Search USGS⌕ Search

USGS · 70215598

Combining dynamic rupture simulations with ground motion data to characterize seismic hazard from Mw 3-5.8 earthquakes in Oklahoma and Kansas

Abstract

Many seismically active areas suffer from a lack of near‐source ground‐motion recordings, making ground‐motion prediction difficult at distances within ∼ 40    km "> ∼ 40 km ∼40 km from an earthquake. We aim to aid the development of near‐source ground‐motion prediction equations (GMPEs) by generating synthetic ground‐motion data via simulation. Building on previous work using point‐source moment tensor sources to simulate small ( ⁠ M w "> M w Mw 3–4) earthquakes for a target region encompassing north central Oklahoma and south central Kansas, we perform dynamic rupture simulations of earthquakes up to M w "> M w Mw 5.8. We introduce complexity into the rupture process by adding stochastically generated heterogeneity to initial stress conditions. Our simulated ground‐motion data are added to a catalog of recorded ground‐motion data to construct a composite recorded‐simulated ground‐motion catalog that we use to develop a GMPE for the target region. This procedure can be generalized and used for GMPE development in other regions with near‐source ground‐motion data scarcity, which could directly benefit critical applications such as the National Seismic Hazard Maps produced by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 34.77771580360469° to 37.735969208590504° latitude; -99.95361328125° to -94.658203125° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Samuel Bydlon, Kyle B. Withers, Eric M. Dunham. 2019-02-26. Combining dynamic rupture simulations with ground motion data to characterize seismic hazard from Mw 3-5.8 earthquakes in Oklahoma and Kansas. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120180042

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↗