Search USGS⌕ Search

USGS · 70247739

On the depth extent of co-seismic rupture

Abstract

We investigate the implications of deformation experiments for the coseismic down‐dip extent of rupture in quasi‐dynamic, whole‐cycle earthquake models of a fault for which the depth of the transition between seismic and aseisimic fault slip depends on strain rate. The calculations use a dislocation fault model from Tse and Rice (1986) with a vertical strike‐slip orientation, mode III rupture, and variable along‐strike length. Our reference calculation is the original rheological representation of Tse and Rice with a strain‐rate‐independent transition. The primary calculations use two different representations of a strain‐rate‐dependent transition: (1) between rate‐weakening friction and dislocation creep and (2) between rate‐weakening and rate‐strengthening frictions. For both these cases, when fault strength is high (friction between 0.5 and 0.6) and the transition is sharp, coseismic slip extends a small distance (1–2 km) below the fixed temperature (depth) that is commonly used to define the rheological transition at the plate‐motion rate. Thus, coseismic slip occurs below the depth assumed in seismic hazard models using microseismicity or a chosen fixed‐temperature contour. Though significant coseismic slip occurs below the plate‐rate transition depth, the added moment is &lt; 10 % "> < 10 % of the total. The deep extension is a region that is rheologically distinct; for example, deep coseismic slip can produce a stress increase rather than a stress drop. If friction is smaller, the deepening effect and its contribution to moment are larger. For all representations of the transition, average and surface slip increase with the along‐strike rupture length in a manner consistent with the limited data from natural observations. However, this property is not controlled by the assumed fault rheology; instead, it arises because the stiffness of the fault decreases weakly with fault length, an intrinsic and unrealistic property of the particular crustal scale fault model used.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Nicholas M. Beeler, G. Hirth, T.E. Tullis, C. H. Webb. 2018-02-13. On the depth extent of co-seismic rupture. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120160295

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Re-evaluation of shaking, dynamic strain, and the source of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

As the largest historical event in the eastern United States, the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, plays a prominent role in our nation’s seismological and human history and an outsized role in our probabilistic ground‐motion hazard estimates, affecting building codes, insurance rates, and geophysical monitoring. Thus, constraining the characteristics of the 1886 earthquake source, as well as the nature of its shaking distribution and impacts to the extent possible, is essential. Given its vintage, however, societal, geological, and geophysical datasets are limited compared with those used in modern seismological analyses. Because of these limitations, some characteristics of the rupture model are fundamentally nonunique. Still, by re‐evaluating all available data, I can constrain several key aspects of this earthquake. I show that several interpretations in recent analyses are inconsistent regarding the inferred source; shaking; ground failure; and, particularly, railway impacts. Importantly, I have shown that although dynamic strain caused the ground failure that led to track deformation, without the intermediate liquefaction step, dynamic strain alone was unlikely to be the source of rail deformation, contrary to earlier studies. Had earlier pronouncements that dynamic strain is a real concern for bending railways held true, there would be serious ramifications for railway engineering as well as for other above‐ and below‐ground linear infrastructure.

South Carolina↗

ETAS-positive: Extracting unbiased epidemic-type aftershock models from incomplete earthquake catalogs

Earthquake catalogs are inherently incomplete, and short-term fluctuations in catalog completeness can strongly bias estimates of seismicity parameters. Here, we extend the positive statistics framework recently introduced for estimating Gutenberg–Richter a and b values to the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model. The approach focuses on complete magnitude–time intervals defined by pairs of earthquakes in which the second event is larger than the first. Comprehensive synthetic tests demonstrate that the proposed ETAS + method retrieves nearly unbiased parameter estimates even from highly incomplete catalogs, whereas parameters obtained using classical estimation approaches are strongly biased. Application to Southern California reveals a similar trend, with the productivity scaling parameter α approaching the b value, consistent with self-similar earthquake triggering within estimation uncertainties. Owing to its robustness against catalog incompleteness and computational efficiency, the ETAS + method provides a powerful new tool for seismicity analysis and earthquake forecasting.

California↗