28.01.2013 Views

Annual Meeting - SCEC.org

Annual Meeting - SCEC.org

Annual Meeting - SCEC.org

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Poster Abstracts | Group 1 – EFP<br />

range of magnitudes, in particular what conditions allow small earthquakes to grow into larger<br />

ones and whether accelerating seismicity at a smaller scale presages larger events. Because we<br />

employ a realistic geometry, use rate and state friction, and use a quasi-static approach to the<br />

behavior during rapid slip, we hope that the behavior of the simulated sequence of events will be<br />

as similar to that of real earthquakes as possible. Because a detailed time-space history of<br />

microseismicity and larger events at Parkfield exists, it will be possible to make comparisons<br />

between the properties of the simulated history of events and those of the actual events. The<br />

smallest elements in the multiscale grid are 7 m in dimension, values small enough to represent a<br />

continuum with laboratory values of Dc and the other constitutive parameters. The multiscale grid<br />

is used so that only the areas having experienced earthquakes are represented by the smallest<br />

elements. The largest elements are used in areas where microearthquakes do not occur, and these<br />

are 200 m in dimension. A total model area 47 km along the San Andreas by 15 km deep that is<br />

based on the observed distribution of 4966 microearthquakes has 1,464,433 elements. Running this<br />

entire model for sufficient time steps, even with the Fast Multipole approach, is probably beyond<br />

the range of existing computers. Consequently we are starting with subsets of the total area having<br />

a range of sizes and numbers of actual earthquakes, to gain experience with the behavior of the<br />

simulations. Note that although the distribution of constitutive parameters and of the smallest<br />

elements may restrict the simulated earthquakes in the model to be spatially similar to actual<br />

earthquakes at Parkfield, the time histories of the simulated earthquakes will occur spontaneously.<br />

The space-time distribution of simulated seismicity is the output of the simulation that we plan to<br />

analyze to see if detectable patterns of activity premonitory to larger events can be detected.<br />

1-088<br />

COMPARISON OF A MULTI-CYCLE EARTHQUAKE SIMULATOR WITH A<br />

DYNAMIC FINITE ELEMENT METHOD FOR A HETEROGENEOUS PLANAR FAULT<br />

Stevens JA, Dieterich JH, Oglesby DD, and Richards-Dinger KB<br />

RSQSim is an earthquake simulator that produces fast simulations of numerous earthquake<br />

ruptures, up to 10^6 events in a simulation, in complex fault systems under the effects of rate- and<br />

state-dependent friction. As part of an effort to validate the quasi-dynamic rupture propagation<br />

aspects of RSQSim, we compare rupture propagation on a variable-strength planar fault in RSQSim<br />

to that on a similar fault in DYNA3D (a fully dynamic finite element mode employing slipweakening<br />

friction). Validation of the final slip and stress change distributions are important to<br />

ensure that subsequent events in RSQSim will inherit the proper stress fields. In addition, if the<br />

time evolution of ruptures in RSQSim is realistic, they may be useful as kinematic sources for<br />

ground motion calculations.<br />

By using fairly consistent values of physical variables in both codes, previous comparisons for<br />

ruptures with uniform fault properties found that both methods produced very similar results. Our<br />

asperity model consists of multiple rectangular zones of increased normal stress of varying size<br />

and amplitude. In both modeling methods the heterogeneities produce complex ruptures - as the<br />

rupture front encounters a barrier, it tends to wrap itself around the barrier and create a burst of<br />

energy once it propagates across the barrier. Both codes allow rupture propagation over significant<br />

zones of negative stress drop in these asperity regions. Rupture durations, average rupture<br />

propagation speeds and overall slip pattern are quite similar with both methods. However,<br />

ruptures with the fully dynamic method (DYNA3D) propagate more rapidly through the barriers,<br />

and generate less high-frequency variations of slip than ruptures with the quasi-dynamic method<br />

(RSQSim). Regardless, the qualitative agreement of these two very different methods is remarkably<br />

good and may improve more with further tuning of quasi-dynamic computational parameters.<br />

116 | Southern California Earthquake Center

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!