Liquefaction Features Produced by the 2010–2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence in Southwest Christchurch, New Zealand, and Preliminary Assessment of Paleoliquefaction Features

Villamor, Pilar; Almond, Peter C.; Tuttle, Martitia P.; Bucci, Monica Giona; Langridge, Robert; Clark, Kate; Ries, W.; Bastin, Sarah; Eger, André; Vandergoes, M.; Quigley, Mark; Barker, Peter; Martı́n, Francisco; Howarth, Jamie

doi:10.1785/0120150223

Cited by 37 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 62 publications

(75 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Earthquake-induced liquefaction features commonly form in alluvial, coastal, deltaic, and lacustrine deposits of the Holocene age (0.01 Ma to present), where sand is interbedded with silt and clay and shallow groundwater conditions prevail (e.g., References [28][29][30][31][32][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61]). Sedimentological and hydrological conditions in these environments are conducive to the formation of liquefaction features.…”

Section: Conditions That Influence the Formation Of Liquefaction Featmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is a large body of literature on earthquake-induced liquefaction features, including articles about laboratory experiments (e.g., References [90,91]), post-earthquake surveys and studies (e.g., References [6,[26][27][28][29][30][31][32]52,53,58,[92][93][94][95][96]), and paleoliquefaction studies (e.g., References [6,8,9,14,15,[21][22][23][24][25][97][98][99]). In addition, there are reviews on earthquake-induced liquefaction features and criteria for distinguishing them from non-seismic features (e.g., References [2,23,44,51,91,[97][98][99][100]).…”

Section: Earthquake-induced Liquefaction Featuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Earthquake-induced liquefaction features can be divided into two categories: (1) features related to deformation extending beyond the layer that liquefies; and (2) features related to deformation within the sedimentary layer that liquefies. Features that extend beyond the liquefied layer include intrusive dikes, sills, and diapirs, and extrusive sand blows or volcanoes (e.g., References [6,[21][22][23][24]26,[28][29][30][31]92,100,108,109]). Features that form within the liquefied layer include disturbed bedding, dish structures, ball-and-pillow structures, load casts and related folds, pseudonodules, convolute bedding and lamination, and folds related to slumping (e.g., References [21][22][23][24][25]32,44,54,91,[97][98][99][100]110,111]).…”

Section: Earthquake-induced Liquefaction Featuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Alternatively, sand blows may be buried and preserved by subsequent deposits (e.g., References [22,120]. For example, a paleo-sand blow and related dikes that formed between anno Domini (AD) 890 and 1400 were found in a trench of sand blows that formed during the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence [29,30]. The paleoliquefaction features, weathered and partially eroded, were buried and preserved by a crevasse splay deposit.…”

Section: Preservation Of Liquefaction Featuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studies focusing on soft-sediment deformation structures in lacustrine deposits were reported for southern Italy [23], Mexico [24], and Argentina [25]. Recently, several paleoliquefaction studies were carried out in the Canterbury region of New Zealand, where a system of crustal faults, some of which did not rupture the surface, produced the 2010-2011 sequence of earthquakes and caused extensive and recurrent liquefaction (e.g., References [26][27][28][29][30][31][32]). Paleoliquefaction data were used to develop seismic source models for the US national seismic hazard maps [33,34] and for the central and eastern US (CEUS) seismic source characterization for nuclear facilities [35].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Paleoliquefaction Studies and the Evaluation of Seismic Hazard

