Earthquake cycle simulations with rate-and-state friction and power-law viscoelasticity

Allison, K. L.; Dunham, Eric M.

doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2017.10.021

Cited by 93 publications

(124 citation statements)

References 106 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

115

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This approach has brought much insight into the rheology of plate boundaries at subduction zones (e.g., Hu et al, 2014Hu et al, , 2016Klein et al, 2016;Kyriakopoulos & Newman, 2016;Masterlark, 2003;Wang, 2007), transform boundaries (e.g., Allison & Dunham, 2018;Freed & Bürgmann, 2004;Masterlark & Wang, 2002;Takeuchi & Fialko, 2013), and collision zones (Castaldo et al, 2017;Cattin & Avouac, 2000;C. This approach has brought much insight into the rheology of plate boundaries at subduction zones (e.g., Hu et al, 2014Hu et al, , 2016Klein et al, 2016;Kyriakopoulos & Newman, 2016;Masterlark, 2003;Wang, 2007), transform boundaries (e.g., Allison & Dunham, 2018;Freed & Bürgmann, 2004;Masterlark & Wang, 2002;Takeuchi & Fialko, 2013), and collision zones (Castaldo et al, 2017;Cattin & Avouac, 2000;C.…”

Section: Subduction Dynamics With the Integral Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Asthenosphere Flow Modulated by Megathrust Earthquake Cycles

Barbot

2018

Geophysical Research Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Subduction megathrusts develop the largest earthquakes, often close to large population centers. Understanding the dynamics of deformation at subduction zones is therefore important to better assess seismic hazards. Here I develop consistent earthquake cycle simulations that incorporate localized and distributed deformation based on laboratory‐derived constitutive laws by combining boundary and volume elements to represent the mechanical coupling between megathrust slip and solid‐state flow in the oceanic asthenosphere and in the mantle wedge. The model is simplified, in two dimensions, but may help the interpretation of geodetic data. Megathrust earthquakes and slow‐slip events modulate the strain rate in the upper mantle, leading to large variations of effective viscosity in space and time and a complex pattern of surface deformation. While fault slip and flow in the mantle wedge generate surface displacements in the same, that is, seaward, direction, the viscoelastic relaxation in the oceanic asthenosphere generates transient surface deformation in the opposite, that is, landward, direction above the rupture area of the mainshock. Aseismic deformation above the seismogenic zone may be challenging to record, but it may reveal important constraints about the rheology of the subducting plate.

show abstract

Section: Subduction Dynamics With the Integral Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Asthenosphere Flow Modulated by Megathrust Earthquake Cycles

Barbot

2018

Geophysical Research Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, for the frictional sliding along a cohesionless fault, a third condition, namely the consistency condition (e.g., Borja, 2013), also commonly known as the fault boundary condition (e.g., Allison & Dunham, 2017), is required. With pore pressure effect, it reads…”

Section: Journal Of Geophysical Research: Solid Earthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fully Dynamic Spontaneous Rupture Due to Quasi‐Static Pore Pressure and Poroelastic Effects: An Implicit Nonlinear Computational Model of Fluid‐Induced Seismic Events

Jin

Zoback

2018

JGR Solid Earth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fluid perturbations play a pivotal role in triggering earthquakes. However, the role of fluid in the coseismic rupture process remains largely unknown. To this end, we develop a 2‐D fully dynamic spontaneous rupture model for fluid‐induced earthquakes. The effect of fluid in the preseismic quasi‐static regime is modeled as either pore pressure diffusion or fully coupled poroelasticity, using our Jin and Zoback (2017, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JB014892) computational model. The two approaches lead to radically different predictions on the time of earthquake nucleation. Correspondingly, the evolved fluid pressure or poroelastic stress on the fault, together with the spatially altered density of the fluid‐saturated hosting rock, is passed to the dynamic regime. Under the assumption of an undrained coseismic fluid‐solid system, we discretize the fully dynamic Cauchy equation of motion subjected to an exact fault contact constraint using a split‐node finite element method in space and an implicit Newmark family finite difference method in time. Within each time step, a fully implicit Newton‐Raphson scheme is implemented iteratively for linearizing the fully discrete equations. Within each Newton iteration, a physics‐based and nonstationary preconditioner is designed to accelerate the convergence of the selected generalized minimal residual method iterative linear solver. The effect of fluid is highlighted throughout the discretization and computational procedures. Finally, by conducting a numerical experiment, we illustrate that a fully coupled poroelastic model can lead to significantly different predictions on coseismic rupture behaviors and wavefields compared to a decoupled model. Our computational model can also serve as one of the earliest full‐physics modeling tool for fluid‐induced earthquakes.

