Visibility of fault strands in exploratory trenches and timing of rupture events
No abstract available.
Geology↗
Geology topics
James J. Lienkaemper
Publications and source records attributed to James J. Lienkaemper.
Statistical relations among earthquake magnitude, surface rupture length, and surface fault displacement
In order to refine correlations of surface-wave magnitude, fault rupture length at the ground surface, and fault displacement at the surface by including the uncertainties in these variables, the existing data were critically reviewed and a new data base was compiled. Earthquake magnitudes were redetermined as necessary to make them as consistent as possible with the Gutenberg methods and results, which make up much of the data base. Measurement errors were estimated for the three variables for 58 moderate to large shallow-focus earthquakes. Regression analyses were then made utilizing the estimated measurement errors. The regression analysis demonstrates that the relations among the variables magnitude, length, and displacement are stochastic in nature. The stochastic variance, introduced in part by incomplete surface expression of seismogenic faulting, variation in shear modulus, and regional factors, dominates the estimated measurement errors. Thus, it is appropriate to use ordinary least squares for the regression models, rather than regression models based upon an underlying deterministic relation in which the variance results primarily from measurement errors. Significant differences exist in correlations of certain combinations of length, displacement, and magnitude when events are grouped by fault type or by region, including attenuation regions delineated by Evernden and others. Estimates of the magnitude and the standard deviation of the magnitude of a prehistoric or future earthquake associated with a fault can be made by correlating M s with the logarithms of rupture length, fault displacement, or the product of length and displacement. Fault rupture area could be reliably estimated for about 20 of the events in the data set. Regression of M s on rupture area did not result in a marked improvement over regressions that did not involve rupture area. Because no subduction-zone earthquakes are included in this study, the reported results do not apply to such zones.
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗
Surface faulting near Livermore, California, associated with the January 1980 earthquakes
The earthquakes of 24 January (M s 5.8) 1980 north of Livermore, California, and 26 January (M s 5.2), were accompanied by surface faulting in the Greenville fault zone and apparently in the Las Positas fault zone also. The surface faulting was discontinuous and of small displacement. The main rupture within the Greenville fault zone trended about N.38°W. It was at least 4.2 km long and may have extended southward to Interstate Highway 580, giving a possible length of 6.2 km; both of these lengths included more gaps than observed surface rupture. Maximum displacements measured by us were about 25 mm of right slip (including afterslip through 28 January); vertical components of as much as 50 mm were seen locally, but these included gravity effects of unknown amount. The main break within the Greenville fault zones is very close to a fault strand mapped by Herd (1977, and unpublished data). A subsidiary break within the Greenville fault zone was about 0.5 km. long, had a general trend of N.46°W., and lay 0.12 to 0.25 km east of the main break. It was characterized by extension of as much as 40 mm and right slip of as much as 20 mm. This break was no more than 25 m from a fault mapped by Herd (unpublished data). Another break within the Greenville fault zone lay about 0.3 km southwest of the projection of the main break and trended about N33°W. It was at least 0.3 km long and showed mostly extension, but at several places a right-lateral component (up to 5 mm) was seen. This break was 80 to 100 m from a strand of the Greenville fault mapped by Herd (1977). Extensional fractures within the Greenville fault zone on the frontage roads north and south of Interstate Highway 580 may be related to regional extension or other processes, but do not seem to have resulted from faulting of the usual kind. One exception in this group is a fracture at the east side of Livermore valley which showed progressive increase in right-lateral displacement in February and March, 1980, and is directly on the projection of a fault in the Greenville fault zone mapped by Herd (1977). A group of more than 20 extensional fractures in Laughlin Road 1 km north of Interstate 580 probably are related to small tectonic displacements on faults in the Greenville fault zone. They are adjacent and parallel to two faults mapped by Herd (1977), are diagonal to the road, and most of them developed between 25 and 29 January, a period that included the M s 5.2 shock of 26 January. Observations at two locations indicate tectonic displacement on the Las Positas fault zone as mapped by Herd (1977). At Vasco Road a prominent break on a strand of the fault showed about 0.5 mm of left-lateral strike slip on 7 February. An alinement array across this and other fractures at the locality indicates about 6 mm of left-lateral displacement occurred between 21 February and 26 March. On Tesla Road several right-stepping fractures, one of which showed 1.5 mm of left-lateral strike slip, lie on or close tp previously mapped strands of the Las Positas fault zone. The evidence at these two localities indicates that tectonic surface displacement occurred along at least 1.1 km of the Las Positas fault zone.
California↗