4.4 Article

Three-Dimensional Seismic-Velocity Model for the Unconsolidated Mississippi Embayment Sediments from H/V Ambient Noise Measurements

Journal

BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA
Volume 104, Issue 5, Pages 2349-2358

Publisher

SEISMOLOGICAL SOC AMER
DOI: 10.1785/0120140026

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Center for Earthquake Research and Information (CERI)
  2. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Department of Interior, under USGS Award [G10AP00008]
  3. National Science Foundation [1053530]
  4. Division Of Earth Sciences
  5. Directorate For Geosciences [1053530] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The horizontal-to-vertical (H/V) technique by Nakamura (1989) was applied to data from 30 new field stations and 64 other broadband temporary and permanent seismic stations within the Mississippi Embayment of the central United States to develop a 3D model of unconsolidated sediment shear-wave velocity structure. Using the Dart (1992) map of sediment thickness as a basis, two self-consistent models of average shear-wave velocity versus sediment thickness were developed by utilizing the theoretical linear relationship between the frequency of the H/V peak and shear-wave velocity. One model was based on the observation that the H/V peak period T-p (s) versus sediment thickness h (m) was seen to be approximately linear with the relationship T-p = 0.003266h + 1.084. The second model was developed by considering peak frequency f(p) versus sediment thickness parameterized to follow ln f(p) = 8.325 x 10(-7) h(2) - 0.00232h - 0.01796. Overall, the models show low-average shear-wave velocity near the edge of the Mississippi Embayment with velocities increasing with increasing sediment thickness, consistent with increased sediment compaction. These models will be useful in studies of site resonance and amplification for earthquake-shaking hazards and for wave propagation computations for the region.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available