USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 70027123

Observed and simulated ground motions in the San Bernardino basin region for the Hector Mine, California, earthquake

Abstract

During the MW 7.1 Hector Mine earthquake, peak ground velocities recorded at sites in the central San Bernardino basin region were up to 2 times larger and had significantly longer durations of strong shaking than sites just outside the basin. To better understand the effects of 3D structure on the long-period ground-motion response in this region, we have performed finite-difference simulations for this earthquake. The simulations are numerically accurate for periods of 2 sec and longer and incorporate the detailed spatial and temporal heterogeneity of source rupture, as well as complex 3D basin structure. Here, we analyze three models of the San Bernardino basin: model A (with structural constraints from gravity and seismic reflection data), model F (water well and seismic refraction data), and the Southern California Earthquake Center version 3 model (hydrologic and seismic refraction data). Models A and F are characterized by a gradual increase in sediment thickness toward the south with an abrupt step-up in the basement surface across the San Jacinto fault. The basin structure in the SCEC version 3 model has a nearly uniform sediment thickness of 1 km with little basement topography along the San Jacinto fault. In models A and F, we impose a layered velocity structure within the sediments based on the seismic refraction data and an assumed depth-dependent Vp/Vs ratio. Sediment velocities within the SCEC version 3 model are given by a smoothly varying rule-based function that is calibrated to the seismic refraction measurements. Due to computational limitations, the minimum shear-wave velocity is fixed at 600 m/sec in all of the models. Ground-motion simulations for both models A and F provide a reasonably good match to the amplitude and waveform characteristics of the recorded motions. In these models, surface waves are generated as energy enters the basin through the gradually sloping northern margin. Due to the basement step along the San Jacinto fault, the surface wave energy is confined to the region north of this structure, consistent with the observations. The SCEC version 3 model, lacking the basin geometry complexity present in the other two models, fails to provide a satisfactory match to the characteristics of the observed motions. Our study demonstrates the importance of using detailed and accurate basin geometry for predicting ground motions and also highlights the utility of integrating geological, geophysical, and seismological observations in the development and validation of 3D velocity models.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 33.687781758439364° to 35.746512259918504° latitude; -117.333984375° to -114.2138671875° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

R.W. Graves, D.J. Wald. 2004. Observed and simulated ground motions in the San Bernardino basin region for the Hector Mine, California, earthquake. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120030025

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↗