BRIEFBRIEF OVERVIEWOVERVIEW OFOF SEISMICSEISMIC THREATTHREAT POSEDPOSED BYBY THETHE NEWNEW MADRIDMADRID SEISMICSEISMIC ZONEZONE

J.J. DavidDavid Rogers,Rogers, Ph.D.,Ph.D., P.E.,P.E., R.G.,R.G., C.E.G.C.E.G. Karl F. Hasselmann Chair in Geological Engineering Natural Hazards Mitigation Institute University of Missouri-Rolla EARTHQUAKESEARTHQUAKES

„ 44 millionmillion earthquakesearthquakes occuroccur everyevery year;year; oror aboutabout 11,00011,000 eacheach dayday „ AboutAbout 6,2006,200 quakesquakes areare strongstrong enoughenough forfor peoplepeople toto noticenotice „ AboutAbout 800800 damagingdamaging quakesquakes betweenbetween MagnitudeMagnitude 5.05.0 andand 5.95.9 eacheach yearyear „ AboutAbout 120120 destructivedestructive quakesquakes withwith MagnitudesMagnitudes 6.06.0 toto 6.96.9 eacheach yearyear „ DespiteDespite improvedimproved buildingbuilding codes,codes, aboutabout 15,00015,000 peoplepeople areare killedkilled eacheach yearyear QUAKESQUAKES KILLKILL PEOPLEPEOPLE

„ InIn 1556,1556, 830,000830,000 peoplepeople werewere killedkilled inin ShensiShensi,, ChinaChina „ 180,000180,000 killedkilled nearnear KansouKansou,, ChinaChina inin 19201920 quakequake „ 9,5009,500 peoplepeople werewere killedkilled andand 30,00030,000 injuredinjured inin MexicoMexico CityCity inin SeptemberSeptember 19851985 byby aa M8.1M8.1 earthquakeearthquake 350350 kmkm away!away! „ InIn 2003,2003, 43,81943,819 peoplepeople werewere killedkilled byby earthquakesearthquakes worldwideworldwide „ GeologyGeology beneathbeneath sitesite isis justjust asas importantimportant asas quakequake magnitudemagnitude

EarthquakeEarthquake MagnitudeMagnitude versusversus EnergyEnergy ReleaseRelease

„ Modern earthquake magnitudes are based on energy release using a logarithmic scale „ Each numerical magnitude is about 33X the energy release of preceding numerical value „ In 1663 the European settlers experienced their first earthquake in America. From 1975-1995 there were only four states that did not have any earthquakes: Florida, Iowa, North Dakota, and Wisconsin. The most damaging earthquakes have occurred in California, Nevada and Alaska. Should we be concerned in the Midwest? „ Isoseismal lines for the December 16, 1811 Ms 8.6 New Madrid earthquake „ Felt over an area greater than 1 million square miles „ Extensive damage to masonry in Cincinnati „ Rang church bells in Boston „ Most people lived along rivers in Midwest and no inhabitants west of the Mississippi NEWNEW MADRIDMADRID STRESSSTRESS FIELDFIELD

„ SolutionSolution forfor distributiondistribution ofof thethe elasticelastic stressstress fieldfield inin thethe crustalcrustal basementbasement atat aa depthdepth ofof 1212 kmkm forfor earthquakesearthquakes feltfelt inin latelate 18111811 andand earlyearly 18121812 NEWNEW MADRIDMADRID SEISMICSEISMIC ZONEZONE

„ 20002000 quakesquakes inin NewNew MadridMadrid SeismicSeismic ZoneZone inin 18111811--12;12; fourfour withwith M>M> 7.57.5 „ FeltFelt overover 11 millionmillion squaresquare miles!miles! „ ChimneysChimneys toppledtoppled inin Cincinnati,Cincinnati, Ohio,Ohio, 560560 kmkm awayaway „ RaisedRaised andand loweredlowered vastvast tractstracts ofof landland asas muchmuch asas 2020 feet,feet, temporarilytemporarily reversingreversing flowflow ofof MississippiMississippi RiverRiver „ GroundGround fissuresfissures andand massivemassive liquefactionliquefaction overover aa zonezone measuringmeasuring 240240 xx 8080 km!km! POSTPOST 18121812 SEISMICITYSEISMICITY inin NEWNEW MADRIDMADRID SEISMICSEISMIC ZONEZONE

„ M6.3M6.3 quakequake inin MarkedMarked Tree,Tree, ARAR inin 1843;1843; diddid considerableconsiderable damagedamage toto Memphis,Memphis, 6060--7070 kmkm easteast „ M6.6M6.6 quakequake inin Charleston,Charleston, MOMO inin 1895;1895; FeltFelt inin 2323 states,states, 3030 kmkm ofof sandsand blowsblows „ M5.4M5.4 inin WabashWabash ValleyValley (Dale,(Dale, IL)IL) inin 1968;1968; alsoalso feltfelt inin 2323 states;states; lightlight damagedamage inin St.St. LouisLouis „ M5.0M5.0 inin WabashWabash ValleyValley westwest ofof Vincennes,Vincennes, ININ (Olney,(Olney, IL)IL) inin 19871987 „ M4.6M4.6 nearnear Evansville,Evansville, ININ inin 20022002 AACTIVECTIVE SEISMICITYSEISMICITY

„ EpicentersEpicenters recordedrecorded betweenbetween 19741974--9696 describedescribe aa seismicallyseismically activeactive zonezone ofof complexcomplex intraplateintraplate tectonicstectonics „ RightRight laterallateral strikestrike slipslip andand blindblind thrustthrust faultingfaulting occuroccur inin thethe samesame regionregion OTHEROTHER SEISMICSEISMIC SOURCESSOURCES

„ NotNot allall ofof thethe region’sregion’s quakesquakes emanateemanate fromfrom thethe recognizedrecognized NewNew MadridMadrid ZoneZone „ OtherOther sourcessources likelylikely DAMAGEDAMAGE POTENTIALPOTENTIAL

