Geology topics

Arthur D. Frankel

Publications and source records attributed to Arthur D. Frankel.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2026

3D broadband ground motion simulations of Cascadia megathrust earthquakes: Full-margin scenarios incorporating variable magnitudes and frontal thrust splay faulting

Great megathrust earthquakes (∼ M w 8–9) that rupture along the Cascadia Subduction Zone pose significant shaking and tsunami hazards to the U.S. Pacific Northwest. Although these large earthquakes are documented in the geologic record, none have been recorded with modern instrumentation, complicating regional seismic hazard assessments. To improve constraints on seismic hazard estimates for future earthquakes, we develop 3D broadband (0–10 Hz) ground‐motion simulations for 36 full‐margin megathrust earthquake scenarios through the Cascadia Coastlines and Peoples Hazards Research Hub. These simulations expand on the M9 Project ( Frankel et al. , 2018 ; Wirth, Frankel, et al. , 2018 ) by incorporating a broader range of rupture parameters—variable magnitudes, splay faulting, and geodetically informed slip distributions. Benchmarking these simulations against the Next Generation Attenuation Subduction (NGA‐Sub) ground‐motion models shows reasonable fits for non‐basin sites, although simulations predict stronger shaking at short (0–2 s) and long (6–10 s) periods. NGA‐Sub basin terms improve fits to synthetic shaking within the Seattle Basin but underpredict amplitudes by a factor of 2 at periods of 2–5 s. We also evaluate how rupture characteristics influence regional inland shaking variability and basin response in the Puget Lowlands. Larger magnitude scenarios generally cause stronger inland shaking due to farther inland extents of slip and larger strong‐motion‐generating fault patches but show little difference in basin amplification within the Puget Lowlands compared to smaller magnitude events. Along‐dip hypocenter location strongly influences overall inland shaking, with offshore (updip) hypocenters generating on average ∼45% higher shaking at long periods (>6 s) compared to onshore (downdip) hypocenters due to rupture directivity effects. Offshore splay faults minimally affect inland shaking but alter offshore deformation important for coupled ground‐shaking and tsunami scenarios. Finally, we show that rupture directivity increases amplification within the Seattle Basin through the generation and interaction of higher order mode surface waves, an effect of 3D basin geometry that cannot be captured using 1D approximations.

British Columbia, California, Oregon, Washington↗

USGS2026

Simulation-based scenario ShakeMaps for large magnitude (MW6.5+) crustal earthquakes on the Seattle, Tacoma, and southern Whidbey Island faults, Washington, USA

Scenario ground‐motion maps based on empirical ground‐motion models (GMMs) provide a rapid and generally reliable means of estimating the amplitude and distribution of earthquake shaking. However, because GMMs are designed for broad applicability, they often rely on simplified representations of Earth structure, which can limit their accuracy in regions with complex source, path, and site effects. This can substantially impact the accuracy of predicted shaking in areas like western Washington State, where deep, interconnected basin structure exerts a strong influence on seismic‐wave propagation. In this study, we present a new suite of simulation‐based scenario ShakeMaps that characterize ground shaking from large‐magnitude ( ⁠ M W 6.5–7.5) earthquakes on the Seattle, Tacoma, and southern Whidbey Island faults. These maps are developed using results from recent 3D wave propagation simulations ( Stone et al. , 2022 , 2023 , 2025 ) that incorporate realistic rupture geometries, variable slip distributions, and a regional 3D seismic velocity model with shallow soils. Broadband ground motions are estimated by combining the low‐frequency (<1 Hz) deterministic seismograms from these studies with high‐frequency (1–10 Hz) stochastic seismograms. Simulated ground motions are corrected to account for the enforced minimum shear‐wave velocity and nonlinear site response. The resulting ShakeMaps represent median ground‐shaking estimates derived from multiple rupture scenarios with varying slip distributions and hypocenter locations for each fault. To extend ShakeMap coverage beyond the simulation domain (i.e., into eastern Washington, northern Oregon, and southwestern British Columbia), we scale GMM‐based ground‐motion estimates using amplification patterns observed in the simulations. These new ShakeMaps reveal the substantial influence of deep basin structure on shaking intensity, underscoring the importance of considering crustal structure complexity in regional hazard assessments for the Pacific Northwest.

