USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 70042554

Rupture directivity of moderate earthquakes in northern California

Abstract

We invert peak ground velocity and acceleration (PGV and PGA) to estimate rupture direction and rupture velocity for 47 moderate earthquakes (3.5≥M≥5.4) in northern California. We correct sets of PGAs and PGVs recorded at stations less than 55–125 km, depending on source depth, for site amplification and source–receiver distance, then fit the residual peak motions to the unilateral directivity function of Ben-Menahem (1961). We independently invert PGA and PGV. The rupture direction can be determined using as few as seven peak motions if the station distribution is sufficient. The rupture velocity is unstable, however, if there are no takeoff angles within 30° of the rupture direction. Rupture velocities are generally subsonic (0.5β–0.9β); for stability, we limit the rupture velocity at v=0.92β, the Rayleigh wave speed. For 73 of 94 inversions, the rupture direction clearly identifies one of the nodal planes as the fault plane. The 35 strike-slip earthquakes have rupture directions that range from nearly horizontal (6 events) to directly updip (5 events); the other 24 rupture partly along strike and partly updip. Two strike-slip earthquakes rupture updip in one inversion and downdip in the other. All but 1 of the 11 thrust earthquakes rupture predominantly updip. We compare the rupture directions for 10 M≥4.0 earthquakes to the relative location of the mainshock and the first two weeks of aftershocks. Spatial distributions of 8 of 10 aftershock sequences agree well with the rupture directivity calculated for the mainshock.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 32.5° to 42° latitude; -124.4° to -114.1° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Linda C. Seekins, John Boatwright. 2010-05-14. Rupture directivity of moderate earthquakes in northern California. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120090161

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↗