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; December 1995; v. 85; no. 6; p. 1873-1878
© 1995 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 Abercrombie, R. E.
Right arrow Articles by Wyatt, F. K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation

Testing a model of earthquake nucleation

Rachel E. Abercrombie*, Duncan C. Agnew and Frank K. Wyatt

Department of Earth Sciences University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California 90089-0740
IGPP 0225 University of California,, San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093-0225

Abstract

Some laboratory models of slip find that a critical amount (or velocity) of slow slip is required over a nucleation patch before dynamic failure begins. Typically, such patch sizes, when extrapolated to earthquakes, have been thought to be very small and the precursory slip undetectable. Ohnaka (1992, 1993) has proposed a model in which foreshocks delineate a growing zone of quasi-static slip that nucleates the dynamic rupture and suggests that it could be large enough (~10 km across) to be detectable and thus useful for short-term earthquake prediction. The 1992 Landers earthquake (M 7.3) had a distinctive foreshock sequence and initiated only 70 km from the strain meters at the Piñon Flat Observatory (PFO). We use this earthquake to investigate the validity and usefulness of Ohnaka's model. The accurate relocations of Dodge et al. (1995) show that the foreshock zone can be interpreted as expanding from an area of 800 m (along strike) by 900 m (in depth), to 2000 by 3200 m in the 6.5 hr before the mainshock. We have calculated the deformation signals expected both at PFO and 20 km from the foreshock zone, assuming either constant slip or constant stress drop on a circular patch expanding at 5 cm/sec over 6.5 hr. We find the slips or stress drops would have to have been implausibly high (meters or kilobars) to have been detectable on the strain meters at PFO. Slightly better limits are possible only 20 km from the source. Even though the distance from Landers to PFO is small compared with the average spacing of strain meters in California, we are unable to prove or disprove Ohnaka's model of earthquake nucleation. This suggests that even if the model is valid, it will not be useful for short-term prediction.

Footnotes

* Present address: Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences, Kelburn Research Centre, 32 Salamanca Road, P.O. Box 1320, Wellington, New Zealand.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of AmericaHome page
M. J. S. Johnston, R. D. Borcherdt, A. T. Linde, and M. T. Gladwin
Continuous Borehole Strain and Pore Pressure in the Near Field of the 28 September 2004 M 6.0 Parkfield, California, Earthquake: Implications for Nucleation, Fault Response, Earthquake Prediction, and Tremor
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, September 1, 2006; 96(4B): S56 - S72.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of AmericaHome page
B. K. Rastogi and P. Mandal
Foreshocks and nucleation of small- to moderate-sized Koyna earthquakes (India)
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, June 1, 1999; 89(3): 829 - 836.
[Abstract] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1995 by the Seismological Society of America.