Here - Stuff
Here - Stuff Here - Stuff
Field, B. D., G. H. Browne, B. Davy, R. H. Herzer, R. H. Hoskins, J.L. Raine, G. J. Wilson, R. J. Sewell, D. Smale, and W. A. Watters(1989). Cretaceous and Cenozoic sedimentary basins and geologicalevolution of the Canterbury region, South Island, New Zealand.New Zealand Geological Survey Basin Studies 2. Wellington, NewZealand: Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, 94 pp.+ enclosures.Forsyth, P. J. (2001). Geology of the Waitaki Area. Institute of Geologicaland Nuclear Sciences 1:250,000 geological map 19, 1 sheet and 64pp. Lower Hutt, New Zealand: GNS Science.Forsyth, P. J., D. J. A. Barrell, and R. Jongens (2008). Geology of theChristchurch Area. Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences1:250,000 geological map 16, 1 sheet and 67 pp. Lower Hutt, NewZealand: GNS Science.Fry, B., and M. C. Gerstenberger (2011). Large apparent stresses from theCanterbury earthquakes of 2010 and 2011. Seismological ResearchLetters 82, 833–838.Fukuyama, E., W. L. Ellsworth, F. Waldhauser, and A. Kubo (2003).Detailed fault structure of the 2000 Western Tottori, Japan, earthquakesequence. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 93,1,468–1,478.Gledhill, K., J. Ristau, M. Reyners, B. Fry, and C. Holden (2011). TheDarfield (Canterbury, New Zealand) M w 7.1 earthquake of 4September 2010: A preliminary seismological report. SeismologicalResearch Letters 82, 378–386.Hicks, S. R. (1989). Structure of the Canterbury Plains, New Zealand,from gravity modelling. Research Report 222, Geophysics Division,Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Wellington,New Zealand.Keiding, M., B. Lund, and T. Árnadóttir (2009). Earthquakes, stress,and strain along an obliquely divergent plate boundary: ReykjanesPeninsula, southwest Iceland. Journal of Geophysical Research 114,B09306; doi:10.1029/2008JB006253.Laird, M. G., and J. D. Bradshaw (2004). The break-up of a long-termrelationship: The Cretaceous separation of New Zealand fromGondwana. Gondwana Research 7, 273–286.Leitner, B., D. Eberhart-Phillips, H. Anderson, and J. Nabelek (2001).A focused look at the Alpine fault, New Zealand: Seismicity,focal mechanisms and stress observations. Journal of GeophysicalResearch 106, 2,193–2,220.Mogg, W. G., K. Aurisch, R. O’Leary, and G. P. Pass (2008). TheCarrack-Caravel prospect complex: A possible sleeping giantin the deep Canterbury Basin, New Zealand. Proceedings of thePetroleum Exploration Society of Australia Eastern AustralasianBasins Symposium III, Sydney, Australia, 14–17 September 2008,369–378.Mount, V. S., and J. Suppe (1987). State of stress near the San Andreasfault. Geology 15, 1,143–1,146.Pearson, C. (1994). Geodetic strain determinations from the Okaritoand Godley-Tekapo regions, central South Island, New Zealand.New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics 37, 309–318.Pearson, C., J. Beavan, D. Darby, G. H. Blick, and R. I. Walcott (1995).Strain distribution across the Australian-Pacific plate boundary inthe central South Island, New Zealand, from 1992 GPS and earlierterrestrial observations. Journal of Geophysical Research 100,22,071–22,081.Quigley, M., P. Villamor, K. Furlong, J. Beavan, R. Van Dissen, N.Litchfield, T. Stahl, B. Duffy, E. Bilderback, D. Noble, D. Barrell, R.Jongens, and S. Cox (2010). Previously unknown fault shakes NewZealand’s South Island. Eos, Transactions, American GeophysicalUnion 91, 469–472.Rattenbury, M. S., D. B. Townsend, and M. R. Johnston (2006). Geologyof the Kaikoura Area. Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences1:250,000 geological map 13, 1 sheet and 70 pp. Lower Hutt, NewZealand: GNS Science.Robinson, R., and P. J. McGinty (2000). The enigma of the Arthur’s Pass,New Zealand, earthquake. 