Comment on “Surface deformation caused by April 6th 2009 earthquake in L’Aquila (Italy): A comparative analysis from ENVISAT ASAR, ALOS PALSAR and ASTER” by M.A. Goudarzi, T. Woldai, V.A. Tolpekin

Chini, Marco; Bignami, Christian; Stramondo, Salvatore

doi:10.1016/j.jag.2011.12.009

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The coseismic ground displacement of the L’Aquila earthquake has also been measured by L‐, C‐ and X‐band DInSAR interferograms, and a very good agreement has been found in all the different data sets, indicating that the presence of atmospheric artefacts was limited (Stramondo et al 2011). Despite the time interval spanned by the pre‐ and post‐seismic images for both interferograms is quite long (nearly a year), we can assume that, within this interval, the inferred deformation pattern is caused by coseismic slip because post‐seismic deformation is negligible (Lanari et al 2010; Reale et al 2011; Stramondo et al 2011; Chini et al 2012) and pre‐seismic transients are absent (Amoruso & Crescentini 2010; Sansosti et al 2010).…”

Section: Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Complexity of the rupture process during the 2009 L’Aquila, Italy, earthquake

Cirella

Piatanesi

Tinti

et al. 2012

Geophysical Journal International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY In this study, we investigate the rupture history of the 2009 April 6 (Mw 6.1) L’Aquila normal faulting earthquake by using a non‐linear inversion of strong motion, GPS and DInSAR data. Both the separate and joint inversion solutions reveal a complex rupture process and a heterogeneous slip distribution. Slip is concentrated in two main asperities: a smaller shallow patch of slip located updip from the hypocentre and a second deeper and larger asperity located southeastwards along‐strike direction. The key feature of the source process emerging from our inverted models concerns the rupture history, which is characterized by two distinct stages. The first stage begins with rupture nucleation and with updip propagation at relatively high (∼4.0 km s−1), but still subshear, rupture velocity. The second stage starts nearly 2.0–2.5 s after nucleation and it is characterized by the along‐strike rupture propagation. The largest and deeper asperity fails during this stage of the rupture process. The rupture velocity is larger in the updip than in the along‐strike direction. The updip and along‐strike rupture propagation are separated in time and associated with a Mode II and a Mode III crack, respectively. The comparison between the source models inferred in this study with the Poisson ratio anomalies in the crustal volume containing the fault plane allows the interpretation of the delay in along‐strike rupture propagation in terms of a structural control of the rupture history. Our results show that the L’Aquila earthquake featured a very complex rupture, with strong spatial and temporal heterogeneities suggesting a strong frictional and/or structural control of the rupture process.

show abstract