„Published damage predictions for the New Madrid Seismic Zone have focused on the near field area, in the upper Mississippi Valley

„These are based on synthetic motion time histories with assumed soil cover; not on site specific characteristics or dynamic properties of structures. EARTHQUAKEEARTHQUAKE MECHANISMSMECHANISMS THATTHAT COMMONLYCOMMONLY IMPACTIMPACT STRUCTURESSTRUCTURES

„ SurfaceSurface faultfault rupturerupture hazardshazards „ GroundGround waveswaves andand flingfling effectseffects „ TopographicTopographic enhancementenhancement ofof seismicseismic energyenergy „ DynamicDynamic consolidationconsolidation ofof soilssoils „ LiquefactionLiquefaction andand laterallateral spreadingspreading „ SiteSite amplificationamplification effectseffects „ LongLong periodperiod motionmotion andand resonantresonant frequencyfrequency effectseffects „ OutOut--ofof--phasephase structuralstructural responseresponse SURFACESURFACE FAULTFAULT RUPTURERUPTURE HAZARDSHAZARDS

Anastomosing fault splays

„ Major active faults usually exteendnd up to the groundground surface, where they can pose a threat to structures. Only about 2% of earthquake-induced structural damage is caused by surface fault rupture. Various fault strands identified near the ground surface may be active, dormant or ancient, as shown above. SURFACESURFACE RUPTURERUPTURE

„ OnlyOnly aa smallsmall percentagepercentage ofof earthquakesearthquakes actuallyactually causecause noticeablenoticeable surfacesurface faultfault rupturerupture „ SometimesSometimes itit isis ratherrather discretediscrete (upper(upper left)left) „ OnOn otherother occasionsoccasions itit cancan bebe veryvery abruptabrupt andand graphicgraphic (lower(lower left)left) FREEFREE BOUNDARY/BOUNDARY/ GROUNDGROUND WAVEWAVE EFFECTEFFECT

„ As the seismic wave train propagates upward and along the Earth’s surface, the peak ground accelerations will tend to increase at the ground surface because there is no confinement. Tunnels and underground openings usually record much lower values of acceleration due to their increased confinement. TOPOGRAPHICTOPOGRAPHIC INFLUENCEINFLUENCE ONON SITESITE RESPONSERESPONSE

„ Steep-sided bedrock ridges usually experience much higher accelerations during earthquakes because they are less laterally constrained. In the October 1989 Loma Prieta earthquakearthquakee the PGA of 0.77g was recordedrecorded in thethe valley bottombottom at Corralitos. Estimates of PGA values for the adjoining ridges were in excess of 1.30g. „ Fill embankments tend to consolidate and settle under dynamic loading in the near-field zone „ Regardless of the compactive effort engendered to filled ground during placement, these materials tend to compress during earthquake- induced shaking, often causing abrupt settlement of the approach fills at the abutments. „ MechanismMechanism ofof seismicallyseismically--inducedinduced settlementsettlement ofof bridgebridge approachapproach fillfill prismsprisms QUAKEQUAKE--INDUCEDINDUCED SETTLEMENTSETTLEMENT

„ ApproachApproach fillsfills forfor pilepile supportedsupported bridgesbridges commonlycommonly exhibitexhibit grievousgrievous differentialdifferential settlementsettlement „ ImpactsImpacts traffictraffic flowflow andand anyany entrainedentrained utilities,utilities, likelike firefire mainsmains „ TheseThese examplesexamples areare fromfrom AugAug 19991999 ChiChi ChiChi earthquakeearthquake inin TaiwanTaiwan APPROACHAPPROACH FILLFILL SETTLEMENTSETTLEMENT

„ SeismicallySeismically--inducedinduced settlementsettlement andand lurchinglurching ofof approachapproach fillsfills forfor thethe CayumapaCayumapa RiverRiver BridgeBridge nearnear ValdiviaValdivia,, Chile,Chile, whichwhich occurredoccurred duringduring thethe M9.5M9.5 MayMay 19601960 earthquakeearthquake „ ReplacementReplacement structurestructure beingbeing constructedconstructed inin lowerlower view,view, usingusing GeofoamGeofoam „ TschebotarioffTschebotarioff (1973)(1973) presentedpresented casecase studiesstudies ofof pilepile supportedsupported bridgesbridges thatthat failedfailed becausebecause ofof approachapproach fillfill settlementsettlement.. SETTLEMENTSETTLEMENT OFOF APPROACHAPPROACH FILLFILL

„ Crib wall supported approach fill for pile supported bridge. As fill consolidated, crib wall deformed and supporting piles deflected inward, towards channel. Taken from Tschetarioff (1973). LIQUEFACTIONLIQUEFACTION

„ BridgeBridge failuresfailures duringduring AprilApril 19911991 M7.5M7.5 CostaCosta RicaRica earthquakeearthquake „ ThoughThough supportedsupported onon steelsteel andand concreteconcrete pilespiles respectively,respectively, thesethese bridgesbridges bothboth failedfailed duedue toto liquefactionliquefaction ofof foundationfoundation materials,materials, whichwhich tiltedtilted thethe pilespiles LIQUEFACTIONLIQUEFACTION Liquefaction is a failure mechanism by which cohesionless materials lose shear strength when the pore pressure is excited to a level equal to the effective confining stress. Usually limited to the upper 50 feet and typically occurs in silt, sand and fine gravel. „ RecentRecent sandsand blowsblows dotdot thethe landscapelandscape surroundingsurrounding NewNew Madrid,Madrid, MO,MO, testifyingtestifying toto massivemassive liquefactionliquefaction „ EnormousEnormous tractstracts ofof landland exhibitexhibit evidenceevidence ofof paleoliquefactionpaleoliquefaction –– onon aa grandiosegrandiose scalescale „ FarmFarm landslands westwest ofof BigBig Lake,Lake, ARAR revealreveal aa seriesseries ofof linearlinear fissuresfissures whichwhich disgorgeddisgorged liquefiedliquefied sandsand fromfrom beneathbeneath aa siltsilt covercover.. PALEOLIQUEFACTIONPALEOLIQUEFACTION STUDIESSTUDIES

