SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

69 records · Page 4Linked to original sources

USGS2016

Summary of the GK15 ground‐motion prediction equation for horizontal PGA and 5% damped PSA from shallow crustal continental earthquakes

We present a revised ground‐motion prediction equation (GMPE) for computing medians and standard deviations of peak ground acceleration (PGA) and 5% damped pseudospectral acceleration (PSA) response ordinates of the horizontal component of randomly oriented ground motions to be used for seismic‐hazard analyses and engineering applications. This GMPE is derived from the expanded Next Generation Attenuation (NGA)‐West 1 database (see Data and Resources ; Chiou et al. , 2008 ). The revised model includes an anelastic attenuation term as a function of quality factor ( Q 0 ) to capture regional differences in far‐source (beyond 150 km) attenuation, and a new frequency‐dependent sedimentary‐basin scaling term as a function of depth to the 1.5  km/s shear‐wave velocity isosurface to improve ground‐motion predictions at sites located on deep sedimentary basins. The new Graizer–Kalkan 2015 (GK15) model, developed to be simple, is applicable for the western United States and other similar shallow crustal continental regions in active tectonic environments for earthquakes with moment magnitudes ( M ) 5.0–8.0, distances 0–250 km, average shear‐wave velocities in the upper 30 m ( V S 30 ) 200–1300  m/s, and spectral periods ( T ) 0.01–5 s. Our aleatory variability model captures interevent (between‐event) variability, which decreases with magnitude and increases with distance. The mixed‐effect residuals analysis reveals that the GK15 has no trend with respect to the independent predictor parameters. Compared to our 2007–2009 GMPE, the PGA values are very similar, whereas spectral ordinates predicted are larger at T <0.2  s and they are smaller at longer periods.

Alaska, California, Nevada↗

USGS2022

Estimates of k0 and effects on ground motions in the San Francisco Bay area

Ground‐motion studies are a key component of seismic hazard analyses and often rely on information of the source, path, and site. Extensive research has been done on each of these parameters; however, site‐specific studies are of particular interest to seismic hazard studies, especially in the field of earthquake engineering, as near‐site conditions can have a significant impact on the resulting ground motion at a site. There has been much focus on the constraint of site parameters and their application to seismic hazard studies, especially in the development of ground‐motion models (GMMs). Kappa is an observational parameter describing the high‐frequency attenuation of spectra, and its site contribution ( ⁠ κ 0 "> κ 0 ) has shown to be a good predictor of high‐frequency ground motions; however, measurements are often limited. In this study, we develop a κ 0 "> κ 0 dataset for the San Francisco Bay area (SFBA) by estimating κ 0 "> κ 0 for 228 stations, and we produce a continuous regional map of κ 0 "> κ 0 ⁠ . We find κ 0 "> κ 0 to range between 0.003 and 0.072 s, with larger values concentrating on the east, north, and south sides of the bay, and lower values concentrating on the west side. We also evaluate the robustness of κ 0 "> κ 0 as a site parameter and find it to correlate with peak ground acceleration. These estimates of κ 0 "> κ 0 can add predictive power to GMMs, thus increasing the accuracy of predicted ground motion and improving the robustness of ground‐motion studies in the SFBA.

California↗

USGS2018

Decomposing leftovers: Event, path, and site residuals for a small magnitude ANZA region GMPE

Ground‐motion prediction equations (GMPEs) are critical elements of probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA), as well as for other applications of ground motions. To isolate the path component for the purpose of building nonergodic GMPEs, we compute a regional GMPE using a large dataset of peak ground accelerations (PGAs) from small‐magnitude earthquakes ( ⁠0.5 ≤ M ≤ 4.5 with > 10,000 events, yielding ∼120,000 recordings) that occurred in 2013 centered around the ANZA seismic network (hypocentral distances ≤180 km⁠ ) in southern California. We examine two separate methods of obtaining residuals from the observed and predicted ground motions: a pooled ordinary least‐squares model and a mixed‐effects maximum‐likelihood model. Whereas the former is often used by the broader seismological community, the latter is widely used by the ground‐motion and engineering seismology community. We confirm that mixed‐effects models are the preferred and most statistically robust method to obtain event, path, and site residuals and discuss the reasoning behind this. Our results show that these methods yield different consequences for the uncertainty of the residuals, particularly for the event residuals. Finally, our results show no correlation (correlation coefficient [CC] <0.03⁠ ) between site residuals and the classic site‐characterization term V S30 ⁠ , the time‐averaged shear‐wave velocity in the top 30 m at a site. We propose that this is due to the relative homogeneity of the site response in the region and perhaps due to shortcomings in the formulation of V S30 ⁠ and suggest applying the provided PGA site correction terms to future ground‐motion studies for increased accuracy.

