Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher.
Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?
Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.
-
Abstract Ground-motion simulations of notable earthquakes in the central and eastern United States are limited and typically assume 1D Earth structure. In this study, we use a 3D seismic velocity model to better constrain the depth and focal mechanism of the 5 April 2024, moment magnitude 4.8 Tewksbury earthquake and investigate the spatial variability of earthquake ground motions and the effects of nearby sedimentary basins. We perform earthquake ground-motion simulations up to 0.5 Hz using the 3D spectral-element wave-propagation solver SPECFEM3D over a region 280 km wide by 260 km long by 77 km deep. Topography and subsurface geophysical structure are assigned using the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Crustal Model with a minimum shear-wave velocity of 200 m/s. We use earthquake time series from 13 broadband seismic stations in the region that have a uniform azimuthal distribution and epicentral distances ranging from 76 to 131 km to compare with synthetics and explore the effects of 1D versus 3D seismic structure on focal mechanism and depth solutions. Ground-motion intensity metrics are also presented relative to the Next Generation Attenuation-East Project (NGA-East) ground-motion models (GMMs) currently used in seismic hazard assessments for the region. We find that the 3D model, which reveals a wide spatial variability of period-dependent ground motions, yields better predictions of earthquake ground motions relative to the 1D model and the NGA-East ergodic GMM, with a 76% reduction of residual variance in observed ground motions averaged over 3, 5, 7, and 10 s periods. Use of the 3D model to solve for a focal mechanism yields a shallower focal depth at 4 km and a shallower east-dipping focal plane relative to the USGS regional moment tensor and Global Centroid Moment Tensor. Our study demonstrates that use of 3D seismic velocity models can improve estimates of earthquake focal mechanisms, ground motions, and seismic hazard.more » « lessFree, publicly-accessible full text available January 15, 2027
-
SUMMARY The thermal structure of the continental crust plays a critical role in understanding its elastic and rheologic properties as well as its dynamic processes. Thermal parameter data sets on continental scales have been used to constrain the crustal thermal structure, including both the direct (e.g. temperature, heat flux and heat conductivity measured at the surface) and indirect (e.g. seismically derived Mohorovičić discontinuity (Moho) temperature, geomagnetically derived Curie depth) observations. In this study, we present a new continental scale crustal heat generation model with additional information from seismologically inferred crustal composition. Together with previous direct and indirect thermal parameter data sets in the conterminous United States, we use the new crustal heat generation model to construct a 3-D crustal temperature model under a newly developed Bayesian framework. Specifically, we first derive profiles of crustal heat generation based on an empirical geochemical relationship at 1683 locations where seismologically derived crustal composition information is available. Then for each of these locations, the average heat generation values in the upper, middle and lower crust are combined with other thermal parameters through a Markov Chain Monte-Carlo inversion for a conductive, vertically smooth temperature profile. The results, posterior distributions of temperature profiles, are used to generate a 3-D crustal thermal model with the uncertainties systematically assessed. The new temperature model overall exhibits similar patterns to that from the U.S. Geological Survey National Crustal Model, but also reduces possible biases and the model's dependence on a single thermal parameter.more » « less
-
Abstract On 5 April 2024, 10:23 a.m. local time, a moment magnitude 4.8 earthquake struck Tewksbury Township, New Jersey, about 65 km west of New York City. Millions of people from Virginia to Maine and beyond felt the ground shaking, resulting in the largest number (>180,000) of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) “Did You Feel It?” reports of any earthquake. A team deployed by the Geotechnical Extreme Events Reconnaissance Association and the National Institute of Standards and Technology documented structural and nonstructural damage, including substantial damage to a historic masonry building in Lebanon, New Jersey. The USGS National Earthquake Information Center reported a focal depth of about 5 km, consistent with a lack of signal in Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar data. The focal mechanism solution is strike slip with a substantial thrust component. Neither mechanism’s nodal plane is parallel to the primary northeast trend of geologic discontinuities and mapped faults in the region, including the Ramapo fault. However, many of the relocated aftershocks, for which locations were augmented by temporary seismic deployments, form a cluster that parallels the general northeast trend of the faults. The aftershocks lie near the Tewksbury fault, north of the Ramapo fault.more » « less
-
ABSTRACT We present initial findings from the ongoing Community Stress Drop Validation Study to compare spectral stress-drop estimates for earthquakes in the 2019 Ridgecrest, California, sequence. This study uses a unified dataset to independently estimate earthquake source parameters through various methods. Stress drop, which denotes the change in average shear stress along a fault during earthquake rupture, is a critical parameter in earthquake science, impacting ground motion, rupture simulation, and source physics. Spectral stress drop is commonly derived by fitting the amplitude-spectrum shape, but estimates can vary substantially across studies for individual earthquakes. Sponsored jointly by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Statewide (previously, Southern) California Earthquake Center our community study aims to elucidate sources of variability and uncertainty in earthquake spectral stress-drop estimates through quantitative comparison of submitted results from independent analyses. The dataset includes nearly 13,000 earthquakes ranging from M 1 to 7 during a two-week period of the 2019 Ridgecrest sequence, recorded within a 1° radius. In this article, we report on 56 unique submissions received from 20 different groups, detailing spectral corner frequencies (or source durations), moment magnitudes, and estimated spectral stress drops. Methods employed encompass spectral ratio analysis, spectral decomposition and inversion, finite-fault modeling, ground-motion-based approaches, and combined methods. Initial analysis reveals significant scatter across submitted spectral stress drops spanning over six orders of magnitude. However, we can identify between-method trends and offsets within the data to mitigate this variability. Averaging submissions for a prioritized subset of 56 events shows reduced variability of spectral stress drop, indicating overall consistency in recovered spectral stress-drop values.more » « less
-
The US National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) was updated in 2023 for all 50 states using new science on seismicity, fault ruptures, ground motions, and probabilistic techniques to produce a standard of practice for public policy and other engineering applications (defined for return periods greater than ∼475 or less than ∼10,000 years). Changes in 2023 time-independent seismic hazard (both increases and decreases compared to previous NSHMs) are substantial because the new model considers more data and updated earthquake rupture forecasts and ground-motion components. In developing the 2023 model, we tried to apply best available or applicable science based on advice of co-authors, more than 50 reviewers, and hundreds of hazard scientists and end-users, who attended public workshops and provided technical inputs. The hazard assessment incorporates new catalogs, declustering algorithms, gridded seismicity models, magnitude-scaling equations, fault-based structural and deformation models, multi-fault earthquake rupture forecast models, semi-empirical and simulation-based ground-motion models, and site amplification models conditioned on shear-wave velocities of the upper 30 m of soil and deeper sedimentary basin structures. Seismic hazard calculations yield hazard curves at hundreds of thousands of sites, ground-motion maps, uniform-hazard response spectra, and disaggregations developed for pseudo-spectral accelerations at 21 oscillator periods and two peak parameters, Modified Mercalli Intensity, and 8 site classes required by building codes and other public policy applications. Tests show the new model is consistent with past ShakeMap intensity observations. Sensitivity and uncertainty assessments ensure resulting ground motions are compatible with known hazard information and highlight the range and causes of variability in ground motions. We produce several impact products including building seismic design criteria, intensity maps, planning scenarios, and engineering risk assessments showing the potential physical and social impacts. These applications provide a basis for assessing, planning, and mitigating the effects of future earthquakes.more » « less
An official website of the United States government