„ C14C14 datingdating ofof organicsorganics caughtcaught inin sandsand boilsboils andand dikesdikes areare usedused toto datedate pastpast earthquakes.earthquakes. ThreeThree M7.5M7.5 toto M8M8 paleoeventspaleoevents havehave beenbeen conclusivelyconclusively dated:dated: ~1450,~1450, ~900~900 andand ~550~550 AD.AD. PaleoliquefactionPaleoliquefaction AssessmentsAssessments

1811-12

1450 AD

900 AD

550 AD

Shaded orange lines show most probable ages of major earthquakes in the NMSZ prior to 1811-12 (shown as dashed line) LiquefactionLiquefaction ofof ConfinedConfined HorizonsHorizons CausesCauses LateralLateral SpreadsSpreads

„ Lateral spreads were initially recognized and identified by USGS geologist Myron Fuller while studying the effects of the 1811-12 New Madrid earthquakes between 1905-12. Fuller made the sketch above, noting that: “The depth of the openings was not usually very great, probably being in most cases limited to the hard clayey zone extending from the surface down to the quicksand which usually underlies the surface soil at depths of from 10 to 20 feet.” Block diagram of a lateral spread which evolved from post- 1964 earthquake evaluations in Alaska by Walt Hansen in USGS Professional Paper 542-A (1966) LATERALLATERAL SPREADINGSPREADING

„ Lateral spreads can exhibit different length-to-depth ratios, depending on soil sensitivity. Liquefaction occurs along discrete horizons which are confined, allowing lateral translation of rafted material, usually towards open channels or depressions. TopographicTopographic ExpressionExpression ofof LateralLateral SpreadsSpreads NearNear Helena,Helena, ArkansasArkansas

„ DivergentDivergent contourscontours „ SteppedStepped topographytopography „ HeadscarpHeadscarp evacuationevacuation grabensgrabens „ ArcuateArcuate headscarpsheadscarps JeffersonvilleJeffersonville LateralLateral SpreadSpread AlongAlong Crowley’sCrowley’s RidgeRidge ~~ 2525 kmkm northnorth ofof Helena,Helena, ArkansasArkansas CrossCross--sectionsection throughthrough JeffersonvilleJeffersonville LateralLateral SpreadSpread andand Crowley’sCrowley’s RidgeRidge

The Jeffersonville Lateral Spread feature appears to have been triggered by the 1811-12 New Madrid earthquake sequence, with the ground translating easterly into the L’Anguille River, near its mouth with the St. Francis River. The eastern escarpment of Crowley’s Ridge is peppered with similar features. „ The type, depth and size of earthquake combine with geophysical properties of the underlying geology to affect seismic site response WHATWHAT ISIS SITESITE RESPONSERESPONSE ??

„ Site response is used to describe the fundamental period of vibration generated by a typical earthquake at any particular site. If soft unconsolidated sediments overlie resistant bedrock an impedance contrast develops at this boundary which causes incoming seismic energy to be absorbed at a rate faster than it can be transferred through the upper layers, causing significant amplification of ground motions. SOFTSOFT SEDIMENTSSEDIMENTS UNDERLYINGUNDERLYING MEXICOMEXICO CITYCITY

„ Generalized geologic cross section of the southern margins of the lacustrine basin underlying Mexico City. The lacustrine sediments were covered with fill as the city developed. These soft materials amplified the incoming seismic wave train from a M.8.1 earthquake located 52 km off the coast of Michoacan Province, some 350 km from Mexico City! ZONEZONE OFOF HEAVIESTHEAVIEST DAMAGEDAMAGE DURINGDURING 19851985 MEXICOMEXICO CITYCITY EARTHQUAKEEARTHQUAKE

„ Computed distribution of peak ground surface accelerations for typical soil profiles in Mexico City, bounding the zone that experienced severe damage during the 1985 M. 8.1 Michoacan earthquake. The earthquake epicenter was 350 km from Mexico City and lasted close to 3 minutes. More than 500 buildings within the highlighted zone were severely damaged and 100 buildings between 6 and 22 stories high actually collapsed; killing 9,500, injuring 30,000 and leaving 100,000 homeless. VARIANCE OF RESPONSE SPECTRA WITH SEDIMENT THICKNESS IN MEXICO CITY

„ Response spectra calculated for different thicknesses of soft sediments in southern Mexico City, between downtown and Chapultepec Heights. Note impact of 30 to 45 m thickness. MODESMODES OFOF VIBRATIONVIBRATION

„ All structures posses fundamental modes of vibration which depend on their skeletal make-up: including material type, shear panels, connections, span distances and symmetry. „ This fundamental mode is known as the “first mode of vibration” and it generally controls the seismic design of most symmetrical structures. „ Secondary modes of vibration become increasingly important in complex structures with asymmetrical form or stiffness, or structures with damaged frames. SITESITE RESPONSERESPONSE VERSUSVERSUS STRUCTURALSTRUCTURAL RESPONSERESPONSE

„ The fundamental period of vibration of any structure depends on its design and construction details. If the site period and structural period converge, a resonant frequency results which may be an order of magnitude greater than the natural site period, and the structure will be severely damaged or destroyed. OUTOUT--OFOF--PHASEPHASE MOTIONMOTION

„ Adjacent structures can react differently to seismic excitation, depending on focal aspects of incoming energy, long period motion, site amplification, and degrading structural response as frames become damaged „ Recently, the destructive effects of the 1811-12 New Madrid events has been attributed to site amplification effects, since most of the inhabited areas were in Holocene channels along major drainages. „ This is a revised map illustrating shaking severity for the January 23, 1812 event, thought to have been something between M7.5 and M8.0 GeologyGeology NorthernNorthern MississippiMississippi EmbaymentEmbayment

Impedance contrasts within the Wisconsin age river channels (yellow) likely pose the greatest seismic threat to highway infrastructure in the Midwest. WHATWHAT ISIS THETHE DESIGNDESIGN EARTHQUAKE?EARTHQUAKE?

