An empirical estimate of near-source ground motion for a major, mb = 6.8, earthquake in the eastern United States

Abstract Three empirical techniques are used to estimate ground-motion amplitudes in the near-source region of a major earthquake hypothesized to occur along the east coast of the United States. These techniques include the estimation of strong-motion parameters from the statistical analysis of selected strong-motion records, from empirical and theoretical attenuation relations, and from Modified Mercalli intensity. Source parameters for the hypothesized earthquake were selected to be similar to those inferred for the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake. The epicentral region is characterized by a Modified Mercalli intensity of X, from which magnitudes of m b = 6.8, M s = 7.2, and M = 7.2 were estimated. Inferred fault mechanisms for the hypothesized event vary from strike-slip on a vertical fault to reverse or reverse-oblique slip on a fault dipping as shallow as 45°. The median estimate of peak horizontal acceleration for a point located 15 km from the surface projection of fault rupture is 0.30 g , independent of site geology. Corresponding estimates of peak horizontal velocity are 35 cm/sec for soil and soft sedimentary rock sites and 18 cm/sec for crystalline basement rock sites. Strong-motion parameters for a point located 15 km from the epicenter, corresponding to a point located directly above the rupture zone of the hypothesized earthquake, are estimated to be approximately 80 per cent higher than these estimates, or about 0.55 g for peak acceleration and about 63 and 33 cm/sec for peak velocity on soil/soft rock and crystalline rock, respectively. Corresponding velocity-acceleration ratios are 115 cm/sec/ g for soil/soft-rock sites and 60 cm/sec/ g for crystalline rock sites. Standard deviations associated with the natural logarithm of peak horizontal acceleration and velocity are estimated to be 0.5 and 0.7, respectively, representing an 84th percentile estimate (or equivalently an upper 68 per cent confidence limit) that is approximately 65 per cent higher than the median for acceleration and 100 per cent higher than the median for velocity. While these strong-motion values are generally higher than those currently used in the seismic design of most structures in the Eastern United States, their impact on the seismic safety of specific sites in the region will depend on an assessment of the probability of occurrence of an earthquake of this size within the near-source region of these sites.

[1]  O. Nuttli,et al.  Average seismic source-parameter relations for mid-plate earthquakes , 1983 .

[2]  Bijan Mohraz,et al.  A study of earthquake response spectra for different geological conditions , 1976 .

[3]  H. Kanamori,et al.  A moment magnitude scale , 1979 .

[4]  G. A. Bollinger,et al.  On the relation between modified Mercalli intensity and body-wave magnitude , 1979, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

[5]  Robin K. McGuire,et al.  The character of high-frequency strong ground motion , 1981 .

[6]  Regional relationships among earthquake magnitude scales , 1981 .

[7]  Jogeshwar P. Singh.  Earthquake Ground Motions: Implications for Designing Structures and Reconciling Structural Damage , 1985 .

[8]  R. Herrmann,et al.  Ground Motion of Mississippi Valley Earthquakes , 1984 .

[9]  C. Allin Cornell,et al.  Seismic motion and response prediction alternatives , 1979 .

[10]  A. McGarr,et al.  Scaling of ground motion parameters, state of stress, and focal depth , 1984 .

[11]  David M. Boore,et al.  Analysis of the ground accelerations radiated by the 1980 Livermore Valley earthquakes for directivity and dynamic source characteristics , 1982 .

[12]  H. Bolton Seed,et al.  Ground Motions and Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes , 1982 .

[13]  Regional modification of acceleration attenuation functions , 1981 .

[14]  David M. Boore,et al.  Peak horizontal acceleration and velocity from strong motion records including records from the 1979 Imperial Valley, California, earthquake , 1981 .

[15]  Mihailo D. Trifunac.  A Note on the Range of Peak Amplitudes of Recorded Accelerations, Velocities and Displacement With Respect to the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale , 1976 .

[16]  Paul C. Jennings,et al.  Design Spectra for Nuclear Power Plants , 1976 .

[17]  Robin K. McGuire,et al.  Seismic Ground Motion Parameter Relations , 1978 .

[18]  C. Mueller,et al.  The 1982 enola, Arkansas, swarm and scaling of ground motion in the eastern United States , 1984 .

[19]  David M. Boore,et al.  Average body-wave radiation coefficients , 1984 .

[20]  N. Donovan,et al.  UNCERTAINTIES IN SEISMIC RISK PROCEDURES , 1978 .

[21]  Gail M. Atkinson,et al.  Attenuation of strong ground motion in Canada from a random vibrations approach , 1984 .

[22]  Mihailo D. Trifunac,et al.  On the correlation of seismic intensity scales with the peaks of recorded strong ground motion , 1975 .

[23]  C. W. Stover,et al.  Earthquake history of the United States , 1982 .

[24]  W. J. Hall,et al.  Earthquake spectra and design , 1982 .

[25]  L. J. O'Brien,et al.  The correlation of peak ground acceleration amplitude with seismic intensity and other physical parameters , 1977, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

[26]  O. Nuttli,et al.  Estimates of magnitudes and short-period wave attenuation of Chinese earthquakes from Modified Mercalli intensity data , 1984 .

[27]  Kenneth W. Campbell,et al.  Near-source attenuation of peak horizontal acceleration , 1981 .

[28]  R. Herrmann,et al.  Magnitude: The relation of ML to mbLg , 1982 .