Washington↗

USGS2026

Evaluating the U.S. Geological Survey’s earthquake shaking hazard forecasts and their implications on seismic risk

We analyze the last six update cycles of the long-term probabilistic earthquake shaking hazard forecast from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and discuss the changes in hazard estimates from the 1996 to the latest 2023 update of the National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for the conterminous U.S. We summarize how our understanding of earthquake hazards has evolved over the last two decades and quantify the implications of changing hazards on people, buildings, and lifeline infrastructure. The net effect of changes in hazard estimates, with reference to the mean hazard from the 2023 NSHM update that has 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years, suggests an overall increase in total geographic areas facing very strong shaking levels (modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) of VII or more) when compared with any of the previous cycles. This increase puts ~159.2 million people (an increase from 111.8 million when using the 2018 NSHM), ~47.3 million residential buildings (an increase from 32.5 million with the 2018 NSHM), and ~$25.6 trillion of economic exposure of all buildings (an increase from $17.4 trillion when using the 2018 NSHM) at risk from earthquakes. We demonstrate that small changes in hazard estimates do not necessarily imply small changes in risk estimates. Therefore, changes in risk estimates can be used to highlight key USGS NSHM updates for improving risk mitigation efforts.

Earthquake Spectra Journal↗

USGS2025

High-frequency and region-scale simulations of large (Mw7+) earthquakes on the southern Whidbey Island fault, Washington, USA

We simulate ground shaking in western Washington State from hypothetical M w 7.0–7.5 earthquakes on the southern Whidbey Island fault (SWIF). Ground motions are modeled considering kinematic source distributions on a complex fault plane, a 3D seismic velocity model, and region‐specific soil velocity models. We run simulations with varying model resolutions, including regional‐scale simulations with a maximum‐modeled frequency of ∼1 Hz and local‐scale simulations with a maximum‐modeled frequency of ∼2.5 Hz. Additional local‐scale simulations are run considering high‐resolution surface topography. We explore how source parameters (i.e., magnitude, hypocenter location, and dip direction) and 3D velocity structure impact peak shaking intensity and its variability. In particular, we find that earthquakes on the SWIF would likely produce strong shaking throughout the populated Puget Lowland, including in the cities of Everett, Seattle, Bellevue, and Tacoma, Washington. Simulated short‐period ( T ≤ 2 s) spectral accelerations are strong throughout the Puget Lowland, and long‐period shaking ( T ≥ 5 s) is strong in the deep regional sedimentary basins, especially the Everett and Seattle basins. Source parameters strongly influence intra‐ and interevent variability in response, primarily through changes in source and site geometry, as well as rupture directivity. We also note a potential coupling between rupture directivity and basin effects, wherein directivity pulses are seemingly guided through the region’s deep, interconnected sedimentary basins. Overall, this work highlights the impacts of 3D source, path, and site effects on seismic hazard in the U.S. Pacific Northwest and substantially expands the catalog of simulated ground motions for Puget Sound area crustal faults.

Washington↗

USGS2025

Earthquake probabilities and hazards in the U.S. Pacific Northwest

Earthquakes and their cascading consequences pose a significant threat to the people, environment, infrastructure, and economy of the U.S. Pacific Northwest. The Pacific Northwest is susceptible to three types of earthquakes: deep (intraslab) earthquakes, subduction zone (megathrust) earthquakes, and shallow crustal earthquakes. For each of these earthquake types, earth scientists can use a variety of methods to estimate the probability of occurrence for future events, which constrains seismic hazard and informs building codes. The timing of past earthquakes indicates that there is an 85-percent chance of a magnitude 6.5 or greater deep earthquake in the Puget Sound region; a 10-15-percent chance of an approximately magnitude 9 earthquake on the Cascadia Subduction Zone; and a 17-percent chance of a magnitude 6.5 or greater crustal fault earthquake in the Puget Sound region in the next 50 years. Individuals and communities can take simple steps to prepare for and reduce the impact of future earthquakes.

