforcements could be superior due to the fact that it is an add-on rather than a foundation-changing system. There is almost always another argument or perspective for a different assertion in anything whether it’s right or wrong. Due to this fact, several other popular methods of seismic engineering were mentioned, along with core principles and staples such as shapes to account for the difficulty of implementing all of these systems and pivotal networks. However, the biggest limit has been the restricted access to certain databases. It has been a priority to obtain sources from databases, as those are typically a haven for not only trusted sources, but a plethora of information in regards to studies done before and knowledge specific to certain experiments.
Discussion
Despite the limitations, there was still a clear answer and result. Although arguments regarding different methods are present, base isolation has proven to be still the most effective method of seismic engineering, especially among the most popular ones. This information is crucial during recent times where massive sky scrapers and structures in general are arising as more of a common appearance in urban areas. In places like Japan, this would be an issue, as they are placed among the most active parts in the Ring of Fire. Similarly, San Francisco has been an earthquake haven in recent history, however, the city has found ways to completely earthquake-proof the region, even with those huge buildings that would typically not be able to sustain large earthquake pressures. Many important industrial factories have been recently placed in places near these such as East Asia or the west coast of America, and with many powerhouse companies focusing lots on sustainability, knowing this kind of information is key and focused on a lot as of recent.
During the research of this project, many studies were being looked at and it was not difficult to find an experiment similar to this, allowing for more perspectives regarding the same topic. While this is good and reveals more about this topic, most of them looked into very similar methods despite the large variety seismic engineering has to offer. It would be more interesting and beneficial if several other systems were experimented with, such as seismic shields.
Conclusion
Overall, throughout all the research, the result was a clear answer that was able to respond to the question that started all of this. What method of seismic engineering is most effective? While this may seem like a central question, the overarching message was quite different, and focused more on how architecture could not only be useful for infrastructure, but to save people in general. Seismic Isolation ultimately supported this remark, making it the most effective method of seismic engineering due to the fact that it was reliable, cost effective, and had lots of variety. Its strong results in several other studies showed how reliable it can be when used properly, especially in buildings as old as the William Clayton. Its sustainability was shown through the durability and heavy utilization of the system. A large portion of New Zealand’s buildings are now using base isolation and have had them for nearly 50 years as well. In addition to this, many bridges and other structures have been utilizing this technique over several different earthquakes, not just one. Along with all of this, the multitude of variations are seen through the several versions of the system such as sliding isolation and many more. All of this points to the fact that not only is it the most effective, but it will save lives as well with tons of other benefits. While there are many other strong methods of seismic engineering that have similar benefits, it is clear that base isolation is superior in many ways in not only this study, but several others as well.
References
BigRentz. (2023, October 16). How Earthquake-Proof Buildings Are Designed in 2024. BigRentz. Retrieved December 27, 2025, from https://www.bigrentz.com/blog/earthquake-proof-buildings
Pletcher, K., & Bolt, B. A. (2024, October 25). Sichuan earthquake of 2008 | Overview, Damage, & Facts. Britannica. Retrieved December 27, 2025, from https://www.britannica.com/event/Sichuan-earthquake-of-2008
Britannica. (2025, December 16). Pendulum | Definition, Formula, & Types. Britannica. Retrieved December 27, 2025, from https://www.britannica.com/technology/pendulum
British Geological Survey. (2025a, June 3). Earthquakes - British Geological Survey. https://www.bgs.ac.uk/discovering-geology/earth-hazards/earthquakes/
British Geological Survey. (2025, July 11). What causes earthquakes? - British Geological Survey. https://www.bgs.ac.uk/discovering-geology/earth-hazards/earthquakes/what-causes-earthquakes/
Makris, N. (2018). Seismic Isolation: Early History. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327839319_Seismic_isolation_Early_history
Herzak, I. (2025, February 25). How earthquake proof buildings are built. PlanHub. https://planhub.com/resources/how-earthquake-proof-buildings-are-built/
Rafferty, J. P. (n.d.). Richter scale | Seismology, Earthquake Magnitude & Intensity. Britannica. Retrieved December 27, 2025, from https://www.britannica.com/science/Richter-scale
Jahnel, L. (n.d.). Earthquake-Resistant Construction: How base isolation can protect Buildings | RINGFEDER®. https://blog.ringfeder.com/earthquake-resistant-construction-how-base-isolation-can-protect-buildings
Science Learning Hub. (n.d.). Science Learning Hub. https://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/resources/1022-base-isolation-and-seismic-dam%20pers
Shareef, S. S. (2023). Earthquake consideration in Architectural Design: Guidelines for Architects. Sustainability, 15(18), 13760. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813760
The science of earthquakes. (n.d.). USGS. https://www.usgs.gov/programs/earthquake-hazards/science-earthquakes
Wang, X., & Qu, Z. (2025, 1 15). Advantages of base isolation in reducing the reliability sensitivity to structural uncertainties of buildings. ScienceDirect, 323(Engineering Structures). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0141029624017978
