Artwork

内容由USGS, Menlo Park (Scott Haefner) and U.S. Geological Survey提供。所有播客内容(包括剧集、图形和播客描述)均由 USGS, Menlo Park (Scott Haefner) and U.S. Geological Survey 或其播客平台合作伙伴直接上传和提供。如果您认为有人在未经您许可的情况下使用您的受版权保护的作品,您可以按照此处概述的流程进行操作https://zh.player.fm/legal
Player FM -播客应用
使用Player FM应用程序离线!

Stress Shadows: Insights into the Physics of Aftershock Triggering

1:00:00
 
分享
 

Manage episode 419719032 series 1399341
内容由USGS, Menlo Park (Scott Haefner) and U.S. Geological Survey提供。所有播客内容(包括剧集、图形和播客描述)均由 USGS, Menlo Park (Scott Haefner) and U.S. Geological Survey 或其播客平台合作伙伴直接上传和提供。如果您认为有人在未经您许可的情况下使用您的受版权保护的作品,您可以按照此处概述的流程进行操作https://zh.player.fm/legal

Jeanne Hardebeck, U.S. Geological Survey

Aftershock triggering is commonly attributed to static Coulomb stress changes from the mainshock. A Coulomb stress increase encourages aftershocks in some areas, while in other areas termed “stress shadows” a decrease in Coulomb stress suppresses earthquake occurrence. While the predicted earthquake rate decrease is rarely seen, lower aftershock rates are observed in the stress shadows compared to stress increase regions. However, the question remains why some aftershocks occur in the stress shadows. I examine three hypotheses: (1) Aftershocks appear in shadows because of inaccuracy in the computed stress change. (2) Aftershocks in the shadows occur on faults with different orientations than the model receiver faults, and these unexpected fault orientations experience increased Coulomb stress. (3) Aftershocks in the shadows are triggered by other physical processes, specifically dynamic stress changes. For the 2016 Kumamoto, Japan, and 2019 Ridgecrest, California, sequences, the first two hypotheses seem unlikely. Over many realizations of the stress calculations with different modeling inputs, numerous aftershocks consistently show negative static Coulomb stress changes both on the model receiver faults and the individual event focal mechanisms. Hypothesis 3 appears more likely, as the spatial and temporal distribution of aftershocks in the stress shadows are consistent with the expectations of dynamic triggering: the aftershocks occur mainly in a burst over the first few days to weeks, and decay with distance like near-field body waves. The time series of dynamic stress can be modeled, and numerous metrics explored, such as the maximum dynamic Coulomb stress change, and the period and duration of the stressing. Determining which metrics correspond to aftershock occurrence in the stress shadows may be useful in discriminating between various proposed physical mechanisms of dynamic stress triggering.

  continue reading

20集单集

Artwork
icon分享
 
Manage episode 419719032 series 1399341
内容由USGS, Menlo Park (Scott Haefner) and U.S. Geological Survey提供。所有播客内容(包括剧集、图形和播客描述)均由 USGS, Menlo Park (Scott Haefner) and U.S. Geological Survey 或其播客平台合作伙伴直接上传和提供。如果您认为有人在未经您许可的情况下使用您的受版权保护的作品,您可以按照此处概述的流程进行操作https://zh.player.fm/legal

Jeanne Hardebeck, U.S. Geological Survey

Aftershock triggering is commonly attributed to static Coulomb stress changes from the mainshock. A Coulomb stress increase encourages aftershocks in some areas, while in other areas termed “stress shadows” a decrease in Coulomb stress suppresses earthquake occurrence. While the predicted earthquake rate decrease is rarely seen, lower aftershock rates are observed in the stress shadows compared to stress increase regions. However, the question remains why some aftershocks occur in the stress shadows. I examine three hypotheses: (1) Aftershocks appear in shadows because of inaccuracy in the computed stress change. (2) Aftershocks in the shadows occur on faults with different orientations than the model receiver faults, and these unexpected fault orientations experience increased Coulomb stress. (3) Aftershocks in the shadows are triggered by other physical processes, specifically dynamic stress changes. For the 2016 Kumamoto, Japan, and 2019 Ridgecrest, California, sequences, the first two hypotheses seem unlikely. Over many realizations of the stress calculations with different modeling inputs, numerous aftershocks consistently show negative static Coulomb stress changes both on the model receiver faults and the individual event focal mechanisms. Hypothesis 3 appears more likely, as the spatial and temporal distribution of aftershocks in the stress shadows are consistent with the expectations of dynamic triggering: the aftershocks occur mainly in a burst over the first few days to weeks, and decay with distance like near-field body waves. The time series of dynamic stress can be modeled, and numerous metrics explored, such as the maximum dynamic Coulomb stress change, and the period and duration of the stressing. Determining which metrics correspond to aftershock occurrence in the stress shadows may be useful in discriminating between various proposed physical mechanisms of dynamic stress triggering.

  continue reading

20集单集

Wszystkie odcinki

×
 
Loading …

欢迎使用Player FM

Player FM正在网上搜索高质量的播客,以便您现在享受。它是最好的播客应用程序,适用于安卓、iPhone和网络。注册以跨设备同步订阅。

 

快速参考指南