Search USGS⌕ Search

Geology topics

Thomas L. Holzer

Publications and source records attributed to Thomas L. Holzer.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2015

Strong ground motion inferred from liquefaction caused by the 1811-1812 New Madrid, Missouri, earthquakes

Peak ground accelerations (PGAs) in the epicentral region of the 1811–1812 New Madrid, Missouri, earthquakes are inferred from liquefaction to have been no greater than ∼0.35 g . PGA is inferred in an 11,380  km 2 area in the Lower Mississippi Valley in Arkansas and Missouri where liquefaction was extensive in 1811–1812. PGA was inferred by applying liquefaction probability curves, which were originally developed for liquefaction hazard mapping, to detailed maps of liquefaction by Obermeier (1989) . The low PGA is inferred because both a shallow (1.5 m deep) water table and a large moment magnitude ( M 7.7) earthquake were assumed in the analysis. If a deep (5.0 m) water table and a small magnitude ( M 6.8) earthquake are assumed, the maximum inferred PGA is 1.10 g . Both inferred PGA values are based on an assumed and poorly constrained correction for sand aging. If an aging correction is not assumed, then the inferred PGA is no greater than 0.22 g . A low PGA value may be explained by nonlinear site response. Soils in the study area have an average V S 30 of 220±15  m/s. A low inferred PGA is consistent with PGA values estimated from ground‐motion prediction equations that have been proposed for the New Madrid seismic zone when these estimates are corrected for nonlinear soil site effects. This application of liquefaction probability curves demonstrates their potential usefulness in paleoseismology.

Missouri↗
USGS2014

The 1964 Great Alaska Earthquake and tsunamis: A modern perspective and enduring legacies

The magnitude 9.2 Great Alaska Earthquake that struck south-central Alaska at 5:36 p.m. on Friday, March 27, 1964, is the largest recorded earthquake in U.S. history and the second-largest earthquake recorded with modern instruments. The earthquake was felt throughout most of mainland Alaska, as far west as Dutch Harbor in the Aleutian Islands some 480 miles away, and at Seattle, Washington, more than 1,200 miles to the southeast of the fault rupture, where the Space Needle swayed perceptibly. The earthquake caused rivers, lakes, and other waterways to slosh as far away as the coasts of Texas and Louisiana. Water-level recorders in 47 states—the entire Nation except for Connecticut, Delaware, and Rhode Island— registered the earthquake. It was so large that it caused the entire Earth to ring like a bell: vibrations that were among the first of their kind ever recorded by modern instruments. The Great Alaska Earthquake spawned thousands of lesser aftershocks and hundreds of damaging landslides, submarine slumps, and other ground failures. Alaska’s largest city, Anchorage, located west of the fault rupture, sustained heavy property damage. Tsunamis produced by the earthquake resulted in deaths and damage as far away as Oregon and California. Altogether the earthquake and subsequent tsunamis caused 129 fatalities and an estimated $2.3 billion in property losses (in 2013 dollars). Most of the population of Alaska and its major transportation routes, ports, and infrastructure lie near the eastern segment of the Aleutian Trench that ruptured in the 1964 earthquake. Although the Great Alaska Earthquake was tragic because of the loss of life and property, it provided a wealth of data about subductionzone earthquakes and the hazards they pose. The leap in scientific understanding that followed the 1964 earthquake has led to major breakthroughs in earth science research worldwide over the past half century. This fact sheet commemorates Great Alaska Earthquake and examines the advances in knowledge and technology that have helped to improve earthquake preparation and response both in Alaska and around the world.