California, Oregon, Washington↗

USGS2025

Three-dimensional seismic velocity model for the Cascadia Subduction Zone with shallow soils and topography, version 1.7

The U.S. Geological Survey’s seismic velocity model for the Cascadia Subduction Zone provides P- and S-wave velocity ( V P and V S , respectively) information from 40.2° to 50.0° N. latitude and −129.0° to −121.0° W. longitude, and is used to support a variety of research topics, including three-dimensional (3D) earthquake simulations and seismic hazard assessment in the Pacific Northwest. This report describes an update to the previous version (v) 1.6 of the 3D seismic velocity model for the Cascadia Subduction Zone. This new model (herein referred to as v1.7) contains more detailed near-surface structure for improved earthquake ground motion modeling. Updated features include the addition of a new shallow soil velocity model in the top few hundred meters and the option of adding user-specified topography. Although v1.6 of the Cascadia seismic velocity model has a minimum V S of 600 meters per second (m/s), the new model (v1.7) has a minimum V S of approximately 40 m/s. Overall, this update will allow for more accurate ground motion estimates from 3D simulations of scenario earthquakes in the Cascadia Subduction Zone region.

British Columbia, California, Oregon, Washington↗

USGS2024

The 2023 U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model: Subduction ground motion models

The US Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Models (NSHMs) are used to calculate earthquake ground-shaking intensities for design and rehabilitation of structures in the United States. The most recent 2014 and 2018 versions of the NSHM for the conterminous United States included major updates to ground-motion models (GMMs) for active and stable crustal tectonic settings; however, the subduction zone GMMs were largely unchanged. With the recent development of the next generation attenuation-subduction (NGA-Sub) GMMs, and recent progress in the utilization of “M9” Cascadia earthquake simulations, we now have access to improved models of ground shaking in the US subduction zones and the Seattle basin. The new NGA-Sub GMMs support multi-period response spectra calculations. They provide global models and regional terms specific to Cascadia and terms that account for deep-basin effects. This article focuses on the updates to subduction GMMs for implementation in the 2023 NSHM and compares them to the GMMs of previous NSHMs. Individual subduction GMMs, their weighted averages, and their impact on the estimated mean hazard relative to the 2018 NSHM are discussed. The updated logic trees include three of the new NGA-Sub GMMs and retain two older models to represent epistemic uncertainty in both the median and standard deviation of ground-shaking intensities at all periods of interest. Epistemic uncertainty is further represented by a three-point logic tree for the NGA-Sub median models. Finally, in the Seattle region, basin amplification factors are adjusted at long periods based on the state-of-the-art M9 Cascadia earthquake simulations. The new models increase the estimated mean hazard values at short periods and short source-to-site distances for interface earthquakes, but decrease them otherwise, relative to the 2018 NSHM. On softer soils, the new models cause decreases to the estimated mean hazard for long periods in the Puget Lowlands basin but increases within the deep Seattle portion of this basin for short periods relative to the 2018 NSHM.

Earthquake Spectra↗

USGS2024

The 2023 US National Seismic Hazard Model: Ground-motion characterization for the conterminous United States

We update the ground-motion characterization for the 2023 National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for the conterminous United States. The update includes the use of new ground-motion models (GMMs) in the Cascadia subduction zone; an adjustment to the central and eastern United States (CEUS) GMMs to reduce misfits with observed data; an updated boundary for the application of GMMs for shallow, crustal earthquakes in active tectonic regions (i.e. western United States (WUS)) and stable continental regions (i.e. CEUS); and the use of improved models for the site response of deep sedimentary basins in the WUS and CEUS. Site response updates include basin models for the California Great Valley and for the Portland and Tualatin basins, Oregon, as well as long-period basin effects from three-dimensional simulations in the Greater Los Angeles region and in the Seattle basin; in the CEUS, we introduce a broadband (0.01- to 10-s period) amplification model for the effects of the passive-margin basins of the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains. In addition, we summarize progress on implementing rupture directivity models into seismic hazard models, although they are not incorporated in the 2023 NSHM. We implement the ground-motion characterization for the 2023 NSHM in the US Geological Survey’s code for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis, nshmp-haz-v2 , and present the sensitivity of hazard to these changes. Hazard calculations indicate widespread effects from adjustments to the CEUS GMMs, from the incorporation of Coastal Plain amplification effects, and from the treatment of shallow-basin and out-of-basin sites in the San Francisco Bay Area and Los Angeles region, as well as locally important changes from subduction-zone GMMs, and from updated and new WUS basins.

