Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2122/1887
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorallBoatwright, J.; U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, CA, U.S.Aen
dc.contributor.authorallCocco, M.; Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica, Roma, Italyen
dc.date.accessioned2006-12-06T11:20:51Zen
dc.date.available2006-12-06T11:20:51Zen
dc.date.issued1994-12en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2122/1887en
dc.description.abstractWe propose that lateral variations in fault friction control the heterogeneity of slip observed in large earthquakes, We model these variations using a rate and state-dependent friction law, where we differentiate velocity-weakening into strong and weak-seismic fields, and velocity-strengthening into compliant and viscous fields. The strong-seismic field comprises the seismic slip concentrations, or asperities. The two «intermediate» frictional fields, weak-seismic and compliant, modulate both the tectonic loading and the dynamic rupture process. During the interseismic period, the compliant and viscous regions slip aseismically while the strong-seismic regions remain locked, evolving into stress concentrations that fail only in main shocks. The weak-seismic regions contain most of the interseismic activity and aftershocks, but also «creep seismically», that is, most of the weak-seismic area slips aseismically, actuating the seismicity on the remaining area. This «mixed» frictional behavior can be obtained from a sufficiently heterogenous distribution for the critical slip distance. The interseismic slip provides an inherent rupture resistance: dynamic rupture fronts decelerate as they penetrate into these unloaded compliant or creeping weak-seismic areas, diffusing into broad areas of accelerated afterslip. Aftershocks occur in both the weak-seismic and compliant areas around the fault, but most of the stress is diffused through aseismic slip. Rapid afterslip on these peripheral areas can also produce aftershocks within the main shock rupture area, by reloading weak fault areas that slipped in the main shock and then healed. We test this frictional model by comparing the interevent seismicity and aftershocks to the coseismic slip distribution for the 1966 Parkfield, 1979 Coyote Lake, and 1984 Morgan Hill earthquakes.en
dc.format.extent8263832 bytesen
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen
dc.language.isoEnglishen
dc.relation.ispartofseries6/37 (1994)en
dc.subjectfrictionen
dc.subjectfaultingen
dc.subjectaftershocksen
dc.subjectaseismic slipen
dc.titleThe effect of lateral variations of friction on crustal faultingen
dc.typearticleen
dc.type.QualityControlPeer-revieweden
dc.subject.INGV04. Solid Earth::04.06. Seismology::04.06.02. Earthquake interactions and probabilityen
dc.description.journalTypeJCR Journalen
dc.description.fulltextopenen
dc.contributor.authorBoatwright, J.en
dc.contributor.authorCocco, M.en
dc.contributor.departmentU.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, CA, U.S.Aen
dc.contributor.departmentIstituto Nazionale di Geofisica, Roma, Italyen
item.openairetypearticle-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
crisitem.author.deptU.S.G.S. Menlo Park-
crisitem.author.deptIstituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (INGV), Sezione Roma1, Roma, Italia-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0001-6798-4225-
crisitem.author.parentorgIstituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia-
crisitem.classification.parent04. Solid Earth-
Appears in Collections:Annals of Geophysics
Manuscripts
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
04 boatwright.pdf8.07 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

120
checked on Apr 24, 2024

Download(s) 50

390
checked on Apr 24, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check