Alaska↗
USGS2013

Global earthquake fatalities and population

Modern global earthquake fatalities can be separated into two components: (1) fatalities from an approximately constant annual background rate that is independent of world population growth and (2) fatalities caused by earthquakes with large human death tolls, the frequency of which is dependent on world population. Earthquakes with death tolls greater than 100,000 (and 50,000) have increased with world population and obey a nonstationary Poisson distribution with rate proportional to population. We predict that the number of earthquakes with death tolls greater than 100,000 (50,000) will increase in the 21st century to 8.7±3.3 (20.5±4.3) from 4 (7) observed in the 20th century if world population reaches 10.1 billion in 2100. Combining fatalities caused by the background rate with fatalities caused by catastrophic earthquakes (>100,000 fatalities) indicates global fatalities in the 21st century will be 2.57±0.64 million if the average post-1900 death toll for catastrophic earthquakes (193,000) is assumed.

Earthquake Spectra↗
USGS2012

Probabilistic liquefaction hazard mapping

Many investigators have applied the liquefaction potential index (LPI) to map regional liquefaction hazard. LPI, which integrates the liquefaction potential of susceptible soil elements at a specific location into a single value, has been used to assess both (1) spatial variability of liquefaction potential, and (2) liquefaction potential of surficial geologic units. A promising application to mapping has been the establishment of a median threshold LPI value at which liquefaction effects occur. This threshold when applied to complementary cumulative frequency distributions of LPI for spatially homogeneous surficial geologic units yield liquefaction probability curves for surficial geologic units that can be used for hazard mapping. Both probabilistic liquefaction scenario maps and PSHA-based liquefaction hazard maps have been produced with this approach. The scenario maps compare favorably with historical liquefaction in the mapped areas.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2011

Comment on “Comparison between probabilistic seismic hazard analysis and flood frequency analysis”

Despite providing an exceptionally clear example of the basics of probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA), Wang and Ormsbee [2005] nevertheless conclude that “…using PSHA for risk analysis is not only confusing, but is also inappropriate.” I argue here that (1) the results of a PSHA analysis are not confusing and have physical meaning, and (2) the authors' basis for declaring PSHA “inappropriate” is misguided. I note in passing that the authors consistently confuse “risk” with “hazard.” Both PSHA and flood frequency analysis provide estimates of hazard. Risk is the product of hazard, vulnerability and exposure. This discussion is only concerned with hazard.

Eos Science News↗
USGS2011

Liquefaction probability curves for surficial geologic deposits

Liquefaction probability curves that predict the probability of surface manifestations of earthquake-induced liquefaction are developed for 14 different types of surficial geologic units. The units consist of alluvial fan, beach ridge, river delta topset and foreset beds, eolian dune, point bar, flood basin, natural river and alluvial fan levees, abandoned river channel, deep-water lake, lagoonal, sandy artificial fill, and valley train deposits. Probability is conditioned on earthquake magnitude and peak ground acceleration. Curves are developed for water table depths of 1.5 and 5.0 m. Probabilities are derived from complementary cumulative frequency distributions of the liquefaction potential index (LPI) that were computed from 927 cone penetration tests. For natural deposits with a water table at 1.5 m and subjected to a M7.5 earthquake with peak ground acceleration (PGA) = 0.25 g , probabilities range from <0.03 for alluvial fan and lacustrine deposits to >0.5 for beach ridge, point bar, and deltaic deposits. The curves also were used to assign ranges of liquefaction probabilities to the susceptibility categories proposed previously for different geologic deposits. For the earthquake described here, probabilities for susceptibility categories have ranges of 0–0.08 for low, 0.09–0.30 for moderate, 0.31–0.62 for high, and 0.63–1.00 for very high. Retrospective predictions of liquefaction during historical earthquakes based on the curves compare favorably to observations.

