Mechanics, Structure and Evolution of Fault Zones 2009
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-0346-0138-2_12
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Nonplanar Faults: Mechanics of Slip and Off-fault Damage

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

10
80
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(90 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
10
80
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Helmstetter and Shaw [2006] showed similar results from numerical simulations of the aftershock occurrence by using the rate-and statedependent friction law [e.g., Dieterich, 1994, Dieterich et al, 2000. Several studies also considered the aftershock occurrence associated with heterogeneous stress change due to the complex slip [e.g., Marsan, 2006;Hainzl and Marsan, 2008] or with nonplanar faults [Dieterich and Smith, 2009]. These results are generally consistent with our observations on the relationship between aftershock distribution and the main shock slip in Figure 8.…”
Section: Aftershock Seismicity and Slip Distribution Of The Main Shocksupporting
confidence: 87%
“…Helmstetter and Shaw [2006] showed similar results from numerical simulations of the aftershock occurrence by using the rate-and statedependent friction law [e.g., Dieterich, 1994, Dieterich et al, 2000. Several studies also considered the aftershock occurrence associated with heterogeneous stress change due to the complex slip [e.g., Marsan, 2006;Hainzl and Marsan, 2008] or with nonplanar faults [Dieterich and Smith, 2009]. These results are generally consistent with our observations on the relationship between aftershock distribution and the main shock slip in Figure 8.…”
Section: Aftershock Seismicity and Slip Distribution Of The Main Shocksupporting
confidence: 87%
“…More than one slip surface is involved, different elements of the moment tensor have different time functions, and a volume change is generally present. However, in recent years there have been a number of studies of off-fault seismicity, which consists of the small earthquakes that are invariably found in a zone extending away from tectonic faults (see for instance POLIAKOV et al 2002;RICE et al 2005;VIESCA et al 2008;SAMMIS et al 2009;DIETERICH and SMITH 2009;POWERS and JORDAN 2010). Thus, while the induced earthquakes and extended crack model of this study may not be appropriate analogs for ordinary tectonic earthquakes, they may be more appropriate analogs for the off-fault seismicity that accompanies tectonic earthquakes.…”
Section: Figure 10mentioning
confidence: 86%
“…The model does not account for numerous factors in the faulting process, including opening normal to the fault, nonuniform friction, displacement gradients, influence of fault tips, host rock anisotropy, selfaffine fault geometries, 3-D fault geometries, or pore fluid pressure variability [e.g., Dieterich and Smith, 2009;Griffith et al, 2010;Ritz and Pollard, 2012;Ritz et al, 2015]. As a result, it does not account for changes in elastic moduli in the damage zone resulting from accumulated inelastic deformation [e.g., Faulkner et al, 2006;Cappa et al, 2014;Xu et al, 2014].…”
Section: Journal Of Geophysical Research: Solid Earthmentioning
confidence: 99%