28.01.2013 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.

Poster Abstracts | Group 2 – FARM<br />

2-063<br />

NEW COMPUTATIONAL APPROACH TO NONPLANAR ELASTODYANIC<br />

RUPTURES Coon ET, Shaw BE, and Spiegelman M<br />

We present a new approach to modeling dynamic ruptures on nonplanar faults. A fundamental<br />

challenge for modeling rupture dynamics on complicated fault networks using current techniques<br />

is dealing with the computational mesh. Generation of a mesh that is both faithful to the<br />

underlying fault structure and suitable for efficient computation is an open problem. Here, we test<br />

the possibility of using an extended finite element method, XFEM, (e.g. [Dolbow, Moes, and<br />

Belytschko, 2001]) for problems of repeated rupture.<br />

This method is mesh-independent -- the fault need not lie on mesh edges -- drastically reducing the<br />

requirements for suitable compuational meshes. We extend the method to include elastodynamics,<br />

and demonstrate the feasibility of XFEM by modeling long-time series of ruptures on complicated,<br />

two-dimensional fault networks. While the problems and geometries we solve are feasible with<br />

existing methods, this demonstration indicates that XFEM should prove useful for the solution of<br />

problems limited by mesh generation.<br />

Using XFEM, sequences of elastodynamic earthquake events on networks of faults, including<br />

branching, are generated. Efficient solution via XFEM enables the study of statistics of populations<br />

of events and the effects of variation of geometry. As varying geometry is handled easily by the<br />

method, we study the resulting variation in event populations. Distributions of event rupture<br />

length, magnitude, epicenter location, and other statistical measures are presented and compared<br />

as a function of geometry. Results for flat fault are shown to be consistent with previous results on<br />

flat faults using other computational approaches. New results for complicated geometries are<br />

presented, and compared with those for flat faults.<br />

2-064<br />

AN EFFICIENT-FEM IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SMOOTH-TSN ALGORITHM FOR<br />

NUMERICAL MODELING OF RUPTURE PROPAGATION Moczo P, Gális M, Kristek J,<br />

and Kristeková M<br />

The Traction-at-Split-Node (TSN) algorithm developed independently by J. D. Andrews and S. M.<br />

Day is so far probably the most accurate way to simulate dynamic rupture propagation in the<br />

numerical-modeling methods in which the computational domain is covered by a grid of discrete<br />

points. We implemented the TSN algorithm in our efficient formulation of the finite-element<br />

method (FEM). The FEM formulation requires less computer memory because it makes use of the<br />

global restoring-force vector instead of the global stiffness matrix. The formulation reduces<br />

considerably the computational time (compared to the standard restoring-force formulation)<br />

because it uses e-invariants (Moczo et al. 2007) in calculation of the restoring force.<br />

Despite its superior accuracy, the standard TSN algorithm is not free from high-frequency<br />

oscillations in the slip-rate time histories in the models with the linear slip-weakening friction law.<br />

The oscillations are due to discretization of the field variables in time and space, and due to the<br />

dynamic boundary condition on the fault. The artificial Kelvin-Voigt damping or perfectly matched<br />

layers have been applied to suppress the oscillations.<br />

In our implementation we do not apply either of the two tools. Instead we apply 2D spatial moving<br />

weighted averaging separately to each of the trial traction components. The weighted averaging<br />

combines a Gaussian-filtered with unfiltered values. We performed extensive numerical<br />

simulations in order to select the best smoothing algorithm. The examined algorithms included the<br />

174 | Southern California Earthquake Center

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!