|
|
||||||||
1 U.S. Geological Survey, MS977
345
Middlefield Road
Menlo Park, California 94025
(J.C.S.)
2 Institute of Earth Sciences, Acadamia
Sinica
P.O. Box 1-55, Nanking
Taipei, Taiwan
115
(S.-B.Y.)
We treat both the number of earthquakes and the deformation following
a mainshock as the superposition of a steady background accumulation and the
postearthquake
process. The preseismic displacement and seismicity rates ru
and rE are
used as estimates of the background rates. Let t be the time after the
mainshock, u(t)
+ u0 the postseismic displacement less the background
accumulation rut, and
N(t)
the observed cumulative number of postseismic earthquakes less the background
accumulation rEt. For the first 160 days (duration limited
by the occurrence of another
nearby earthquake) following the Chengkung (M 6.5, 10 December 2003,
eastern
Taiwan) and the first 560 days following the Parkfield (M 6.0, 28
September 2004,
central California) earthquakes u(t) +
u0 is a linear function of
N(t).
The aftershock
accumulation
N(t) for both earthquakes is described by
the modified Omori Law
d
N/dt
(1 +
t/
)–p with p =
0.96 and
= 0.03 days. Although the Chengkung
earthquake involved sinistral, reverse slip on a moderately dipping fault and
the
Parkfield earthquake right-lateral slip on a near-vertical fault, the
earthquakes share
an unusual feature: both occurred on faults exhibiting interseismic fault creep
at the
surface. The source of the observed postseismic deformation appears to be
afterslip
on the coseismic rupture. The linear relation between u(t)
+ u0 and N(t) suggests
that this afterslip also generates the aftershocks. The linear relation between
u(t) +
u0 and
N(t) obtains after neither
the 1999 M 7.1 Hector Mine (southern California)
nor the 1999 M 7.6 Chi-Chi (central Taiwan) earthquakes, neither of
which occurred
on fault segments exhibiting fault creep.
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |