4.1 Article

On the scale dependence of earthquake stress drop

Journal

JOURNAL OF SEISMOLOGY
Volume 20, Issue 4, Pages 1151-1170

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10950-016-9594-4

Keywords

Stress drop; Self-similarity; Scale dependence; Earthquake source mechanics

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We discuss the debated issue of scale dependence in earthquake source mechanics with the goal of providing supporting evidence to foster the adoption of a coherent interpretative framework. We examine the heterogeneous distribution of source and constitutive parameters during individual ruptures and their scaling with earthquake size. We discuss evidence that slip, slip-weakening distance and breakdown work scale with seismic moment and are interpreted as scale dependent parameters. We integrate our estimates of earthquake stress drop, computed through a pseudo-dynamic approach, with many others available in the literature for both point sources and finite fault models. We obtain a picture of the earthquake stress drop scaling with seismic moment over an exceptional broad range of earthquake sizes (-8 < M-W < 9). Our results confirm that stress drop values are scattered over three order of magnitude and emphasize the lack of corroborating evidence that stress drop scales with seismic moment. We discuss these results in terms of scale invariance of stress drop with source dimension to analyse the interpretation of this outcome in terms of self-similarity. Geophysicists are presently unable to provide physical explanations of dynamic self-similarity relying on deterministic descriptions of micro-scale processes. We conclude that the interpretation of the self-similar behaviour of stress drop scaling is strongly model dependent. We emphasize that it relies on a geometric description of source heterogeneity through the statistical properties of initial stress or fault-surface topography, in which only the latter is constrained by observations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available