2006
DOI: 10.1029/170gm28
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On scaling of fracture energy and stress drop in dynamic rupture models: Consequences for near-source ground-motions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

3
20
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 42 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
3
20
1
Order By: Relevance
“…From numerical simulations of the dynamic faulting process, Madariaga [1976] and Lapusta and Liu [2009] indicated that the stress change t d -t f because of dynamic overshoot is 10-20% of the static stress drop t i -t f . By using dynamic rupture models of moderateto-large earthquakes, Mai et al [2006] found that the difference between the static and dynamic stress drops was about 10%.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From numerical simulations of the dynamic faulting process, Madariaga [1976] and Lapusta and Liu [2009] indicated that the stress change t d -t f because of dynamic overshoot is 10-20% of the static stress drop t i -t f . By using dynamic rupture models of moderateto-large earthquakes, Mai et al [2006] found that the difference between the static and dynamic stress drops was about 10%.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In contrast, average stress drop over the entire fault plane at most only slightly increases with increasing moment; the substantial scatter of average stress drop values in Figure 1 of Mai et al (2006) is consistent with average stress drop that is constant with moment. The Mai et al (2006) results for maximum stress drop are consistent with first-order constraints on stochastic aspects of seismic source properties (Andrews, 1981;Boore, 1983;Frankel, 1991). As fault area increases, the probability of observing a larger stress drop somewhere on the fault plane increases since stress drop must exhibit correlatedrandom variability over the fault to explain the first-order observations of seismic source properties inferred from ground motion recordings, such as the  2 spectral shape (Andrews, 1981;Frankel, 1991).…”
Section: Earthquakementioning
confidence: 64%
“…Somerville (2003) notes that the period of the dominant amplitude near-fault motions is related to source parameters such as the rise time and the fault dimensions, which generally increase with magnitude. Mai et al (2006) present an analysis of scaling of stress drop with seismic moment and find a strong increase of maximum stress drop on the fault plane as a function of increasing moment. In contrast, average stress drop over the entire fault plane at most only slightly increases with increasing moment; the substantial scatter of average stress drop values in Figure 1 of Mai et al (2006) is consistent with average stress drop that is constant with moment.…”
Section: Earthquakementioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations