Open Access
Transient stresses al Parkfield, California, produced by the M 7.4 Landers earthquake of June 28, 1992: implications for the time-dependence of fault friction
Author(s) -
Paul Spudich,
Lee K. Steck,
M. Hellweg,
J. B. Fletcher,
L. R. I. Baker
Publication year - 1994
Publication title -
annals of geophysics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.394
H-Index - 60
eISSN - 2037-416X
pISSN - 1593-5213
DOI - 10.4401/ag-4146
Subject(s) - geology , hypocenter , aftershock , seismology , induced seismicity , differential stress , geodesy , epicenter , geodetic datum , deformation (meteorology) , oceanography
he M 7.4 Landers earthquake triggered widespread seismicity in the Western U.S. Because the transient dynamic stresses induced at regional distances by the Landers surface waves are much larger than the expected static stresses, the magnitude and the characteristics of the dynamic stresses may bear upon the earthquake triggering mechanism. The Landers earthquake was recorded on the UPSAR array, a group of 14 triaxial accelerometers located within a 1-square-km region 10 km southwest of the town of Parkfield, California, 412 km northwest of the Landers epicenter. We used a standard geodetic inversion procedure to determine the surface strain and stress tensors as functions of time from the observed dynamic displacements. Peak dynamic strains and stresses at the Earth's surface are about 7 microstrain and 0.035 MPa, respectively, and they have a flat amplitude spectrum between 2 s and 15 s period. These stresses agree well with stresses predicted from a simple rule of thumb based upon the ground velocity spectrum observed at a single station. Peak stresses ranged from about 0.035 MPa at the surface to about 0.12 MPa between 2 and 14 km depth, with the sharp increase of stress away from the surface resulting from the rapid increase of rigidity with depth and from the influence of surface wave mode shapes. Comparison of Landers-induced static and dynamic stresses at the hypocenter of the Big Bear aftershock provides a clear example that faults are stronger on time scales of tens of seconds than on time scales of hours or longer