How fast is rupture during an earthquake? New insights from the 1999 Turkey Earthquakes

Bouchon, Michael; Bouin, Marie‐Paule; Karabulut, Hayrullah; Toksöz, M. Nafi; Dietrich, Michel; Rosakis, Ares J.

doi:10.1029/2001gl013112

Cited by 261 publications

(224 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

204

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…when the "friction coefficient" is significantly greater than µ s 0.6 in PMMA [141] or granite [152]). In addition to laboratory experiments and simulations, there is growing evidence that super-shear propagation can occur in earthquakes [156,[204][205][206][207] which are often associated with extreme damage.…”

Section: Fig 12mentioning

confidence: 99%

Recent developments in dynamic fracture: some perspectives

Fineberg

Bouchbinder

2015

Int J Fract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We briefly review a number of important recent experimental and theoretical developments in the field of dynamic fracture. Topics include experimental validation of the equations of motion for straight tensile cracks (in both infinite media and strip geometries), validation of a new theoretical description of the near-tip fields of dynamic cracks incorporating weak elastic nonlinearities, a new understanding of dynamic instabilities of tensile cracks in both 2D and 3D, crack front dynamics, and the relation between frictional motion and dynamic shear cracks. Related future research directions are briefly discussed.

show abstract

Section: Fig 12mentioning

confidence: 99%

Recent developments in dynamic fracture: some perspectives

Fineberg

Bouchbinder

2015

Int J Fract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The examples are the 1979 Imperial Valley earthquake (Archuleta, 1984), the 1999 Izmit earthquake (Bouchon et al, 2001), and the 2001 Kunlun earthquake (Bouchon and Vallée, 2003). Although the details are still being debated, the observation that the rupture speed is comparable to, or faster than, β, at least over some segments of the fault, appears well established.…”

Section: Fracture Energymentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Note the drastic difference between the two, which is caused by saturation of M S for great earthquakes. [8] where, [9] Two difficulties are encountered. First, with seismological measurements alone, the absolute value of the stresses, σ 0 and σ 1 , cannot be determined.…”

Section: Fracture Energymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The relation obtained by Gutenberg (1956), log E R = 1.5 M S + 4. 8 (E R in Joule) [1] where M S is the surface-wave magnitude (the magnitude scale computed from the amplitude of seismic surface waves at a period of about 20 sec) has been used for a long time as a useful relationship, which converts the empirical parameter M S to a physical parameter E R . This practice is meaningful only if the 20 sec wave represents the overall energy spectrum.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The diversity of the physics of earthquakes

Kanamori

2004

Proceedings of the Japan Academy. Ser. B: Physical and Biologic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Earthquakes exhibit diverse characteristics. Most shallow earthquakes are "brittle" in the sense that they excite seismic waves efficiently. However, some earthquakes are slow, as characterized by tsunami earthquakes and even slower events without any obvious seismic radiation. Also, some earthquakes, like the 1994 Bolivian deep earthquake, involved a large amount of fracture and thermal energy and may be more appropriately called a thermal event, rather than an earthquake. Some earthquakes are caused by processes other than faulting, such as landslides. This diversity can be best understood in terms of the difference in the partition of the released potential energy to radiated, fracture, and thermal energies during an earthquake. This approach requires detailed studies on quantification of earthquakes and estimation of various kinds of energies involved in earthquake processes. This paper reviews the progress in this field from historical and personal points of view and discusses its implications for earthquake damage mitigation.Key words: Quantification of earthquakes; energy budget of earthquakes; radiation efficiency; rupture speed; earthquake rupture pattern; earthquake early warning. Reviewamplitude of seismic waves observed on the standard Wood-Anderson seismograph at a distance ∆ from the epicenter. The function f(∆) is determined empirically so that M L = 3 if A is 1 mm at a distance of 100 km. Although this is a purely empirical parameter and cannot be directly related to any specific physical parameter of the earthquake, it proved to be a very useful quantification parameter and has long been used widely not only in California but also worldwide.The scale has been extended so that it can be determined with different types of instruments and different kinds of seismic waves. Yet, most of the scales were still empirical in the sense that they were determined from the observed amplitude and it was difficult to relate them to the physical parameters of the earthquake. Gutenberg and Richter (1942, 1955), Båth (1966) and many others attempted to relate the magnitude to more meaningful seismic source parameters such as the radiated energy, E R . The relation obtained by Gutenberg (1956),where M S is the surface-wave magnitude (the magnitude scale computed from the amplitude of seismic surface waves at a period of about 20 sec) has been used for a long time as a useful relationship, which converts the empirical parameter M S to a physical parameter E R . This practice is meaningful only if the 20 sec wave represents the overall energy spectrum. It turned out that the 20 sec wave represents the energy spectrum reasonably well for earthquakes up to M S = 7.5. For events larger than M S = 7.5, the peak of the energy spectrum is at a period much longer than 20 sec. The 20 sec wave used for M S determination can no longer represent the total energy of the radiated seismic wave; as a result, the M S scale saturates beyond M S = 8. For earthquakes with very large fault areas, for which the total amount of...