California↗

USGS2021

A ground motion model for GNSS peak ground displacement

We present an updated ground‐motion model (GMM) for M w "> M w Mw 6–9 earthquakes using Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) observations of the peak ground displacement (PGD). Earthquake GMMs inform a range of Earth science and engineering applications, including source characterization, seismic hazard evaluations, loss estimates, and seismic design standards. A typical GMM is characterized by simplified metrics describing the earthquake source (magnitude), observation distance, and site terms. Most often, GMMs are derived from broadband seismometer and accelerometer observations, yet during strong shaking, these traditional seismic instruments are affected by baseline offsets, leading to inaccurate recordings of low‐frequency ground motions such as displacement. The incorporation of geodetic data sources, particularly for characterizing the unsaturated ground displacement of large‐magnitude events, has proven valuable as a complement to traditional seismic approaches and led to the development of an initial point‐source GMM based on PGD estimated from high‐rate GNSS data. Here, we improve the existing GMM to more effectively account for fault finiteness, slip heterogeneity, and observation distance. We evaluate the limitations of the currently available GNSS earthquake data set to calibrate the GMM. In particular, the observed earthquake data set is lacking in observations within 100 km of large‐magnitude events ( ⁠ M w > 8 "> M w > 8 Mw>8 ⁠ ), inhibiting evaluation of fault dimensions for earthquakes too large to be represented as point sources in the near field. To that end, we separately consider previously validated synthetic GNSS waveforms within 10–1000 km of M w "> M w Mw 7.8–9.3 Cascadia subduction zone scenario ruptures. The synthetic data highlight the importance of fault distance rather than point‐source metrics and improve our preparedness for large‐magnitude earthquakes with spatiotemporal qualities unlike those in our existing data set.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

USGS2013

Vs30 and spectral response from collocated shallow, active- and passive-source Vs data at 27 sites in Puerto Rico

Shear‐wave velocity (V S ) and time‐averaged shear‐wave velocity to 30 m depth (V S30 ) are the key parameters used in seismic site response modeling and earthquake engineering design. Where V S data are limited, available data are often used to develop and refine map‐based proxy models of V S30 for predicting ground‐motion intensities. In this paper, we present shallow V S data from 27 sites in Puerto Rico. These data were acquired using a multimethod acquisition approach consisting of noninvasive, collocated, active‐source body‐wave (refraction/reflection), active‐source surface wave at nine sites, and passive‐source surface‐wave refraction microtremor (ReMi) techniques. V S ‐versus‐depth models are constructed and used to calculate spectral response plots for each site. Factors affecting method reliability are analyzed with respect to site‐specific differences in bedrock V S and spectral response. At many but not all sites, body‐ and surface‐wave methods generally determine similar depths to bedrock, and it is the difference in bedrock V S that influences site amplification. The predicted resonant frequencies for the majority of the sites are observed to be within a relatively narrow bandwidth of 1–3.5 Hz. For a first‐order comparison of peak frequency position, predictive spectral response plots from eight sites are plotted along with seismograph instrument spectra derived from the time series of the 16 May 2010 Puerto Rico earthquake. We show how a multimethod acquisition approach using collocated arrays compliments and corroborates V S results, thus adding confidence that reliable site characterization information has been obtained.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

