Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · 70224608

The liquefaction record of past earthquakes in the Central Virginia Seismic Zone, Eastern United States

Abstract

Following the 2011 moment magnitude, M "> M M 5.7 Mineral, Virginia, earthquake, we conducted a search for paleoliquefaction features and found 41 sand dikes, sand sills, and soft‐sediment deformation features at 24 sites exposed in cutbanks along several rivers: (1) the South Anna River, where paleoliquefaction features were found in the epicentral area of the Mineral earthquake and farther downstream to the southeast; (2) the Mattaponi and Pamunkey Rivers east of the Fall Line, where liquefiable sediments are more common than in the epicentral area; and (3) the James River and Rivanna River–Stigger Creek, where a few sand dikes were found in the 1990s. Liquefaction features are grouped into two age categories based on dating of host sediment in which they occur and weathering characteristics of the features. A younger generation of features that formed during the past 350 yr are small, few in number, and appear to be limited to the James and Pamunkey Rivers. Though there are large uncertainties in their locations and magnitudes, one or more preinstrumental earthquakes, including the 1758, 1774, and 1875 events, likely caused these features. An older generation of liquefaction features that formed between 350 and 2800 yr ago are larger, more numerous, and more broadly distributed than the younger generation of features. Several earthquakes could account for the regional distribution of paleoliquefaction features, including one event of M "> M M 6.25–6.5 near Holly Grove, or two events of M "> M M 6.0 near Mineral and M "> M M 6.25 near Ashland. Amplification of ground motions in Coastal Plain sediment might have contributed to liquefaction along the Mattaponi and Pamunkey Rivers.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Martitia P. Tuttle, Kathleen Dyer-Williams, Mark W. Carter, Steven L. Forman, Kathleen Tucker, Zamara Fuentes, Carlos Velez, Laurel Bauer. 2021-06-02. The liquefaction record of past earthquakes in the Central Virginia Seismic Zone, Eastern United States. https://doi.org/10.1785/0220200456

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Digitizer Suite: The Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory Digitizer Testing Suite

Laboratory testing of digitizers and seismometers helps ensure that prior to deployment the instrumentation can produce high quality data and is operating within specifications. In this work we detail the software package called: the Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory (ASL) Digitizer Test Suite. This Java software package provides several algorithms to verify various performance parameters of digitizers commonly used for recording analog seismic instruments. The goal of these tests is not to be exhaustive, but to identify common failures that could compromise the integrity of seismic data being recorded on the digitizer. For example, Sandia National Laboratories (e.g., Slad and Merchant, 2018) routinely do comprehensive testing of digitizers for various monitoring missions. While these tests reports are valuable for comprehensively characterizing a recording system, it would be resource intensive to conduct such tests on every seismic recorder used in a network. We focus on tests that include ways to estimate the sensitivity, timing, self-noise, and clip-level of the digitizer, as well as the fidelity of the signal being recorded. The software is publicly available and provides a way for the community to verify the integrity of a digitizer using a minimum amount of outside equipment.

Seismological Research Letters

The digital archivist: Automating legacy macroseismic data processing using large language models

Macroseismic data are a key resource to investigate shaking and damage from preinstrumental and early instrumental eras. However, data are often stored as inconsistently formatted reports describing observed shaking and damage, making manually parsing and interpreting accounts labor‐intensive. We introduce a novel workflow using Google’s Gemini 2.5 Pro large language model (LLM) to automate the extraction and structuring of macroseismic observations from summary reports. We apply this workflow to the 22 March 1957 M 5.3 Daly City, California, earthquake as a case study. We used Gemini to extract addresses, originally assigned modified Mercalli intensity values, and descriptions from each report. To address coordinate precision limits, addresses were geocoded via Google’s Geocoding application programming interface. This workflow yielded over 2300 geocoded intensity reports for the Daly City earthquake. We use the geocoded accounts, with the original report intensity assignments, to develop a shaking intensity map that in some respects rivals modern Did You Feel It? Maps. We also extract and present data for the 9 February 1971 M L 6.7 Sylmar, California, earthquake. Our results demonstrate the potential of LLMs for reliably extracting and analyzing large, unstructured macroseismic datasets. LLMs offer a scalable solution for rapidly digitizing macroseismic archives, enabling their broader use to constrain ground‐motion models in modern seismic hazard analysis and to improve our understanding of site effects in urban areas. The concepts explored here may also be applied to the handling of other legacy seismological and earth science data.

Seismological Research Letters