USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 70037718

Detailed p- and s-wave velocity models along the LARSE II transect, Southern California

Abstract

Structural details of the crust determined from P-wave velocity models can be improved with S-wave velocity models, and S-wave velocities are needed for model-based predictions of strong ground motion in southern California. We picked P- and S-wave travel times for refracted phases from explosive-source shots of the Los Angeles Region Seismic Experiment, Phase II (LARSE II); we developed refraction velocity models from these picks using two different inversion algorithms. For each inversion technique, we calculated ratios of P- to S-wave velocities (VP/VS) where there is coincident P- and S-wave ray coverage.We compare the two VP inverse velocity models to each other and to results from forward modeling, and we compare the VS inverse models. The VS and VP/VS models differ in structural details from the VP models. In particular, dipping, tabular zones of low VS, or high VP/VS, appear to define two fault zones in the central Transverse Ranges that could be parts of a positive flower structure to the San Andreas fault. These two zones are marginally resolved, but their presence in two independent models lends them some credibility. A plot of VS versus VP differs from recently published plots that are based on direct laboratory or down-hole sonic measurements. The difference in plots is most prominent in the range of VP = 3 to 5 km=s (or VS ~ 1:25 to 2:9 km/s), where our refraction VS is lower by a few tenths of a kilometer per second from VS based on direct measurements. Our new VS - VP curve may be useful for modeling the lower limit of VS from a VP model in calculating strong motions from scenario earthquakes.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J.M. Murphy, G. S. Fuis, T. Ryberg, W. J. Lutter, R. D. Catchings, M. R. Goldman. 2010-12-06. Detailed p- and s-wave velocity models along the LARSE II transect, Southern California. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120090004

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↗