Rupture Nucleation on a Periodically Heterogeneous Interface

Gounon, Alisson; Latour, Soumaya; Letort, Jean; Arem, Saber El

doi:10.1029/2021gl096816

Cited by 13 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 44 publications

(89 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with our results (Figures 11d and 12h), quasistatic slip patches for all laboratory and crustal earthquakes from these examples, ranging from M w ∼ −6 to 9, show L / S ∼ 0.7 to 1 at the onset of dynamic rupture. The correlation with laboratory observations suggests that the interaction and coalescence of “mesoscale” quasistatic faults is an important mechanism of earthquake nucleation, providing support for preslip nucleation models (e.g., Cattania & Segall, 2021; Ellsworth & Beroza, 1995; Gounon et al., 2022; Kato et al., 2012; McLaskey, 2019; Noda et al., 2013; Passelègue et al., 2017; Schär et al., 2021; Xu et al., 2023).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 61%

“…In particular, clusters of repeating foreshocks that migrate toward the hypocenters are thought to be a byproduct of a precursory slow slip (preslip) event, which eventually expands to dynamic rupture (e.g., Chen & Shearer, 2016; Kato et al., 2012; Marty et al., 2023). It is possible that many earthquakes nucleate through the interaction and coalescence of multiple precursory slow slip events and large foreshocks (e.g., Gounon et al., 2022; Kato & Ben‐Zion, 2021; Yao et al., 2020). Geophysical interpretations of precursory processes remain challenging, partly because the underlying physics of crack interaction and fault nucleation is not well understood.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Role of Crack Interaction on Shear Localization in Porous Granular Rocks Deformed in the Brittle and Ductile Fields

Kanaya,

Hirth

2024

JGR Solid Earth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Crack interactions leading to shear localization were quantified using microstructural analysis for brittle faults and high‐temperature ductile faults formed during experiments on quartz sandstone. In both faulting regimes, the nucleation of macroscopic faults results from the interactions of microfractures at two length scales in ensemble. Brittle faults nucleate when the longest mesoscale shear fractures and transgranular tensile cracks critically interact. In contrast, ductile faults nucleate when the longest mesoscale shear fractures and multi‐grain scale intergranular shear cracks critically interact. For both faulting regimes, we conclude the interaction and coalescence of the longest mesoscale shear fractures is the fundamental process responsible for fault nucleation. Hence, mesoscale shear fractures, which accommodate the majority of axial strain prior to shear localization in both faulting regimes, also serve as the nucleus of macroscopic faults. Locally, the growth of the mesoscale shear fractures is promoted by the interaction and coalescence of the multi‐grain scale cracks in both faulting regimes. We hypothesize that attainment of a critical microstructure for shear localization (i.e., local clustering of the longest microfractures) requires a characteristic amount of plastic axial strain, which depends on deformation conditions. In brittle faulting, distributed microfracturing is confined within limited regions of the rock volume, which expedites crack clustering and fault nucleation at low characteristic strains. In ductile faulting, distributed microfracturing occurs more uniformly throughout the rock volume, delaying shear localization to high characteristic strains. Accurate prediction of shear localization requires models that describe crack interactions of the largest flaws that account for crack clustering.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 61%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Role of Crack Interaction on Shear Localization in Porous Granular Rocks Deformed in the Brittle and Ductile Fields

Kanaya,

Hirth

2024

JGR Solid Earth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In summary, when taken individually, foreshock sequences are characterized by high variability which, as suggested theoretically (Lebihain et al., 2021; Schär et al., 2021) and experimentally (Gounon et al., 2022), is the manifestation of complex rupture nucleations on an heterogeneous fault interface. Because stacking the foreshocks sequences smooths this variability, our interpretation of the scaling on the inverse Omori law with normal stress/nucleation size, is thus that stacked foreshock sequences do indeed reflect the homogenized nucleation of the mainshock itself as conceptualized by Ohnaka's model (Ohnaka, 1992).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 69%

Nucleation of Laboratory Earthquakes: Quantitative Analysis and Scalings

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The term "foreshocks" refers to small earthquakes that would occur nearby in time and space of a larger earthquake to come. Papazachos (1973) made the observation that when a sufficient number of foreshock sequences were synchronized to the time of their respective mainshock and then stacked, the seismicity rate increases as an inverse power law of time when approaching the nucleation. This law, called "the inverse Omori law," had then provided a potential path to earthquake prediction. However, statistical models (Helmstetter & Sornette, 2003;Ogata, 1988) are able to reproduce most of the features attributed to foreshock sequences which was used as an

show abstract

“…McLaskey and Lockner (2018) studied a "pin" of intact rock transecting a saw-cut granite fault. Gounon et al (2022) explored rupture nucleation on a polycarbonate sample with alternating rough and smooth fault sections. Other studies imposed a fracture energy barrier using a rock gouge layer (Rubino et al, 2022), a lubricant (Bayart et al, 2018), or other surface treatment (Gvirtzman & Fineberg, 2021).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Laboratory Earthquake Rupture Interactions With a High Normal Stress Bump

Cebry,

Sorhaindo,

McLaskey

2023

JGR Solid Earth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To better understand how normal stress heterogeneity affects earthquake rupture, we conducted laboratory experiments on a 760 mm poly (methyl‐mathacrylate) PMMA sample with a 25 mm “bump” of locally higher normal stress (∆σbt). We systematically varied the sample‐average normal stress () and bump prominence (). For bumps with lower prominence () the rupture simply propagated through the bump and produced regular sequences of periodic stick‐slip events. Bumps with higher prominence () produced complex rupture sequences with variable timing and ruptures sizes, and this complexity persisted for multiple stick‐slip supercycles. During some events, the bump remained locked and acted as a barrier that completely stopped rupture. In other events, a dynamic rupture front terminated at the locked bump, but rupture reinitiated on the other side of the bump after a brief pause of 0.3–1 ms. Only when stress on the bump was near critical did the bump slip and unload built up strain energy in one large event. Thus, a sufficiently prominent bump acted as a barrier (energy sink) when it was far from critically stressed and as an asperity (energy source) when it was near critically stressed. Similar to an earthquake gate, the bump never acted as a permanent barrier. In the experiments, we resolve the above rupture interactions with a bump as separate rupture phases; however, when observed through the lens of seismology, it may appear as one continuous rupture that speeds up and slows down. The complicated rupture‐bump interactions also produced enhanced high frequency seismic waves recorded with piezoelectric sensors.

show abstract

Rupture Nucleation on a Periodically Heterogeneous Interface

Cited by 13 publications

References 44 publications

Role of Crack Interaction on Shear Localization in Porous Granular Rocks Deformed in the Brittle and Ductile Fields

Role of Crack Interaction on Shear Localization in Porous Granular Rocks Deformed in the Brittle and Ductile Fields

Nucleation of Laboratory Earthquakes: Quantitative Analysis and Scalings

Laboratory Earthquake Rupture Interactions With a High Normal Stress Bump

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About