2001
DOI: 10.1130/0091-7613(2001)029<0831:chroaa>2.0.co;2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Coseismic hydrologic response of an alluvial fan to the 1999 Chi-Chi earthquake, Taiwan

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

4
144
0
1

Year Published

2009
2009
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 147 publications
(155 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
4
144
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…At distances beyond the near field, static poroelastic strain is so small that it cannot easily account for the large amplitude of the observed hydrologic changes (Rojstaczer et al 1995;Manga & Wang 2007). Furthermore, the model often has difficulty in explaining the sign of the observed groundwater-level changes (Roeloffs 1998;Wang et al 2001;Koizumi et al 2004) and the persistent streamflow increases in response to multiple earthquakes of different mechanisms and orientations .…”
Section: Changes In Permeabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At distances beyond the near field, static poroelastic strain is so small that it cannot easily account for the large amplitude of the observed hydrologic changes (Rojstaczer et al 1995;Manga & Wang 2007). Furthermore, the model often has difficulty in explaining the sign of the observed groundwater-level changes (Roeloffs 1998;Wang et al 2001;Koizumi et al 2004) and the persistent streamflow increases in response to multiple earthquakes of different mechanisms and orientations .…”
Section: Changes In Permeabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other explanations that have been put forward for other co-seismic pressure and water-level transients (e.g., Wang et al, 2001), including the possibilities that signals propagate from remote locations to borehole sites hydrologically or that formation pressure anomalies are the consequence of seismic shaking, are considered unlikely at the Nankai sites.…”
Section: First Order Inferencesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this regard, groundwater level changes are not limited to co-seismic ones; signals before strong earthquakes are more valuable in terms of earthquake hazard prevention. In reality, variations of groundwater level are affected by barometric pressure, Earth's tides and other factors (Bredehoeft, 1976;Chen et al, 2010b;Chia et al, 2001;Wakita, 1991, 1995;Kingsley et al, 2001;Quilty and Roeloffs, 1997;Roeloffs, 1988Roeloffs, , 1998Narasimhan et al, 1984;Scholz et al, 1973;Van Der Kamp and Gale, 1983;Wang et al, 2001;Wang and Manga, 2010). Anomalous variations of groundwater level response to earthquakes are generally considered as meaningful (Brodsky et al, 2003;Igarashi and Wakita, 1991;Wang and Manga, 2010) while aforementioned factors can be effectively ruled out.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%