Impact of power-law rheology on the viscoelastic relaxation pattern and afterslip distribution following the 2010 Mw 8.8 Maule earthquake

Peña, Carlos; Heidbach, Oliver; Moreno, Marcos; Bedford, Jonathan; Ziegler, Moritz; Tassara, Andrés Ollero; Oncken, Onno

doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2020.116292

Cited by 30 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As shown by Peña et al. (2020), nonlinear rheology will enhance the contribution of viscoelastic relaxation for deep regions and therefore reduce the inferred apparent deep afterslip.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…A reference strain rate of 0.5 × 10 −6 yr −1 is used in the model. Because initial tests indicated that the simulated deformation is not sensitive to the parameter of the upper mantle, we use the parameters shown in Peña et al (2020) for the upper mantle. We vary the parameters (i.e., preexponent A) of the lower crust beneath southern Tibet to make the model predictions comparable with the observations.…”

Section: Postseismic Viscoelastic Relaxation With a More Reliable Finmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Reasonable data fitting suggests that this simple rheological model works well for the present case. Further investigations considering a spatiotemporal variable behavior and its effect on inferred afterslip distribution are worth to be explored in future, especially for regions showing clear lateral inhomogeneity of rheological structure and/ or following huge earthquakes (>M 8) (e.g., Peña et al, 2020). As shown by Peña et al (2020), nonlinear rheology will enhance the contribution of viscoelastic relaxation for deep regions and therefore reduce the inferred apparent deep afterslip.…”

Section: Rheological Structure Beneath Southern Tibetan Plateaumentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous studies indicate that the viscosity may reveal to be stress‐dependent and increase as the coseismic stress change decreasing from the source area (e.g., A. M. Freed & Bürgmann, 2004; Peña et al., 2020). Here, we further carry out viscoelastic relaxation models with the power‐law rheology using the Pylith software.…”

Section: Modeling Of Postseismic Deformation Following the 2015 Gorkhmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Peña et al. (2020) considered a power‐law rheology when modeling viscoelastic relaxation following the 2010 Mw 8.8 Maule earthquake and suggested that the power‐law rheology can reduce the solved deep afterslip.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Overlapped Postseismic Deformation Caused by Afterslip and Viscoelastic Relaxation Following the 2015 Mw 7.8 Gorkha (Nepal) Earthquake

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By accommodating ∼50% of the India-Eurasia plate convergence, the Main Himalayan Thrust (MHT) is considered to be a seismogenic zone with potential for generating large earthquakes (Avouac, 2003; Bilham, 2004). The recent 2015 Gorkha earthquake partly ruptured a known seismic gap on the central MHT between the 1505 M 8.5 earthquake to the west and the 1934 M 8.2 earthquake to the east (Figure 1). Seismological studies reveal that the rupture of the Gorkha earthquake initiated 15-18 km beneath the Gorkha region, then propagated eastward for ∼140 km (e.g., Avouac et al., 2015; Fan & Shearer, 2015; Lay et al., 2017). Geodetic slip models indicate that coseismic slip of the earthquake was concentrated on the subhorizontal décollement at a depth of 10-15 km, whereas the shallow portion of the fault remains unbroken (e.g., Diao et al., 2015; Elliott et al., 2016). After the event, significant postseismic surface deformation has been observed by Global Positioning System (GPS) and InSAR (Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar) techniques (e.g., Mencin et al., 2016; K. Wang & Fialko, 2018). Based on these postseismic observations, several previous studies have investigated two main mechanisms: afterslip and viscoelastic relaxation. Postseismic deformation in early periods is mostly attributed to afterslip at the downdip extension of the coseismic slip (

show abstract

“…As shown by Peña et al. (2020), nonlinear rheology will enhance the contribution of viscoelastic relaxation for deep regions and therefore reduce the inferred apparent deep afterslip.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Section: Postseismic Viscoelastic Relaxation With a More Reliable Finmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Rheological Structure Beneath Southern Tibetan Plateaumentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Modeling Of Postseismic Deformation Following the 2015 Gorkhmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Overlapped Postseismic Deformation Caused by Afterslip and Viscoelastic Relaxation Following the 2015 Mw 7.8 Gorkha (Nepal) Earthquake

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Role of poroelasticity during the early postseismic deformation of the 2010 Maule megathrust earthquake

Peña

Metzger

Heidbach

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the aftermath of large earthquakes, the Earth surface displays time-dependent deformation patterns on different spatiotemporal scales that may last several of years or decades due to the relaxation of coseismically imposed stress and pore pressure changes in the lithosphere-asthenosphere system (e.g., Hergert & Heidbach, 2006;Hughes et al., 2010; K. Wang et al., 2012, and references therein). These relaxation processes are aseismic postseismic slip on the fault interface (afterslip), poroelastic processes in the upper crust, and viscoelastic relaxation in the lower crust and upper mantle (e.g.,

show abstract

A secondary zone of uplift measured after megathrust earthquakes: caused by early downdip afterslip?

Ragon

Simons

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A secondary zone of surface uplift (SZU), located ˜300 kilometers from the trench, has been measured after several megathrust earthquakes. The SZU reached a few centimeters hours after the 2011 Mw 9.1 Tohoku (Japan) earthquake. Less than a day after the 2010 Mw 8.8 Maule (Chile) earthquake, it peaked at 12 cm. Published coseismic finite-fault models for these events do not reproduce the measured SZU. One interpretation is that this SZU is universal, driven by volume deformation around the slab interface (van Dinther et al. 2019). In contrast, with synthetic tests and an investigation of the Maule event, we demonstrate the SZU may instead result from slip on the slab interface. Further, we suggest that slip occurs as rapid postseismic afterslip. We can reproduce the SZU with fault slip if elastic heterogeneities associated with the subducting slab are accounted for, as opposed to assuming homogeneous or layered elastic lithospheric structures.

show abstract

Impact of power-law rheology on the viscoelastic relaxation pattern and afterslip distribution following the 2010 Mw 8.8 Maule earthquake

Cited by 30 publications

References 69 publications

Overlapped Postseismic Deformation Caused by Afterslip and Viscoelastic Relaxation Following the 2015 Mw 7.8 Gorkha (Nepal) Earthquake

Overlapped Postseismic Deformation Caused by Afterslip and Viscoelastic Relaxation Following the 2015 Mw 7.8 Gorkha (Nepal) Earthquake

Role of poroelasticity during the early postseismic deformation of the 2010 Maule megathrust earthquake

A secondary zone of uplift measured after megathrust earthquakes: caused by early downdip afterslip?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About