Geology topics

Laurie G. Baise

Publications and source records attributed to Laurie G. Baise.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2017

An updated geospatial liquefaction model for global application

We present an updated geospatial approach to estimation of earthquake-induced liquefaction from globally available geospatial proxies. Our previous iteration of the geospatial liquefaction model was based on mapped liquefaction surface effects from four earthquakes in Christchurch, New Zealand, and Kobe, Japan, paired with geospatial explanatory variables including slope-derived VS30, compound topographic index, and magnitude-adjusted peak ground acceleration from ShakeMap. The updated geospatial liquefaction model presented herein improves the performance and the generality of the model. The updates include (1) expanding the liquefaction database to 27 earthquake events across 6 countries, (2) addressing the sampling of nonliquefaction for incomplete liquefaction inventories, (3) testing interaction effects between explanatory variables, and (4) overall improving model performance. While we test 14 geospatial proxies for soil density and soil saturation, the most promising geospatial parameters are slope-derived VS30, modeled water table depth, distance to coast, distance to river, distance to closest water body, and precipitation. We found that peak ground velocity (PGV) performs better than peak ground acceleration (PGA) as the shaking intensity parameter. We present two models which offer improved performance over prior models. We evaluate model performance using the area under the curve under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) and the Brier score. The best-performing model in a coastal setting uses distance to coast but is problematic for regions away from the coast. The second best model, using PGV, VS30, water table depth, distance to closest water body, and precipitation, performs better in noncoastal regions and thus is the model we recommend for global implementation.

Christchurch, Kobe↗

USGS2016

USGS approach to real-time estimation of earthquake-triggered ground failure - Results of 2015 workshop

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Earthquake Hazards and Landslide Hazards Programs are developing plans to add quantitative hazard assessments of earthquake-triggered landsliding and liquefaction to existing real-time earthquake products (ShakeMap, ShakeCast, PAGER) using open and readily available methodologies and products. To date, prototype global statistical models have been developed and are being refined, improved, and tested. These models are a good foundation, but much work remains to achieve robust and defensible models that meet the needs of end users. In order to establish an implementation plan and identify research priorities, the USGS convened a workshop in Golden, Colorado, in October 2015. This document summarizes current (as of early 2016) capabilities, research and operational priorities, and plans for further studies that were established at this workshop. Specific priorities established during the meeting include (1) developing a suite of alternative models; (2) making use of higher resolution and higher quality data where possible; (3) incorporating newer global and regional datasets and inventories; (4) reducing barriers to accessing inventory datasets; (5) developing methods for using inconsistent or incomplete datasets in aggregate; (6) developing standardized model testing and evaluation methods; (7) improving ShakeMap shaking estimates, particularly as relevant to ground failure, such as including topographic amplification and accounting for spatial variability; and (8) developing vulnerability functions for loss estimates.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2016

Soil amplification with a strong impedance contrast: Boston, Massachusetts

In this study, we evaluate the effect of strong sediment/bedrock impedance contrasts on soil amplification in Boston, Massachusetts, for typical sites along the Charles and Mystic Rivers. These sites can be characterized by artificial fill overlying marine sediments overlying glacial till and bedrock, where the depth to bedrock ranges from 20 to 80 m. The marine sediments generally consist of organic silts, sand, and Boston Blue Clay. We chose these sites because they represent typical foundation conditions in the city of Boston, and the soil conditions are similar to other high impedance contrast environments. The sediment/bedrock interface in this region results in an impedance ratio on the order of ten, which in turn results in a significant amplification of the ground motion. Using stratigraphic information derived from numerous boreholes across the region paired with geologic and geomorphologic constraints, we develop a depth-to-bedrock model for the greater Boston region. Using shear-wave velocity profiles from 30 locations, we develop average velocity profiles for sites mapped as artificial fill, glaciofluvial deposits, and bedrock. By pairing the depth-to-bedrock model with the surficial geology and the average shear-wave velocity profiles, we can predict soil amplification in Boston. We compare linear and equivalent-linear site response predictions for a soil layer of varying thickness over bedrock, and assess the effects of varying the bedrock shear-wave velocity (V Sb ) and quality factor (Q). In a moderate seismicity region like Boston, many earthquakes will result in ground motions that can be modeled with linear site response methods. We also assess the effect of bedrock depth on soil amplification for a generic soil profile in artificial fill, using both linear and equivalent-linear site response models. Finally, we assess the accuracy of the model results by comparing the predicted (linear site response) and observed site response at the Northeastern University (NEU) vertical seismometer array during the 2011 M 5.8 Mineral, Virginia, earthquake. Site response at the NEU vertical array results in amplification on the order of 10 times at a period between 0.7-0.8 s. The results from this study provide evidence that the mean short-period and mean intermediate-period amplification used in design codes (i.e., from the F a and F v site coefficients) may underpredict soil amplification in strong impedance contrast environments such as Boston.