USGS2022

Earthquake early warning for estimating floor shaking levels of tall buildings

This article investigates methods to improve earthquake early warning (EEW) predictions of shaking levels for residents of tall buildings. In the current U.S. Geological Survey ShakeAlert EEW system, regions far from an epicenter will not receive alerts due to low predicted ground‐shaking intensities. However, residents of tall buildings in those areas may still experience significant shaking due to the acceleration amplification caused by tall buildings’ dynamic behavior, as recently experienced by residents of the 52‐story building in downtown Los Angeles (DTLA) during the 2019 M 7.1 Ridgecrest earthquake. Using more than 400 recorded response data acquired from 77 instrumented buildings in California, here we compare the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) P‐58 and American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 7‐16 simplified equations for peak floor acceleration (PFA), finding that the ASCE estimation is close to the median of data recorded in large and long‐distance events, whereas the current FEMA estimation is not suitable. In the second part of this article, four instrumented tall buildings in DTLA are extensively studied, and the performance of the simplified and response spectrum (RS) methods giving both an estimation of the free‐field horizontal peak ground acceleration (PGA) and pseudospectral acceleration is evaluated. The results show that the RS method is as accurate as the response history analysis as long as the ground‐motion RS is accurate, whereas the ASCE 7‐16 prediction is conservative. However, when ground‐motion RS or PGA is estimated for DTLA using a ground‐motion model (GMM), the performance of the RS method significantly degrades due to underestimation by the GMM at long periods. The results of this study imply that a nonergodic GMM, which may give more accurate prediction in Los Angeles, could improve the results for PFA when the building’s behavior is dominated by a few long‐period fundamental modes, as is the case for the 52‐story building in DTLA.

California↗

USGS2025

A scientific vision and roadmap for earthquake rupture forecast developments, a USGS perspective

We articulate a scientific vision and roadmap for the development of improved Earthquake Rupture Forecast models, which are one of the two main modeling components used in modern seismic hazard and risk analysis. One primary future objective is to provide fully time-dependent models that include both elastic rebound and spatiotemporal clustering nationwide, which is particularly important for shorter-term hazard and risk considerations (e.g., earthquake insurance products). We also discuss the importance and perennial challenges associated with quantifying epistemic uncertainties, including those associated with deformation-model slip rates, un-quantified sampling errors with respect to off-fault seismicity, and any spatial covariances. The need for more physics-based approaches is also emphasized, as is the benefit of adding model valuation (quantifying usefulness) to our verification and validation protocols. Given the multidisciplinary and system-level nature of this activity, modular design is critical. Future updates will also draw from best-available science by both the United States Geological Survey and the external community. The primary goal of this paper is to highlight plans that guide research and facilitate community engagement with model development, especially with respect to lowering the entry barrier for early career scientists and engineers. The paper is written so readers can focus on the sections that interest them most (see table of contents), with the Introduction and Discussion providing a stand-alone overview and summary.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

USGS2004

Ground motion in Anchorage, Alaska, from the 2002 Denali fault earthquake: Site response and displacement pulses

Data from the 2002 Denali fault earthquake recorded at 26 sites in and near Anchorage, Alaska, show a number of systematic features important in studies of site response and in constructing long-period spectra for use in earthquake engineering. The data demonstrate that National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) site classes are a useful way of grouping stations according to site amplification. In general, the sites underlain by lower shear-wave velocities have higher amplification. The amplification on NEHRP class D sites exceeds a factor of 2 relative to an average of motions on class C sites. The amplifications are period dependent. They are in rough agreement with those from previous studies, but the new data show that the amplifications extend to at least 10 sec, periods longer than considered in previous studies. At periods longer than about 14 sec, all sites have motion of similar amplitude, and the ground displacements are similar in shape, polarization, and amplitude for all stations. The displacement ground motion is dominated by a series of four pulses, which are associated with the three subevents identified in inversion studies (the first pulse is composed of P waves from the first subevent). Most of the high-frequency ground motion is associated with the S waves from subevent 1. The pulses from subevents 1 and 2, with moment releases corresponding to M 7.1 and 7.0, are similar to the pulse of displacement radiated by the M 7.1 Hector Mine earthquake. The signature from the largest subevent (M 7.6) is more subdued than those from the first two subevents. The two largest pulses produce response spectra with peaks at a period of about 15 sec. The spectral shape at long periods is in good agreement with the recent 2003 NEHRP code spectra but is in poor agreement with the shape obtained from Eurocode 8.