conterminous United States↗

USGS2023

The 2023 US 50-State National Seismic Hazard Model: Overview and implications

The US National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) was updated in 2023 for all 50 states using new science on seismicity, fault ruptures, ground motions, and probabilistic techniques to produce a standard of practice for public policy and other engineering applications (defined for return periods greater than ∼475 or less than ∼10,000 years). Changes in 2023 time-independent seismic hazard (both increases and decreases compared to previous NSHMs) are substantial because the new model considers more data and updated earthquake rupture forecasts and ground-motion components. In developing the 2023 model, we tried to apply best available or applicable science based on advice of co-authors, more than 50 reviewers, and hundreds of hazard scientists and end-users, who attended public workshops and provided technical inputs. The hazard assessment incorporates new catalogs, declustering algorithms, gridded seismicity models, magnitude-scaling equations, fault-based structural and deformation models, multi-fault earthquake rupture forecast models, semi-empirical and simulation-based ground-motion models, and site amplification models conditioned on shear-wave velocities of the upper 30 m of soil and deeper sedimentary basin structures. Seismic hazard calculations yield hazard curves at hundreds of thousands of sites, ground-motion maps, uniform-hazard response spectra, and disaggregations developed for pseudo-spectral accelerations at 21 oscillator periods and two peak parameters, Modified Mercalli Intensity, and 8 site classes required by building codes and other public policy applications. Tests show the new model is consistent with past ShakeMap intensity observations. Sensitivity and uncertainty assessments ensure resulting ground motions are compatible with known hazard information and highlight the range and causes of variability in ground motions. We produce several impact products including building seismic design criteria, intensity maps, planning scenarios, and engineering risk assessments showing the potential physical and social impacts. These applications provide a basis for assessing, planning, and mitigating the effects of future earthquakes.

Earthquake Spectra↗

USGS2023

The USGS 2023 Conterminous U.S. time‐independent earthquake rupture forecast

We present the 2023 U.S. Geological Survey time‐independent earthquake rupture forecast for the conterminous United States, which gives authoritative estimates of the magnitude, location, and time‐averaged frequency of potentially damaging earthquakes throughout the region. In addition to updating virtually all model components, a major focus has been to provide a better representation of epistemic uncertainties. For example, we have improved the representation of multifault ruptures, both in terms of allowing more and less fault connectivity than in the previous models, and in sweeping over a broader range of viable models. An unprecedented level of diagnostic information has been provided for assessing the model, and the development was overseen by a 19‐member participatory review panel. Although we believe the new model embodies significant improvements and represents the best available science, we also discuss potential model limitations, including the applicability of logic tree branch weights with respect different types of hazard and risk metrics. Future improvements are also discussed, with deformation model enhancements being particularly worthy of pursuit, as well as better representation of sampling errors in the gridded seismicity components. We also plan to add time‐dependent components, and assess implications with a wider range of hazard and risk metrics.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

USGS2023

3-D wave propagation simulations of Mw 6.5+ earthquakes on the Tacoma Fault, Washington state, considering the effects of topography, a geotechnical gradient, and a fault damage zone

