Search USGS⌕ Search

Geology topics

James N. Brune

Publications and source records attributed to James N. Brune.

6 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2013

Low footwall accelerations and variable surface rupture behavior on the Fort Sage Mountains fault, northeast California

The Fort Sage Mountains fault zone is a normal fault in the Walker Lane of the western Basin and Range that produced a small surface rupture (<20 cm) during an M L 5.6 earthquake in 1950. We investigate the paleoseismic history of the Fort Sage fault and find evidence for two paleoearthquakes with surface displacements much larger than those observed in 1950. Rupture of the Fort Sage fault ∼5.6 ka resulted in surface displacements of at least 0.8–1.5 m, implying earthquake moment magnitudes (M w ) of 6.7–7.1. An older rupture at ∼20.5 ka displaced the ground at least 1.5 m, implying an earthquake of M w 6.8–7.1. A field of precariously balanced rocks (PBRs) is located less than 1 km from the surface‐rupture trace of this Holocene‐active normal fault. Ground‐motion prediction equations (GMPEs) predict peak ground accelerations (PGAs) of 0.2–0.3g for the 1950 rupture and 0.3–0.5g for the ∼5.6 ka paleoearthquake one kilometer from the fault‐surface trace, yet field tests indicate that the Fort Sage PBRs will be toppled by PGAs between 0.1–0.3g. We discuss the paleoseismic history of the Fort Sage fault in the context of the nearby PBRs, GMPEs, and probabilistic seismic hazard maps for extensional regimes. If the Fort Sage PBRs are older than the mid‐Holocene rupture on the Fort Sage fault zone, this implies that current GMPEs may overestimate near‐fault footwall ground motions at this site.

California↗
USGS2013

Extreme ground motions and Yucca Mountain

Yucca Mountain is the designated site of the underground repository for the United States' high-level radioactive waste (HLW), consisting of commercial and military spent nuclear fuel, HLW derived from reprocessing of uranium and plutonium, surplus plutonium, and other nuclear-weapons materials. Yucca Mountain straddles the western boundary of the Nevada Test Site, where the United States has tested nuclear devices since the 1950s, and is situated in an arid, remote, and thinly populated region of Nevada, ~100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Yucca Mountain was originally considered as a potential underground repository of HLW because of its thick units of unsaturated rocks, with the repository horizon being not only ~300 m above the water table but also ~300 m below the Yucca Mountain crest. The fundamental rationale for a geologic (underground) repository for HLW is to securely isolate these materials from the environment and its inhabitants to the greatest extent possible and for very long periods of time. Given the present climate conditions and what is known about the current hydrologic system and conditions around and in the mountain itself, one would anticipate that the rates of infiltration, corrosion, and transport would be very low—except for the possibility that repository integrity might be compromised by low-probability disruptive events, which include earthquakes, strong ground motion, and (or) a repository-piercing volcanic intrusion/eruption. Extreme ground motions (ExGM), as we use the phrase in this report, refer to the extremely large amplitudes of earthquake ground motion that arise at extremely low probabilities of exceedance (hazard). They first came to our attention when the 1998 probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for Yucca Mountain was extended to a hazard level of 10 -8 /yr (a 10-4/yr probability for a 10 4 -year repository “lifetime”). The primary purpose of this report is to summarize the principal results of the ExGM research program as they have developed over the past 5 years; what follows will be focused on Yucca Mountain, but not restricted to it.

