USGS ScienceSearch

Geology topics

Research about Mineral, Virginia

Source-linked reports with geographic coverage including Mineral, Virginia.

10 recordsLinked to original sources

Geotechnical aspects in the epicentral region of the 2011, M w 5.8 Mineral, Virginia earthquake

A reconnaissance team documented the geotechnical and geological aspects in the epicentral region of the M w (moment magnitude) 5.8 Mineral, Virginia (USA), earthquake of 23 August 2011. Tectonically and seismically induced ground deformations, evidence of liquefaction, rock slides, river bank slumps, ground subsidence, performance of earthen dams, damage to public infrastructure and lifelines, and other effects of the earthquake were documented. This moderate earthquake provided the rare opportunity to collect data to help assess current geoengineering practices in the region, as well as to assess seismic performance of the aging infrastructure in the region. Ground failures included two marginal liquefaction sites, a river bank slump, four minor rockfalls, and a ~4-m-wide, ~12-m-long, ~0.3-m-deep subsidence on a residential property. Damage to lifelines included subsidence of the approaches for a bridge and a water main break to a heavily corroded, 5-cm-diameter valve in Mineral, Virginia. Observed damage to dams, landfills, and public-use properties included a small, shallow slide in the temporary (“working”) clay cap of the county landfill, damage to two earthen dams (one in the epicentral region and one further away near Bedford, Virginia), and substantial structural damage to two public school buildings.

Virginia

The 2011 Virginia M5.8 earthquake: Insights from seismic reflection imaging into the influence of older structures on eastern U.S. seismicity

The Mineral, Virginia (USA), earthquake of 23 August 2011 occurred at 6– 8 km depth within the allochthonous terranes of the Appalachian Piedmont Province, rupturing an ~N36°E striking reverse fault dipping ~50° southeast. This study used the Interstate Highway 64 seismic refl ection profi le acquired ~6 km southwest of the hypocenter to examine the structural setting of the earthquake. The profi le shows that the 2011 earthquake and its aftershocks are almost entirely within the early Paleozoic Chopawamsic volcanic arc terrane, which is bounded by listric thrust faults dipping 30°–40° southeast that sole out into an ~2-km-thick, strongly refl ective zone at 7– 12 km depth. Refl ectors above and below the southward projection of the 2011 earthquake focal plane do not show evidence for large displacement, and the updip projection of the fault plane does not match either the location or trend of a previously mapped fault or lithologic boundary. The 2011 earthquake thus does not appear to be a simple reactivation of a known Paleozoic thrust fault or a major Mesozoic rift basin-boundary fault. The fault that ruptured appears to be a new fault, a fault with only minor displacement, or to not extend the ~3 km from the aftershock zone to the seismic profi le. Although the Paleozoic structures appear to infl uence the general distribution of seismicity in the area, Central Virginia seismic zone earthquakes have yet to be tied directly to specifi c fault systems mapped at the surface or imaged on seismic profiles.

