1 / 29

Geodetic Deformation, Seismicity and Fault Friction

Geodetic Deformation, Seismicity and Fault Friction. Ge277- 2007 Sensitivity of seismicity to stress perturbations, implications for  earthquakes  nucleation. Key Observation :

halima
Download Presentation

Geodetic Deformation, Seismicity and Fault Friction

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Geodetic Deformation, Seismicity and Fault Friction Ge277- 2007 Sensitivity of seismicity to stress perturbations, implications for  earthquakes  nucleation

  2. Key Observation : Seismicity rate and Geodetic strain rate are generally proportional, and both decays as t-1 following an earthquake • Aftershocks and postseismic relaxation following the : • Mw7.6, Chichi earthquake (1999) • Mw 7.2 Landers Earthquake (1992) • Mw 8.1, Peru earthquake (2001) • Mw 8.7, Nias earthquake (2005) • Background seismicity in the Nepal Himalaya

  3. (Svarc and Savage, 1997) Postseismic Displacements following the Mw 7.2 1992 Landers Earthquake CPA analysis show that all GPS stations follow about the same time evolution f(t)

  4. Comparing aftershocks and afterslip following Landers EQ

  5. Seismicity and Postseismic displacements follow the same relaxation curve consistent with the Omori Law. (Perfettini and Avouac, 2004a)

  6. Geodetic deformation across the Nepal Himalaya Velocities relative to India (Bettinelli et al, 2006)

  7. Locked Fault Zone, width  110km Creeping Zone 17-18mm/yr

  8. Seismicity and Coulomb stress change due to interseismic stress accumulation (Bollinger et al, JGR, 2004) Seismicity coincides with the area where Coulomb stress increases by 4-6 kpa/a

  9. Conceptual Model

  10. Seismicity and Coulomb stress change due to interseismic stress accumulation (Bollinger et al, JGR, 2004) Seismicity coincides with the area where Coulomb stress increases by 4-6 kpa/a

  11. Winter seismicity rate is twice as large as summer seismicity rate

  12. Seasonal variation of Horizontal Displacements Detrend GPS time-series

  13. Water level in Ganges Basin determinedfrom TOPEX-POSEIDON and GRACE GUMBA-SIMRA

  14. TOPEX-POSEIDON GRACE

  15. Displacements induced by surface water level variations in the Ganges basin Summer Winter

  16. Finite Element Modeling

  17. Seasonal variations of seismicity and water level in the Ganges Basin

  18. Seasonal variations of seismicity and water level in the Ganges Basin Compression Extension Compression

  19. Strain induced by surface water level variations in the Ganges basin Summer: Extension Winter: Compression

  20. Seasonal Coulomb stress variations Coulomb stress variations are estimated to about 500 pa (<earth tides, 2-3kPa for T=12h and 14 days)

  21. Seasonal variation of Coulomb stress rate Coulomb stress rate With secular term added 10 kPa/yr 8 kPa/yr 6 kPa/yr • Seasonal variations of geodetic displacements reflect deformation due to water level variations in the Ganges basin • Interseismic Coulomb stress increase by 4-5 kPa/yr is modulated by seasonal variations of 500pa (corresponding to stress rate variation of 2-3kPa/yr) modulating the seismicity rate by a factor of 2.

  22. In these examples: • Seismicity rate and stress rate are approximately proportional • The characteristic time associated with the stress variations is of the order of 1 yr.

  23. Standard Coulomb failure Assuming , - seismicity rate obeys : - so, for periodic loading :

  24. (Lockner and Beeler, 1999; Heki, 2003)

  25. Standard Coulomb failure For periodic loading : Seismicity rate should be much more sensitive to earth tides. This is not observed, probably because rupture is a time-dependent process, as suggested by rock mechanics experiments.

More Related