1 / 18

Yan Y. Kagan and David D. Jackson Dept. Earth and Space Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles,

Yan Y. Kagan and David D. Jackson Dept. Earth and Space Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1567, ykagan@ucla.edu , http://eq.ess.ucla.edu/~kagan.html. Maximum Earthquake Size for Subduction Zones. http://moho.ess.ucla.edu/~kagan/SSA12 .ppt. Outline.

zoe
Download Presentation

Yan Y. Kagan and David D. Jackson Dept. Earth and Space Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles,

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. Yan Y. Kagan and David D. Jackson Dept. Earth and Space Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1567, ykagan@ucla.edu, http://eq.ess.ucla.edu/~kagan.html Maximum Earthquake Size for Subduction Zones http://moho.ess.ucla.edu/~kagan/SSA12.ppt

  2. Outline Maximum earthquake size estimates for subduction zones: Historical method; Statistical method; Moment-conservation method: tectonic versus seismic moment rates – area- and site-specific.

  3. Flinn-Engdahl seismic regions: • Why select them? Regions were defined before GCMT catalog started (no selection bias), and it is easier to replicate our results (programs and tables available). • Kagan (JGR, 1997) used these regions to estimate Mmax for several tectonic categories.

  4. A log-likelihood map for the distribution of the scalar seismic moment of earthquakes in the Flinn-Engdahl zone #19 (Japan--Kurile-Kamchatka)

  5. Review of results on spectral slope, b –Bird & Kagan, 2004 Although there are variations, none is significant with 95%-confidence. Kagan’s [1999] hypothesis of uniform b still stands.

  6. DETERMINATION OF MAXIMUM • (CORNER) MAGNITUDE: • MOMENT CONCERVATION PRINCIPLE • Seismic moment rate depends on 3 variables -- • The number of earthquakes in a region (N); • The beta-value (b-value) of G-R relation; • The value of maximum (corner) magnitude. • Tectonic moment rate depends on 3 variables -- • 1. Width of seismogenic zone (W - 30 -- 104 km); • 2. Seismic efficiency coefficient (chi - 50 -- 100%); • 3. Value of shear modulus (mu - 30GPa -- 49GPa).

  7. Tectonic rate for1977-1995/6/30 period is calculated by using Kagan (JGR, 1997) parameters: W=30 km, mu=30 GPa, chi=1.0. Tectonic rate for 1977-2010/12/31 period is calculated by using Bird & Kagan (BSSA, 2004) parameters: W=104 km, mu=49 GPa, chi=0.5.

  8. DETERMINATION OF MAXIMUM (CORNER) MAGNITUDE: SITE-SPECIFIC MOMENT CONCERVATION PRINCIPLE 1. General (area-specific) distribution of the earthquake size, for the simplicity of calculations we take it as the truncated Pareto distribution. 2. Site-specific moment distribution – large earthquakes have a bigger chance to intersect a site, hence the moment distribution is different from area-specific. 3. Geometric scaling of earthquake rupture. Length-width-slip are scale-invariant, proportional to the cube root of scalar moment. 4. Earthquake depth distribution is different for small versus large shocks: at least for strike-slip earthquakes large events would penetrate below the seismogenic layer. 5. Most of the small earthquakes do not reach the Earth surface and therefore do not contribute to the surface fault slip.

  9. Calculation of Mmax for fault slip

  10. Calculation of Mmax for fault slip (cont.) For Tohoku area site-specific calculations yield Mmax estimates 8.5-9.5

  11. END Thank you

More Related