USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · 70242887

Toppling of a Trona Pinnacles Spire following the M5.5 RidgecrestaAftershock of June 2020

Abstract

The 2019 M w 7.1 Ridgecrest California earthquake rupture passed within 4 km of the Trona Pinnacles, a large group of tufa rock pillars. Reconnaissance following the Ridgecrest mainshock documented fresh damage to several of the Pinnacles. Repeated aerial photogrammetric surveys also documented damage during subsequent aftershocks. Here, we describe the photogrammetric data with emphasis on a specific rock spire that toppled during an M w 5.5 aftershock. We calculate the volumes of the intact spire and of its subsequent debris. To explore the utility of the pinnacles as fragile geologic features for constraining past earthquake shaking intensity, we calculate the quasi static, horizontal acceleration required to break the spire at its base. We also examine the response of this feature to observed shaking using a dynamic model of the spire. In this case, we find that the quasi‐static estimate provides a conservative maximum constraint on fragility. The dynamic model of the spire suggests that shaking during the M w 7.1 mainshock likely generated tensile stresses in excess of the spire’s bulk strength, thereby making it vulnerable to collapse in subsequent aftershocks.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 35.61036568121271° to 35.61140365258099° latitude; -117.37290967993692° to -117.37105357870811° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Andrea Donnellan, Joaquin Garcia-Suarez, Devin McPhillips, Domniki Asimaki, Christine Goulet, Xiaofeng Meng, Savannah Devine, Gregory Lyzanga. 2022-03-30. Toppling of a Trona Pinnacles Spire following the M5.5 RidgecrestaAftershock of June 2020. https://doi.org/10.1785/0220210275

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Digitizer Suite: The Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory Digitizer Testing Suite

Laboratory testing of digitizers and seismometers helps ensure that prior to deployment the instrumentation can produce high quality data and is operating within specifications. In this work we detail the software package called: the Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory (ASL) Digitizer Test Suite. This Java software package provides several algorithms to verify various performance parameters of digitizers commonly used for recording analog seismic instruments. The goal of these tests is not to be exhaustive, but to identify common failures that could compromise the integrity of seismic data being recorded on the digitizer. For example, Sandia National Laboratories (e.g., Slad and Merchant, 2018) routinely do comprehensive testing of digitizers for various monitoring missions. While these tests reports are valuable for comprehensively characterizing a recording system, it would be resource intensive to conduct such tests on every seismic recorder used in a network. We focus on tests that include ways to estimate the sensitivity, timing, self-noise, and clip-level of the digitizer, as well as the fidelity of the signal being recorded. The software is publicly available and provides a way for the community to verify the integrity of a digitizer using a minimum amount of outside equipment.

Seismological Research Letters

The digital archivist: Automating legacy macroseismic data processing using large language models

Macroseismic data are a key resource to investigate shaking and damage from preinstrumental and early instrumental eras. However, data are often stored as inconsistently formatted reports describing observed shaking and damage, making manually parsing and interpreting accounts labor‐intensive. We introduce a novel workflow using Google’s Gemini 2.5 Pro large language model (LLM) to automate the extraction and structuring of macroseismic observations from summary reports. We apply this workflow to the 22 March 1957 M 5.3 Daly City, California, earthquake as a case study. We used Gemini to extract addresses, originally assigned modified Mercalli intensity values, and descriptions from each report. To address coordinate precision limits, addresses were geocoded via Google’s Geocoding application programming interface. This workflow yielded over 2300 geocoded intensity reports for the Daly City earthquake. We use the geocoded accounts, with the original report intensity assignments, to develop a shaking intensity map that in some respects rivals modern Did You Feel It? Maps. We also extract and present data for the 9 February 1971 M L 6.7 Sylmar, California, earthquake. Our results demonstrate the potential of LLMs for reliably extracting and analyzing large, unstructured macroseismic datasets. LLMs offer a scalable solution for rapidly digitizing macroseismic archives, enabling their broader use to constrain ground‐motion models in modern seismic hazard analysis and to improve our understanding of site effects in urban areas. The concepts explored here may also be applied to the handling of other legacy seismological and earth science data.

Seismological Research Letters