„ >M7.5>M7.5 inin ~550~550 „ >M7.5>M7.5 inin ~900~900 „ >M7.5>M7.5 inin ~1450~1450 „ M7.5+M7.5+ inin 18111811 „ M8.0M8.0 inin 18121812 „ M6.3M6.3 inin 18431843 „ M6.6M6.6 inin 18951895 „ M5.4M5.4 inin 19681968 „ M5.0M5.0 inin 19871987 „ M4.6M4.6 inin 20022002 RecurrenceRecurrence IntervalsIntervals forfor NewNew MadridMadrid EarthquakeEarthquake Events*Events*

Magnitude Recurrence Interval 4.0 14 Months 5.0 10 – 12 Years 6.0 70 – 90 Years 7.0 254 – 500 Years 8.0 550 – 1200 Years

* based on existing data; always subject to update and revision „ 18951895 M6.6M6.6 Charleston,Charleston, MOMO earthquakeearthquake 18951895 M6.6M6.6 Charleston,Charleston, MOMO QuakeQuake

„ October 31, 1895 Magnitude 6.6 Earthquake near Charleston Missouri. Modified Mercalli Intensity VIII „ Largest earthquake to occur in the Mississippi Valley region since the 1811-1812 New Madrid earthquake sequence. The estimated body-wave magnitude of this event is 5.9 and the surface-wave magnitude estimate is 6.7. „ People in 23 states felt this earthquake which caused extensive damage. to a number of structures in the Charleston region, including schools, churches, and homes. Structural damage and liquefaction were reported along a line from Bertrand, MO to Cairo, IL. The most severe damage occurred in Charleston, Puxico, and Taylor, Missouri; Alton, and Cairo, Illinois; Princeton, Indiana; and Paducah, Kentucky. „ The earthquake caused extensive damage (including downed chimneys, cracked walls, shattered windows, and broken plaster) to school buildings, churches, private houses, and to almost all the buildings in the commercial section of Charleston, MO. That’s the reason the epicenter was assumed to be near Charleston. IllinoisIllinois CentralCentral BridgeBridge atat Cairo,Cairo, ILIL

„ TheThe IllinoisIllinois CentralCentral RailroadRailroad bridgebridge acrossacross thethe OhioOhio RiverRiver atat Cairo,Cairo, ILIL waswas thethe longestlongest ironiron oror steelsteel bridgebridge inin worldworld At low water whenwhen completedcompleted inin 18891889 (4(4 miles).miles). „ OneOne ofof itsits masonrymasonry bentsbents waswas crackedcracked andand severelyseverely damageddamaged duringduring OctOct 18951895 Charleston,Charleston, MOMO quakequake At high water SHAKING INTENSITY versus DISTANCE

Midwest quakes are less frequent, but much more lethal than California quakes because there is less damping of seismic energy. Areas affected by earthquakes of similar magnitude - the December

1811 Ms8.0 New Madrid and Ms8.3 1906 San Francisco earthquakes. The red zones denote areas of minor to major damage. The three largest New Madrid quakes affected more than 10X area San Francisco quake, deadliest in US history. „ AreasAreas affectedaffected byby earthquakesearthquakes ofof similarsimilar magnitudemagnitude –– thethe M6.8M6.8 18951895 Charleston,Charleston, MOMO andand M6.7M6.7 19941994 NorthridgeNorthridge earthquakes.earthquakes. CurrentCurrent andand ProposedProposed MODOTMODOT StandardsStandards forfor SeismicSeismic DesignDesign

„ GreenGreen lineslines areare currentcurrent ASSHTOASSHTO designdesign parametersparameters usingusing USGSUSGS 10%10% PEPE (1988)(1988) „ RedRed lineslines areare proposedproposed designdesign parametersparameters usingusing USGSUSGS 2%2% PEPE (1996)(1996) http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/seismic/modot.htm SCREENINGSCREENING ANALYSESANALYSES

„ RiskRisk assessmentassessment isis perhapsperhaps thethe mostmost nefariousnefarious aspectaspect ofof ourour profession.profession. IfIf wewe wantedwanted toto knowknow thethe 100100 yearyear recurrencerecurrence frequencyfrequency flood,flood, wewe wouldwould needneed 10001000 yearsyears ofof flowflow records.records. „ WeWe havehave aa significantsignificant riskrisk ofof futurefuture destructivedestructive earthquakesearthquakes inin thethe Midwest.Midwest. But,But, ourour probabalisticprobabalistic modelsmodels areare basedbased solelysolely onon datadata gatheredgathered fromfrom thethe NewNew MadridMadrid SeismicSeismic Zone,Zone, ignoringignoring otherother likelylikely sources.sources. „ ScreeningScreening analysesanalyses allowallow usus toto identifyidentify thethe structuresstructures withwith thethe greatestgreatest riskrisk--consequenceconsequence ofof failurefailure andand prioritizeprioritize bridgesbridges basedbased onon seismicseismic vulnerability.vulnerability. EXAMPLEEXAMPLE SCREENINGSCREENING ANALYSISANALYSIS

„ AA preliminarypreliminary sitesite responseresponse evaluationevaluation waswas undertakenundertaken onon threethree bridgebridge sitessites alongalong thethe MissouriMissouri River,River, locatedlocated betweenbetween 215215 andand 257257 kmkm fromfrom thethe NewNew MadridMadrid SeismicSeismic Zone.Zone. „ InIn ourour lifetimes,lifetimes, thethe mostmost likelylikely earthquakeearthquake toto impactimpact thesethese structuresstructures wouldwould bebe aa repeatrepeat ofof thethe M6.6M6.6 Charleston,Charleston, MOMO quakequake ofof 1895,1895, whichwhich hashas aa recurrencerecurrence frequencyfrequency ofof 70+/70+/-- 1515 yearsyears (overdue(overdue sincesince 1980).1980). TECHNICALTECHNICAL APPROACHAPPROACH