Massachusetts↗

USGS2014

Surface wave site characterization at 27 locations near Boston, Massachusetts, including 2 strong-motion stations

The geotechnical properties of the soils in and around Boston, Massachusetts, have been extensively studied. This is partly due to the importance of the Boston Blue Clay and the extent of landfill in the Boston area. Although New England is not a region that is typically associated with seismic hazards, there have been several historical earthquakes that have caused significant ground shaking (for example, see Street and Lacroix, 1979; Ebel, 1996; Ebel, 2006). The possibility of strong ground shaking, along with heightened vulnerability from unreinforced masonry buildings, motivates further investigation of seismic hazards throughout New England. Important studies that are pertinent to seismic hazards in New England include source-parameter studies (Somerville and others, 1987; Boore and others, 2010), wave-propagation studies (Frankel, 1991; Viegas and others, 2010), empirical ground-motion prediction equations (GMPE) for computing ground-motion intensity (Tavakoli and Pezeshk, 2005; Atkinson and Boore, 2006), site-response studies (Hayles and others, 2001; Ebel and Kim, 2006), and liquefaction studies (Brankman and Baise, 2008). The shear-wave velocity (VS) profiles collected for this report are pertinent to the GMPE, site response, and liquefaction aspects of seismic hazards in the greater Boston area. Besides the application of these data for the Boston region, the data may be applicable throughout New England, through correlations with geologic units (similar to Ebel and Kim, 2006) or correlations with topographic slope (Wald and Allen, 2007), because few VS measurements are available in stable tectonic regions. Ebel and Hart (2001) used felt earthquake reports to infer amplification patterns throughout the greater Boston region and noted spatial correspondence with the dominant period and amplification factors obtained from ambient noise (horizontal-to-vertical ratios) by Kummer (1998). Britton (2003) compiled geotechnical borings in the area and produced a microzonation map based on generalized velocity profiles, where the amplifications were computed using Shake (Schnable and others, 1972), along with an assumed input ground motion. The velocities were constrained by only a few local measurements associated with the Central Artery/Tunnel project. The additional VS measurements presented in this report provide a number of benefits. First, these measurements provide improved spatial coverage. Second, the larger sample size provides better constraints on the mean and variance of the VS distribution for each layer, which may be paired with a three-dimensional (3D) model of the stratigraphy to generate one-dimensional (1D) profiles for use in a standard site-response analysis (for example, Britton, 2003). Third, the velocity profiles may also be used, along with a 3D model of the stratigraphy, as input into a 3D simulation of the ground motion to investigate the effects of basin-generated surface waves and the potential focusing of seismic waves. This report begins with a short review of the geology of the study area and the field methods that we used to estimate the velocity profiles. The raw data, processed data, and the interpreted VS profiles are given in appendix 1. Photographs and descriptions of the sites are provided in appendix 2.

Massachusetts↗

USGS2011

Estimating unknown input parameters when implementing the NGA ground-motion prediction equations in engineering practice

The ground-motion prediction equations (GMPEs) developed as part of the Next Generation Attenuation of Ground Motions (NGA-West) project in 2008 are becoming widely used in seismic hazard analyses. However, these new models are considerably more complicated than previous GMPEs, and they require several more input parameters. When employing the NGA models, users routinely face situations in which some of the required input parameters are unknown. In this paper, we present a framework for estimating the unknown source, path, and site parameters when implementing the NGA models in engineering practice, and we derive geometrically-based equations relating the three distance measures found in the NGA models. Our intent is for the content of this paper not only to make the NGA models more accessible, but also to help with the implementation of other present or future GMPEs.

Earthquake Spectra↗

USGS2010

Three-dimensional site response at KiK-net downhole arrays

Ground motions at two Kiban-Kyoshin Network (KiK-net) strong motion downhole array sites in Hokkaido, Japan (TKCH08 in Taiki and TKCH05 in Honbetsu) illustrate the importance of three-dimensional (3D) site effects. These sites recorded the M8.0 2003 Tokachi-Oki earthquake, with recorded accelerations above 0.4 g at both sites as well as numerous ground motions from smaller events. Weak ground motions indicate that site TKCH08 is well modeled with the assumption of plane SH waves traveling through a 1D medium (SH1D), while TKCH05 is characteristic of a poor fit to the SH1D theoretical response. We hypothesized that the misfit at TKCH05results from the heterogeneity of the subsurface. To test this hypothesis, we measured four S-wave velocity profiles in the vicinity (< 300 m) of each site with the spectral analysis of surface waves (SASW) method. This KiK-net site pair is ideal for assessing the relative importance of 3D site effects and nonlinear site effects. The linear ground motions at TKCH05 isolate the 3D site effects, as we hypothesized from the linear ground motions and confirmed with our subsequent SASW surveys. The Tokachi-Oki time history at TKCH08 isolates the effects of nonlinearity from spatial heterogeneity because the 3D effects are negligible. The Tokachi-Oki time history at TKCH05 includes both nonlinear and 3D site effects. Comparisons of the accuracy of the SH1D model predictions of these surface time histories from the downhole time histories indicates that the 3D site effects are at least as important as nonlinear effects in this case. The errors associated with the assumption of a 1D medium and 1D wave propagation will be carried into a nonlinear analysis that relies on these same assumptions. Thus, the presence of 3D effects should be ruled out prior to a 1D nonlinear analysis. The SH1D residuals show that 3D effects can be mistaken for nonlinear effects.

Hokkaido↗