Virginia

Preface

This book grew out of a topical session on “Central Virginia Earthquakes of 2011: Geology, Geophysics, and Significance for Seismic Hazards in Eastern North America” at the 2012 The Geological Society of America (GSA) Annual Meeting in Charlotte, North Carolina (USA). It also benefitted from related sessions at other meetings. The goal of this volume, The 2011 Mineral, Virginia, Earthquake, and Its Significance for Seismic Hazards in Eastern North America , is to bring together as much information as possible on lessons learned from this rare event. Chapters encompass a wide range of geoscience, engineering, and related studies of this earthquake and its effects from the epicentral area in central Virginia to Washington, D.C., and beyond. The intended audience is a broad spectrum of geoscientists, engineers, and decision makers interested in understanding earthquakes and seismic hazards in eastern North America and other intraplate settings. Chapters by Berti et al. (21), Chapman (2), Costain (8), Davenport et al. (15), Green et al. (9), Heller and Carter (10), Horton et al. (14), Hughes et al. (19), Powars et al. (23), Pratt et al. (16), Roeloffs et al. (7), Shah et al. (17), Stephenson et al. (3), Walsh et al. (18), and Wells et al. (12) are expansions of presentations at the 2012 GSA meeting. The volume also contains chapters from recent studies that were not presented at the GSA meeting, including those by Bobyarchick (22), Burton et al. (20), Dreiling and Mooney (5), Li et al. (11), McNamara et al. (4), Pollitz and Mooney (6), and Shahidi et al. (13). Following an overview and synthesis by the volume editors (1), chapters are arranged under the topical headings “Seismology and Regional Effects,” “Earthquake Damage, Geotechnical, and Engineering Investigations,” “Aftershocks, Geophysical Imaging, and Modeling,” “Geologic Investigations—Epicentral Area,” and “Geologic Investigations— Central Virginia Seismic Zone and Nearby Faults.” We thank the authors for their contributions and the many scientists and engineers who contributed time and expertise in reviewing manuscripts to substantially improve the quality of the volume. These reviewers include Gail Atkinson, Christopher Bailey, Richard Berquist, Kimberly Blisniuk, Paul Bodin, Aaron Bradshaw, Clive Collins, Ariel Conn, Randy Cox, Haitham Dawood, James Dewey, John Ebel, David Fenster, Alexander Gates, Kathleen Haller, Gregory Hancock, Robert Hatcher, William Henika, Paul Hsieh, Steven Jaumé, Jeffrey Kimball, Charles Langston, Jongwon Lee, Andrea Llenos, John McBride, Scott Olson, Michael Oskin, Brent Owens, Gilles Peltzer, Mark Quigley, Dhananjay Ravat, David Saftner, Arthur Snoke, Jamison Steidl, Kevin Stewart, Alice Stieve, Danielle Sumy, Ertugrul Taciroglu, Roy Van Arsdale, Mason Walters, Chiyuen Wang, Yang Wang, Richard Whittecar, Lorraine Wolf, Clint Wood, Liam Wotherspoon, and some anonymous reviewers.

Virginia

The 2011 Mineral, Virginia, earthquake and its significance for seismic hazards in eastern North America: overview and synthesis

The 23 August 2011 M w (moment magnitude) 5.7 ± 0.1, Mineral, Virginia, earthquake was the largest and most damaging in the central and eastern United States since the 1886 M w 6.8–7.0, Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake. Seismic data indicate that the earthquake rupture occurred on a southeast-dipping reverse fault and consisted of three subevents that progressed northeastward and updip. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) "Did You Feel It?" intensity reports from across the eastern United States and southeastern Canada, rockfalls triggered at distances to 245 km, and regional groundwater-level changes are all consistent with efficient propagation of high-frequency seismic waves (∼1 Hz and higher) in eastern North America due to low attenuation. Reported damage included cracked or shifted foundations and broken walls or chimneys, notably in unreinforced masonry, and indicated intensities up to VIII in the epicentral area based on USGS "Did You Feel It?" reports. The earthquake triggered the first automatic shutdown of a U.S. nuclear power plant, located ∼23 km northeast of the main shock epicenter. Although shaking exceeded the plant's design basis earthquake, the actual damage to safety-related structures, systems, and components was superficial. Damage to relatively tall masonry structures 130 km to the northeast in Washington, D.C., was consistent with source directivity, soft-soil ground-motion amplification, and anisotropic wave propagation with lower attenuation parallel to the northeast-trending Appalachian tectonic fabric. The earthquake and aftershocks occurred in crystalline rocks within Paleozoic thrust sheets of the Chopawamsic terrane. The main shock and majority of aftershocks delineated the newly named Quail fault zone in the subsurface, and shallow aftershocks defined outlying faults. The earthquake induced minor liquefaction sand boils, but notably there was no evidence of a surface fault rupture. Recurrence intervals, and evidence for larger earthquakes in the Quaternary in this area, remain important unknowns. This event, along with similar events during historical time, is a reminder that earthquakes of similar or larger magnitude pose a real hazard in eastern North America.

