Quick
Search: 
 
advanced search
 GSW Home    GeoRef Home    My GSW Alerts    Contact GSW    About GSW    Journals List    Help 
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America Signup for GSW Email News
JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America; August 2008; v. 98; no. 4; p. 1642-1658; DOI: 10.1785/0120070201
© 2008 Seismological Society of America
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ma, S.
Right arrow Articles by Beroza, G. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation

Rupture Dynamics on a Bimaterial Interface for Dipping Faults

Shuo Ma and Gregory C. Beroza

Department of Geophysics, Stanford University, 397 Panama Mall, Stanford, California 94305

Dip-slip faulting may juxtapose different geologic materials with different properties, such that a strong material contrast will naturally tend to form. Both the material contrast across a fault and dip-slip motion on a nonvertical fault lead to normal stress variations during earthquake rupture. This normal stress variation will significantly affect dynamic rupture propagation. To demonstrate this, we model dynamic rupture propagation on two-dimensional (2D), reverse, and normal faults (30°, 45°, and 60° dipping) with 20% material contrasts. For predominantly up-dip rupture propagation, we find that normal stress variations due to the free surface and material contrast can either reinforce or counteract each other depending on the configuration. For reverse faults, we find a larger strength drop for a more compliant hanging wall and a lower strength drop for a more compliant footwall. For normal faults, we find a larger strength drop for a more compliant footwall and a lower strength drop for a more compliant hanging wall. For both reverse and normal faults, ground motion will be more symmetric between the hanging wall and footwall with compliant material on the footwall and more asymmetric if more compliant materials are on the hanging wall. Our results have important implications for the dynamics of crustal and perhaps subduction-zone earthquake faulting, where strong bimaterial contrasts across dipping faults are possible. In continental settings, reverse faulting will tend to advect rigid materials from greater depth onto the hanging wall, such that the effects of fault dip and material contrast will counteract one another. In subduction zones, the hanging wall is likely to be more compliant, and hence the material and geometric effects may reinforce one another.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of AmericaHome page
L. Munguia, E. Glowacka, F. Suarez-Vidal, H. Lira-Herrera, and O. Sarychikhina
Near-Fault Strong Ground Motions Recorded during the Morelia Normal-Fault Earthquakes of May 2006 in Mexicali Valley, B. C., Mexico
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, June 1, 2009; 99(3): 1538 - 1551.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2009 by Seismological Society of America