We simulate shaking in Tacoma, Washington, and surrounding areas from M w 6.5 and 7.0 earthquakes on the Tacoma fault. Ground motions are directly modeled up to 2.5 Hz using kinematic, finite‐fault sources; a 3D seismic velocity model considering regional geology; and a model mesh with 30 m sampling at the ground surface. In addition, we explore how adjustments to the seismic velocity model affect predicted shaking over a range of periods. These adjustments include the addition of a region‐specific geotechnical gradient, surface topography, and a fault damage zone. We find that the simulated shaking tends to be near estimates from empirical ground‐motion models (GMMs). However, long‐period ( T = 5.0 s) shaking within the Tacoma basin is typically underpredicted by the GMMs. The fit between simulated and GMM‐derived short‐period ( T = 0.5 s) shaking is significantly improved with the addition of the geotechnical gradient. From comparing different M w 6.5 earthquake scenarios, we also find that the response of the Tacoma basin is sensitive to the azimuth of incoming seismic waves. In adding surface topography to the simulation, we find that average ground motion is similar to that produced from the nontopography model. However, shaking is often amplified at topographic highs and deamplified at topographic lows, and the wavefield undergoes extensive scattering. Adding a fault damage zone has the effect of amplifying short‐period shaking adjacent to the fault, while reducing far‐field shaking. Intermediate‐period shaking is amplified within the Tacoma basin, likely due to enhanced surface‐wave generation attributable to the fault damage zone waveguide. When applied in the same model, the topography and fault damage zone adjustments often enhance or reduce the effects of one another, adding further complexity to the wavefield. These results emphasize the importance of improving near‐surface velocity model resolution as waveform simulations progress toward higher frequencies.

Washington↗

USGS2022

Using seismic noise correlation to determine the shallow velocity structure of the Seattle basin, Washington

Cross-correlation waveforms of seismic noise in the Seattle basin, Washington, were analyzed to determine the group velocities of surface waves and constrain the shear-wave velocity ( V S ) for depths less than about 2 kilometers (km). Twenty broadband seismometers were deployed for about 3 weeks in three dense arrays separated by about 5 km, with minimum intra-array station spacing of about 0.5 km. Cross correlations of only 9 days of noise recordings produced Green’s functions at periods of 2 to 6 seconds (s) for sites about 5 km apart. Usable noise correlations for shorter periods of 0.5 to 1.0 s were found for sites within the arrays separated by 1 to 2 km. We bandpass filtered the inter- and intra-array cross-correlation waveforms to determine Love-wave group velocities at periods of 0.5 to 6 s for paths within the Seattle basin and at 3 to 5 s for paths crossing the southern edge of the basin. We developed a non-linear inversion program to determine V S profiles that fit the observed group velocities for paths in the basin. We found that these group velocities are well fit by a variety of V S profiles, each with a distinct jump in V S at depths ranging from 0.9 to 1.3 km. This jump in V S is inferred to represent the top of bedrock. The observed group velocities are not matched by models with the top of bedrock at 0.7-km depth or shallower. The group velocities are also fit by a model with no large jumps in V S in depths less than 2.4 km. The V S profile for the middle of the basin from Stephenson and others (2017), with a depth to bedrock of 0.9 km, also adequately fits the group velocity observations, if a velocity gradient is added from 0.05- to 0.1-km depth. The results indicate that short (3-week) deployments of seismometers to record seismic noise may provide useful constraints on the V S of sedimentary basins.

Washington↗

USGS2022

High‐frequency rupture processes of the 2014 Mw 8.2 Iquique and 2015 Mw 8.3 Illapel, Chile, earthquakes determined from strong‐motion recordings

Strong‐motion recordings of the 2014 M w "> M w Mw 8.2 Iquique and 2015 M w "> M w Mw 8.3 Illapel, Chile, earthquakes were analyzed to determine rupture propagation and the location, timing, and strength of subevents that produce most of the high‐frequency (≥1 Hz) ground motions. A moving window,cross‐correlation analysis of recordings from a local dense array, band‐pass filtered at 1 Hz, directly shows that the Iquique earthquake ruptured to the southeast over a distance of about 60 km. Array analysis of lower frequency energy (0.03–0.1 Hz) indicates that it occurred updip of the high‐frequency rupture. A methodology was developed for inverting the envelopes of acceleration records (1–5 Hz) to map high‐frequency source factors on the rupture zone and was applied to the two earthquakes. Waveforms of M w "> M w Mw 6 earthquakes were used as empirical Green’s functions in the inversions. High‐frequency subevents within the two M w "> M w Mw 8 earthquakes were located at depths ranging from 25 to 55 km and mostly occurred downdip of the peak slip of these earthquakes. Fourier spectral ratios of the Iquique mainshock with respect to M w "> M w Mw 5–6 aftershocks were fit to determine their stress drops. The stress drops were roughly constant from M w "> M w Mw 5 to 8 at 10–20 MPa. A compound rupture model is described in which subevents occur in areas of spatially heterogeneous strength and stress on the rupture, and produce the high‐frequency radiated energy of the overall earthquake, but are not located in the areas of peak slip. The stress drop of the overall earthquake is shown to equal the root mean square stress drop of subevents averaged over the rupture area.

Iquique, Illapel↗

USGS2022

Topographic response to simulated Mw 6.5-7.0 earthquakes on the Seattle Fault

We explore the response of ground motions to topography during large crustal fault earthquakes by simulating several magnitude 6.5–7.0 rupture scenarios on the Seattle fault, Washington State. Kinematic simulations are run using a 3D spectral element code and a detailed seismic velocity model for the Puget Sound region. This model includes realistic surface topography and a near‐surface low‐velocity layer; a mesh spacing of ∼30 m at the surface allows modeling of ground motions up to 3 Hz. We simulate 20 earthquake scenarios using different slip distributions and hypocenter locations on a planar fault surface. Results indicate that average ground motions in simulations with and without topography are similar. However, shaking amplification is common at topographic highs, and more than a quarter of all sites experience short‐period (≤2 s) ground‐motion amplification greater than 25%–35%, compared with models without topography. Comparisons of peak ground velocity at the top and bottom of topographic features demonstrate that amplification is sensitive to period, with the greatest amplifications typically manifesting near a topographic feature’s estimated resonance frequency and along azimuths perpendicular to its primary axis of elongation. However, interevent variability in topographic response can be significant, particularly at shorter periods (<1 s). We do not observe a clear relationship between source centroid‐to‐site azimuths and the strength of topographic amplification. Overall, our results suggest that although topographic resonance does influence the average ground motions, other processes (e.g., localized focusing and scattering) also play a significant role in determining topographic response. However, the amount of consistent, significant amplification due to topography suggests that topographic effects should likely be considered in some capacity during seismic hazard studies.

Washington↗

USGS2021

2021 U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model for the State of Hawaii

The 2021 U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for the State of Hawaii updates the two-decades-old former model by incorporating new data and modeling techniques to improve the underlying ground shaking forecasts of tectonic-fault, tectonic-flexure, volcanic, and caldera collapse earthquakes. Two earthquake ground shaking hazard models (public policy and research) are produced that differ in how they account for declustered catalogs. The earthquake source model is based on (1) declustered earthquake catalogs smoothed with adaptive smoothing methods, (2) earthquake rate forecasts based on three temporally varying 60-year time periods, (3) maximum magnitude models that extend to larger earthquakes than previously considered, (4) a separate Kīlauea-specific seismogenic caldera collapse model which accounts for clustered event behavior observed during the 2018 eruption, and (5) fault ruptures that consider historic seismicity, GPS-based strain rates, and a new Quaternary fault database. Two new Hawaii-specific ground motion models (GMMs) and five additional global models consistent with Hawaii shaking data are used to forecast ground shaking at 23 spectral periods and peak parameters. Site effects are modeled using western U.S. and Hawaii specific empirical equations and provide shaking forecasts for eight site classes. For most sites the new model results in similar spectral accelerations as those in the 2001 NSHM, with a few exceptions caused mostly by GMM changes. Ground motions are highest in the southern portion of the Island of Hawai‘i due to high rates of forecasted earthquakes on décollement faults. Shaking decays to the northwest where lower earthquake rates result from flexure of the tectonic plate. Large epistemic uncertainties in source characterizations and GMMs lead to an overall high uncertainty (more than a factor of 3) in ground shaking at Honolulu and Hilo. The new shaking model indicates significant chances of slight or greater damaging ground motions across most of the island chain.