show abstract

“…While most earthquakes' rupture speeds (V r ) are less than the local shear wave (V S ) or Rayleigh wave speeds (V R ), supershear ruptures (i.e., V r > V S ) have been reported for several shallow strike-slip earthquakes (e.g., 1979Imperial Valley, 1999Izmit, 2001Kunlun, 2002Denali, 2010Yushu, and 2013 Craig earthquakes) [Archuleta, 1984;Bouchon et al, 2001;Bouchon and Vallée, 2003;Dunham and Archuleta, 2004;Walker and Shearer, 2009;Vallée and Dunham, 2012;Wang and Mori, 2012;Yue et al, 2013]. Observations and understanding of supershear ruptures have important implications for seismic hazard and earthquake dynamics [Dunham et al, 2003;Xia et al, 2004;Dunham, 2007;Das, 2010;Mello et al, 2010;Schmedes et al, 2010].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supershear rupture in the 24 May 2013 M_w 6.7 Okhotsk deep earthquake: Additional evidence from regional seismic stations

Zhan

Shearer

Kanamori

2015

Geophysical Research Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Zhan et al. (2014a) reported supershear rupture during the Mw 6.7 aftershock of the 2013 Mw 8.3 Sea of Okhotsk deep earthquake, relying heavily on the regional station PET, which played a critical role in constraining the vertical rupture dimension and rupture speed. Here we include five more regional stations and find that the durations of the source time functions derived from these stations are consistent with Zhan et al.'s supershear rupture model. Furthermore, to reduce the nonuniqueness of deconvolution and combine the bandwidths of different stations, we conduct a joint inversion of the six regional stations for a single broadband moment‐rate function (MRF). The best fitting MRF, which explains all the regional waveforms well, has a smooth shape without any temporal gaps. The Mw 6.7 Okhotsk deep earthquake is more likely a continuous supershear rupture than a dynamically triggered doublet.

show abstract

How fast is rupture during an earthquake? New insights from the 1999 Turkey Earthquakes

Cited by 261 publications

References 18 publications

Recent developments in dynamic fracture: some perspectives

Recent developments in dynamic fracture: some perspectives

The diversity of the physics of earthquakes

Supershear rupture in the 24 May 2013 M_w 6.7 Okhotsk deep earthquake: Additional evidence from regional seismic stations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

How fast is rupture during an earthquake? New insights from the 1999 Turkey Earthquakes

Cited by 261 publications

References 18 publications

Recent developments in dynamic fracture: some perspectives

Recent developments in dynamic fracture: some perspectives

The diversity of the physics of earthquakes

Supershear rupture in the 24 May 2013 Mw 6.7 Okhotsk deep earthquake: Additional evidence from regional seismic stations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Supershear rupture in the 24 May 2013 M_w 6.7 Okhotsk deep earthquake: Additional evidence from regional seismic stations