USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · 70018833

Source parameters and crustal Q for four earthquakes in South Carolina

Abstract

Two three-component seismometers (one surface and one borehole) were re-installed on the Savannah River Site (SRS), South Carolina in July 1992 to determine attenuation in the Coastal Plain sediment wedge and source parameters of local earthquakes. Four earthquakes M ∼ 1.8 to 3.6 were recorded during the next 6 months. The largest event was located near Summerville within the meizoseismal area for the 1886 Charleston earthquake. Two shocks were located 50 km to the east near Neeses, and one was located 20 km north of the SRS near Aiken. Although source parameters have been determined from strong motion data and short-period regional networks for east coast earthquakes, such as the Saguenay, Nahanni, and Mt. Laurier earthquakes (e.g., Atkinson, 1993 ), these are some of the first source parameters determined from broad-band digital recorders. Seismograms for the Summerville event are also available from Chapel Hill, North Carolina and Blacksburg, Virginia, providing estimates of t * beyond 200 km. Here we determine source parameters such as moment, stress drop, and the attenuation parameter t * using a non-linear least-squares algorithm. We do not correct for site response because the deepest borehole is not below the Coastal Plain sediments (about 300m thick at this site) and because only one station is available for most of the data. Values of t* are marginally higher from seismograms recorded at the surface when compared to records from the 91m depth borehole seismograph. A value of 170-200 bars was determined for the Brune stress drop of the Summerville event using the borehole data, which is high compared to a value of 50 bars usually specified for modeling strong motion in western North America, but similar to other estimates for eastern North America. A higher stress drop leads to a higher seismic risk because peak acceleration is approximately proportional to stress drop. Moreover, mid- to upper-crustal Qs are in the range of 2,000 to 3,000, which would permit the propagation of high frequency seismic waves. A comparison of the surface records from the SRS with a record from the USGS dense array at Parkfield, CA for an event at about the same distance range and moment as the Summerville event-SRS case shows that the peak acceleration of the Summerville event is 16 times higher than that for the event from California (stress drop of 21 bars).

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 32.0346° to 35.215402° latitude; -83.353238° to -78.541087° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Joe B. Fletcher. 1995. Source parameters and crustal Q for four earthquakes in South Carolina. https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.66.4.44

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Digitizer Suite: The Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory Digitizer Testing Suite

Laboratory testing of digitizers and seismometers helps ensure that prior to deployment the instrumentation can produce high quality data and is operating within specifications. In this work we detail the software package called: the Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory (ASL) Digitizer Test Suite. This Java software package provides several algorithms to verify various performance parameters of digitizers commonly used for recording analog seismic instruments. The goal of these tests is not to be exhaustive, but to identify common failures that could compromise the integrity of seismic data being recorded on the digitizer. For example, Sandia National Laboratories (e.g., Slad and Merchant, 2018) routinely do comprehensive testing of digitizers for various monitoring missions. While these tests reports are valuable for comprehensively characterizing a recording system, it would be resource intensive to conduct such tests on every seismic recorder used in a network. We focus on tests that include ways to estimate the sensitivity, timing, self-noise, and clip-level of the digitizer, as well as the fidelity of the signal being recorded. The software is publicly available and provides a way for the community to verify the integrity of a digitizer using a minimum amount of outside equipment.

Seismological Research Letters

The digital archivist: Automating legacy macroseismic data processing using large language models

Macroseismic data are a key resource to investigate shaking and damage from preinstrumental and early instrumental eras. However, data are often stored as inconsistently formatted reports describing observed shaking and damage, making manually parsing and interpreting accounts labor‐intensive. We introduce a novel workflow using Google’s Gemini 2.5 Pro large language model (LLM) to automate the extraction and structuring of macroseismic observations from summary reports. We apply this workflow to the 22 March 1957 M 5.3 Daly City, California, earthquake as a case study. We used Gemini to extract addresses, originally assigned modified Mercalli intensity values, and descriptions from each report. To address coordinate precision limits, addresses were geocoded via Google’s Geocoding application programming interface. This workflow yielded over 2300 geocoded intensity reports for the Daly City earthquake. We use the geocoded accounts, with the original report intensity assignments, to develop a shaking intensity map that in some respects rivals modern Did You Feel It? Maps. We also extract and present data for the 9 February 1971 M L 6.7 Sylmar, California, earthquake. Our results demonstrate the potential of LLMs for reliably extracting and analyzing large, unstructured macroseismic datasets. LLMs offer a scalable solution for rapidly digitizing macroseismic archives, enabling their broader use to constrain ground‐motion models in modern seismic hazard analysis and to improve our understanding of site effects in urban areas. The concepts explored here may also be applied to the handling of other legacy seismological and earth science data.

Seismological Research Letters