Hawai'i↗

USGS2021

The 2018 update of the US National Seismic Hazard Model: Ground motion models in the western US

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) is the scientific foundation of seismic design regulations in the United States and is regularly updated to consider the best available science and data. The 2018 update of the conterminous U.S. NSHM includes significant changes to the underlying ground motion models (GMMs), most of which are necessary to enable the new multi-period response spectra (MPRS) requirements of seismic design regulations that use hazard results for 22 spectral periods and eight site classes. This article focuses on the GMMs used in the western United States (WUS) and is a companion to a recent article on the GMMs used in the central and eastern United States (CEUS). In the WUS, for crustal and subduction earthquakes, two models used in previous versions of the NSHM are excluded to provide consistency over all considered periods and site classes. To more accurately estimate ground motions at long periods in the vicinity of Los Angeles, San Francisco, Salt Lake City, and Seattle, the 2018 NSHM incorporates deep sedimentary basin depth from local seismic velocity models. The subduction GMMs considered lack basin depth terms and are modified to include an additional scale factor to account for this. This article documents the WUS GMMs used in the 2018 NSHM update and provides detail on the changes to GMM medians, aleatory variability, epistemic uncertainty, and site-effect models. It compares each of these components with those considered in prior NSHMs and discusses their total effect on hazard.

Arizona, California, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, N↗

USGS2021

Structure and Qp-Qs relations in the Seattle and Tualatin basins from converted seismic phases

We use converted body‐wave phases from local earthquakes to constrain depth to basement and average attenuation relations for the Seattle basin in Washington and the Tualatin basin in Oregon. P ‐, P‐to‐S ‐( Ps ), S‐to‐P‐ ( Sp ), and S ‐wave arrivals are present in three‐component recordings of magnitude 2.5–4.0 earthquakes at seismic stations located in these basins. Based on their relative travel times, these phases are attributed to body‐wave conversions at the basement‐to‐basin contact or to high‐impedance interfaces within the basins. Depth to basement values are calculated using the differential travel times between direct and converted phases, as well as average P ‐ and S ‐wave velocity values. We also identify a high‐impedance layer in the Tualatin basin that likely represents a laterally extensive deposit of volcanic materials embedded between the basement contact and the Columbia River Basalt Group. In addition, the average Q P – Q S "> Q P - Q S attenuation relation is calculated for each station by taking the spectral ratio of converted phases to their parent body‐wave arrivals. For the Seattle basin, our analysis yields an average Q P "> Q P value of 73 and an average Q S "> Q S value of 60 for seismic waves with frequencies between 2 and 25 Hz. In the Tualatin basin, a much reduced Q P – Q S "> Q P – Q S relation suggests that average body‐wave attenuation is likely higher than in the Seattle basin. The converted phase techniques presented here provide a reliable way to develop estimates of basin depth and attenuation structure for undercharacterized regions using simple passive source seismic records.

Oregon, Washington↗

USGS2021

The 2018 update of the US National Seismic Hazard Model: Ground motion models in the central and eastern US

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) is the scientific foundation of seismic design regulations in the United States and is regularly updated to consider the best available science and data. The 2018 update of the conterminous US NSHM includes major changes to the underlying ground motion models (GMMs). Most of the changes are motivated by the new multi-period response spectra requirements of seismic design regulations that use hazard results for 22 spectral periods and 8 site classes. In the central and eastern United States (CEUS), the 2018 NSHM incorporates 31 new GMMs for hard-rock site conditions ( V S 30 = 3000 m / s ) "> ( V S 30 = 3000 m / s ) (VS30=3000m/s) , including the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA)-East GMMs. New aleatory variability and site-effect models, both specific to the CEUS, are applied to all median hard-rock GMMs. This article documents the changes to the USGS GMM selection criteria and provides details on the new CEUS GMMs used in the 2018 NSHM update. The median GMMs, their weights, epistemic uncertainty, and aleatory variability are compared with those considered in prior NSHMs. This article further provides implementation details on the CEUS site-effect model, which allows conversion of hard-rock ground motions to other site conditions in the CEUS for the first time in NSHMs. Compared with the 2014 NSHM hard-rock ground motions, the weighted average of median GMMs increases for large magnitude events at middle to large distance range, epistemic uncertainty increases in almost all situations, but aleatory variability is not significantly different. Finally, the total effect on hazard is demonstrated for an assumed earthquake source model in the CEUS, which shows an increased ring of ground motions in the vicinity of the New Madrid seismic zone and decreased ground motions near the East Tennessee seismic zone.

Earthquake Spectra↗