Alaska↗

USGS1991

The Loma Prieta earthquake, ground motion, and damage in Oakland, Treasure Island, and San Francisco

The basis of this study is the acceleration, velocity, and displacement wave-forms of the Loma Prieta earthquake (18 October 1989; M = 7.0) at two rock sites in San Francisco, a rock site on Yerba Buena Island, an artificial-fill site on Treasure Island, and three sites in Oakland underlain by thick sections of poorly consolidated Pleistocene sediments. The waveforms at the three rock sites display a strong coherence, as do the three sedimentary sites in Oakland. The duration of strong motion at the rock sites is very brief, suggestive of an unusually short source duration for an earthquake of this size, while the records in Oakland show strong amplification effects due to site geology. The S -wave group at Treasure Island is phase coherent with the Oakland records, but at somewhat diminished amplitudes, until the steps in acceleration at approximately 15 sec, apparently signaling the onset of liquefaction. All seven records clearly show shear-wave first motion opposite to that expected for the mainshock radiation pattern and peak amplitudes greater than expected for sites at these distances (95 ± 3 km) from an earthquake of this magnitude. While the association between these ground motion records and related damage patterns in nearby areas has been easily and eagerly accepted by seismological and engineering observers of them, we have had some difficulty in making such relationships quantitative or even just clear. The three Oakland records, from sites that form a nearly equilateral triangle about the Cypress Street viaduct collapse, are dominated by a long-period resonance (≃ 1 1/2-sec period) far removed from the natural frequency of the structure to transverse motion (2.5 Hz) or from high-frequency amplification bands observed in aftershock studies. A spectral ratio arbiter of this discrepancy confuses it further. The failure of the East Bay crossing of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge cannot be attributed to relative displacements of the abutments in Oakland and Yerba Buena Island, but the motions of the Bay Bridge causing failure remain unknown. The steps in acceleration at Treasure Island present unusual strong-motion accelerogram processing problems, and modeling suggests that the velocity and displacement waveforms are contaminated by a spurious response of the filtering operations to the acceleration steps. A variety of coincidences suggests that the Treasure island accelerogram is the most likely strong-motion surrogate for the filled areas of the Marina District, for which no mainshock records are available, but the relative contributions of bad ground, poor construction and truly strong ground motion to damage in the Marina District will never by known in any quantitative way. The principal lesson of all of this is that until a concerted effort is mounted to instrument ground and structures that are likely to fail during earthquakes, our understanding of the very complex relationships between strong ground motion and earthquake damage will, in general, remain rudimentary, imprecise, and vague.

California↗

USGS2018

Observations of rotational motions from local earthquakes using two temporary portable sensors in Waynoka, Oklahoma

Characterizing rotational motions from earthquakes at local distances has the potential to improve earthquake engineering and seismic gradiometry by better characterizing the complete seismic wavefield. Applied Technology Associates (ATA) has developed a proto‐seismic magnetohydrodynamic (SMHD) three‐component rotational rate sensor. We deploy two ATA rotational rate sensors at a temporary aftershock station in Waynoka, Oklahoma. From 27 April to 6 June 2017, we recorded the translational and rotational motions of 155 earthquakes of ML≥2.0 within 220 km of the station. Using the recorded events, we compare peak ground rotation rate (⁠ PGω˙ ⁠) with peak ground velocity (PGV) and with peak ground acceleration (PGA). Our results support previously identified potential relationships between the two quantities. We also compare peak ground rotations (⁠ PGω ⁠) as a function of seismic moment and distance. We found that PGω˙ decays with an exponent of approximately −4.0km−1 for both horizontal and vertical components. On the other hand, PGA decays with an exponent of approximately −1.8km−1 for all components. We compute apparent phase velocity directly from the rotational data for both horizontally polarized shear waves (SH; 379m/s with a standard deviation of 114m/s ⁠) and vertically polarized compression and shear waves (P‐SV; 387m/s with a standard deviation of 121m/s ⁠). Finally, by comparing various rotational and translational components, we look at potential implications for estimating local event source parameters. We found that the absolute correlation of nearby earthquakes decays at a rate of approximately 0.39/km for rotational sensors. This decay rate of absolute correlation is faster on translational sensors with a decay rate of 0.44/km. The latter may help in identifying phenomena such as repeating earthquakes by using differences in correlations as a function of distance and how these differences compare with translational correlations.

