Validating Nevada ShakeZoning Predictions of Las Vegas Basin Response against 1992 Little Skull Mountain Earthquake Records

Over the last two years, the Nevada Seismological Laboratory has devel- oped and refined Nevada ShakeZoning (NSZ) procedures to characterize earthquake hazards in the Intermountain West. Simulating the ML 5.6-5.8 Little Skull Mountain (LSM) earthquake validates the results of the NSZ process and the ground shaking it predicts for Las Vegas Valley (LVV). The NSZ process employs a physics-based finite- difference code from Lawrence Livermore Laboratory to compute wave propagation through complex 3D earth models. Computing limitations restrict the results to low frequencies of shaking. For this LSM regional model the limitation is to frequencies of 0.12 Hz, and below. The Clark County Parcel Map, completed in 2011, is a critical and unique geotechnical data set included in NSZ predictions for LVV. Replacing default geotechnical velocities with the Parcel Map velocities in a sensitivity test produced peak ground velocity amplifications of 5%-11% in places, even at low frequencies of 0.1 Hz. A detailed model of LVV basin-floor depth and regional basin-thickness mod- els derived from gravity surveys by the U.S. Geological Survey are also important components of NSZ velocity-model building. In the NSZ-predicted seismograms at 0.1 Hz, Rayleigh-wave minus P-wave (R − P) differential arrival times and the pulse shapes of Rayleigh waves correlate well with the low-pass filtered LSM recordings. Importantly, peak ground velocities predicted by NSZ matched what was recorded, to be closer than a factor of two. Observed seismograms within LVV show longer du- rations of shaking than the synthetics, appearing as horizontally reverberating, 0.2 Hz longitudinal waves beyond 60 s after Rayleigh-wave arrival. Within the basins, the current velocity models are laterally homogeneous below 300 m depth, leading the 0.1 Hz NSZ synthetics to show insufficient shaking durations of only 30-40 s.

[1]  The 1992 Little Skull Mountain Earthquake Sequence, Southern Nevada Test Site , 2001 .

[2]  G. H. F. Gardner,et al.  FORMATION VELOCITY AND DENSITY—THE DIAGNOSTIC BASICS FOR STRATIGRAPHIC TRAPS , 1974 .

[3]  Robert W. Graves,et al.  Ground-motion amplification in the Santa Monica area: Effects of shallow basin-edge structure , 1998, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

[4]  Kenneth D. Smith,et al.  Next-Level ShakeZoning for earthquake hazard definition in the Intermountain West , 2011 .

[5]  P. Maechling,et al.  Strong shaking in Los Angeles expected from southern San Andreas earthquake , 2006 .

[6]  V. Langenheim,et al.  Thickness of Cenozoic deposits and location and geometry of the Las Vegas Valley shear zone, Nevada, based on gravity, seismic-reflection, and aeromagnetic data , 1998 .

[7]  John G. Anderson,et al.  Effect of Site Amplification and Basin Response on Strong Motion in Las Vegas, Nevada , 1998 .

[8]  David Carver,et al.  Seismic Hazard Maps for Seattle, Washington, Incorporating 3D Sedimentary Basin Effects, Nonlinear Site Response, and Rupture Directivity , 2007 .

[9]  T. West,et al.  Earthquake Hazard Class Mapping by Parcel in Las Vegas Valley , 2011 .

[10]  John N. Louie,et al.  Faster, Better: Shear-Wave Velocity to 100 Meters Depth From Refraction Microtremor Arrays , 2001 .

[11]  Kim B. Olsen,et al.  Site Amplification in the Los Angeles Basin from Three-Dimensional Modeling of Ground Motion , 2000 .

[12]  William T. Holmes,et al.  The 1997 NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures , 2000 .

[13]  A. Rodgers,et al.  Site Response in Las Vegas Valley, Nevada from NTS Explosions and Earthquake Data , 2006 .

[14]  Göran Ekström,et al.  The global CMT project 2004–2010: Centroid-moment tensors for 13,017 earthquakes , 2012 .

[15]  William A. Bryant,et al.  A Site-Conditions Map for California Based on Geology and Shear-Wave Velocity , 2000 .

[16]  S. Larsen,et al.  NEXT-GENERATION NUMERICAL MODELING: INCORPORATING ELASTICITY, ANISOTROPY AND ATTENUATION , 2001 .

[17]  Kim B. Olsen,et al.  Estimation of Q for Long-Period (>2 sec) Waves in the Los Angeles Basin , 2003 .

[18]  J. Louie Assembling a Nevada 3-d Velocity Model: Earthquake-wave Propagation In the Basin & Range, And Seismic Shaking Predictions For Las Vegas , 2008 .

[19]  R. Saltus,et al.  Gravity and basin-depth maps of the Basin and Range Province, Western United States , 1995 .

[20]  Arthur J. Rodgers,et al.  Simulations of the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake , 2005 .

[21]  J. Miller,et al.  Geophysical constraints on the location and geometry of the Las Vegas Valley Shear Zone, Nevada , 2001 .

[22]  John H. Woodhouse,et al.  Determination of earthquake source parameters from waveform data for studies of global and regional seismicity , 1981 .

[23]  Thomas H. Heaton,et al.  TriNet “ShakeMaps”: Rapid Generation of Peak Ground Motion and Intensity Maps for Earthquakes in Southern California , 1999 .

[24]  P Goldstein,et al.  SAC Availability for the IRIS Community , 2005 .