4.4 Article

High-resolution satellite imagery mapping of the surface rupture and slip distribution of the MW ∼7.8, 14 November 2001 Kokoxili Earthquake, Kunlun Fault, northern Tibet, China

期刊

出版社

SEISMOLOGICAL SOC AMER
DOI: 10.1785/0120040233

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The M-w 7.8 Kokoxili earthquake of 14 November 2001, which ruptured a 450-km-long stretch of the sinistral Kunlun strike-slip fault, at the northeastern edge of the Tibet plateau, China, ranks as the largest strike-slip event ever recorded instrumentally in Asia. Newly available high-resolution satellite HRS images (pixel size <= 1 m) acquired in the months following the earthquake proved a powerful tool to complement field investigations and to produce the most accurate map to date of the coseismic displacements along the central Kusai Hu segment of the rupture. The coseismic rupture geometry south and west of Buka Daban Feng, near the earthquake epicenter, was also investigated in detail. Along the Kusai Hu segment, slip partitioning is for the first time observed to occur simultaneously during a single event, with two parallel strands, similar to 2 km apart, localizing almost pure strike-slip and normal faulting. In all, 83 new HRS coseismic offset measurements, some of which calibrated by field work, show large, well-constrained variations (>= 100%) of the slip function over distances of only similar to 25 km. Tension cracks opening ahead of the shear dislocation and later offset by the upward propagating strike-slip rupture were observed, demonstrating that the rupture front propagated faster at depth than near the surface. The triple junction between the central Kusai Hu segment, the Kunlun Pass fault, where the rupture ended, and the Xidatan-Dongdatan segment, which could be the next segment to fall along, the main Kunlun fault, acted as a strong barrier, implying that direct triggering of earthquake rupture on the Xidatan-Dongdatan segment by Kokoxili-type earthquakes may not be the rule.

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

4.4
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