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; August 2003; v. 93; no. 4; p. 1792-1802; DOI: 10.1785/0120020173
© 2003 Seismological Society of America
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
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 ISI Web of Science
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 ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Chen, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Sammis, C. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation

Article

Asperity Models for Earthquakes

Youlin Chen and Charles G. Sammis

Department of Earth Sciences
University of Southern California
Los Angeles, California 90089
(Y.C., C.G.S.)

Manuscript received 14 August 2002.

A quasi-static numerical method was used to simulate the failure of a strong stuck asperity on an otherwise creeping fault plane. The numerical model produced the same slip distribution as analytical asperity models, which, for constant loading rate, produced repeating events having a period T that scales with moment M0 as , the scaling relation observed by Nadeau and Johnson (1998) at Parkfield. When the asperity is a composite of smaller hard unit asperities, we still find but the constant of proportionality depends on the density of unit asperities within the cluster. Since only clusters with a fixed asperity density follow the observed scaling, this result rules out the fractal spatial distribution (Cantor dust) of unit asperities at Parkfield suggested by Sammis et al. (1999). For solid asperities, the average stress drop on the asperity is on the order of 100 MPa, but the average stress drop over the entire rupture area is significantly lower, equivalent to that estimated from spectral analysis. However, the stress drop for asperity models is not independent of seismic moment but decreases with earthquake size. The energy release rate for asperity events is estimated to be J/m2, near the upper limit of estimates by Li (1987) using parameters from large events on the San Andreas Fault.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of AmericaHome page
L. R. Johnson and R. M. Nadeau
Asperity Model of an Earthquake: Dynamic Problem
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, February 1, 2005; 95(1): 75 - 108.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2003 by the Seismological Society of America.