Nevada↗
USGS2010

Earthquake refraction profiles of the root of the Sierra Nevada

We examine the seismic structure of the Sierra Nevada using records of nine earthquakes and one explosion in and near the Sierra, recorded on stations in the Sierra. We first interpret travel times from these paths, which are confined to a single tectonic block, in terms of one‐dimensional structures. The most nearly reversed pair of earthquakes, the 1966 Truckee and 1983 Durrwood Meadows earthquakes, share refracted ( P n ) arrival times (corrected to surface focus) along a line t =8.75±0.25+Δ/8.0, suggesting that a nearly flat layer of 8.0 km/s mantle material lies at depths of 46–48 km. First arrivals from these events do not constrain velocities from ≈30 to 45 km depth. Secondary arrivals and some first arrivals from other earthquakes suggest that velocities in part of this region range between 6.9 and 7.8 km/s. The presence of this “7.x‐km/s” layer can help to explain previous contradictory observations. The 7.x‐km/s layer could be interpreted as either the mafic bottom of a silicic, Mesozoic magmatic arc or as accreted mafic underplating or rejuvenated mantle related to Cenozoic arc volcanism or Basin and Range spreading. Arrivals at stations in the foothills and the crest of the Sierra cannot be fit with a single longitudinal structure, indicating a lateral variation of velocity structure. These variations support previously inferred variations of lithospheric structure, with higher‐velocity, thinner crust to the west beneath the Sierran foothills and slower‐velocity crust (or possibly upper mantle) beneath the high mountains in the eastern Sierra. Rapid changes in arrival times between stations separated by short distances in the eastern Sierra suggest that a sharp boundary exists between the Sierra and the Basin and Range at Moho depths. We also present fresh evidence of the asymmetry of the root of the Sierra, wherein arrivals from earthquakes on the west of the Sierra are delayed within the Sierra and return to original values in the Basin and Range, while arrivals from earthquakes and explosions from the Sierra into the Great Valley. We suggest that if the 7.x‐km/s material occurs in a wedge above the Moho, then the asymmetry can be explained by arrivals from the west being delayed by the dipping 8.0‐km/s Moho, while those from the east may be entering the root along a 7.x‐km/s layer that is near the depth of the Basin and Range Moho.

New Hampshire↗
USGS2002

35 - Strength and energetics of active fault zones

The strength of active fault zones, i.e., the shear stress level required to cause fault slip, is fundamental to understanding the physics of earthquakes and to assessing earthquake hazard. Although many researchers have concluded that fault zones are weak (shear stresses 10 MPa or less averaged between 0 and ˜20 km depth), others maintain that faults are strong (˜100 MPa average of an approximate linear increase with depth). Thus, despite 30 y of dedicated research, relevant data remain inconclusive and fault strength remains uncertain by an order of magnitude. In part, this is because the main source of energy release in earthquakes is at depths greater than 5 km, inaccessible to direct instrumental observation. Very large earthquakes rupture to the Earth's surface where direct observation of the shallow rupture process is possible. However, the rupture characteristics at shallow depth may differ from those at seismogenic depths. To date no great ( M ≥ 7.75) earthquakes have occurred within a network of modern strong-motion instruments, but the large, well-recorded 1999 earthquakes in Turkey and Taiwan, both M = 7.6, show that this data gap is rapidly being filled. Furthermore, shear stress changes at the earthquake source (and the resulting seismic waves) are nearly linear perturbations of the absolute stress field. Thus, an unknown absolute background stress does not greatly affect the basic characteristics of the observed low frequency seismic waves and the observed geodetic deformation. Other, less-direct data must then be used to infer the physical state and ambient stress levels on active faults. This chapter discusses available evidence and current ideas about fault zone strength and energetics. In our review we begin by outlining the general physical conditions prevailing in the Earth around active faults and summarize the generally agreed upon observational features of faulting and earthquake occurrence ( Section 2 ). In doing so we make as few assumptions as possible, because making uncertain assumptions may lead to logical inconsistencies and apparent paradoxes. For example, the absence of a measurable, frictionally generated heat flow anomaly near active faults, the so-called stress-heat flow paradox, rests upon assumptions that must somehow be incorrect. We wish to avoid such inconsistencies and to begin we introduce the observations and briefly state what they imply about fault zones. Subsequently, in Sections 3–8 , we place these observations in an interpretative context and show how they have been used to infer various measures of fault shear stress. Section 9 summarizes our assessment of the average shear stress state near faults, argues for the general importance of stress heterogeneity in faulting processes, and discusses its implications.

International Geophysics↗