New Mapping of Creeping Faults Bartlett Springs Fault & northern Green Valley Fault 20092009 20102010.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Earthquake recurrence models Are earthquakes random in space and time? We know where the faults are based on the geology and geomorphology Segmentation.
Advertisements

(Introduction to) Earthquake Energy Balance
Long-term rates and the depth extent of fault creep along the San Andreas Fault system in northern California from alinement arrays and GPS data James.
New paleoseismic data from the northern San Jacinto Fault Zone, southern California Nate Onderdonk (CSULB) Tom Rockwell (SDSU) Sally McGill (CSUSB) Gayatri.
Active Folding within the L.A. Basin with a focus on: Argus et al. (2005), Interseismic strain accumulation and anthropogenic motion in metropolitan Los.
Slides for Ben Study Area 500 km N Great Earthquakes, Strongly-Coupled Arc Pacific plate motion 1938, , M S 7.4 tsunami earthquake 1957, 9.1.
16/9/2011UCERF3 / EQ Simulators Workshop Terry Tullis Steve Ward John RundleJim Dieterich Keith Richards-Dinger Fred Pollitz Generic Description of Earthquake.
The trouble with segmentation David D. Jackson, UCLA Yan Y. Kagan, UCLA Natanya Black, UCLA.
Prague, March 18, 2005Antonio Emolo1 Seismic Hazard Assessment for a Characteristic Earthquake Scenario: Integrating Probabilistic and Deterministic Approaches.
Earthquake Probabilities in the San Francisco Bay Region, 2002–2031 Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities, 2002 Chapters 1 & 2.
Ch 3: Characterization of the SFBR Earthquake Sources Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities, 2002.
Earthquake Probabilities for the San Francisco Bay Region Working Group 2002: Chapter 6 Ved Lekic EQW, April 6, 2007 Working Group 2002: Chapter.
A New Approach To Paleoseismic Event Correlation Glenn Biasi and Ray Weldon University of Nevada Reno Acknowledgments: Tom Fumal, Kate Scharer, SCEC and.
Predicting the Endpoints of Earthquake Ruptures Steven G. Wesnousky Nature, 444, , 2006 doi: /nature05275.
Chapter 4: The SFBR Earthquake Source Model: Magnitude and Long-Term Rates Ahyi Kim 2/23/07 EQW.
Lecture #13- Focal Mechanisms
Chapter 5: Calculating Earthquake Probabilities for the SFBR Mei Xue EQW March 16.
EARTHQUAKE RECURRENCE Crucial for hazards, earthquake physics & tectonics (seismic versus aseismic deformation) Recordings of the east-west component of.
Learning objectives Understand the relationship of earthquakes to faulting Familiarization with earthquake & wave (energy) terminology Understand the.
E ARTHQUAKE C ENTER S OUTHERN C ALIFORNIA Statewide 3D Community Fault Model (SCFM) A statewide community-based, object-oriented, 3-D representation of.
UseIT Tutorial # 3 Earthquakes in the Southern California Fault System Tom Jordan June 16, 2011.
Near-Field Modeling of the 1964 Alaska Tsunami: A Source Function Study Elena Suleimani, Natalia Ruppert, Dmitry Nicolsky, and Roger Hansen Alaska Earthquake.
Earthquake potential of the San Andreas and North Anatolian Fault Zones: A comparative look M. B. Sørensen Department of Earth Science, University of Bergen,
Segments of the San Andreas Fault Historically, the San Andreas has been divided up into individual fault segments that range from tens to hundreds of.
NA-Pa Plate Boundary Wilson [1960] USGS Prof. Paper 1515.
2007 NSTA: St. Louis, Missouri Earthquake Prediction and Forecasting: A Case Study of the San Andreas and New Madrid Faults Sponsored by: IRIS (Incorporated.
U.S. Earthquake Frequency Estimation - Ratemaking for Unusual Events CAS Ratemaking Seminar Nashville, Tennessee March 11-12, 1999 Stuart B. Mathewson,
San Andreas Big Bend A geometric feature Restraining the relative plate motion Nature’s solution Impacts include:  patterns of faults, seismicity  Rupture.
Paleoseismic and Geologic Data for Earthquake Simulations Lisa B. Grant and Miryha M. Gould.
Chapter 5 EARTHQUAKES and ENVIRONMENT. Earthquakes Violent ground-shaking phenomenon by the sudden release of strain energy stored in rocks One of the.
Source characteristics of inferred from waveform analysis
Updating Models of Earthquake Recurrence and Rupture Geometry of the Cascadia Subduction Zone for UCERF3 and the National Seismic Hazard Maps Art Frankel.