„ ModelModel oneone--dimensionaldimensional equivalentequivalent linearlinear sitesite responseresponse andand liquefactionliquefaction susceptibilitysusceptibility atat thethe bridgebridge sites.sites. „ LiquefactionLiquefaction potentialpotential assessedassessed throughthrough aa twotwo partpart qualitativequalitative andand quantitativequantitative analysis.analysis. „ GenerateGenerate artificialartificial timetime historieshistories usingusing Boore’sBoore’s (2001)(2001) SMSIMSMSIM codecode forfor basebase rockrock inputinput motions.motions. „ SimulationSimulation ofof seismicseismic wavewave propagationpropagation throughthrough thethe surficialsurficial materialsmaterials usingusing thethe programprogram DEEPSOILDEEPSOIL byby ParkPark andand HashashHashash (2003).(2003). MissouriMissouri RiverRiver BridgesBridges withwith HighHigh QualityQuality GeotechnicalGeotechnical DataData

„ PagePage ExtensionExtension MissouriMissouri RiverRiver BridgeBridge exploredexplored inin 1996.1996. 215215 kmkm fromfrom NMSZNMSZ

„ PagePage ExtensionExtension CreveCreve CoeurCoeur LakeLake MemorialMemorial ParkPark BridgeBridge exploredexplored inin 1996.1996. 215215 kmkm fromfrom NMSZNMSZ

„ ProposedProposed StateState RouteRoute 1919 replacementreplacement forfor Hermann,Hermann, MissouriMissouri BridgeBridge exploredexplored inin 1999.1999. 257257 kmkm fromfrom thethe NMSZNMSZ

„ Long period motions (T > 1.0 second) of great import when evaluating structures > 160 km from the quake hypocenter „ WeWe cancan estimateestimate thethe fundamentalfundamental sitesite periodperiod withwith somesome basicbasic data.data. TheThe periodperiod willwill changechange withwith locationlocation inin aa parabolicparabolic shapedshaped channel.channel. „ Site amplification is a function of the Impedance Ratio between the valley fill and the underlying basement rock. Impedance Ratios in Midwestern US channels are among the most excessive examples identified anywhere in the world. EstimatingEstimating VVs fromfrom (N(N1))60

„Andrus et al., 2004 SHEARSHEAR WAVEWAVE VELOCITYVELOCITY CORRELATIONSCORRELATIONS

„Andrus et al., 2004 „ If we attempted to model the dynamic system created by the channel’s interaction with an extremely long bridge structure, we would have to consider lateral and vertical incoherence of the foundations. This is usually performed in a full-blown dynamic analysis, not in a screening analysis. UNDERLYINGUNDERLYING GEOLOGYGEOLOGY

„ TheThe MissouriMissouri RiverRiver bridgesbridges areare foundedfounded onon upup toto 3131 mm ofof unconsolidatedunconsolidated loess,loess, channelchannel sands,sands, silts,silts, andand oxbowoxbow clays/silts.clays/silts. „ ChannelChannel fillfill isis unconsolidatedunconsolidated HoloceneHolocene ageage material;material; mostlymostly saturatedsaturated channelchannel sandssands withwith lowlow relativerelative densitydensity „ UnderlyingUnderlying bedrockbedrock isis stiffstiff PaleozoicPaleozoic ageage limestone,limestone, dolomite,dolomite, andand shale.shale. „ AllAll threethree bridgesbridges crosscross asymmetricasymmetric channelschannels,, withwith bedrockbedrock onon oneone abutmentabutment andand unconsolidatedunconsolidated sedimentsediment beneathbeneath thethe other.other.

GenerationGeneration ofof ArtificialArtificial TimeTime HistoriesHistories

„ ArtificialArtificial timetime historieshistories werewere generatedgenerated usingusing SMSIMSMSIM codecode developeddeveloped byby DaveDave BooreBoore ofof thethe USGSUSGS andand modifiedmodified byby BobBob HerrmannHerrmann atat St.St. LouisLouis UniversityUniversity forfor MidwestMidwest deepdeep soilsoil sites.sites.

Model NAME SITE EFFECT

1 Atkinson-Boore 1995 (AB95) ENA Hard Rock

2 USGS 1996 Generic B-C Boundary

3 USGS 1996 (modified) Mid-Continent Deep Soil (new) 4 Mid-America Deep Soil AB95 source (modified) Mid-Continent Deep Soil (new) 5 Mid-America Deep Soil USGS 96 source Mid-Continent Deep Soil (modified) (new) ARTIFICIALARTIFICIAL TIMETIME HISTORIESHISTORIES FORFOR SCREENINGSCREENING ANALYSESANALYSES GENERATEDGENERATED FORFOR THREETHREE HISTORICHISTORIC EVENTSEVENTS EMANATINGEMANATING FROMFROM THETHE NEWNEW MADRIDMADRID SEISMICSEISMIC ZONE:ZONE:

„ 1616 DecDec 18111811 MMs8.68.6 == M7.3M7.3 eventevent

„ 77 FebFeb 18121812 MMs 8.08.0 == M7.5M7.5 eventevent

„ 3131 OctOct 18951895 MMs 6.86.8 == M6.6M6.6 eventevent PagePage AvenueAvenue MissouriMissouri RiverRiver BridgeBridge ArtificialArtificial TimeTime HistoriesHistories

Page Extension, Missouri River Bridge Page Extension, Missouri River Bridge Page Extension, Missouri River Bridge 1811 Event 1812 Event 1895 Event

0.2 0.25 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.08 0.1 0.15 0.06 0.05 0.1 0.04 0.05 ) ) 0 ) 0.02 g 0 A (g

A (g 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 -0.05 A ( 0 -0.05 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 -0.1 -0.02 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 -0.1 -0.04 -0.15 -0.15 -0.2 -0.2 -0.06 -0.25 -0.25 -0.08 Time (sec) Time (sec) Time (sec)

0.2 0.3 0.06 0.15 0.2 0.04 0.1

0.05 0.02 0.1 ) ) ) s 0 / 0 /s /s m 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 m 0 m 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 -0.05 V ( V ( 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 V ( -0.02 -0.1 -0.1 -0.04 -0.15 -0.2 -0.2 -0.06

-0.3 -0.25 -0.08 Time (sec) Time (sec) Time (sec)

0.25 0.3 0.03 0.2 0.02 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.01 0.1 0.05

) 0 ) ) m 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 0 D ( 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 D (m D (m -0.01 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 -0.05

-0.1 -0.1 -0.02 -0.15 -0.2 -0.03 -0.2

-0.25 -0.04 -0.3 Time (sec) Time (sec) Time (sec)

„1811 „1812 „1895 CreveCreve CoeurCoeur LakeLake BridgeBridge ArtificialArtificial TimeTime HistoriesHistories Page Extension, Creve Coeur Lake Memorial Park Page Extension, Creve Coeur Lake Memorial Park Page Extension, Creve Coeur Lake Memorial Park Bridge Bridge Bridge 1811 Event 1812 Event 1895 Event

0.2 0.25 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.08 0.1 0.15 0.06 0.1 0.05 0.04 0.05 ) ) 0 )

g 0.02 0 g

A ( 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 -0.05 A (g A ( 0 -0.05 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 -0.1 -0.1 -0.02 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 -0.15 -0.15 -0.04 -0.2 -0.2 -0.06 -0.25 -0.25 -0.08 Time (sec) Time (sec) Time (sec)

0.3 0.25 0.06 0.2 0.2 0.04 0.15

0.1 0.1 0.02 0.05 ) ) ) /s /s 0 s / m 0 m 0

m 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 V ( 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 V ( 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

-0.05 V ( -0.02 -0.1 -0.1 -0.04 -0.15 -0.2 -0.2 -0.06 -0.3 -0.25 -0.08 Time (sec) Time (sec) Time (sec)

0.3 0.25 0.03 0.2 0.02 0.2 0.15

0.1 0.01 0.1 0.05 0 ) ) )

0 0 m 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 D ( D (m D (m 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 -0.01 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 -0.05 -0.1 -0.1 -0.02 -0.15 -0.2 -0.03 -0.2

-0.3 -0.25 -0.04 Time (sec) Time (sec) Time (sec)

„1811 „1812 „1895 HermannHermann BridgeBridge SiteSite ArtificialArtificial TimeTime HistoriesHistories Proposed Hermann Bridge Proposed Hermann Bridge Proposed Hermann Bridge 1811 Event 1812 Event 1895 Event

0.2 0.2 0.08

0.15 0.15 0.06 0.1 0.1 0.04 0.05 0.05 ) ) ) 0.02 g g 0 0 A (g A ( A ( 0 -0.05 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 -0.05 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 -0.02 -0.1 -0.1 -0.15 -0.15 -0.04 -0.2 -0.2 -0.06 Time (sec) Time (sec) Time (sec)

0.3 0.2 0.05

0.25 0.15 0.04 0.2 0.03 0.1 0.15 0.02 0.1 0.05

) 0.01 ) ) /s /s /s 0.05

m 0 m m 0

0 V ( 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 V ( V ( 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 -0.01 -0.05 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 -0.05 -0.02 -0.1 -0.1 -0.15 -0.03 -0.15 -0.2 -0.04 -0.25 -0.2 -0.05 Time (sec) Time (sec) Time (sec)

0.3 0.2 0.02

0.15 0.015 0.2 0.01 0.1 0.005 0.1 0.05 0 ) ) ) m

m 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 0 0 -0.005 D ( D ( 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 D (m -0.01 -0.05 -0.1 -0.015 -0.1 -0.02 -0.2 -0.15 -0.025

-0.3 -0.2 -0.03 Time (sec) Time (sec) Time (sec)

„1811 1812 1895 ScreeningScreening AnalysisAnalysis forfor LiquefactionLiquefaction PotentialPotential

„ RecommendRecommend using:using: T.T. L.L. Youd,1998,Youd,1998, ScreeningScreening GuideGuide forfor RapidRapid AssessmentAssessment ofof LiquefactionLiquefaction HazardHazard atat HighwayHighway BridgeBridge SitesSites:: TechnicalTechnical ReportReport MCEERMCEER--9898--00050005 „ ItIt employsemploys aa QualitativeQualitative AnalysisAnalysis;; andand „ AA QuantitativeQuantitative AnalysisAnalysis „ GoodGood ideaidea toto includeinclude bothboth QualitativeQualitative LiquefactionLiquefaction AnalysisAnalysis FlowFlow ChartChart fromfrom MCEERMCEER 9898--0505 GEOLOGICGEOLOGIC EVALUATIONEVALUATION

Type of Deposit <500 yr Holocene Pleistocene Pre-Pleistocene

River Channel Very High High Low Very Low

Flood Plain High Moderate Low Very Low

Alluvial Fan Moderate Low Very Low Very Low

Delta High Moderate Low Very Low

Lacustrine High Moderate Low Very Low

Colluvium High Moderate Low Very Low

Glacial Till Low Low Very Low Very Low

„Youd (1998) SEISMICSEISMIC EVALUATIONEVALUATION

Earthquake Soil Profile Type I Soil Profile Type III Magnitude and II and IV (Stiff Sites) (Soft Sites) Very Low Hazard for

M < 5.2 Amax < 0.4g Amax < 0.1g

5.2 < M < 6.4 Amax < 0.1g Amax < 0.05g

6.4 < M < 7.6 Amax < 0.05g Amax < 0.025g

7.6 < M Amax < 0.025 Amax < 0.025

„Youd (1998) „Soil Profile Descriptions from AASHTO (1996) WATERWATER TABLETABLE EVALUATIONEVALUATION

