USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 70021109

The seismic response of the Los Angeles basin, California

Abstract

Using strong-motion data recorded in the Los Angeles region from the 1992 ( M w 7.3) Landers earthquake, we have tested the accuracy of existing three-dimensional (3D) velocity models on the simulation of long-period (≧2 sec) ground motions in the Los Angeles basin and surrounding San Fernando and San Gabriel Valleys. First, the overall pattern and degree of long-period excitation of the basins were identified in the observations. Within the Los Angeles basin, the recorded amplitudes are about three to four times larger than at sites outside the basins; amplitudes within the San Fernando and San Gabriel Valleys are nearly a factor of 3 greater than surrounding bedrock sites. Then, using a 3D finite-difference numerical modeling approach, we analyzed how variations in 3D earth structure affect simulated waveforms, amplitudes, and the fit to the observed patterns of amplification. Significant differences exist in the 3D velocity models of southern California that we tested (Magistrale et al. , 1996; Graves, 1996a; Hauksson and Haase, 1997). Major differences in the models include the velocity of the assumed background models; the depth of the Los Angeles basin; and the depth, location, and geometry of smaller basins. The largest disparities in the response of the models are seen for the San Fernando Valley and the deepest portion of the Los Angeles basin. These arise in large part from variations in the structure of the basins, particularly the effective depth extent, which is mainly due to alternative assumptions about the nature of the basin sediment fill. The general ground-motion characteristics are matched by the 3D model simulations, validating the use of 3D modeling with geologically based velocity-structure models. However, significant shortcomings exist in the overall patterns of amplification and the duration of the long-period response. The successes and limitations of the models for reproducing the recorded ground motions as discussed provide the basis and direction for necessary improvements to earth structure models, whether geologically or tomographically derived. The differences in the response of the earth models tested also translate to variable success in the ability to successfully model the data and add uncertainty to estimates of the basin response given input “scenario” earthquake source models.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 33.06723699039365° to 34.55506704434386° latitude; -119.73138478196108° to -116.55633595383603° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

D.J. Wald, R.W. Graves. 1998-04-01. The seismic response of the Los Angeles basin, California. https://doi.org/10.1785/bssa0880020337

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Re-evaluation of shaking, dynamic strain, and the source of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

As the largest historical event in the eastern United States, the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, plays a prominent role in our nation’s seismological and human history and an outsized role in our probabilistic ground‐motion hazard estimates, affecting building codes, insurance rates, and geophysical monitoring. Thus, constraining the characteristics of the 1886 earthquake source, as well as the nature of its shaking distribution and impacts to the extent possible, is essential. Given its vintage, however, societal, geological, and geophysical datasets are limited compared with those used in modern seismological analyses. Because of these limitations, some characteristics of the rupture model are fundamentally nonunique. Still, by re‐evaluating all available data, I can constrain several key aspects of this earthquake. I show that several interpretations in recent analyses are inconsistent regarding the inferred source; shaking; ground failure; and, particularly, railway impacts. Importantly, I have shown that although dynamic strain caused the ground failure that led to track deformation, without the intermediate liquefaction step, dynamic strain alone was unlikely to be the source of rail deformation, contrary to earlier studies. Had earlier pronouncements that dynamic strain is a real concern for bending railways held true, there would be serious ramifications for railway engineering as well as for other above‐ and below‐ground linear infrastructure.

South Carolina↗

ETAS-positive: Extracting unbiased epidemic-type aftershock models from incomplete earthquake catalogs

Earthquake catalogs are inherently incomplete, and short-term fluctuations in catalog completeness can strongly bias estimates of seismicity parameters. Here, we extend the positive statistics framework recently introduced for estimating Gutenberg–Richter a and b values to the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model. The approach focuses on complete magnitude–time intervals defined by pairs of earthquakes in which the second event is larger than the first. Comprehensive synthetic tests demonstrate that the proposed ETAS + method retrieves nearly unbiased parameter estimates even from highly incomplete catalogs, whereas parameters obtained using classical estimation approaches are strongly biased. Application to Southern California reveals a similar trend, with the productivity scaling parameter α approaching the b value, consistent with self-similar earthquake triggering within estimation uncertainties. Owing to its robustness against catalog incompleteness and computational efficiency, the ETAS + method provides a powerful new tool for seismicity analysis and earthquake forecasting.

California↗