Search USGS⌕ Search

USGS · 70233967

A comparative ground response study near Los Angeles using recordings of Nevada nuclear tests and the 1971 San Fernando earthquake

Abstract

A comparative ground response study at sites in the Los Angeles region is based on the extensive strong-motion data set recorded in the 1971 San Fernando earthquake and 159 three-component recordings of distant nuclear tests in Nevada. Amplitude spectral ratios computed for the nuclear test data over those frequency bands for which there is an adequate signal-to-noise ratio provide statistically stable estimates of the local ground response related to the type of local geologic conditions. Comparison of the strong-motion data recorded from the 1971 San Fernando earthquake with that recorded at 28 of the same sites for the nuclear tests show that the corresponding amplitude spectral ratios are statistically equivalent for most sites, provided reference stations are chosen to minimize effects on the earthquake data of azimuthal source variations and crustal propagation path. Statistical equivalence of the spectral ratios for the two types of data sources suggests that amplitude spectral ratios computed with respect to the appropriate reference station provide a first-order estimate of local ground response.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 33.61690656060317° to 34.472599425831355° latitude; -118.51776123046875° to -117.89154052734375° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

A. M. Rogers, Roger D. Borcherdt, P. A. Covington, D. M. Perkins. 1984-10-01. A comparative ground response study near Los Angeles using recordings of Nevada nuclear tests and the 1971 San Fernando earthquake. https://doi.org/10.1785/bssa0740051925

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↗