Oklahoma↗

USGS2014

A V S30 map for California with geologic and topographic constraints

For many earthquake engineering applications, site response is estimated through empirical correlations with the time‐averaged shear‐wave velocity to 30 m depth ( V S 30 ). These applications therefore depend on the availability of either site‐specific V S 30 measurements or V S 30 maps at local, regional, and global scales. Because V S 30 measurements are sparse, a proxy frequently is needed to estimate V S 30 at unsampled locations. We present a new V S 30 map for California, which accounts for observational constraints from multiple sources and spatial scales, such as geology, topography, and site‐specific V S 30 measurements. We apply the geostatistical approach of regression kriging (RK) to combine these constraints for predicting V S 30 . For the V S 30 trend, we start with geology‐based V S 30 values and identify two distinct trends between topographic gradient and the residuals from the geology V S 30 model. One trend applies to deep and fine Quaternary alluvium, whereas the second trend is slightly stronger and applies to Pleistocene sedimentary units. The RK framework ensures that the resulting map of California is locally refined to reflect the rapidly expanding database of V S 30 measurements throughout California. We compare the accuracy of the new mapping method to a previously developed map of V S 30 for California. We also illustrate the sensitivity of ground motions to the new V S 30 map by comparing real and scenario ShakeMaps with V S 30 values from our new map to those for existing V S 30 maps.

California↗

USGS1988

Teleseismic and near-field analysis of the Nahanni earthquakes in the Northwest Territories, Canada

The analysis of the Nahanni earthquakes of October 5, 1985 (MS 6.6), and December 23, 1985 (MS 6.9), will have important implications for the assessment of seismic hazards in intraplate environments. To maximize the information available to seismic engineers, broadband data recorded teleseismically are analyzed jointly with strong-motion data recorded in the near field. The time-domain analysis of teleseismic data yields the source mechanisms, depths, and complexities of rupture of each earthquake. Both earthquakes occurred as shallow thrusts with centroid depths (6 to 7 km) and shallowly dipping fault planes that correspond well with the aftershock distributions obtained from a local survey run by the Canadian Geological Survey. The shallow nodal plane for the October 5 earthquake dips 30° to the WSW, while the shallow nodal planes of the subevents for the December 23 earthquake dip an average of 23° to the WSW. The October 5 earthquake has an impulsive initial rupture, followed by a weak subevent of longer duration but smaller moment release. The December 23 earthquake exhibits more complexity, being comprised of three subevents of similar size. The subevent delays derived from the teleseismic analysis are used to help interpret arrivals in records of ground velocity recorded in the near field of the December 23 earthquake. The rupture geometries inferred from the joint near- and far-field analysis suggest that the rupture processes were unusually complicated and that the 2g peak that occurs late in one of the near-field records could be a localized phenomenon. Spectral analyses of the teleseismic P waves yield the following source parameters for the October 5 and December 23 earthquakes, respectively: the seismic moments are 1.2 and 1.8 × 1026 dyne-cm, the radiated energies are 1.8 and 2.8 × 1021 dyne-cm, and the dynamic stress drops are 65 and 50 bar. The acceleration source spectra of both earthquakes exhibit an intermediate slope (| üα(ω) | ∝ω) from 0.03 to 0.3 Hz, suggesting that the earthquakes represent the failure of asperities. Extrapolating the teleseismic P-wave spectra to estimate the near-field S-wave spectra yields good fits to the acceleration spectra from two strong motion records, but underestimates the spectra from a third strong motion record with the strongest, but possibly localized, accelerations.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

USGS2000

Comparison of phase velocities from array measurements of Rayleigh waves associated with microtremor and results calculated from borehole shear-wave velocity profiles