Virginia

Aftershocks illuminate the 2011 Mineral, Virginia, earthquake causative fault zone and nearby active faults

Deployment of temporary seismic stations after the 2011 Mineral, Virginia (USA), earthquake produced a well-recorded aftershock sequence. The majority of aftershocks are in a tabular cluster that delineates the previously unknown Quail fault zone. Quail fault zone aftershocks range from ~3 to 8 km in depth and are in a 1-km-thick zone striking ~036&deg; and dipping ~50&deg;SE, consistent with a 028&deg;, 50&deg;SE main-shock nodal plane having mostly reverse slip. This cluster extends ~10 km along strike. The Quail fault zone projects to the surface in gneiss of the Ordovician Chopawamsic Formation just southeast of the Ordovician&ndash;Silurian Ellisville Granodiorite pluton tail. The following three clusters of shallow (<3 km) aftershocks illuminate other faults. (1) An elongate cluster of early aftershocks, ~10 km east of the Quail fault zone, extends 8 km from Fredericks Hall, strikes ~035&deg;&ndash;039&deg;, and appears to be roughly vertical. The Fredericks Hall fault may be a strand or splay of the older Lakeside fault zone, which to the south spans a width of several kilometers. (2) A cluster of later aftershocks ~3 km northeast of Cuckoo delineates a fault near the eastern contact of the Ordovician Quantico Formation. (3) An elongate cluster of late aftershocks ~1 km northwest of the Quail fault zone aftershock cluster delineates the northwest fault (described herein), which is temporally distinct, dips more steeply, and has a more northeastward strike. Some aftershock-illuminated faults coincide with preexisting units or structures evident from radiometric anomalies, suggesting tectonic inheritance or reactivation.

Virginia

Geology and neotectonism in the epicentral area of the 2011 M5.8 Mineral, Virginia, earthquake

This fi eld guide covers a two-day west-to-east transect across the epicentral region of the 2011 M5.8 Mineral, Virginia, earthquake, the largest ever recorded in the Central Virginia seismic zone. The fi eld trip highlights results of recent bedrock and surficial geologic mapping in two adjoining 7.5-min quadrangles, the Ferncliff and the Pendleton, which together encompass the epicenter and most of the 2011–2012 aftershocks. Tectonic history of the region includes early Paleozoic accretion of an island arc (Ordovician Chopawamsic Formation) to Laurentia, intrusion of a granodiorite pluton (Ordovician Ellisville pluton), and formation of a post-Chopawamsic successor basin (Ordovician Quantico Formation), all accompanied by early Paleozoic regional deformation and metamorphism. Local transpressional faulting and retrograde metamorphism occurred in the late Paleozoic, followed by diabase dike intrusion and possible local normal faulting in the early Mesozoic. The overall goal of the bedrock mapping is to determine what existing geologic structures might have been reactivated during the 2011 seismic event, and surfi cial deposits along the South Anna River are being mapped in order to determine possible neotectonic uplift. In addition to bedrock and surfi cial studies, we have excavated trenches in an area that contains two late Paleozoic faults and represents the updip projection of the causative fault for the 2011 quake. The trenches reveal faulting that has offset surfi cial deposits dated as Quaternary in age, as well as numerous other brittle structures that suggest a geologically recent history of neotectonic activity.

Virginia

The Mw 5.8 Mineral, Virginia, earthquake of August 2011 and aftershock sequence: constraints on earthquake source parameters and fault geometry

