530 - geology.arkansas.gov€¦ · stress (youd, 1973). types of ground failure resulting from...
TRANSCRIPT
§̈¦40
£¤67
£¤63
£¤49
£¤226
£¤67
UV18Jonesboro
Paragould
Searcy
West Memphis
Blytheville
Pine Bluff
Gilmore
Beebe
Newport
Forrest City
Diaz
Wynne
Batesville
Clarkedale
Osceola
Hardy
Bay
Turrell
Hoxie
Earle
Lafe
Lake View
Marked Tree
Concord
Black Rock
Marion
Cherokee Village
Walnut Ridge
Oxford
Highland
Horseshoe Bend
Ward
Etowah
Stuttgart
Piggott
Melbourne
Brinkley
Helena-West Helena
Pocahontas
Ash Flat
CarlisleLonoke Hazen
Trumann
Keo
Manila
Ozark Acres
Corning
Bald Knob
Cushman
Salem
Parkin
Caldwell
DeWitt
Lynn
Marianna
Palestine
Wheatley
Colt
Judsonia
Sidney
Viola
Grady
HughesDesArc
Madison
Bono
Cave City
Jennette
Caraway
Augusta
Edmondson
Cabot
Kensett
Lake City
Franklin
Dell
Ravenden
Mount Pleasant
Portia
England
Newark
Mc Crory
Harrisburg
Altheimer
StrawberryGosnell
Leachville
Rector
Weiner
Marvell
Moro
Lepanto
Tuckerman
Coy
Tyronza
Reyno
Dyess
Wilson
Gillett
Austin
Oak Grove Heights
Rondo
Clarendon
Austin
OKean
Biscoe
Cabot
Biggers
Luxora
Maynard
Monette
Garner
Humphrey
Patterson
Beedeville
Evening Shade
Datto
Moorefield
Brookland
Imboden
Delaplaine
Bradford
Campbell Station
DeVallsBluff
Guion
Marmaduke
Lexa
Hunter
Holly Grove
Sulphur Rock
Burdette
Higginson
Fargo
Elaine
Cotton Plant
St. Charles
Alicia
McRae
Grubbs
Mammoth Springs
Peach Orchard
Minturn
Swifton
Widener
Smithville
Magness
KnobelRavenden Springs
Ulm
Keiser
Egypt
Letona
Cherry ValleyPangburn
Cash
Almyra
Pleasant Plains
Griffithville
Roe
Aubrey
Hickory Ridge
South Bend
Sedgwick
Joiner
Jericho
Pollard
Victoria
Tupelo
West Point
Black Oak
Fisher
Williford
Crawfordsville
McDougal
Sunset
Heber Springs
College City
Haynes
Weldon
St. Francis
Bassett
AllportHumnoke
Wabbaseka
Russell
Jackson-Port
Success
Nimmons
Greenway
Marie
Georgetown
Birdsong
Oil Trough
Sherrill
Gould
Powhatan
La Grange
WaldenburgAmagon
Horseshoe Lake
Anthonyville
£¤70
£¤64
£¤167
£¤79
£¤49
£¤412
£¤67
£¤62
£¤165
£¤63
£¤65
£¤79B
£¤425
£¤63B
£¤67B £¤64B
£¤65B
£¤49B
£¤165B
Lee
White
Clay
Cross
Arkansas
Prairie
Sharp
Phillips
Poinsett
Lonoke
Izard
Mississippi
Monroe
Greene
Jackson
Fulton
Craighead
Randolph
Woodruff
Lawrence
Jefferson
Crittenden
St. Francis
Independence
Lincoln
Cleburne
Stone
DeshaCleveland
§̈¦40
§̈¦55
§̈¦530
Liquefaction Susceptibility Map Of Northeast Arkansas
(N
Arkansas Geological SurveyBekki White, State Geologist and Director
GH-EQ-LSM-007
Scott M. AusbrooksErica Doerr
2010
1 : 360,0002 July 2010 Jerry W. ClarkRevised Date: Scale: Digital compilation:
T21N
R 9 W R 8 W R 1 ER 1 WR 2 WR 3 WR 4 WR 5 WR 6 WR 7 W
R 11 ER 10 E
R 9 E
R 8 ER 7 ER 6 ER 5 ER 4 ER 3 ER 2 E
R 9 ER 8 ER 7 ER 13 ER 12 E
T20N
T19N
T18N
T17N
T16N
T15N
T14N
T13N
T12N
T11N
T10N
T9N
T8N
T7N
T6N
T5N
T4N
T3N
T2N
T1N
T1S
T2S
T3S
T4S
T5S
T6S
T7S
T8S
Generalized Geologic Map of Arkansas
Disclaimer
About the MapEarthquake-induced ground failures such as liquefaction have historically brought loss of life and damage to property and infrastructure. Liquefaction is the transformation of a granular material from a solid state into a liquefied state as a consequence of increased pore-pressure and decreased effective stress (Youd, 1973). Types of ground failure resulting from liquefaction can include sand boils, lateral spreads, ground settlement, ground cracking and ground warping. The distribution of liquefaction is not random but is restricted to areas underlain by loose, cohesionless (unconsolidated) sands and silts that are saturated with water. Areas of liquefaction susceptibility can be qualitatively assessed and delineated on the basis of physical properties of near-surface deposits and depth to groundwater through geologic, geomorphic, and hydrologic mapping and map analysis (Tinsley and Holzer, 1990; Youd and Perkins, 1978). This liquefaction susceptibility map was developed from existing geologic and surficial materials maps including the USGS I-2789: Map of Surficial Deposits in the Eastern and Central United States (Fullerton, D.S., et al, 2003), as well as available groundwater and standard penetration (SPT) data. The correlation between the near-surface materials and their relative susceptibility to liquefy was determined on the basis of three factors: (1) presence of loose, cohesionless, sandy or silty deposits within 50 feet of the surface (depth threshold defined by Tinsley and others in 1985), (2) presence of groundwater which saturates these deposits, and (3) historical records of liquefaction during previous earthquakes. Liquefaction susceptibility values obtained from this map may be incorporated into the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) HAZUS software for estimating potential losses from earthquakes. This map is for screening purposes only and is not intended to be a substitute for a site specific evaluation. Copies of this map are available from the Arkansas Geological Survey, Little Rock, Arkansas.
0 50 10025Miles
LegendQuaternary (Gravel, Sand, Silt, Clay and Loess)
Tertiary (Sand and Clay with minor amounts ofLimestone andLignite)Igneous (Syenite and Lamproite)
Cretaceous (Sand, Chalk, Clay and Marl withminor amounts of Limestone)Pennsylvanian (Shale and Sandstone)Mississippian (Limestone, Shale, Sandstoneand Chert)Silurian/Devonian (includes middle and upperdivision of Mississippian, Arkansas Novaculite)Silurian/Devonian (Limestone, Shale and Sandstone)Ordovician (Limestone, Dolostone, Sandstone and Chert)
Cambrian (includes portion of Lower OrdovicianCollier Shale)
Arkansas Highway and TransportationDepartment (AHTD) - New Madridseismic zone (NMSZ) - CatastrophicEarthquake Emergency Response Routes
SymbolsPrimary RouteSecondary RouteTertiary RouteInterstateUS HighwaysState HighwaysGas Pipeline
Oil Pipeline
Product PipelineSand Blow Area (Coverage greater than 25%)Sand Blow Area (Coverage 1% to 25%)Incorporated Areas
(/64
§̈¦40
Priority
ArkansasMissouri
Illinois
Kentucky
Tennessee
NMSZ
Arkansas Department of Emergency Management (ADEM)has designated 34 counties (shaded in pink) as the NewMadrid seismic zone (NMSZ) catastrophic planning area.The New Madrid seismic zone (NMSZ) is shaded in purple.
Fullerton, D.S., Bush, C.A., and Pennell, J.N., 2003, Map of surficial deposits and materials in the Eastern and Central United States (east of 102° west longitude): U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Investigations Series Map I–2789, 1 sheet, scale 1:2,500,000; pamphlet, 48 p., http://pubs.usgs.gov/imap/i-2789/.
Rhea, Susan, and Wheeler, R.L., 1995, Map
showing synopsis of seismotectonic features in the vicinity of New Madrid, Missouri: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I-2521, 1 sheet, scale 1:250,000.
Sims, J.D. and Garvin, C.D., 1995, Recurrent
liquefaction at Soda Lake, California, induced by the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, and 1990 and 1991 aftershocks: Implications for paleoseismicity studies, Seismological Society of America Bulletin, v. 85, p. 51-65.
Tinsley, J.C., and Holzer, T.L., 1990,
Liquefaction in the Monterey Bay region: U.S. Geological Survey Open-file Report 90-334, pp. 642-643.
Tinsley, J.C., Youd, T.L., Perkins, D.M., and
Chen, A.T.F, 1985, Evaluating Liquefaction Potential, in Ziony, J.I., ed., Evaluating earthquake hazards in the Los Angeles Region - an earth-science perspective: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1360, p. 263-316.
Youd, T.L., 1973, Liquefaction, flow, and
associated ground failure: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 688, 12 pp.
Youd, T.L. and Perkins, D.M., 1978, Mapping of
Liquefaction Induced Ground Failure Potential: Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 104, No. 4, pp.433-446.
References
Water
£¤49
10 0 10 20 30 40 505Miles
10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1005Kilometers
Although this map was compiled from digital data that was successfully processed on a computer system using ESRI ArcGIS 9.x software at the Arkansas Geological Survey (AGS), no warranty, expressed or implied, is made by the AGS regarding the unity of the data on any other system, nor shall the act of distribution constitute any such warranty. The AGS does not guarantee this map or digital data to be free of errors nor assume liability for interpretations made from this map or digital data, or decisions based thereon. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the Arkansas Geological Survey. The 5M Hillshade base used in the making of this map was acquired at the Spatial Analysis Laboratory, University of Arkansas, Monticello and some of the other Feature Class Data was acquired online at (www.geostor.arkansas.gov).
UV18
Graphic Illustration of a Sand Blow
HAZUS Number Susceptibility Unit On
Map5 Very High Yes4 High Yes3 Moderate Yes2 Low Yes1 Very Low Yes0 None NoW Water Yes
LIQUEFACTION SUSCEPTIBILITY CLASSIFICATION
Aerial Photograph of Sand BlowsSource: USGS
(after Sims and Garvin,1995)