Environmental & Engineering Geoscience↗
USGS2010

Earth fissures and localized differential subsidence

Long linear tension cracks associated with declining groundwater levels at four sites in subsiding areas in south-central Arizona, Fremont Valley, California, and Las Vegas Valley, Nevada, occur near points of maximum convex-upward curvature in subsidence profiles oriented perpendicular to the cracks. Profiles are based on repeated precise vertical control surveys of lines of closely spaced bench marks. Association of these fissures with zones of localized differential subsidence indicates that linear earth fissures are caused by horizontal tensile strains probably resulting from localized differential compaction. Horizontal tensile strains across the fissures at the point of maximum convex-upward curvature, ranging from approximately 100 to 700 microstrains (0.01 to 0.07% per year), were indicated based on measurements with a tape or electronic distance meter.

Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Utah↗
USGS2010

The water table

The water table is a fundamental concept in hydrogeology, yet it is frequently incorrectly defined. For example, both the NGWA (2003) and AGI (Neuendorf et al. 2005) glossaries define the water table as the atmospheric pressure surface that is coincident with the top of the zone of saturation. This definition is also found occasionally in groundwater textbooks as well as in primers, where it is simply defined as the top of the zone of saturation. This incorrect definition of the water table perpetuates an important conceptual misunderstanding in hydrogeology that the top of the zone of saturation is uniquely related to the water table. This commentary reviews the correct definition of the water table and addresses evidence for unsaturation beneath the water table.

Ground Water↗
USGS2010

Maps and documentation of seismic CPT soundings in the central, eastern, and western United States

Nine hundred twenty seven seismic cone penetration tests (CPT) in a variety of geologic deposits and geographic locations were conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) primarily between 1998 and 2008 for the purpose of collecting penetration test data to evaluate the liquefaction potential of different types of surficial geologic deposits (table 1). The evaluation is described in Holzer and others (in press). This open-file report summarizes the seismic CPT and geotechnical data that were collected for the evaluation, outlines the general conditions under which the data were acquired, and briefly describes the geographic location of each study area and local geologic conditions. This report also describes the field methods used to obtain the seismic CPT data and summarizes the results of shear-wave velocities measurements at 2-m intervals in each sounding. Although the average depth of the 927 soundings was 18.5 m, we estimated a time-averaged shear-wave velocity to depths of 20 m and 30 m, VS20 and VS30, respectively, for soundings deeper than 10 m and 20 m. Soil sampling also was selectively conducted in many of the study areas at representative seismic CPT soundings. These data are described and laboratory analyses of geotechnical properties of these samples are summarized in table 2.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2010

Predicted liquefaction in the greater Oakland area and northern Santa Clara Valley during a repeat of the 1868 Hayward Fault (M6.7-7.0) earthquake

Probabilities of surface manifestations of liquefaction due to a repeat of the 1868 ( M 6.7-7.0) earthquake on the southern segment of the Hayward Fault were calculated for two areas along the margin of San Francisco Bay, California: greater Oakland and the northern Santa Clara Valley. Liquefaction is predicted to be more common in the greater Oakland area than in the northern Santa Clara Valley owing to the presence of 57 km 2 of susceptible sandy artificial fill. Most of the fills were placed into San Francisco Bay during the first half of the 20th century to build military bases, port facilities, and shoreline communities like Alameda and Bay Farm Island. Probabilities of liquefaction in the area underlain by this sandy artificial fill range from 0.2 to ~0.5 for a M 7.0 earthquake, and decrease to 0.1 to ~0.4 for a M 6.7 earthquake. In the greater Oakland area, liquefaction probabilities generally are less than 0.05 for Holocene alluvial fan deposits, which underlie most of the remaining flat-lying urban area. In the northern Santa Clara Valley for a M 7.0 earthquake on the Hayward Fault and an assumed water-table depth of 1.5 m (the historically shallowest water level), liquefaction probabilities range from 0.1 to 0.2 along Coyote and Guadalupe Creeks, but are less than 0.05 elsewhere. For a M 6.7 earthquake, probabilities are greater than 0.1 along Coyote Creek but decrease along Guadalupe Creek to less than 0.1. Areas with high probabilities in the Santa Clara Valley are underlain by young Holocene levee deposits along major drainages where liquefaction and lateral spreading occurred during large earthquakes in 1868 and 1906.