The M w 5.8 earthquake of 23 August 2011 (17:51:04 UTC) (moment, M0 5.7×10 17 N·m) occurred near Mineral, Virginia, within the central Virginia seismic zone and was felt by more people than any other earthquake in United States history. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) received 148,638 felt reports from 31 states and 4 Canadian provinces. The USGS PAGER system estimates as many as 120,000 people were exposed to shaking intensity levels of IV and greater, with approximately 10,000 exposed to shaking as high as intensity VIII. Both regional and teleseismic moment tensor solutions characterize the earthquake as a northeast‐striking reverse fault that nucleated at a depth of approximately 7±2 km. The distribution of reported macroseismic intensities is roughly ten times the area of a similarly sized earthquake in the western United States (Horton and Williams, 2012). Near‐source and far‐field damage reports, which extend as far away as Washington, D.C., (135 km away) and Baltimore, Maryland, (200 km away) are consistent with an earthquake of this size and depth in the eastern United States (EUS). Within the first few days following the earthquake, several government and academic institutions installed 36 portable seismograph stations in the epicentral region, making this among the best‐recorded aftershock sequences in the EUS. Based on modeling of these data, we provide a detailed description of the source parameters of the mainshock and analysis of the subsequent aftershock sequence for defining the fault geometry, area of rupture, and observations of the aftershock sequence magnitude–frequency and temporal distribution. The observed slope of the magnitude–frequency curve or b‐value for the aftershock sequence is consistent with previous EUS studies (b=0.75), suggesting that most of the accumulated strain was released by the mainshock. The aftershocks define a rupture that extends between approximately 2–8 km in depth and 8–10 km along the strike of the fault plane. Best‐fit modeling of the geometry of the aftershock sequence defines a rupture plane that strikes N36°E and dips to the east‐southeast at 49.5°. Moment tensor solutions of the mainshock and larger aftershocks are consistent with the distribution of aftershock locations, both indicating reverse slip along a northeast–southwest striking southeast‐dipping fault plane.

Virginia

Field survey and damage assessment of the Mineral, Virginia, earthquake of August 23, 2011

The town of Mineral, Virginia (Va.), underwent an M=5.8 earthquake on August 23, 2011. A U.S. Geological Survey team was sent to visually inspect and document the damage in the cities of Richmond, Charlottesville, Louisa, and Mineral, Va. Our inspection concluded that the Modified Mercalli Intensity rating of moderate (V) to very strong (VII) is consistent with the expected and observed damage at these locations. Louisa County, Va., sustained the most extensive damage. We photographed fallen chimneys, collapsed walls, and cracked foundations. From visual inspection of the above-listed locations, this report catalogs the range and extent of damage from the August 23, 2011, earthquake for future reference and analysis.

Virginia

Extraordinary distance limits of landslides triggered by the 2011 Mineral, Virginia, earthquake

The 23 August 2011 Mineral, Virginia, earthquake (M w 5.8) was the largest to strike the eastern U.S. since 1897 and was felt over an extraordinarily large area. Although no large landslides occurred, the shaking did trigger many rock and soil falls from steep river banks and natural cliffs in the epicentral area and from steep road cuts along, and northwest of, the Blue Ridge Parkway. We mapped the occurrence of rock falls to determine distance limits that could be compared with those from other documented earthquakes. Studies of previous earthquakes indicated a maximum epicentral distance limit for landsliding of ~60 km for an M 5.8 earthquake; the maximum distance limit for the 2011 earthquake was 245 km, the largest exceedance of the historical limit ever recorded. Likewise, the previous maximum area affected by landslides for this magnitude was 1500 km 2 ; the area affected by landslides in the 2011 earthquake was 33,400 km 2 . These observations provide physical evidence that attenuation of strong shaking for eastern U.S. earthquakes is significantly lower than for plate‐boundary earthquakes. Also, distance limits parallel to the regional structural trend are greater than those that transect the structure, which suggests anisotropic attenuation related to the regional geologic structure. Peak ground acceleration (PGA) at the landslide distance limits is estimated to have been about 0.02–0.04g.

Virginia

Initial assessment of the intensity distribution of the 2011 M w 5.8 Mineral, Virginia, earthquake

The intensity data collected by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) "Did You Feel It?" (DYFI) Website (USGS, DYFI; http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/dyfi/events/se/082311a/us/index.html, last accessed Sept 2011) for the M w 5.8 Mineral, Virginia, earthquake, are unprecedented in their spatial richness and geographical extent. More than 133,000 responses were received during the first week following the earthquake. Although intensity data have traditionally been regarded as imprecise and generally suspect (e.g., Hough 2000), there is a growing appreciation for the potential utility of spatially rich, systematically determined DYFI data to address key questions in earthquake ground-motions science (Atkinson and Wald, 2007; Hauksson et al., 2008).

Virginia