4.7 Article

Tidal modulation and triggering of low-frequency earthquakes in northern Cascadia

期刊

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-SOLID EARTH
卷 120, 期 1, 页码 384-405

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1002/2014JB011430

关键词

low-frequency earthquakes; tectonic tremor; Cascadia subduction zone; Earth and ocean tides

资金

  1. NSERC [RGPIN 138004]
  2. NSF [1249775]
  3. Directorate For Geosciences
  4. Division Of Earth Sciences [1249775] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We analyze the influence of Earth and ocean tides on the triggering of low-frequency earthquakes (LFEs) in northern Cascadia using three LFE catalogs for southern Vancouver Island and Washington state from episodic tremor and slip events between 2003 and 2013. Sensitivities of LFE families to tidally induced fault normal stress, updip shear stress (UDSS), and corresponding time derivatives are computed and their geographic variability is mapped. We find localized areas showing higher sensitivity to UDSS than their surroundings, suggesting that tidal sensitivity depends on laterally heterogeneous physical properties such as variable pore fluid pressures and frictional properties along the plate interface. We observe that sensitivity of LFEs to UDSS rises dramatically from near zero on the first day of strong activity to a maximum approximate to 4 days later. In addition, the peak LFE rate transitions from a correlation with peak tidal shear stress rate to a correlation with peak tidal shear stress through large slow slip events. We identify 64 Rapid-Tremor-Reversals (RTRs) that start a few days after the main slip front. The RTRs have an average stress drop of approximate to 0.8 kPa and a majority (72%) occurs during periods of large positive UDSS. The combined observations imply that RTRs play an important role in slow slip processes and that modulation of creep rate due to tidal stress and tidal triggering of secondary events are jointly responsible for the observed tidal sensitivity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据