California↗
USGS2010

Implications of ground-deformation measurements across earth fissures in subsidence areas in the southwestern USA

Ground deformation was monitored at earth fissures in areas of land subsidence induced by groundwater extraction in the southwestern United States. The ground deformation is consistent with the mechanism that fissures are caused by horizontal strains generated by bending of overburden in response to localized differential compaction. Subsidence profiles indicated that localized differential subsidence occurred across the fissures and that maximum convex-upward curvature was at the fissure. The overall shape of the profile stayed similar with time, and maximum curvature remained stationary at the fissure. Horizontal displacements were largest near the fissure, and generally were small to negligible away from the fissure. Maximum tensile horizontal strains were at the fissure and coincided with maximum curvature in the subsidence profiles. Horizontal tensile strain continued to accumulate at fissures after they formed with rates of opening ranging from 30 to 120 microstrain/year at fissures in Arizona.

Arizona, California, Nevada↗
USGS2008

Liquefaction hazard maps for three earthquake scenarios for the communities of San Jose, Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Los Gatos, Milpitas, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Santa Clara, Saratoga, and Sunnyvale, Northern Santa Clara County, California

Maps showing the probability of surface manifestations of liquefaction in the northern Santa Clara Valley were prepared with liquefaction probability curves. The area includes the communities of San Jose, Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Los Gatos Milpitas, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Santa Clara, Saratoga, and Sunnyvale. The probability curves were based on complementary cumulative frequency distributions of the liquefaction potential index (LPI) for surficial geologic units in the study area. LPI values were computed with extensive cone penetration test soundings. Maps were developed for three earthquake scenarios, an M7.8 on the San Andreas Fault comparable to the 1906 event, an M6.7 on the Hayward Fault comparable to the 1868 event, and an M6.9 on the Calaveras Fault. Ground motions were estimated with the Boore and Atkinson (2008) attenuation relation. Liquefaction is predicted for all three events in young Holocene levee deposits along the major creeks. Liquefaction probabilities are highest for the M7.8 earthquake, ranging from 0.33 to 0.37 if a 1.5-m deep water table is assumed, and 0.10 to 0.14 if a 5-m deep water table is assumed. Liquefaction probabilities of the other surficial geologic units are less than 0.05. Probabilities for the scenario earthquakes are generally consistent with observations during historical earthquakes.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2005

Coordinating NEHRP Post-Earthquake Investigations: Exercising the Plan

Three exercises of The Plan to Coordinate NEHRP Post-Earthquake Investigations were developed and implemented in late 2003 and early 2004 in order to test the Plan itself via realistic scenarios, and for the NEHRP agencies to learn how to coordinate post-earthquake investigations. The exercises were selected to cover a range of seismic activity and consequences, and were based on scenario events: (1) a Hayward Fault Mw 7 event without foreshocks; (2) a New Madrid seismic zone Mw 7 event with foreshocks, and (3) a Puerto Rico Mw 8 subduction event on the Puerto Rican Trench accompanied by a tsunami affecting the eastern seaboard of the United States. Each exercise consisted of a four-hour telephone conference call with a Web-based electronic link and post-exercise evaluations fed back to participants. Evaluation of the exercises found the Plan to be adequate, with implementation of the Plan by the NEHRP agencies improving with each exercise. Based on the exercises, recommendations were provided that a Plan coordinator should be designated within USGS, an annual exercise of the Plan should be conducted in different regions of the United States, a permanent NEHRP electronic link should be created, and coordination of post-earthquake data collection, preservation, archiving, and dissemination should be greatly improved.

