4.7 Article

Submarine landslide potential near the megasplay fault at the Nankai subduction zone

期刊

EARTH AND PLANETARY SCIENCE LETTERS
卷 312, 期 3-4, 页码 453-462

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.epsl.2011.10.024

关键词

submarine landslides; slope stability; Nankai Trough; sediment transport

资金

  1. NSF [OCE-0451602, OCE-0752114, OCE-0648331]
  2. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) via MARUM Research Center

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We investigate the mechanics of slope failures on the Nankai accretionary complex offshore Japan in the vicinity of a major out-of-sequence thrust fault (termed the megasplay). Incorporating laboratory-measured shear strength of slope sediments sampled during Integrated Ocean Drilling Project (IODP) Expeditions 315 and 316 with local seafloor slope angles from bathymetric data and constraints on in-situ effective stress conditions from drilling, we find that slopes in the study area are stable and submarine landslides are not expected to occur under static conditions. In order to assess the possibility of slope failure triggered by coseismic rupture of the megasplay fault, we use empirical relations for strong ground motion attenuation from earthquakes with M-w 6-9. We find that the slope sediments should be stable based on computations from one model, developed from a catalog of worldwide subduction zone earthquakes (Youngs et al., 1997). However, using a different model developed primarily from a catalog of crustal earthquakes in Japan (Kanno et al., 2006), we find that slopes should be unstable for earthquakes 8 <= M-w <= 9, and possibly unstable for events with 6 <= M-w<8, depending on the proximity of rupture to the seafloor. Considering limitations of the models and geologic observations of slope failure recurrence, the true slope stability is likely to be in between the predictions of the two models, and we suggest that it may be modulated by long-term pore pressure fluctuations. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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