Fault-slip inversions: Their importance in terms of strain, heterogeneity, and kinematics of brittle deformation

Riller, Ulrich; Clark, Martin D.; Daxberger, Heidi; Doman, Daniel; Lenauer, I.; Plath, S.; Santimano, Tasca

doi:10.1016/j.jsg.2017.06.013

Cited by 28 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 107 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, it is better to use extension direction (a strain term) than stress directions when discussing rifting. Note that the above listed complications can also lead to an overestimate of brittle deformation phases, as pointed out by Riller et al (2017). Hence much of the above discussion of use and abuse of deformation phases also applies to the brittle field.…”

Section: Use and Abuse Of The Term Stressmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Paleostress at the scale of an outcrop can be constrained by the kinematics and orientations of brittle structures (shear fractures, extension fractures, veins, dikes and stylolites) (e.g., Angelier 1979) and by calcite deformation twins (e.g., Craddock & van der Pluijm 1999, Lacombe 2010). However, even for brittle deformation, the complications caused by block rotations, reorientation of the stress field around weak or strong structures, progressive rotation of local stress due to fracture growth and interaction (Gapais et al 2000, Riller et al 2017, Simón 2019 has led many geologists to refer to strain and strain rate axes (instantaneous stretching axes) rather than stress axes (Twiss & Unruh 1998). For example, it is better to use extension direction (a strain term) than stress directions when discussing rifting.…”

Section: Use and Abuse Of The Term Stressmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Writing papers with an emphasis on structural geology and tectonics: advices and warnings

Fossen

2019

Braz. J. Geol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this short paper was to provide some advice on how to write a geoscience paper of international standard and to warn against some common pitfalls. It is focused on how to structure a paper and stresses the importance of building its contents around a well-defined problem. Furthermore, the importance of moving away from outdated and counterproductive ways of describing and interpreting deformation is emphasized. In particular, describing structures and tectonic evolution in a poorly founded scheme of multiple deformation phases and making stress interpretations from structurally complex and heterogeneous rocks where rotations and stress perturbations are difficult or impossible to account for are strongly discouraged. Instead, I encourage the use of modern structural geology and tectonics ideas that, among other things, allow for composite and overprinting structures to form progressively and diachronously with a wide variation in style and orientation during a single deformation history. Also, more emphasis should be put on strain and kinematics, toning down the use of stress. After all, stress is only observed through strain and kinematics; going from one to the other is not straightforward in general, and particularly difficult in ductilely deformed rocks.

show abstract

Section: Use and Abuse Of The Term Stressmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Use and Abuse Of The Term Stressmentioning

confidence: 99%

Writing papers with an emphasis on structural geology and tectonics: advices and warnings

Fossen

2019

Braz. J. Geol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To supplement the sparse earthquake data, a number of studies have inferred the direction of extension throughout the Andes to be N-S based on slip vectors along minor fault planes (e.g., Cladouhos et al, 1994;Daxberger & Riller, 2015;Mercier et al, 1992;Schoenbohm & Strecker, 2009;Sébrier et al, 1985;Tibaldi & Bonali, 2018). However, slip on minor faults also represents a small component of the total crustal strain and may not accurately record the bulk orientation of extension (Riller et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extension and Dynamics of the Andes Inferred From the 2016 Parina (Huarichancara) Earthquake

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Mw 6.1 2016 Parina earthquake led to extension of the south Peruvian Andes along a normal fault with evidence of Holocene slip. We use interferometric synthetic aperture radar, seismology, and field mapping to determine a source model for this event and show that extension at Parina is oriented NE‐SW, which is parallel to the shortening direction in the adjacent sub‐Andean lowlands. In addition, we use earthquake source models and GPS data to demonstrate that shortening within the sub‐Andes is parallel to topographic gradients. Both observations imply that forces resulting from spatial variations in gravitational potential energy are important in controlling the geometry of the deformation in the Andes. We calculate the horizontal forces per unit length acting between the Andes and South America due to these potential energy contrasts to be 4–8 ×1012 N/m along strike of the mountain range. Normal faulting at Parina implies that the Andes in south Peru have reached the maximum elevation that can be supported by the forces transmitted across the adjacent foreland, which requires that the foreland faults have an effective coefficient of friction ≲0.2. Additionally, the onset of extension in parts of the central Andes following orogen‐wide compression in the late Miocene suggests that there has been a change in the force balance within the mountains. We propose that shortening on weak detachment faults within the Andean foreland since ∼5–9 Ma reduced the shear tractions acting along the base of the upper crust in the eastern Andes, leading to extension in the highest parts of the range.

show abstract

“…Angelier & Mechler, ; Twiss & Unruh, ; Yamaji, ). This principle states that faults slip parallel to the direction of maximum resolved shear stress on the considered plane of the local spatially homogeneous stress tensor (refer to Lacombe, ; Riller et al., for further discussion).…”

Section: Brittle Deformation Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Late Cenozoic brittle deformation in the Southern Patagonian Andes: Record of plate coupling/decoupling during variable subduction?

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Andes of southern Patagonia experienced a Miocene shift towards faster and higher angle subduction followed by the approach and collision of the Chile oceanic ridge. We present a kinematic study characterizing palaeostress fields computed from brittle tectonics to better constrain upper crustal deformation during this complex scenario. Although previous studies already suggested variable kinematics, it is striking that in a long-lasting subduction environment, the computed palaeostress tensors are mostly strike-slip (55%), while 35% are extensional, and only 10% compressive which are concentrated along a main frontal thrust. Cross-cutting relationships and synsedimentary deformation indicate that a long-lived strike-slip regime was punctuated by a lower Miocene extensional event in the foreland before the main compressional event. The results are discussed in contrasting geodynamic models of plate coupling/decoupling versus direction and rate of convergence of the subducting plate, to explain the main mechanisms that control back-arc deformation.

show abstract

Fault-slip inversions: Their importance in terms of strain, heterogeneity, and kinematics of brittle deformation

Cited by 28 publications

References 107 publications

Writing papers with an emphasis on structural geology and tectonics: advices and warnings

Writing papers with an emphasis on structural geology and tectonics: advices and warnings

Extension and Dynamics of the Andes Inferred From the 2016 Parina (Huarichancara) Earthquake

Late Cenozoic brittle deformation in the Southern Patagonian Andes: Record of plate coupling/decoupling during variable subduction?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About