Hydrological effects of the<i>M</i><sub>W</sub>7.1 Darfield (Canterbury) earthquake, 4 September 2010, New Zealand

Cox, Simon C.; Rutter, Helen; Sims, Alex; Manga, Michael; Weir, Julian; Ezzy, Timothy Robert; White, P. A.; Horton, Travis W.; Scott, D. M.

doi:10.1080/00288306.2012.680474

Cited by 85 publications

(90 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are fewer studies of large-scale responses with a dense network of wells. Some examples include responses over large alluvial fans following the 1999 M7.1 Chi-Chi earthquake in Taiwan where water level changes in over 180 wells were documented and analyzed Wang and Chia, 2008), and the 2011 M7.1 Christchurch earthquake, New Zealand, where over 120 water level responses were analyzed (Cox et al, 2012). In both examples, responses were documented in unconsolidated aquifers, which may be significantly different from those in consolidated aquifers Wang and Chia, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Mechanism of co-seismic water level change following four great earthquakes – insights from co-seismic responses throughout the Chinese mainland

Shi

Wang

Manga

et al. 2015

Earth and Planetary Science Letters

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We analyze the co-seismic groundwater level responses to four great earthquakes recorded by China's network of groundwater monitoring wells. The large number of operational wells (164 wells for the 2007 Mw 8.5 Sumatra earthquake, 245 wells for the Mw 7.9 Wenchuan earthquake, 228 wells for the Mw 9.0 Tohoku earthquake and 223 wells for 2012 Mw 8.6 Sumatra earthquake) and co-seismic responses provide an opportunity to test hypotheses on mechanisms for co-seismic water level changes. Overall, the co-seismic water level responses are complex over large spatial scales, and there is great variability both in the sign and amplitude of water level responses in the data set. As shown in previous studies, permeability change, rather than static strain, is a more plausible mechanism to explain most of the coseismic responses. However, we find through tidal analysis of water level responses to solid Earth tide that only one third of these wells that showed a sustained post-seismic response can be explained by earthquake-induced permeability change in aquifers, and these wells had sustained (>30 days) water level changes. Wells that did not show sustained changes are more likely affected by permeability changes only immediately adjacent to the wellbore.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Mechanism of co-seismic water level change following four great earthquakes – insights from co-seismic responses throughout the Chinese mainland

Shi

Wang

Manga

et al. 2015

Earth and Planetary Science Letters

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Also, observations of recurrent liquefaction during the sequence, following both the larger earthquakes and other moderate events have been considered, in combination with measurements of ground motion by a dense seismograph network, to assess the threshold of shaking required to induce liquefaction at a site of highly susceptible sediment . Groundwater characteristics recorded during the events were successfully used to assess the influence of the liquefaction process on changes in artesian pressure in confined aquifers (Cox et al, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Liquefaction Features Produced by the 2010–2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence in Southwest Christchurch, New Zealand, and Preliminary Assessment of Paleoliquefaction Features

Villamor¹,

Almond²,

Tuttle³

et al. 2016

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Liquefaction features and the geologic environment in which they formed were carefully studied at two sites near Lincoln in southwest Christchurch. We undertook geomorphic mapping, excavated trenches, and obtained hand cores in areas with surficial evidence for liquefaction and areas where no surficial evidence for liquefaction was present at two sites (Hardwick and Marchand). The liquefaction features identified include (1) sand blows (singular and aligned along linear fissures), (2) blisters or injections of subhorizontal dikes into the topsoil, (3) dikes related to the blows and blisters, and (4) a collapse structure. The spatial distribution of these surface liquefaction features correlates strongly with the ridges of scroll bars in meander settings. In addition, we discovered paleoliquefaction features, including several dikes and a sand blow, in excavations at the sites of modern liquefaction. The paleoliquefaction event at the Hardwick site is dated at A.D. 908-1336 , and the one at the Marchand site is dated at A.D. 1017-1840 (95% confidence intervals of probability density functions obtained by Bayesian analysis). If both events are the same, given proximity of the sites, the time of the event is A.D. 1019-1337. If they are not, the one at the Marchand site could have been much younger. Taking into account a preliminary liquefaction-triggering threshold of equivalent peak ground acceleration for an M w 7.5 event (PGA 7:5 ) of 0:07g, existing magnitude-bounded relations for paleoliquefaction, and the timing of the paleoearthquakes and the potential PGA 7:5 estimated for regional faults, we propose that the Porters Pass fault, Alpine fault, or the subduction zone faults are the most likely sources that could have triggered liquefaction at the study sites. There are other nearby regional faults that may have been the source, but there is no paleoseismic data with which to make the temporal link.Online Material: Figures showing areas of liquefaction, trench logs, information on dike and sand-blow parameters, dike azimuths, core logs, radiocarbon samples, and OxCal analysis, and tables detailing units exposed in the trenches and stereonets.

show abstract

“…Studies of hydrologic responses to earthquakes often analyze responses of several well sites to one earthquake or one site to multiple earthquakes [Cox et al, 2012;Brodsky et al, 2003]. One of the complexities of interpreting several well site responses to one earthquake is the site-specific nature of the responses themselves [Roeloffs et al, 2011].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Insights into water level response to seismic waves: A 24 year high‐fidelity record of global seismicity at Devils Hole

Weingarten

2014

Geophysical Research Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We studied the 24 year record of water level responses in Devils Hole, Death Valley National Park, NV, to dynamic crustal stresses from earthquakes. The continuous water level record exhibited 219 responses from earthquakes around the world, displaying hydroseismogram and coseismic offset types of response. We found that the water level in Devils Hole is extremely sensitive to earthquakes, and the seismic energy density required to initiate both hydroseismogram and coseismic offset responses is e~10 À6 J/m 3 , 2 orders of magnitude smaller than previously documented. Multiple mechanisms at Devils Hole may be responsible for observed water level responses to distant earthquakes. The hydroseismogram-type responses are best explained by poroelastic deformation, while coseismic offset responses are likely the result of localized permeability changes. This study could have implication to studying dynamic triggering of earthquakes, as remote earthquakes can lead to pore pressure changes and consequently effective stress changes in fluid-filled fault zones.

show abstract

Hydrological effects of theM_W7.1 Darfield (Canterbury) earthquake, 4 September 2010, New Zealand

Cited by 85 publications

References 35 publications

Mechanism of co-seismic water level change following four great earthquakes – insights from co-seismic responses throughout the Chinese mainland

Mechanism of co-seismic water level change following four great earthquakes – insights from co-seismic responses throughout the Chinese mainland

Liquefaction Features Produced by the 2010–2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence in Southwest Christchurch, New Zealand, and Preliminary Assessment of Paleoliquefaction Features

Insights into water level response to seismic waves: A 24 year high‐fidelity record of global seismicity at Devils Hole

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Hydrological effects of theMW7.1 Darfield (Canterbury) earthquake, 4 September 2010, New Zealand

Cited by 85 publications

References 35 publications

Mechanism of co-seismic water level change following four great earthquakes – insights from co-seismic responses throughout the Chinese mainland

Mechanism of co-seismic water level change following four great earthquakes – insights from co-seismic responses throughout the Chinese mainland

Liquefaction Features Produced by the 2010–2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence in Southwest Christchurch, New Zealand, and Preliminary Assessment of Paleoliquefaction Features

Insights into water level response to seismic waves: A 24 year high‐fidelity record of global seismicity at Devils Hole

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Hydrological effects of theM_W7.1 Darfield (Canterbury) earthquake, 4 September 2010, New Zealand