USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Near Surface Geophysics”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

992 records · Page 56Linked to original sources
USGS1967

Effects of the earthquake of March 27, 1964, at Seward, Alaska

Seward, in south-central Alaska, was one of the towns most devastated by the Alaska earthquake of March 27, 1964. The greater part of Seward is built on an alluvial fan-delta near the head of Resurrection Bay on the southeast coast of the Kenai Peninsula. It is one of the few ports in south-central Alaska that is ice free all year, and the town’s economy is almost entirely dependent upon its port facilities. The Alaska earthquake of March 27, 1964, magnitude approximately 8.3–8.4, began at 6:36 p.m. Its epicenter was in the northern part of the Prince William Sound area; focal depth was 20–50 km. Strong ground motion at Seward lasted 3–4 minutes. During the shaking, a strip of land 50–400 feet wide along the Seward waterfront, together with docks and other harbor facilities, slid into Resurrection Bay as a result of large-scale submarine landsliding. Fractures ruptured the ground for'severa1 hundred feet back from the landslide scarps. Additional ground was fractured in the Forest Acres subdivision and on the alluvial floor of the Resurrection River valley; fountaining and sand boils accompanied the ground fracturing. Slide-generated wares, possibly seiche waves, and seismic sea waves crashed onto shore; ware runup was as much as 30 feet above mean lower low water and caused tremendous damage; fire from burning oil tanks added to the destruction. Damage from strong ground motion itself was comparatively minor. Tectonic subsidence of about 3.6 feet resulted in low areas being inundated at high tide. Thirteen people were killed and five were injured as a result of the earthquake. Eighty-six houses were totally destroyed and 260 were heavily damaged. The harbor facilities were almost completely destroyed, and the entire economic base of the town was wiped out. The total cost to replace the destroyed public and private facilities was estimated at $22 million. Seward lies on the axis of the Chugach Mountains geosyncline. The main structural trend in the mapped area, where the rocks consist almost entirely of graywacke and phyllite, is from near north to N. 20° E. Beds and cleavage of the rocks commonly dip 70° W. or NW. to near vertical. Locally, the rocks are complexly folded or contorted. So major faults were found in the mapped area, but small faults, shear zones, and joints are common. Surficial deposits of the area hare been divided for mapping into the following units: drift deposits, alluvial fan deposits, valley alluvium, intertidal deposits, landslide deposits, and artificial fill. Most of these units intergrade and were deposited more or less contemporaneously. The drift deposits consist chiefly of till that forms moraines along the lower flanks of the Resurrection River valley and up tributary valleys. The till is predominantly silt and sand and lesser amounts of clay-size particles, gravel, cobbles, and boulders. Glacial outwash and stratified ice-contact deposits constitute the remainder of the drift deposits. Fans and fan-deltas have been deposited at the valley mouths of tributary streams. Some, including the one upon which Seward built, project into Resurrection Bay, and deltaic-type deposits form their distal edges. The larger fans—composed chiefly of loosely compacted and poorly sorted silt, sand, and gravel—form broad aprons having low gradients. The fan deposits range in thickness from about 100 feet to possibly several hundred feet and, at least in some places, lie on a platform of compact drift. Smaller fans at the mouths of several canyons have steep gradients and considerable local relief. Valley alluvium, deposited chiefly by the Resurrection River, consists mostly of coarse sand and fine to medium gravel. In the axial part of the valley it is probably more than 100 feet thick. Near the head of Resurrection Bay, the alluvium is underlain by at least 75 feet of marine deltaic sediments, which are in turn underlain by 600 or more feet of drift in the deepest part of the bedrock valley. Beach, deltaic, and estuarine sediments, deposited on intertidal flats at the head of the bay and along far1 margins that extend into the bay, arc mapped as intertidal deposits. They consist mostly of silt, sand, and fine gravel, and lesser amounts of clay-size particles. The earthquake reactivated old slides and trigged new ones in the mountains. Rock and snow avalanches, debris flows, and creep of talus deposits characterized slide activity on the steeper slops. The Seward waterfront had been extended before the earthquake by adding artificial fill consisting of loose sand and gravel; part of the lagoon area had been filled with refuse. After the earth- quake, fill, consisting of silt and sand dredged from the head of the bay, was pumped onto part of the lagoon area and also on land at the northwest corner of the bay. Response to the disaster was immediate and decisive. City, State, and Federal agencies, as well as other organizations and individuals, gave unstintingly of their time and facilities. Within a few days, there was temporary restoration of water, sewerage, and electrical facilities. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers was authorized to select sites and construct a new dock for the Alaska Railroad, a new small-boat basin, and related facilities. The firm of Shannon and Wilson, Inc., under contract to the Corps of Engineers, investigated subsurface soils extensively to determine the factors responsible for the sliding along the Seward waterfront and to assist in site selection for reconstruction of the destroyed harbor facilities. Borings also made along the Seward waterfront and at the head of the bay, and laboratory tests were conducted on pertinent samples. These studies were augmented by geophysical studies both on land and in the bay. In addition, the Corps of Engineers made shallow borings on the intertidal flats at the head of the bay and performed pile-driving and load tests. Borings also were drilled and test pits were dug in the subdivision of Forest Acres. Sliding along the Seward waterfront markedly deepened the water along the former shoreline. Post-earthquake slopes of the bay floor immediately offshore also are steeper in places than before the earthquake. The strong ground motion of the earthquake triggered the landsliding, but several factors may have contributed to the magnitude and characteristics of the slides. These factors are: (1) the long duration of strong ground motion, (2) the grain size and texture of the material involved in the sliding, (3) the probability that the finer grained materials liquefied and flowed seaward, and (4) the added load of manmade facilities built on the edge of the shore, Secondary effects of the slides themselves—sudden drawdown of water, followed by the weight of returning waves—also may have contributed to the destruction. Submarine sliding at the northwest corner of the bay occurred in fine-grained deltaic deposits whose frontal slopes probably were in metastable equilibrium under static conditions. Uplift pressures from aquifers under hydrostatic head, combined with the probable liquefaction characteristics of the sediments when vibrated by strong ground motion, probably caused the material to slide and flow seaward as a heavy slurry. Under static conditions, no major shoreline or submarine landsliding is expected in the Seward area; in the event of another severe earthquake, however, additional sliding is likely along the Seward waterfront and also in the deltaic deposits at the northwest corner of the bay. Fractured ground in back of the present shoreline along the Seward waterfront is an area of incipient landslides that would be unstable under strong shaking. For this reason the Scientific and Engineering Task Force placed the area in a high-risk classification and recommended no repair, rehabilitation, or new construction in this area involving use of Federal funds; it was further recommended that the area should be reserved for park or other uses that do not involve large congregations of people. The deltaic deposits at the head of the bay probably also would be susceptible to sliding during another large earthquake. This sliding would result in further landward retreat of the present shoreline toward the new railroad dock. Specifications for the new dock, whose seaward end is now approximately 1,100 feet from the back scarp of the subaqueous landslide, require design pro- visions to withstand seismic shock up to certain limits. Earthquake-induced fracturing of the ground in the subdivision of Forest Acres was confined to the lower part of a broad alluvial fan. There, sewer and water lines were ruptured and the foundations of some homes were heavily damaged. Landsliding, such as occurred along the shoreline of the bay, was not a contributing cause of the fracturing. Two hypotheses are offered to explain the fracturing: 1. Seismic energy was transformed into visible surface waves of such amplitude that the strength of surface layer was exceeded and rupturing occurred; tensional and compressional stresses alternately opened and closed the fractures and forced out water and mud. 2. Compaction by vibration of the fine-grained deposits of the fan caused ground settlement and fracturing; ground water under temporary hydrostatic head was forced to the surface as fountains and carried the finer material with it. Water waves that crashed onto shore, while shaking was still continuing, were generated chiefly by onshore and offshore landsliding. Waves that overran the shores about 25 minutes after shaking stopped and that continued to arrive for the next several hours are believed to be seismic sea waves (tsunamis) that originated in an uplifted area in the Gulf of Alaska. During the time of seismic sea-wave activity and perhaps preceding it, seiche wares also may have been generated within Resurrection Bay and complicated the wave effects along the shoreline.

Alaska↗
USGS2017

Suitability of river delta sediment as proppant, Missouri and Niobrara Rivers, Nebraska and South Dakota, 2015

Sediment management is a challenge faced by reservoir managers who have several potential options, including dredging, for mitigation of storage capacity lost to sedimentation. As sediment is removed from reservoir storage, potential use of the sediment for socioeconomic or ecological benefit could potentially defray some costs of its removal. Rivers that transport a sandy sediment load will deposit the sand load along a reservoir-headwaters reach where the current of the river slackens progressively as its bed approaches and then descends below the reservoir water level. Given a rare combination of factors, a reservoir deposit of alluvial sand has potential to be suitable for use as proppant for hydraulic fracturing in unconventional oil and gas development. In 2015, the U.S. Geological Survey began a program of researching potential sources of proppant sand from reservoirs, with an initial focus on the Missouri River subbasins that receive sand loads from the Nebraska Sand Hills. This report documents the methods and results of assessments of the suitability of river delta sediment as proppant for a pilot study area in the delta headwaters of Lewis and Clark Lake, Nebraska and South Dakota. Results from surface-geophysical surveys of electrical resistivity guided borings to collect 3.7-meter long cores at 25 sites on delta sandbars using the direct-push method to recover duplicate, 3.8-centimeter-diameter cores in April 2015. In addition, the U.S. Geological Survey collected samples of upstream sand sources in the lower Niobrara River valley. At the laboratory, samples were dried, weighed, washed, dried, and weighed again. Exploratory analysis of natural sand for determining its suitability as a proppant involved application of a modified subset of the standard protocols known as American Petroleum Institute (API) Recommended Practice (RP) 19C. The RP19C methods were not intended for exploration-stage evaluation of raw materials. Results for the washed samples are not directly applicable to evaluations of suitability for use as fracture sand because, except for particle-size distribution, the API-recommended practices for assessing proppant properties (sphericity, roundness, bulk density, and crush resistance) require testing of specific proppant size classes. An optical imaging particle-size analyzer was used to make measurements of particle-size distribution and particle shape. Measured samples were sieved to separate the dominant-size fraction, and the separated subsample was further tested for roundness, sphericity, bulk density, and crush resistance. For the bulk washed samples collected from the Missouri River delta, the geometric mean size averaged 0.27 millimeters (mm), 80 percent of the samples were predominantly sand in the API 40/70 size class, and 17 percent were predominantly sand in the API 70/140 size class. Distributions of geometric mean size among the four sandbar complexes were similar, but samples collected from sandbar complex B were slightly coarser sand than those from the other three complexes. The average geometric mean sizes among the four sandbar complexes ranged only from 0.26 to 0.30 mm. For 22 main-stem sampling locations along the lower Niobrara River, geometric mean size averaged 0.26 mm, an average of 61 percent was sand in the API 40/70 size class, and 28 percent was sand in the API 70/140 size class. Average composition for lower Niobrara River samples was 48 percent medium sand, 37 percent fine sand, and about 7 percent each very fine sand and coarse sand fractions. On average, samples were moderately well sorted. Particle shape and strength were assessed for the dominant-size class of each sample. For proppant strength, crush resistance was tested at a predetermined level of stress (34.5 megapascals [MPa], or 5,000 pounds-force per square inch). To meet the API minimum requirement for proppant, after the crush test not more than 10 percent of the tested sample should be finer than the precrush dominant-size class. For particle shape, all samples surpassed the recommended minimum criteria for sphericity and roundness, with most samples being well-rounded. For proppant strength, of 57 crush-resistance tested Missouri River delta samples of 40/70-sized sand, 23 (40 percent) were interpreted as meeting the minimum criterion at 34.5 MPa, or 5,000 pounds-force per square inch. Of 12 tested samples of 70/140-sized sand, 9 (75 percent) of the Missouri River delta samples had less than 10 percent fines by volume following crush testing, achieving the minimum criterion at 34.5 MPa. Crush resistance for delta samples was strongest at sandbar complex A, where 67 percent of tested samples met the 10-percent fines criterion at the 34.5-MPa threshold. This frequency was higher than was indicated by samples from sandbar complexes B, C, and D that had rates of 50, 46, and 42 percent, respectively. The group of sandbar complex A samples also contained the largest percentages of samples dominated by the API 70/140 size class, which overall had a higher percentage of samples meeting the minimum criterion compared to samples dominated by coarser size classes; however, samples from sandbar complex A that had the API 40/70 size class tested also had a higher rate for meeting the minimum criterion (57 percent) than did samples from sandbar complexes B, C, and D (50, 43, and 40 percent, respectively). For samples collected along the lower Niobrara River, of the 25 tested samples of 40/70-sized sand, 9 samples passed the API minimum criterion at 34.5 MPa, but only 3 samples passed the more-stringent criterion of 8 percent postcrush fines. All four tested samples of 70/140 sand passed the minimum criterion at 34.5 MPa, with postcrush fines percentage of at most 4.1 percent. For two reaches of the lower Niobrara River, where hydraulic sorting was energized artificially by the hydraulic head drop at and immediately downstream from Spencer Dam, suitability of channel deposits for potential use as fracture sand was confirmed by test results. All reach A washed samples were well-rounded and had sphericity scores above 0.65, and samples for 80 percent of sampled locations met the crush-resistance criterion at the 34.5-MPa stress level. A conservative lower-bound estimate of sand volume in the reach A deposits was about 86,000 cubic meters. All reach B samples were well-rounded but sphericity averaged 0.63, a little less than the average for upstream reaches A and SP. All four samples tested passed the crush-resistance test at 34.5 MPa. Of three reach B sandbars, two had no more than 3 percent fines after the crush test, surpassing more stringent criteria for crush resistance that accept a maximum of 6 percent fines following the crush test for the API 70/140 size class. Relative to the crush-resistance test results for the API 40/70 size fraction of two samples of mine output from Loup River settling-basin dredge spoils near Genoa, Nebr., four of five reach A sample locations compared favorably. The four samples had increases in fines composition of 1.6–5.9 percentage points, whereas fines in the two mine-output samples increased by an average 6.8 percentage points.

Nebraska, South Dakota↗