2017
DOI: 10.1007/s00531-017-1467-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Postseismic Coulomb stress changes on intra-continental dip-slip faults due to viscoelastic relaxation in the lower crust and lithospheric mantle: insights from 3D finite-element modelling

Abstract: We thank the topic editor J. Nüchter and three anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments, which greatly improved the manuscript. We used the Generic Mapping Tools by Wessel and Smith (1998) for creating some of the figures.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 62 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As stated in Section 3.2, we assume that, if present, any postseismic afterslip would be included in the value of slip measured at the surface, so the interseismic creep we have modeled includes also postseismic afterslip. In other words, this means that contrary to other works (e.g., Bagge et al, 2019;Bagge & Hampel, 2017;Verdecchia & Carena, 2015Verdecchia et al, 2018) we have not needed to separately model the stresses that occur due to postseismic viscoelastic relaxation after earthquakes. The transient postseismic viscoelastic stress changes are likely to be a second order effect, particularly in the few years following an earthquake, when postseismic afterslip is the dominant effect (e.g., Diao et al, 2014).…”
Section: Model Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 95%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As stated in Section 3.2, we assume that, if present, any postseismic afterslip would be included in the value of slip measured at the surface, so the interseismic creep we have modeled includes also postseismic afterslip. In other words, this means that contrary to other works (e.g., Bagge et al, 2019;Bagge & Hampel, 2017;Verdecchia & Carena, 2015Verdecchia et al, 2018) we have not needed to separately model the stresses that occur due to postseismic viscoelastic relaxation after earthquakes. The transient postseismic viscoelastic stress changes are likely to be a second order effect, particularly in the few years following an earthquake, when postseismic afterslip is the dominant effect (e.g., Diao et al, 2014).…”
Section: Model Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…However, whether future earthquakes can be triggered by past events cannot be solely explained by studies of coseismic Coulomb stress changes (Mildon et al., 2019). The evolution of stress that brings a fault to rupture is mainly controlled by interseismic strain accumulation, while other transient stress changes can occur, such as postseismic effects due to viscoelastic relaxation (e.g., Bagge et al., 2019; Bagge & Hampel, 2017; Freed & Lin, 2001; Verdecchia & Carena, 2015, 2016; Verdecchia et al., 2018), postseismic fluid pressure changes (e.g., Albano et al., 2017, 2019; Bosl & Nur, 2002; Cocco & Rice, 2002; Miao et al., 2021; Noir et al., 1997; Vidale & Shearer, 2006), and dynamic seismic waves (e.g., Belardinelli et al., 2003; Gonzalez‐Huizar & Velasco, 2011; Velasco et al., 2008), and have been suggested to modify the distribution and magnitude of stress changes. Therefore, the inclusion of coseismic, postseismic and interseismic loading, reproducing the effect of the tectonic rates at which faults slip, appears to be the key to understanding patterns of occurrence of earthquakes, and examples from historical earthquakes (e.g., Mildon et al., 2019; Sgambato, Faure Walker, Mildon, & Roberts, 2020; Verdecchia & Carena, 2015, 2016; Wedmore et al., 2017) and propagating triggered earthquake sequences (Pondard et al., 2007) are consistent with this.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To first gain an understanding of how local postseismic relaxation may have reloaded the Mochiyama Fault, we built a set of generalised stress-driven models that link coseismic slip to the postseismic reloading of the rupture area [e.g. Ellis and Stöckhert, 2004;Bagge and Hampel, 2017]. The models were designed to capture the maximum contribution of the three main postseismic deformation mechanisms -afterslip, localised viscous shear and distributed visco-elastic relaxation -to reloading a normal fault after an earthquake [e.g.…”
Section: Generalised Models Of Postseismic Reloadingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other numerical methods for modeling viscoelastic deformations that are based on the finite element technique, through which the lateral heterogeneity can be considered, have been developed (e.g., Aagaard et al, ; Bagge & Hampel, ; Cohen, ; Hu et al, ; Tanaka et al, ; Timothy, ; Wahr & Wyss, ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%