USGS Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70022313

Variability of site response in Seattle, Washington

S. Hartzell·D. Carver·E. Cranswick·A. Frankel
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Ground motion from local earthquakes and the SHIPS (Seismic Hazards Investigation in Puget Sound) experiment is used to estimate site amplification factors in Seattle. Earthquake and SHIPS records are analyzed by two methods: (1) spectral ratios relative to a nearby site on Tertiary sandstone, and (2) a source/site spectral inversion technique. Our results show site amplifications between 3 and 4 below 5 Hz for West Seattle relative to Tertiary rock. These values are approximately 30% lower than amplification in the Duwamish Valley on artificial fill, but significantly higher than the calculated range of 2 to 2.5 below 5 Hz for the till-covered hills east of downtown Seattle. Although spectral amplitudes are only 30% higher in the Duwamish Valley compared to West Seattle, the duration of long-period ground motion is significantly greater on the artificial fill sites. Using a three-dimensional displacement response spectrum measure that includes the effects of ground-motion duration, values in the Duwamish Valley are 2 to 3 times greater than West Seattle. These calculations and estimates of site response as a function of receiver azimuth point out the importance of trapped surface-wave energy within the shallow, low-velocity, sedimentary layers of the Duwamish Valley. One-dimensional velocity models yield spectral amplification factors close to the observations for till sites east of downtown Seattle and the Duwamish Valley, but underpredict amplifications by a factor of 2 in West Seattle. A two-dimensional finite-difference model does equally well for the till sites and the Duwamish Valley and also yields duration estimates consistent with the observations for the Duwamish Valley. The two-dimensional model, however, still underpredicts amplification in West Seattle by up to a factor of 2. This discrepancy is attributed to 3D effects, including basin-edge-induced surface waves and basin-geometry-focusing effects, caused by the proximity of the Seattle thrust fault and the sediment-filled Seattle basin.

Explore related subjects

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of AmericaArticle
90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 47.496560255027696° to 47.64249216425028° latitude; -122.41722106933594° to -122.18650817871094° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

S. Hartzell, D. Carver, E. Cranswick, A. Frankel. 2000. Variability of site response in Seattle, Washington. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120000022

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

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↗
USGS2026

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↗