24.11.2012 Views

Annual Meeting - SCEC.org

Annual Meeting - SCEC.org

Annual Meeting - SCEC.org

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Report | <strong>SCEC</strong> Research Accomplishments<br />

Shearer, P., E. Hauksson, and G. Lin, Southern California hypocenter relocation with waveform cross correlation: Part 2.<br />

Results using source-specific station terms and cluster analysis, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 95, 904-915, doi:<br />

10.1785/0120040168, 2005.<br />

Stephenson, W. J., J. K. Odum, R. A.Williams, and M. L. Anderson, 2002, Delineation of faulting and basin geometry along a<br />

seismic reflection transect in urbanized San Bernardino valley, California, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 92, 2504–2520.<br />

Süss, M. P., and J. H. Shaw, 2003, P-wave seismic velocity structure derived from sonic logs and industry reflection data in the<br />

Los Angeles basin, California, Journal of Geophysical<br />

Research, 108/B3.<br />

Tape, C., Q. Liu, A. Maggi, and J. Tromp, 2010, Seismic<br />

tomography of the southern California crust based on<br />

spectral-element and adjoint methods, Geophys. J. Int.,<br />

180, 433–462.<br />

Tape, C., Q. Liu, A. Maggi, and J. Tromp, 2009, Adjoint<br />

tomography of southern California, Science, vol 325, p.<br />

988-992.<br />

Fault and Rupture Mechanics<br />

The primary mission of the Fault and Rupture Mechanics<br />

Focus Group is to develop physics-based models of the<br />

nucleation, propagation, and arrest of dynamic rupture to<br />

understand earthquakes in Southern California. Specific<br />

research goals of FARM are to investigate the relative<br />

importance of different dynamic weakening mechanisms,<br />

characterize the constitutive behavior of faults and<br />

develop a capability to incorporate the behavior into<br />

dynamic rupture models, discover the relation of fault<br />

zone structure and earthquake mechanics at all scales, and<br />

determine the extent and causes of rupture directivity.<br />

Over the past year a large number of funded projects have<br />

addressed the research priorities of FARM using a variety<br />

of techniques. For the purpose of reporting research<br />

accomplishments, the projects are loosely categorized into<br />

the themes of fault-slip behavior, the micromechanics of<br />

faulting, the constitutive behavior of fault materials,<br />

advanced dynamic rupture modeling, and the<br />

characteristics of fault-slip and fault structure through<br />

observational studies in the field and laboratory. This<br />

section provides a brief summary of some<br />

accomplishments and research-related activities reported<br />

in March of 2011. Additional accomplishments are<br />

reviewed in other sections of this report. For a complete<br />

review of all FARM-related activities please see the annual<br />

reports for the individual projects posted on the <strong>SCEC</strong><br />

website.<br />

Mechanics-based Analysis of Fault Slip<br />

Behavior<br />

Building off of earlier work of Shearer et al. (2005), Bird<br />

recomputed Brune-type stress drops of magnitude 1.5-3.1<br />

earthquakes occurring in southern California from 1989 to<br />

2001 to test hypotheses relating stress drops to hypocentral<br />

56 | Southern California Earthquake Center<br />

Figure 18. Interpreted stress-drop regimes, based on temperature- and<br />

depth-systematics (from Fig. 3 in <strong>SCEC</strong> Report #10025). Dotted lines<br />

show steady-state geotherms for various heat-flows, based on the<br />

assumed crustal conductivity and radioactivity. Long-dashed curves<br />

show model brittle/ductile transition conditions (for strain rates varying<br />

over 4 orders of magnitude) in the homogeneous crustal rheology<br />

assumed by Liu & Bird [2002], whose models used the same thermal<br />

parameters and map of of heat flow.<br />

Figure 19. (a) The profiles of coseismic displacement on the Earth<br />

surface for the elastic simulation, a plastic simulation, an elastic<br />

prediction for the simulated slip distribution shown in panel b, and the<br />

best fitting model to the plastic response in the inversion. (b) The slip<br />

distribution in the plastic simulation and slip inversions of the surface<br />

displacements. The blue curve is the inverted slip of the surface<br />

displacement of the elastic prediction. The red curve is the inverted slip<br />

of the surface displacement of the simulated plastic response. (c)<br />

Difference between the inverted slip distributions shown in panel b,<br />

indicating that 10% (0.5 m) of the coseismic slip at 3-4 km depths is<br />

due to an artifact of the inversion that is based on the elastic model.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!