Shear-wave velocities (V S ) are widely used for earthquake ground-motion site characterization. V S data are now largely obtained using borehole methods. Drilling holes, however, is expensive. Nonintrusive surface methods are inexpensive for obtaining V S information, but not many comparisons with direct borehole measurements have been published. Because different assumptions are used in data interpretation of each surface method and public safety is involved in site characterization for engineering structures, it is important to validate the surface methods by additional comparisons with borehole measurements. We compare results obtained from a particular surface method (array measurement of surface waves associated with microtremor) with results obtained from borehole methods. Using a 10-element nested-triangular array of 100-m aperture, we measured surface-wave phase velocities at two California sites, Garner Valley near Hemet and Hollister Municipal Airport. The Garner Valley site is located at an ancient lake bed where water-saturated sediment overlies decomposed granite on top of granite bedrock. Our array was deployed at a location where seismic velocities had been determined to a depth of 500 m by borehole methods. At Hollister, where the near-surface sediment consists of clay, sand, and gravel, we determined phase velocities using an array located close to a 60-m deep borehole where downhole velocity logs already exist. Because we want to assess the measurements uncomplicated by uncertainties introduced by the inversion process, we compare our phase-velocity results with the borehole V S depth profile by calculating fundamental-mode Rayleigh-wave phase velocities from an earth model constructed from the borehole data. For wavelengths less than ~2 times of the array aperture at Garner Valley, phase-velocity results from array measurements agree with the calculated Rayleigh-wave velocities to better than 11%. Measurement errors become larger for wavelengths 2 times greater than the array aperture. At Hollister, the measured phase velocity at 3.9 Hz (near the upper edge of the microtremor frequency band) is within 20% of the calculated Rayleigh-wave velocity. Because shear-wave velocity is the predominant factor controlling Rayleigh-wave phase velocities, the comparisons suggest that this nonintrusive method can provide V S information adequate for ground-motion estimation.

California↗

USGS2003

Estimating the magnitude of the 100-year peak flow in the Big Lost River at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, Idaho

Accurate estimates of peak flows in the Big Lost River at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) are needed to assist planners and managers with evaluating possible effects of flooding on facilities at the INEEL. A large difference of 4,350 cubic feet per second (ft 3 /s) between two previous estimates of the magnitude of the 100-year peak flow in the Big Lost River near the western boundary of the INEEL prompted the present study. Regression models that compared annual peak flows and attenuation of annual peak flows between successive gaging stations for the same flow event were used to estimate the magnitude of the 100-year peak flow in the Big Lost River. The 100-year peak flow of 4,790 ft 3 /s at the Howell Ranch gaging station was used as the starting point for this analysis. This estimate was determined by using a three-parameter log-Pearson Type III distribution as outlined in “Guidelines for Determining Flood Flow Frequency” (Bulletin 17B by the Interagency Advisory Committee on Water Data). The regression models indicated that, in the reach of the Big Lost River between Howell Ranch and Mackay Reservoir, downstream peak flows are lower than upstream peak flows. Peak-flow attenuation values for this reach of the river decreased nonlinearly as the magnitude of the peak flow increased. Extrapolation of the trend resulted in an attenuation estimate of 13 percent for this reach relative to the 100-year peak flow at the Howell Ranch gaging station. In the lower reach of the Big Lost River between Mackay Reservoir and Arco, downstream peak flows are also lower than upstream peak flows. However, in contrast to the upper reach, peak-flow attenuation values decreased linearly as the magnitude of the peak flow increased. Extrapolation of the data indicated that peak-flow attenuations in this reach of the river approach zero for flows approaching the 100-year peak-flow estimate immediately upstream and downstream from Mackay Reservoir. A regression model of annual maximum daily mean flows between Arco and the INEEL diversion dam indicated that the attenuation values in this reach of the river are nearly the same for all flows of record. Extrapolation of the linear regression of these values resulted in an attenuation estimate of 10 percent. Seepage measurements made during 1951–53 also resulted in a loss estimate of approximately 10 percent. This attenuation value, combined with the values from analyses of the upstream reaches, resulted in an estimate of the 100-year peak flow for the Big Lost River immediately upstream from the INEEL diversion dam of 3,750 ft 3 /s; upper and lower 95-percent confidence limits were 6,250 ft 3 /s and 1,300 ft 3 /s, respectively. Localized rainfall, even of high intensity, is not likely to produce large peak flows at the INEEL because of high loss rates (infiltration, bank storage, and channel storage) along much of the stream channel. The relatively short flow durations resulting from rainstorms historically have not provided sufficient volumes of water to satisfy local storage demands (bank and channel storage). Only after these storage demands are met do the loss rates decrease enough for significant peak flows to reach the INEEL site. An uncertain component of the present analysis is the effect of seismic activity on the 100-year peak-flow estimate. Analysis of the effect of the magnitude 7.3 Borah Peak earthquake in 1983 on normal flow conditions in the Big Lost River suggests that the joint occurrence of a large earthquake and a 100-year peak flow could significantly increase the magnitude of the peak flow at the INEEL.

