Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America; June 1994; v. 84; no. 3; p. 826-834
© 1994 Seismological Society of America
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Behr, J.
Right arrow Articles by Gross, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation

Eureka Peak fault afterslip following the 28 June 1992 Landers earthquake

Jeffrey Behr*, Roger Bilham, Paul Bodin{dagger} and Susanna Gross

CIRES Univesity of Colorado, Boulder, Boulder, Colorado 80309-0216

Abstract

Although surface ruptures of the principal Landers faults apparently slipped co-seismically, surface slip on the 10-km-long Eureka Peak fault has continued at a decreasing rate during the year following the mainshock. Three creepmeters installed on the fault as early as 4 days after the mainshock have recorded afterslip amplitudes of more than 8 cm on the northern half of the mapped fault. The maximum observed slip 1 yr after the earthquake is 23 ± 2 cm, and an additional 1 to 3 cm of afterslip may occur on the fault in the next decade if the current rate of slip decrease remains steady. Should this occur, it will bring surface slip amplitudes close to the ~25 cm of slip inferred from geodetic data to have occurred at depth on the northern 4 km of the fault. Creepmeters on the fault record both episodic creep events and slow background slip, but, although changes in creep rate occur, they do not correlate well with seismic moment release in volumes near the fault zone. As is the case with many afterslip processes and other creeping faults in California, the Eureka Peak fault cuts through sediments. It is possible that such sedimentary layers, and corresponding depths to which afterslip is occurring, are relatively shallow or that the fault lacks a well-developed gouge zone near sites where episodic creep is absent.

Footnotes

* Present address: Insitute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, California 92093.

{dagger} Present address: Center for Earthquake Research and Information, University of Memphis, Memphis, Tennessee 38152.

1. Jeffrey Behr is now at: Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics Scripps Institution of Oceanography La Jolla, CA 92093

2. Paul Bodin is now at: Center for Earthquake Research and Information University of Memphis Memphis, TN




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of AmericaHome page
Lack of Precursory Slip to the 1999 Hector Mine, California, Earthquake as Constrained by InSAR
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, May 1, 2002; 92(4): 1443 - 1449.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1994 by the Seismological Society of America.