4.7 Review

Global Omori law decay of triggered earthquakes: Large aftershocks outside the classical aftershock zone

期刊

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2001JB000646

关键词

earthquake triggering; aftershocks; Omori's law; seismicity rate; seismicity distribution; earthquake probability

向作者/读者索取更多资源

[1] Triggered earthquakes can be large, damaging, and lethal as evidenced by the 1999 shocks in Turkey and the 2001 earthquakes in El Salvador. In this study, earthquakes with M-s greater than or equal to7.0 from the Harvard centroid moment tensor (CMT) catalog are modeled as dislocations to calculate shear stress changes on subsequent earthquake rupture planes near enough to be affected. About 61% of earthquakes that occurred near (defined as having shear stress change \Deltatau\ greater than or equal to 0.01 MPa) the M-s greater than or equal to 7.0 shocks are associated with calculated shear stress increases, while similar to39% are associated with shear stress decreases. If earthquakes associated with calculated shear stress increases are interpreted as triggered, then such events make up at least 8% of the CMT catalog. Globally, these triggered earthquakes obey an Omori law rate decay that lasts between similar to7-11 years after the main shock. Earthquakes associated with calculated shear stress increases occur at higher rates than background up to 240 km away from the main shock centroid. Omori's law is one of the few time-predictable patterns evident in the global occurrence of earthquakes. If large triggered earthquakes habitually obey Omori's law, then their hazard can be more readily assessed. The characteristic rate change with time and spatial distribution can be used to rapidly assess the likelihood of triggered earthquakes following events of M-s greater than or equal to 7.0. I show an example application to the M = 7.7 13 January 2001 El Salvador earthquake where use of global statistics appears to provide a better rapid hazard estimate than Coulomb stress change calculations.

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