Geology Reports⌕ Search

USGS · 70021733

Site response for Seattle and source parameters of earthquakes in the Puget Sound Region

Abstract

We analyzed seismograms from 21 earthquakes ( M L 2.0-4.9) recorded by digital seismographs we deployed in urban Seattle to determine site response and earthquake stress drops. The seismometers were situated on a wide variety of geologic units, including artificial fill (e.g., Kingdome, Harbor Island), Pleistocene age soils (glacial till and outwash deposits of Seattle's hills), modified land (downtown Seattle, Space Needle), and Tertiary sedimentary rock. Two mainshock-aftershock sequences were recorded: the June 1997 Bremerton sequence (mainshock M L 4.9) and the February 1997 South Seattle sequence (mainshock M L 3.5), along with other events in the Puget Sound region. We developed a new inversion procedure to estimate site response, source corner frequencies, and seismic moments from the S -wave spectra. This inversion uses corner frequencies determined from spectral ratios of mainshock-aftershock pairs as constraints. The site responses found from the inversion are not relative to the rock site but are relative to an idealized site with a flat frequency response. The response of the rock site is also found from the inversion. The inversion results show high response for the sites on artificial fill, more moderate amplification for most sites on stiff Pleistocene soils or modified land, and low response for the rock site. Some sites display resonances, such as a strong 2-Hz resonance at our site near the Kingdome, which is caused by the surficial layers of fill and younger alluvium. The sites in West Seattle exhibit high amplification, even though they are on relatively stiff soils of glacial outwash. This may be partly caused by basin surface waves produced by conversion of incident S waves. This high response in West Seattle is consistent with damage reports from the 1949 ( m b 7.1) and 1965 ( m b 6.5) earthquakes. Stress-drop estimates for the events we recorded were generally low, between 0.4 and 25 bars, although some of the events may have had higher stress drops that could not be resolved because of the limited passband. We calculated a stress drop of 24 bars for the Bremerton mainshock and 10 bars for the South Seattle mainshock.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 47.4689028364341° to 47.75865223343823° latitude; -122.52533897944195° to -122.0988280442098° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

A. Frankel, D. Carver, E. Cranswick, M. Meremonte, T. Bice, D. Overturf. 1999-04-01. Site response for Seattle and source parameters of earthquakes in the Puget Sound Region. https://doi.org/10.1785/bssa0890020468

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↗