show abstract

“…In the previous studies assuming power law rheologies for the lower crust and the upper mantle, thousands of earthquakes cycles are required for a model to reach a regular cycle (e.g., Allison & Dunham, ; Takeuchi & Fialko, ). Our simulation demonstrates that this spin‐up corresponds to the tectonic stress buildup, and the fault behavior can be highly variable during this period.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous investigations of the deformation of the lower crust and the upper mantle using mechanical models have shown that localized shear deformation can be developed in the lower crust under the interplate (e.g., Allison & Dunham, 2018;Moore & Parsons, 2015;Takeuchi & Fialko, 2012;Thatcher & England, 1998) and intraplate (e.g., Zhang & Sagiya, 2017) strike-slip faults. Some of these models considered earthquake cycles (e.g., Allison & Dunham, 2018;Erickson et al, 2017;Lambert & Barbot, 2016;Takeuchi & Fialko, 2012) and others considered a creeping fault (e.g., Moore & Parsons, 2015;Thatcher & England, 1998;Zhang & Sagiya, 2017) in the upper crust. The localized deformation in the lower crust under a fault appears in all these models.…”

Section: Comparison With Mechanical Models For Interplate Strike-slipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intraplate Strike‐Slip Faulting, Stress Accumulation, and Shear Localization of a Crust‐Upper Mantle System With Nonlinear Viscoelastic Material

Zhang

Sagiya

2018

JGR Solid Earth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigate the evolution of tectonic background stress and elastic as well as inelastic strain in a crust‐upper mantle system around an infinitely long vertical strike‐slip fault in a self‐consistent mechanical earthquake cycle model. In the early stage of the stress evolution, deformation of the crust and the upper mantle is dominated by a uniform simple shear. Shear localization in the lower crust starts when coseismic rupture extends to the entire brittle upper crust. Together with this transition, the earthquake recurrence intervals decrease by an order of magnitude due to a basal drag originated from a localized plastic flow of the lower crust. After the shear zone is fully developed in the lower crust, the fault slip rate catches up with the far‐field velocity and earthquakes starts to occur periodically. Such a steady state can be reached in several hundred thousand years from the beginning, which includes few hundreds of earthquake cycles. A shear zone with large cumulative strain needs a few million years to develop under an intraplate strike‐slip fault, which is much longer than the time for shear strain rate to be localized. The model successfully reproduced evolution of tectonic stress around an intraplate strike‐slip fault, interacting with the development of localized shear zone in the lower crust. The model demonstrates the importance of considering the whole mechanical system in which rheological structure and fault activities interacting with each other for the better understanding of the intraplate earthquakes.

show abstract

Earthquake cycle simulations with rate-and-state friction and power-law viscoelasticity

Cited by 93 publications

References 106 publications

Asthenosphere Flow Modulated by Megathrust Earthquake Cycles

Asthenosphere Flow Modulated by Megathrust Earthquake Cycles

Fully Dynamic Spontaneous Rupture Due to Quasi‐Static Pore Pressure and Poroelastic Effects: An Implicit Nonlinear Computational Model of Fluid‐Induced Seismic Events

Intraplate Strike‐Slip Faulting, Stress Accumulation, and Shear Localization of a Crust‐Upper Mantle System With Nonlinear Viscoelastic Material

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About