Mechanics, Structure and Evolution of Fault Zones 2009
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-0346-0138-2_4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Influence of Outcrop Scale Fractures on the Effective Stiffness of Fault Damage Zone Rocks

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 70 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, in the case of natural faults, all other variables in equations (4) and (5), and the stiffness of the system should be rescaled. Though the stiffness of natural faults varies sensibly throughout the evolution of the fault zone with repeated slip events [Griffith et al, 2009], a rough estimation for the stiffness right before the earthquake derives from [Eshelby, 1957] k ¼ 7πG=16r (6) using the simplest approximation of a buried circular crack of radius r and shear modulus G and assuming that the earthquake instability does not propagate beyond the nucleation patch. We can use indicatively G = 25 GPa (e.g., granite) and r ranging from 5 to 50 m resulting in k = [0.7-7] 10 À3 MPa/μm per unit fault area, up to 1 order of magnitude smaller than the stiffness of SHIVA.…”
Section: Implications For Fault Stabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, in the case of natural faults, all other variables in equations (4) and (5), and the stiffness of the system should be rescaled. Though the stiffness of natural faults varies sensibly throughout the evolution of the fault zone with repeated slip events [Griffith et al, 2009], a rough estimation for the stiffness right before the earthquake derives from [Eshelby, 1957] k ¼ 7πG=16r (6) using the simplest approximation of a buried circular crack of radius r and shear modulus G and assuming that the earthquake instability does not propagate beyond the nucleation patch. We can use indicatively G = 25 GPa (e.g., granite) and r ranging from 5 to 50 m resulting in k = [0.7-7] 10 À3 MPa/μm per unit fault area, up to 1 order of magnitude smaller than the stiffness of SHIVA.…”
Section: Implications For Fault Stabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Secondly, damaged rocks have reduced elastic moduli, cohesion and yield strength (e.g. Bruhn et al, 1994;Callahan et al, 2019;Faulkner et al, 2006;Griffith et al, 2012;Griffith et al, 2009;Walsh, 1965), resulting in reduced elastic wave velocity, which can cause attenuation and potentially non-linear wave propagation effects during ruptures (e.g. Wu et al, 2009).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2). Cochran, Vidale and Li (2003) and Griffith, Sanz and Pollard (2009) connected the directional amplifications in fault zones to the stiffness anisotropy of the fractured rock mass, where the predominant seismic motion is expected to be normal to the fractures orientation. Pischiutta et al (2013) interpreted the directional resonance observed at PFS in terms of changes in the kinematic and deformation fields on the opposite sides of the fault.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%