Idaho↗

USGS1988

The formation and failure of natural dams

Of the numerous kinds of dams that form by natural processes, dams formed from landslides, glacial ice, and late-neoglacial moraines present the greatest threat to people and property. Landslide dams form in a wide range of physiographic settings. The most common types of mass movements that form landslide dams are rock and debris avalanches; rock and soil slumps and slides; and mud, debris, and earth flows. The most common initiation mechanisms for dam-forming landslides are excessive rainfall and snowmelt and earthquakes. Landslide dams can be classified into six categories based on their relation with the valley floor. Type I dams (11% of 184 landslide dams from around the world that we were able to classify) do not reach from one valley side to the other. Type II dams (44%) span the entire valley floor, in some cases depositing material high on opposite valley sides. Type III dams (41%) move considerable distances both upstream and downstream from the landslide failure. Type IV dams (<1%) are rare and involve the contemporaneous failure of material from both sides of a valley. Type V dams (<1%) also are rare and are created when a single landslide sends multiple tongues of debris into a valley and forms two or more landslide dams in the same reach of river. Type VI dams (3%) involve one or more failure surfaces that extend under the stream or valley and emerge on the opposite valley side. Many landslide dams fail shortly after formation. In our sample of 73 documented landslide-dam failures, 27% of the landslide dams failed less than 1 day after formation, and about 50% failed within 10 days. Over-topping is by far the most common cause of failure. The timing of failure and the magnitude of the resulting floods are controlled by dam size and geometry; material characteristics of the blockage; rate of inflow to the impoundment; size and depth of the impoundment; bedrock control of flow; and engineering controls such as artificial spill-ways, diversions, tunnels, and planned breaching by blasting or conventional excavation. Glacial-ice dams can produce at least nine kinds of ice-dammed lakes. The most dangerous are lakes formed in main valleys dammed by tributary glaciers. Failure can occur by erosion of a drainage tunnel under or through the ice dam or by a channel over the ice dam. Cold polar-ice dams generally drain supraglacially or marginally by downmelting of an outlet channel. Warmer, temperate-ice dams tend to fail by sudden englacial or subglacial breaching and drainage. Late-neoglacial moraine-dammed lakes are located in steep mountain areas affected by the advances and retreats of valley glaciers in the last several centuries. These late-neoglacial dams pose hazards because (1) they are sufficiently young that vegetation has not stabilized their slopes, (2) many dam faces are steeper than the angle of repose, (3) these dams and lakes are immediately downslope from steep crevassed glaciers and near-vertical rock slopes, and (4) downstream from these dams are steep canyons with easily erodible materials that can be incorporated in the flow and increase flood peaks. The most common reported failure mechanism is overtopping and breaching by a wave or series of waves in the lake generated by icefalls, rockfalls, or snow or rock avalanches. Melting of ice cores or frozen ground and piping and seepage are other possible failure mechanisms. Natural dams may cause upstream flooding as the lake rises and downstream flooding as a result of failure of the dam. Although data are few, for the same potential energy at the dam site, ownstream flood peaks from the failure of glacier-ice dams are smaller than those from landslide, moraine, and structed earth-fill and rock-fill dam failures. Moraine-dam failures appear to produce some of the largest downstream flood peaks for potential energy at the dam site greater than 10 11 -10 12 joules. Differences in flood peaks natural-dam failures appear to be controlled by dam characteristics and failure mechanisms.

Geological Society of America Bulletin↗