Lisa Wald USGS Pasadena U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey USGS Earthquake Hazards Program Earthquakes 101 (EQ101)
Earthquakes (Chapter 13). Lecture Outline What is an earthquake? Seismic waves Epicenter location Earthquake magnitude Tectonic setting Hazards.
Intraplate Seismicity Finite element modeling. Introduction Spatial patterns (Fig. 1) –Randomly scattered (Australia) –Isolated “seismic zones” (CEUS)
Earthquake Science (Seismology). Seismometers and seismic networks Seismometers and seismic networks Earthquake aftershocks Earthquake aftershocks Earthquake.
National Seismic Hazard Maps and Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast 1.0 National Seismic Hazard Mapping Project (Golden, CO) California Geological.
NE Caribbean and Hispaniola = major plate boundary, 2 cm/yr relative motion Strike-slip + convergence partitioned between 3 major fault systems Apparent.
Earth Science Applications of Space Based Geodesy DES-7355 Tu-Th 9:40-11:05 Seminar Room in 3892 Central Ave. (Long building) Bob Smalley Office: 3892.
Random stress and Omori's law Yan Y. Kagan Department of Earth and Space Sciences, University of California Los Angeles Abstract We consider two statistical.
Scientific Drilling Into the San Andreas Fault zone San Andreas Fault Observatory at Depth (SAFOD)
Estimating Tsunami Periods and its Behavior in the Indian Ocean through Tsunami Sedimentation Survey Name of organization: National Research Institute.
March 2006 WGCEP Workshop Ruth A. Harris U.S. Geological Survey.
Stress- and State-Dependence of Earthquake Occurrence Jim Dieterich, UC Riverside.
1 Japanese Segmentation Perspective Yasuo AWATA Active Fault Research Center, Geol.Surv.Japan, AIST WGCEP workshop at Caltech, March 15, 2006.
Forecasting Magnitude from Fault Geometry Bill Ellsworth, USGS Menlo Park, CA.
Yan Y. Kagan Dept. Earth and Space Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA , Evaluation.
Pelatihan : Techniques in Active Tectonic Study Juni 20-Juli 2, 2013 Instruktur: Prof. J Ramon Arrowsmith (JRA) Dari Arizona State University (ASU) - US.
Geodetic Deformation, Seismicity and Fault Friction Ge Sensitivity of seismicity to stress perturbations, implications for earthquakes nucleation.
112/16/2010AGU Annual Fall Meeting - NG44a-08 Terry Tullis Michael Barall Steve Ward John Rundle Don Turcotte Louise Kellogg Burak Yikilmaz Eric Heien.
The repetition of large earthquakes, with similar coseismic offsets along the Carrizo segment of San Andreas fault has been documented using geomorphic.
Can we forecast an Earthquake??? In the next minute there will be an earthquake somewhere in the world! This sentence is correct (we have seen that there.
Earthquakes 101 (EQ101) Lisa Wald USGS Earthquake Hazards Program
The 2002 Working Group Approach to Modeling Earthquake Probabilities Michael L. Blanpied U.S. Geological Survey Earthquake Hazards Program, Reston, VA.
California Earthquake Rupture Model Satisfying Accepted Scaling Laws (SCEC 2010, 1-129) David Jackson, Yan Kagan and Qi Wang Department of Earth and Space.
Dynamic Issues in Fault- to-Fault Jumping David Oglesby UC Riverside UCERF3 Workshop June 11, 2011.
Synthetic aperture radar (SAR) data … also, use ENVISAT (C-band) data from the same time period to resolve vertical/horizontal components of surface velocity.
Epistemic uncertainty in California-wide simulations of synthetic seismicity Fred Pollitz, USGS Menlo Park Acknowledgments: David Schwartz, Steve Ward.
Fault Segmentation: User Perspective Norm Abrahamson PG&E March 16, 2006.
GeoFEM Kinematic Earthquake Cycle Modeling in the Japanese Islands Hirahara, K. (1), H. Suito (1), M. Hyodo (1) M. Iizuka (2) and H. Okuda (3) (1) Nagoya.
EGS-AGU-EUG Joint Assembly Nice, France, 10th April 2003
Comments on physical simulator models
Images courtesy of Google Earth
Shoreline and Hosgri Faults, Central Coast
Maximum Earthquake Size for Subduction Zones
Interplate earthquake: 1994 Sanriku (Ms 7.6) Nakayama & Takeo (1997)
Southern California Earthquake Center
The Parkfield Experiment
SICHUAN EARTHQUAKE May 12, 2008
by Julian C. Lozos Science Volume 2(3):e March 11, 2016
Presentation transcript:

New Mapping of Creeping Faults Bartlett Springs Fault & northern Green Valley Fault

Long Long-term Monitoring of Creep Rate Why? Estimate long-term aseismic moment release rate. Creep reduces size of future earthquake by limiting stress accumulation and rupture extent Where? In SFBR at 77 sites on 11 faults How? By annual measurement of angular change across ~ m aperture arrays Who? SFSU-USGS

New Mapping of Creeping Faults Bartlett Springs Fault [2009] 170-km long northern Green Valley Fault [2010] Green Valley Fault: ~50 km, new mapping ~130 km, total length See the poster See the poster for detail !

Green Valley Fault, simple rupture model  Green Valley fault (GVF) [and Bartlett Springs fault (BSF)] contain geometric irregularities (steps and bends) of ~2-3 km extent, which may tend to stop about half of ruptures reaching them (Wesnousky, 2008) “Soft segment boundaries” NORTHERN SOUTHERN Northern GVF Southern GVF Historical strike-slip ruptures Historical strike-slip ruptures Wesnousky (2008) Key assumption: each event has ~50% chance of rupture propagation thru a node, or, and continuing (at least) to the next node, unless terminal chance of rupture propagation thru a node, S or C, and continuing (at least) to the next node, unless terminal Key assumption: each event has ~50% chance of rupture propagation thru a node, or, and continuing (at least) to the next node, unless terminal chance of rupture propagation thru a node, S or C, and continuing (at least) to the next node, unless terminal & are terminal nodes W & A are terminal nodes

Green Valley Fault, model results  The southern GVF (south of Berryessa) tends to rupture rarely (RI~1000+ yr) in large multisegment (M ), but more frequently in ~M6.7 single-segment ruptures Simplifying assumptions:  80% of ruptures unilateral (McGuire et al., 2002)  Creep rate 3 mm/yr; long-term rate 6 mm/yr  7.5 km depth of creep using equations of Savage & Lisowski  14 km rupture width (Waldhauser & Schaff, 2008)  Mw-moment-area-slip: Hanks & Kanamori (1979), Wells and Coppersmith (1994) Wells and Coppersmith (1994)  Ruptures nucleate at nodes i.e., steps & bends (Oglesby, 2005) i.e., steps & bends (Oglesby, 2005) Simplifying assumptions:  80% of ruptures unilateral (McGuire et al., 2002)  Creep rate 3 mm/yr; long-term rate 6 mm/yr  7.5 km depth of creep using equations of Savage & Lisowski  14 km rupture width (Waldhauser & Schaff, 2008)  Mw-moment-area-slip: Hanks & Kanamori (1979), Wells and Coppersmith (1994) Wells and Coppersmith (1994)  Ruptures nucleate at nodes i.e., steps & bends (Oglesby, 2005) i.e., steps & bends (Oglesby, 2005)  The northern GVF (Hunting Creek and Berryessa sections) also tends to rupture rarely (RI~1000+ yr) in large multisegment (M ), but more frequently in smaller (M ) single-segment ruptures HUNTING CREEK BERRY -ESSA CONCORD- GREEN VALLEY CONCORD- GREEN VALLEY

UCERF2 sources (BSF & GVF) revised sources Bartlett Springs fault Hunting Cr- Berryessa Concord- Green Valley Soft boundaries Terminal W W P P L L S S C C A A H H

Green Valley Fault, new map & model  Green Valley fault (GVF) zone length, ~130 km [Compared to WG03 length, 56 km] [Compared to WG03 length, 56 km]  Although longer (~130 km) ruptures are possible, creep and geometrical discontinuities tend to limit actual rupture lengths. GVF and Bartlett Springs fault (BSF) each contain two or more “soft” segment boundaries, which may allow through only about half of ruptures based on global data set (Wesnousky, 2008)  Large ruptures (M≥6.7) are expected to be most frequent on the main section of the GVF (south of Lake Berryessa),~200 yr recurrence interval. This result agrees with our millennial paleoseismic record on GVF (199 ± 82 yr, 1  )  However, on the much shorter Berryessa and Hunting Creek sections, our model suggests such large events are probably much less frequent, ~650 yr and ~1400 yr estimated recurrence intervals, respectively.  The UCERF2 sources for BSF and GVF can be greatly improved by including results of this new mapping  Green Valley fault (GVF) zone length, ~130 km [Compared to WG03 length, 56 km] [Compared to WG03 length, 56 km]  Although longer (~130 km) ruptures are possible, creep and geometrical discontinuities tend to limit actual rupture lengths. GVF and Bartlett Springs fault (BSF) each contain two or more “soft” segment boundaries, which may allow through only about half of ruptures based on global data set (Wesnousky, 2008)  Large ruptures (M≥6.7) are expected to be most frequent on the main section of the GVF (south of Lake Berryessa),~200 yr recurrence interval. This result agrees with our millennial paleoseismic record on GVF (199 ± 82 yr, 1  )  However, on the much shorter Berryessa and Hunting Creek sections, our model suggests such large events are probably much less frequent, ~650 yr and ~1400 yr estimated recurrence intervals, respectively.  The UCERF2 sources for BSF and GVF can be greatly improved by including results of this new mapping