Group B, Poster #094, Earthquake Geology
Pre-rupture fault mapping from geomorphic features to quantify fault location uncertainty for fault displacement hazard studies
Poster Image:
Poster Presentation
2022 SCEC Annual Meeting, Poster #094, SCEC Contribution #12270 VIEW PDF
fore several earthquakes. Students ranged from senior undergraduates to post doctoral scholars from five universities in three countries. We implemented a systematic approach to fault mapping involving mapping surficial geology, morphology, and tectonic geomorphic indicators before delineating fault traces. The class focused on two major activities:
1. All students mapped the same areas independently, addressing mapping repeatability. If faults can be mapped similarly by multiple people, it suggests the signals in the landscape are recognizable and significant. We examined how experience level affects mapping. Inexperienced students introduce epistemic uncertainty due to misunderstanding the geomorphology. They do not map with the prior knowledge of a more experienced mapper. The width of the uncertainty surrounding fault traces is indicated by the features multiple mappers cite while mapping the same fault. Over half of the students anticipated the trend of the coseismic ruptures in four out of five mapping areas. Students anticipated rupture trace segments within 150 m.
2. Projects addressed the impacts of mapping faults using different types of base datasets. Data types varied in quality and included datasets such as 30m/pix SRTM data, historical aerial imagery, 1-2 m/pix lidar, and 10cm/pix sUAS data processed with SfM. We sought to discover what makes a dataset helpful to mapping faults and what kind of dataset is most appropriate to reveal geomorphic indicators. Students were most successful when mapping with higher resolution topographic datasets. Aerial imagery was limiting in areas with high vegetation and anthropogenic alteration, but helpful as a supplement to topographic data.
SHOW MORE
1. All students mapped the same areas independently, addressing mapping repeatability. If faults can be mapped similarly by multiple people, it suggests the signals in the landscape are recognizable and significant. We examined how experience level affects mapping. Inexperienced students introduce epistemic uncertainty due to misunderstanding the geomorphology. They do not map with the prior knowledge of a more experienced mapper. The width of the uncertainty surrounding fault traces is indicated by the features multiple mappers cite while mapping the same fault. Over half of the students anticipated the trend of the coseismic ruptures in four out of five mapping areas. Students anticipated rupture trace segments within 150 m.
2. Projects addressed the impacts of mapping faults using different types of base datasets. Data types varied in quality and included datasets such as 30m/pix SRTM data, historical aerial imagery, 1-2 m/pix lidar, and 10cm/pix sUAS data processed with SfM. We sought to discover what makes a dataset helpful to mapping faults and what kind of dataset is most appropriate to reveal geomorphic indicators. Students were most successful when mapping with higher resolution topographic datasets. Aerial imagery was limiting in areas with high vegetation and anthropogenic alteration, but helpful as a supplement to topographic data.
SHOW MORE
Citation: Zuckerman, M. G., Scott, C. P., Arrowsmith, R., Adam, R. N., Koehler, R. D., Madugo, C. M., & Kottke, A. R. (2022, 09). Pre-rupture fault mapping from geomorphic features to quantify fault location uncertainty for fault displacement hazard studies. Poster Presentation at 2022 SCEC Annual Meeting.
Keywords: tectonic geomorphology, fault mapping
Relevant SCEC Themes:
Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis
MORE POSTERS BY THE AUTHORS
|
|
|
|
|
MORE FROM EARTHQUAKE GEOLOGY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
