Skip to main content

Advertisement

We’d like to understand how you use our websites in order to improve them. Register your interest.

Inferring fault strength from earthquake rupture properties and the tectonic implications of high pore pressure faulting

Abstract

The strength of seismogenic faults is fundamental to earthquake mechanics and plate tectonics, affecting many subsidiary processes in the solid earth. The key to understanding fault strength is determining the pore pressures and hydraulic properties within the faults and surrounding crust. The debate has lasted over decades, with evidence provided for both strong fault and weak fault scenarios. A recently proposed hypothesis for quantifying the strength at which faults fail uses earthquake scaling arguments to show that earthquakes fail over a range of strengths in the upper 15–20 km, and at near-lithostatic pore pressure below this depth. This observation, if correct, has important implications for crustal hydraulics, plate tectonics, and earthquake hazard assessment. This paper summarizes the arguments for high pore pressure faulting, and explores its implications for earthquake stress drops, strength of the lithosphere, and earthquake scaling. The hope is to establish a general framework for quantifying the role of fluids in the earthquake process, and to demonstrate that high fluid pressure may dominate failure of the brittle crust.

References

  1. Ague, J., J. Park, and D. Rye, Regional metamorphic dehydration and seismic hazard, Geophys. Res. Lett., 22, 4421–4224, 1998.

  2. Blanpied, M., D. Lockner, and J. Byerlee, An earthquake mechanism based on rapid sealing of faults, Nature, 358, 574–576, 1992.

  3. Caine, J., J. Evans, and C. Forster, Fault zone architecture and permeability structure, Geology, 24, 1025–1028, 1996.

  4. Cochard, A. and R. Madariaga, Dynamic faulting under rate-dependent friction, Pure Appl. Geophys., 142, 419–445, 1994.

  5. Cox, S., Faulting processes at high fluid pressures: An example of fault valve behavior from the Wattle Gully Fault, Victoria, Australia, J. Geophys. Res., 100, 12,841–12,859, 1995.

  6. Evans, J. and F. Chester, Fluid-rock interaction in faults of the San Andreas system: Inferences from San Gabriel fault rock geochemistry and microstructures, J. Geophys. Res., 100, 13,007–13,020, 1995.

  7. Floyd, J., J. Mutter, A. M. Goodliffe, and B. Taylor, Evidence for fault weakness and fluid flow within an active low-angle normal fault, Nature, 411, 779–783, 2001.

  8. Fujii, Y. and M. Matsu’ura, Regional differences in scaling laws for large earthquakes and its tectonic implication, Pure Appl. Geophys., 157, 2283–2302, 2000.

  9. Henry, C. and S. Das, Aftershock zones of large shallow earthquakes: Fault dimensions, aftershock area expansion, and scaling relations, Geophys. J. Int., 147, 272–293, 2001.

  10. Husen, S. and E. Kissling, Postseismic fluid flow after the large subduction earthquake of Antofagasta, Chile, Geology, 29, 847–850, 2001.

  11. Kirby, S., Intraslab earthquakes and phase changes in subducting lithosphere, Rev. Geophys., supp., 287–297, 1995.

  12. Mai, P. and G. Beroza, Source scaling properties from finite fault rupture models, Bull. Seis. Soc. Am., 90, 604–615, 2000.

  13. Manning, C. and S. Ingebritsen, Permeability of the continental crust: Implications of geothermal data and metamorphic systems, Rev. Geophys., 37, 127–150, 1999.

  14. Matsu’ura, M. and T. Sato, Loading mechanism and scaling relations or large interplate earthquakes, Tectonophys., 277, 189–198, 1997.

  15. Miller, S., The properties of large ruptures and the dynamical influence of fluids on earthquakes and faulting, J. Geophys. Res., 107, 10.1029/2000JB000032, 2002a.

  16. Miller, S., Earthquake scaling and the strength of seismogenic faults, Geophys. Res. Lett., 29, 10.1029/2001GL014181, 2002b.

  17. Miller, S., A. Nur, and D. Olgaard, Earthquakes as a coupled shear stresshigh pore pressure dynamical system, Geophys. Res. Lett., 23, 197–200, 1996.

  18. Miller, S., W. van der Zee, D. Olgaard, and J. Connolly, A fluid-pressure controlled feedback model for dehydration reactions, Tectonophys., 2002c (in press).

  19. Muir-Wood, R. and G. King, Hydrological signature of earthquake strain, J. Geophys. Res., 98, 22,035–22,068, 1993.

  20. Peacock, S., Are the lower planes of double couple seismic zones caused by serpentine dehydration in subducting oceanic mantle?, Geology, 29, 299–302, 2001.

  21. Pegler, G. and S. Das, Anaylysis of the relationship between seismic moment and fault length for large crustal strike-slip earthquakes between 1977–92, Geophys. Res. Lett., 23, 905–908, 1996.

  22. Quattrocchi, F., In search of evidence of deep fluid discharges and pore pressure evolution in the crust to explain the seismicity style of the umbria-marche 1997–1998 seismic sequence Central Italy, Ann. Geophys., 42, 609–636, 1999.

  23. Rice, J., Fault stress states, pore pressure redistributions, and the weakness of the San Andreas fault, in Fault Mechanics and Transport Properties of Rock, edited by B. Evans and T.-F. Wong, pp. 476–503, Academic Press, 1992.

  24. Roeloffs, E., Persistent water level changes in a well near Parkfield, California, due to local and distant earthquakes, J. Geophys. Res., 103, 869–889, 1998.

  25. Romanowicz, B., Strike-slip earthquakes on quasi-vertical transcurrent faults—inferences for general scaling relations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 19, 481–484, 1992.

  26. Romanowicz, B. and L. Ruff, On moment-length scaling of large earthquakes and the strength of faults, Geophys. Res. Lett., 29, 10.1029/2001GL014479, 2002.

  27. Scholz, C., Scaling laws for large earthquakes: Consequences for physical models, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 72, 1–14, 1982.

  28. Scholz, C., The Mechanics of Earthquakes and Faulting, Cambridge Univ. Press, New York, 1990.

  29. Scholz, C., A reappraisal of large earthquake scaling, Bull. Seis. Soc. Am., 84, 215–218, 1994.

  30. Shaw, B. and C. Scholz, Slip-length scaling in large earthquakes: Observations and theory and implications for earthquake physics, Geophys. Res. Lett., 28, 2991–2994, 2001.

  31. Sibson, R., Implications of fault-valve behavior for rupture nucleation and recurrence, Tectonophys., 211, 283–293, 1992.

  32. Sleep, N. and M. Blanpied, Creep, compaction and the weak rheology of major faults, Nature, 359, 687–692, 1992.

  33. Townend, J. and M. Zoback, How faulting keeps the crust strong, Geology, 28, 399–402, 2000.

  34. Yin, Z.-M. and G. Rogers, Toward a physical understanding of earthquake scaling relations, Pure Appl. Geophys., 146, 661–675, 1996.

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephen A. Miller.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Miller, S.A. Inferring fault strength from earthquake rupture properties and the tectonic implications of high pore pressure faulting. Earth Planet Sp 54, 1173–1179 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1186/BF03353318

Download citation

Keywords

  • Fault Zone
  • Pore Pressure
  • Fault Plane
  • Large Earthquake
  • Stress Drop