Earthquake Spectra↗
USGS2004

Liquefaction-induced lateral spreading in Oceano, California, during the 2003 San Simeon Earthquake

The December 22, 2003, San Simeon, California, (M6.5) earthquake caused damage to houses, road surfaces, and underground utilities in Oceano, California. The community of Oceano is approximately 50 miles (80 km) from the earthquake epicenter. Damage at this distance from a M6.5 earthquake is unusual. To understand the causes of this damage, the U.S. Geological Survey conducted extensive subsurface exploration and monitoring of aftershocks in the months after the earthquake. The investigation included 37 seismic cone penetration tests, 5 soil borings, and aftershock monitoring from January 28 to March 7, 2004. The USGS investigation identified two earthquake hazards in Oceano that explain the San Simeon earthquake damage?site amplification and liquefaction. Site amplification is a phenomenon observed in many earthquakes where the strength of the shaking increases abnormally in areas where the seismic-wave velocity of shallow geologic layers is low. As a result, earthquake shaking is felt more strongly than in surrounding areas without similar geologic conditions. Site amplification in Oceano is indicated by the physical properties of the geologic layers beneath Oceano and was confirmed by monitoring aftershocks. Liquefaction, which is also commonly observed during earthquakes, is a phenomenon where saturated sands lose their strength during an earthquake and become fluid-like and mobile. As a result, the ground may undergo large permanent displacements that can damage underground utilities and well-built surface structures. The type of displacement of major concern associated with liquefaction is lateral spreading because it involves displacement of large blocks of ground down gentle slopes or towards stream channels. The USGS investigation indicates that the shallow geologic units beneath Oceano are very susceptible to liquefaction. They include young sand dunes and clean sandy artificial fill that was used to bury and convert marshes into developable lots. Most of the 2003 damage was caused by lateral spreading in two separate areas, one near Norswing Drive and the other near Juanita Avenue. The areas coincided with areas with the highest liquefaction potential found in Oceano. Areas with site amplification conditions similar to those in Oceano are particularly vulnerable to earthquakes. Site amplification may cause shaking from distant earthquakes, which normally would not cause damage, to increase locally to damaging levels. The vulnerability in Oceano is compounded by the widespread distribution of highly liquefiable soils that will reliquefy when ground shaking is amplified as it was during the San Simeon earthquake. The experience in Oceano can be expected to repeat because the region has many active faults capable of generating large earthquakes. In addition, liquefaction and lateral spreading will be more extensive for moderate-size earthquakes that are closer to Oceano than was the 2003 San Simeon earthquake. Site amplification and liquefaction can be mitigated. Shaking is typically mitigated in California by adopting and enforcing up-to-date building codes. Although not a guarantee of safety, application of these codes ensures that the best practice is used in construction. Building codes, however, do not always require the upgrading of older structures to new code requirements. Consequently, many older structures may not be as resistant to earthquake shaking as new ones. For older structures, retrofitting is required to bring them up to code. Seismic provisions in codes also generally do not apply to nonstructural elements such as drywall, heating systems, and shelving. Frequently, nonstructural damage dominates the earthquake loss. Mitigation of potential liquefaction in Oceano presently is voluntary for existing buildings, but required by San Luis Obispo County for new construction. Multiple mitigation procedures are available to individual property owners. These procedures typically involve either

Open-File Report↗
USGS2003

The plan to coordinate NEHRP post-earthquake investigations

This is the plan to coordinate domestic and foreign post-earthquake investigations supported by the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP). The plan addresses coordination of both the NEHRP agencies—Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), National Science Foundation (NSF), and U. S. Geological Survey (USGS)—and their partners. The plan is a framework for both coordinating what is going to be done and identifying responsibilities for post-earthquake investigations. It does not specify what will be done. Coordination is addressed in various time frames ranging from hours to years after an earthquake. The plan includes measures for (1) gaining rapid and general agreement on high-priority research opportunities, and (2) conducting the data gathering and fi eld studies in a coordinated manner. It deals with identifi cation, collection, processing, documentation, archiving, and dissemination of the results of post-earthquake work in a timely manner and easily accessible format.

Circular↗