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent and historical studies of earthquake-induced liquefaction, as well as paleoliquefaction studies, demonstrate the potential usefulness of liquefaction data in the assessment of the earthquake potential of seismic sources. Paleoliquefaction studies, along with other paleoseismology studies, supplement historical and instrumental seismicity and provide information about the long-term behavior of earthquake sources. Paleoliquefaction studies focus on soft-sediment deformation features, including sand blows and sand dikes, which result from strong ground shaking. Most paleoliquefaction studies have been conducted in intraplate geologic settings, but a few such studies have been carried out in interplate settings. Paleoliquefaction studies provide information about timing, location, magnitude, and recurrence of large paleoearthquakes, particularly those with moment magnitude, M, greater than 6 during the past 50,000 years. This review paper presents background information on earthquake-induced liquefaction and resulting soft-sediment deformation features that may be preserved in the geologic record, best practices used in paleoliquefaction studies, and application of paleoliquefaction data in earthquake source characterization. The paper concludes with two examples of regional paleoliquefaction studies-in the Charleston seismic zone and the New Madrid seismic zone in the southeastern and central United States, respectively-which contributed to seismic source models used in earthquake hazard assessment.the New Madrid seismic zone in the central United States (US) (e.g., ), the Charleston seismic zone in the southeastern US (e.g., References [9-12]), and the Charlevoix seismic zone in southeastern Canada [13], where large historical earthquakes are known to have induced liquefaction ( Figure 1). They have been carried out in the Wabash Valley (e.g., References [14,15]) and the Eastern Tennessee [16] seismic zones, where only small to moderate earthquakes occurred during the historical period. In addition, paleoliquefaction studies were conducted in interplate settings like the Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico in the northeastern Caribbean and the Pacific Northwest in the US, where subduction zones and crustal faults pose a significant seismic hazard (e.g., References [3,[17][18][19][20]). Paleoliquefaction studies have been conducted in a lacustrine setting in eastern Turkey [21] and a volcanic setting in southern Italy [22]. Studies focusing on soft-sediment deformation structures in lacustrine deposits were reported for southern Italy [23], Mexico [24], and Argentina [25]. Recently, several paleoliquefaction studies were carried out in the Canterbury region of New Zealand, where a system of crustal faults, some of which did not rupture the surface, produced the 2010-2011 sequence of earthquakes and caused extensive and recurrent liquefaction (e.g., References [26][27][28][29][30][31][32]).Paleoliquefaction data were used to develop seismic source models for the US national seismic hazard maps [33,34] and for t...

show abstract

Section: Conditions That Influence the Formation Of Liquefaction Featmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Earthquake-induced Liquefaction Featuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Earthquake-induced Liquefaction Featuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Preservation Of Liquefaction Featuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Paleoliquefaction Studies and the Evaluation of Seismic Hazard

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Anatomy of modern sedimentary volcanoes produced by gas‐charged groundwater liquefaction, Lake Powell, Hite, Utah: Implications for the recognition and interpretation of ancient sedimentary volcanoes

Wizevich,

Simpson,

Underwood

et al. 2024

The Depositional Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous sedimentary volcanoes, recently exposed on the Colorado River delta surface at Lake Powell near Hite, Utah, were generated by sediment slurries propelled by gas, mainly microbially generated methane (CH4). Two sedimentary volcanoes were excavated, one in 2016 and the other in 2019, in order to characterise the internal structures. Comparison of the internal structures of these features with those of previously documented seismic‐generated sedimentary volcanoes helps in differentiating the various modes of mobilised sediment generation. Sedimentary volcanoes are commonly employed as tools in palaeoseismic reconstruction, thus it is important to establish criteria to differentiate non‐seismic‐generated sedimentary volcanoes and accompanying sediment deformation from those features generated by earthquakes. Trenches through the volcanoes and immediate subsurface areas reveal a complex cone stratigraphy of centimetre‐scale graded sand‐silt laminations and clastic dikes that cross‐cut the cone and sub‐cone (delta) sediment. Some cone strata have ripple cross laminations, a scoured base and are disrupted by soft‐sediment deformation. In the 2016 volcano, the lowest 0.5 m of the dikes exposed in the trench are filled with organic‐rich mud, but these conduits are empty nearer to the surface as a result of sediment settling after eruption cessation. The 2019 sedimentary volcano differs from the other by: (1) more cross laminations in the cone, (2) collapse structures surrounding the crater, (3) a relatively simple plumbing system assisted by desiccation‐generated fissures and (4) a massive sediment infill of the vent. Both complex internal cone stratigraphy and the two distinct cross‐cutting dike‐conduit systems, unequivocally generated by recurrent gas and water discharge, add to the database of features for non‐seismic‐generated sedimentary volcanoes. This array of sedimentary structures from a non‐seismic‐generated sedimentary volcano demonstrates that certain features, including numerous internal laminations composing the cone and complex generations of dike systems are not unique to seismic‐generated sand volcanoes.

show abstract