Groundwater Table Relative Liquefaction Depth Susceptibility < 3 m Very High

3 m to 6 m High

6 m to 10 m Moderate

10 m to 15 m Low

> 15 m Very Low

„Youd (1998) QUANTITATIVEQUANTITATIVE ANALYSISANALYSIS YoudYoud etet al.al. (2001)(2001)

„ BasedBased onon T.T. L.L. YoudYoud etet al.,al., 2001,2001, LiquefactionLiquefaction ResistanceResistance ofof Soils:Soils: SummarySummary ReportReport fromfrom thethe 19961996 NCEERNCEER andand 19981998 NCEER/NSFNCEER/NSF WorkshopsWorkshops onon EvaluationEvaluation ofof LiquefactionLiquefaction ResistanceResistance ofof SoilsSoils:: ASCEASCE JournalJournal ofof GeotechnicalGeotechnical andand GeoenvironmentalGeoenvironmental EngineeringEngineering „ CyclicCyclic StressStress RatioRatio (CSR)(CSR) vs.vs. CyclicCyclic ResistanceResistance RatioRatio (CRR)(CRR) (normalized(normalized forfor MM 7.5)7.5) „ FactorFactor ofof SafetySafety (includes(includes aa magnitudemagnitude scalingscaling factor)factor) MAGNITUDEMAGNITUDE SCALINGSCALING FACTORSFACTORS forfor calculatingcalculating liquefactionliquefaction factorfactor ofof safetysafety cancan bebe estimatedestimated fromfrom publishedpublished chartscharts

„ taken from Youd et al. (2001) PagePage Ave.Ave. MissouriMissouri RiverRiver BridgeBridge CSRCSR vs.vs. CRRCRR

„M8s.6 PagePage Ave.Ave. MissouriMissouri RiverRiver BridgeBridge LiquefactionLiquefaction FactorFactor ofof SafetySafety

Page Extension, Missouri River Bridge Boring B2-41 Factor of Safety

0

5

10 (m) 15 Depth

20

25

30 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.3 1.50 2.00 2.50 Factor of Safety

„M8s.6 PagePage Ave.Ave. MissouriMissouri RiverRiver BridgeBridge CSRCSR vs.vs. CRRCRR

„Ms8.6 PagePage Ave.Ave. MissouriMissouri RiverRiver BridgeBridge LiquefactionLiquefaction FactorFactor ofof SafetySafety Page Extension, Missouri River Bridge Boring B2-41 Factor of Safety

0

5

10 (m) 15 Depth

20

25

30 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.3 1.50 2.00 2.50 Factor of Safety

„M8s.6 PagePage Ave.Ave. MissouriMissouri RiverRiver BridgeBridge CSRCSR vs.vs. CRRCRR

Page Extension, Missouri River Bridge Boring B2-41 1895 Event

0

5

10

) 15 m h (

Dept 20

25

30

35 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50

CRR CSR

„M8s.6 PagePage Ave.Ave. MissouriMissouri RiverRiver BridgeBridge LiquefactionLiquefaction FactorFactor ofof SafetySafety

Page Extension, Missouri River Bridge Boring B2-41 Factor of Safety

0

5

10 (m) 15 Depth

20

25

1.3 30 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 Factor of Safety

„Ms8.6 1D1D SeismicSeismic SiteSite ResponseResponse EquivalentEquivalent LinearLinear ApproachApproach EPRIEPRI GENERICGENERIC MODULUSMODULUS REDUCTIONREDUCTION CURVESCURVES

„ SoilSoil parametersparameters correlatedcorrelated fromfrom CorrectedCorrected SPTSPT blowblow counts.counts. „ DynamicDynamic soilsoil parametersparameters estimatedestimated toto fitfit modulusmodulus reductionreduction andand dampingdamping curvescurves recommendedrecommended byby EPRIEPRI (1993)(1993)

„EPRI (1993) EPRIEPRI CurvesCurves ApproximatedApproximated SoilSoil ParameterParameter InputInput InterfaceInterface usingusing DEEPSOILDEEPSOIL 11--DD wavewave propagationpropagation analysisanalysis PagePage Ave.Ave. MissouriMissouri RiverRiver BridgeBridge M8.6M8.6 18111811 NMSZNMSZ EventEvent

Page Extension, Missouri River Bridge 1811 Page Extension, Missouri River Bridge 1811 Layer 1 Layer 20

0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 n n o o i i t 0.6 t 0.6 a a er 0.5 er 0.5 cel cel c 0.4 c 0.4 A A l l

a 0.3 a 0.3 r r 0.2 0.2 ect ect p p

S 0.1 S 0.1 0 0 024681012 024681012 Period (sec) Period (sec)

At ground surface At bedrock interface PagePage Ave.Ave. MissouriMissouri RiverRiver BridgeBridge M8.0M8.0 18121812 NMSZNMSZ EventEvent

Page Extension, Missouri River Bridge 1812 Page Extension, Missouri River Bridge 1812 Layer 1 Layer 20

0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 n n o o i i t t

a 0.5 a 0.5 er er 0.4 0.4 cel cel c c

A 0.3 A 0.3 l l a a r 0.2 r 0.2 ect ect p p

S 0.1 S 0.1 0 0 024681012 024681012 Period (sec) Period (sec)

At ground surface „At bedrock interface PagePage Ave.Ave. MissouriMissouri RiverRiver BridgeBridge M6.6M6.6 18951895 NMSZNMSZ EventEvent

Page Extension, Missouri River Bridge 1895 Page Extension, Missouri River Bridge 1895 Layer 1 Layer 20

0.6 0.3

n 0.5 n 0.25 o o i i t t a 0.4 a 0.2 er er cel cel c 0.3 c 0.15 A A l l a a r 0.2 r 0.1 ect ect p 0.1 p 0.05 S S

0 0 024681012 024681012 Period (sec) Period (sec)

At ground surface „At bedrock interface

Increases to 0.58 g amax = 0.22g PagePage Ave.Ave. CreveCreve CoeurCoeur LakeLake MemorialMemorial ParkPark BridgeBridge M8.6M8.6 18111811 EventEvent

