2003
DOI: 10.1785/0120030046
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Local Earthquake Wave Propagation through Mississippi Embayment Sediments, Part I: Body-Wave Phases and Local Site Responses

Abstract: P and S body waves from microearthquakes in the New Madrid Seismic Zone (NMSZ) are investigated at selected sites in an effort to understand wave propagation from future large earthquakes. Earthquake body waveforms display distinctive features that constrain the nature of P-and S-wave local site responses and wave propagation within the unconsolidated Mississippi embayment sediments. Modeling of the waveforms demonstrates that a near-surface low-velocity zone is characteristic of structure within the upper 60 … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
31
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 56 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
4
31
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus v P /v S is about 4.3, which is much higher than 1.73 of Poisson solid. Similar ratio of v P /v S is also found by Langston (2003a). The near surface velocity of sediment basin is so low that waves will travel much slower in this layer, so attention should be paid to especially when traveling time of P or S is used to study the deeper structure in tomography modeling or locating earthquakes.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 71%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Thus v P /v S is about 4.3, which is much higher than 1.73 of Poisson solid. Similar ratio of v P /v S is also found by Langston (2003a). The near surface velocity of sediment basin is so low that waves will travel much slower in this layer, so attention should be paid to especially when traveling time of P or S is used to study the deeper structure in tomography modeling or locating earthquakes.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…Also many other studies indicated that the Q values for both P and S waves showed substantial variability within range from extremely low Q (~10) to moderate values of about 25 (Boatwright et al, 1986;Hauksson et al, 1987;Malin et al, 1988;Seale and Archuleta, 1989;Blakeslee and Malin, 1991;Aster and Shearer, 1991). Langston even argued that Q S must be significantly greater than 30 and is probably around 100 after detailed body wave analysis and surface wave modeling (Langston, 2002(Langston, , 2003aLangston et al, 2005). He attributed the low Q S from spectral studies to neglect of complexity in velocity structure (Langston, 2003a, b).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Distribution of (a) Vp/Vs and (b) Qp/Qs ratios versus the thermal gradient (K km -1 ) map by field investigation. A Vp/Vs ratio of 2.7 is considered the average value of the unconsolidated sediments referring to Langston (2003), and a Qs/Qp ratio of 1.0 is considered the boundary between dry and fully saturated rocks, according to an experimental study (Winkler and Nur 1982) …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…That estimate is consistent with the results cited previously from California and also with results by Liu et al (1994) from similar work in the Mississippi Embayment. On the other hand, Langston (2004aLangston ( , 2004b presented an assessment of potential bias in the quantification of attenuation. On the basis of modeling microearthquake waveforms in the Mississippi Embayment, he found evidence for much higher values of Q in that area.…”
Section: Shear Modulus and Damping Behavior As A Function Of Shear Stmentioning
confidence: 99%