Global frequency of oceanic and continental supershear earthquakes

Bao, Huang; Xu, Liuwei; Meng, Lingsen; Ampuero, Jean‐Paul; Gao, Lei; Zhang, Haijiang

doi:10.1038/s41561-022-01055-5

Cited by 25 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 75 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Together with recent observations (Bao et al., 2022), we suggest that there might be frequent episodes of supershear rupture, during many, if not all strike‐slip earthquakes. Since supershear ruptures could generate devastating Mach waves, recognizing the common features of strike‐slip faults that can promote the occurrence of supershear ruptures would strengthen our understanding of rupture dynamics and earthquake hazard assessment, especially in those areas where large strike‐slip faults go across.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

The 2021 Mw 7.3 Madoi, China Earthquake: Transient Supershear Ruptures on a Presumed Immature Strike‐Slip Fault

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At 02:04 a.m. on May 22, 2021 (local time, hereafter the same), an Mw 7.3 earthquake occurred in Madoi County (34.59°N, 98.34°E, depth 17 km, according to the China Earthquake Networks Center, CENC), Qinghai Province, China (hereafter referred to as "The Madoi Earthquake"), with the epicenter located in the Bayan Har block of the Tibetan Plateau (Figure 1). The seismic intensity map showed a northwest-southeast (NW-SE)-oriented damage zone centered at the earthquake epicenter, with a maximum seismic intensity of X degree (Ministry of Emergency, China,

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

The 2021 Mw 7.3 Madoi, China Earthquake: Transient Supershear Ruptures on a Presumed Immature Strike‐Slip Fault

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, without the spatial and temporal resolution of the laboratory measurements made with slip sensors and DIC, the complex set of ruptures illustrated in Type 4 events (Figure 6h) may appear as one single rupture that simply slowed down when it encountered a bump and potentially sped up after passing it. For natural earthquakes, such speedups and slowdowns have been observed with back projection imaging (e.g., Bao et al, 2022). A more complete consideration of the seismic implications of rupture interactions with a bump is the topic of a future study.…”

Section: Effect Of the Bump On Earthquake Spectramentioning

confidence: 89%

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

“…Indeed, measuring rupture speed is challenging given scarce, frequency‐limited data and uncertain earth structure (Meng et al., 2016; Zeng et al., 2020). However, a recent global survey (Bao et al., 2022) using state‐of‐the‐art teleseismic back‐projection rupture imaging (Bao et al., 2019) overcomes the observational bias but still founds merely 15% supershear ruptures among large strike‐slip earthquakes since 2000. Here, we show that the rarity of supershear earthquakes could be controlled by fault frictional properties.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%