Page Extension, Creve Coeur Lake Memorial Park Page Extension, Creve Coeur Lake Memorial Park Bridge 1811 Bridge 1811 Layer 1 Layer 23

0.8 0.8

n 0.7 n 0.7 o o i i t 0.6 t 0.6 a a r r e e l 0.5 l 0.5 ce ce

c 0.4 c 0.4 A A l 0.3 l 0.3 a a r r t 0.2 t 0.2 ec ec p 0.1 p 0.1 S S 0 0 024681012 024681012 Period (sec) Period (sec)

„At ground surface „At bedrock interface PagePage Ave.Ave. CreveCreve CoeurCoeur LakeLake MemorialMemorial ParkPark BridgeBridge M8.0M8.0 18121812 EventEvent

Page Extension, Creve Coeur Lake Memorial Park Page Extension, Creve Coeur Lake Memorial Park Bridge 1812 Bridge 1812 Layer 1 Layer 23

1 0.8

n n 0.7 o o i 0.8 i t t 0.6 a a r r e e l 0.6 l 0.5 ce ce

c c 0.4 A A l 0.4 l 0.3 a a r r t t 0.2

ec 0.2 ec p p 0.1 S S 0 0 024681012 024681012 Period (sec) Period (sec)

„At ground surface „At bedrock interface

Increases to 0.90 g amax = 0.70g PagePage Ave.Ave. CreveCreve CoeurCoeur LakeLake MemorialMemorial ParkPark BridgeBridge M6.6M6.6 18951895 EventEvent

Page Extension, Creve Coeur Lake Memorial Park Page Extension, Creve Coeur Lake Memorial Park Bridge 1895 Bridge 1895 Layer 1 Layer 23

0.6 0.3 n n

o 0.5 o 0.25 i i t t a a r r

e 0.4 e 0.2 l l ce ce

c 0.3 c 0.15 A A l l a 0.2 a 0.1 r r t t ec 0.1 ec 0.05 p p S S 0 0 024681012 024681012 Period (sec) Period (sec)

„At ground surface „At bedrock interface

Increases to 0.53 g amax = 0.24g HermannHermann BridgeBridge SiteSite M8.6M8.6 18111811 EventEvent

Hermann Bridge 1811 Hermann Bridge 1811 Layer 1 Layer 18

0.6 0.5 0.45 n 0.5 n

o o 0.4 i i t t a 0.4 a 0.35 er er 0.3 cel cel c 0.3 c 0.25 A A l l 0.2 a a r 0.2 r 0.15 ect ect p 0.1 p 0.1 S S 0.05 0 0 024681012 024681012 Period (sec) Period (sec)

„At ground surface „At bedrock interface

Increases to 0.56 g amax = 0.44g HermannHermann BridgeBridge SiteSite M8.0M8.0 18121812 EventEvent

Hermann Bridge 1812 Hermann Bridge 1812 Layer 1 Layer 18

0.7 0.45 0.6 0.4 n n o o

i i 0.35 t t

a 0.5 a 0.3 er er 0.4 0.25 cel cel c c 0.2

A 0.3 A l l a a r r 0.15 0.2 ect ect 0.1 p p

S 0.1 S 0.05 0 0 024681012 024681012 Period (sec) Period (sec)

„At ground surface „At bedrock interface

Increases to 0.60g amax = 0.39g HermannHermann BridgeBridge SiteSite M6.6M6.6 18951895 EventEvent

Hermann Bridge 1895 Hermann Bridge 1895 Layer 1 Layer 18

0.4 0.25 0.35 n n

o o 0.2 i i t 0.3 t a a er 0.25 er 0.15 cel cel c 0.2 c A A l l 0.1

a 0.15 a r r 0.1 ect ect

p p 0.05

S 0.05 S 0 0 024681012 024681012 Period (sec) Period (sec)

„At ground surface „At bedrock interface

Increases to 0.35g amax = 0.19g „ Asymmetric channel section; Missouri river on far south side of parabolic shaped channel „ Main spans supported on stiff caissons to rock „ Tail spans supported on pile groups of differing length „ Soft pockets on old oxbows can be problematic „ Widespread liquefaction and lateral spreads likely near channels „ Simply supported tail spans would appear to be most vulnerable part of existing highway bridges „ Site amplification causes long period motions to peak between 1.0 and 1.5 seconds „ We can expect liquefaction of foundations (areas shown in pink) CONCLUSIONSCONCLUSIONS

„ WidespreadWidespread liquefactionliquefaction likelylikely inin M6.6M6.6 oror greatergreater eventsevents atat greatgreat rangerange (~250(~250 km)km) „ LiquefactionLiquefaction soso severesevere (deep)(deep) andand continuouscontinuous inin M7.5+M7.5+ eventsevents thatthat localizedlocalized failure/tiltfailure/tilt ofof supportingsupporting pilepile groupsgroups cancan bebe expectedexpected „ LateralLateral spreadsspreads cancan bebe expectedexpected nearnear channelschannels inin thosethose areasareas subjectsubject toto severesevere liquefaction.liquefaction. TheseThese wouldwould destroydestroy anyany pilepile supportedsupported structuresstructures „ Long period motions will cause significant site amplification locally, which could trigger collapse of simply supported spans at great range (~250 km) „ Two-dimensional effect of bedrock channels not considered in these screening analyses. This could make matters worse locally. AboutAbout thethe PresenterPresenter

„ J. David Rogers served as Chair of the Building Codes Committee of the Association of Engineering Geologists between 1990-97 and was AEG representative to the International Conference of Building Officials while the 1991, 1994 and 1997 Uniform Building Codes and 2000 International Building Code were developed. „ He has taught short courses on seismic hazards for the University of California, J. David Rogers, Ph.D., P.E., R.G. is the University of California, Karl F. Hasselmann Chair in Geological FEMA, California Geological Engineering at the University of Missouri- Survey and the Southern Rolla. He can be contacted at California Earthquake Center. [email protected]