2. The aftershock distribution and itsrelation to regional and induced stress fields. Journal of GeophysicalResearch 105, 16,139–16,150.Sibson, R. H. (1985). A note on fault reactivation. Journal of StructuralGeology 7, 751–754.Sibson, R. H. (1986). Rupture interaction with fault jogs. In EarthquakeSource Mechanics, ed. S. Das, J. Boatwright, and C. H. Scholz, 157–167. American Geophysical Union Monograph 37 (Maurice EwingSeries 6). Washington, DC: American Geophysical Union.Sibson, R. H., F. C. Ghisetti, and R. A. Crookbain (forthcoming).“Andersonian” wrench faulting in a regional stress field duringthe 2010–2011 Canterbury, New Zealand, earthquake sequence.In Stress Controls on Faulting, Fracturing and Igneous Intrusionin the Earth’s Crust—Commemorating the Work of Ernest MassonAnderson, ed. D. Healy et al. Geological Society of London specialpublication.Thatcher, W., and D. P. Hill (1991). Fault orientations in extensional andconjugate strike-slip environments and their implications. Geology19, 1,116–1,120.Wallace, L. M., J. Beavan, R. McCaffrey, K. Berryman, and P. Denys(2007). Balancing the plate motion budget in the South Island,New Zealand, using GPS, geological and seismological data.Geophysical Journal International 168, 332–352.Wesnousky, S. G. (1988). Seismological and structural evolution ofstrike-slip faults. Nature 335, 340–343.Department of GeologyUniversity of OtagoP.O. Box 56Dunedin 9054, New Zealandrick.sibson@otago.ac.nz(R. S.)832 Seismological Research Letters Volume 82, Number 6 November/December 2011
Large Apparent Stresses from the CanterburyEarthquakes of 2010 and 2011B. Fry and M. C. GerstenbergerB. Fry and M. C. GerstenbergerGNS ScienceINTRODUCTIONAn earthquake of Mw 6.1–6.3 1 (Beavan et al. 2011, page 789of this issue) that struck Christchurch, New Zealand, on 22February (21 February, UTC) produced recorded groundmotion acceleration over 2 g. The event caused widespread damagewith dense recordings of non-linear site behavior. Globally,dense near-field recordings of shallow intraplate earthquakesare rare. It is possible that extreme ground motions are commonwith this type of earthquake and that their rarity is merelya function of inadequate seismic sampling in the near field ofsuch low-probability, high-potency events. To better define thenature of these events, we calculate apparent stress (τ a ) of thethree largest earthquakes in the Canterbury sequence and comparethem to global and regional data. We then place recordedPGA and spectral accelerations into the context of regionaland global ground motion prediction equations and discussthe implications of high-stress events for future seismic hazardestimates for the region. For the February event, we also brieflyexplore the implications of directivity on measured groundmotions in central Christchurch.The earthquakes that occurred in the Canterbury regionof the South Island, New Zealand, from September 2010 tothe present have disproportionately large energy magnitudes(Me) to their moment magnitudes (Mw). They have producedthe largest ground motions ever measured in New Zealand.The sequence began with the Mw 7.1 earthquake that occurredabout 40 km west of the city of Christchurch on 4 September2010. The maximum recorded ground acceleration recordedduring the event was over 1.25 g, which was experienced nearthe intersection of the triggering thrust on which the rupturebegan and the strike-slip Greendale fault that carried mostof the moment in the earthquake (Gledhill et al. 2010). Peakground accelerations (PGA) in the central business districtof Christchurch averaged between about 0.2 and 0.3 g. Thesemotions were sufficient to generate liquefaction in areas of thecity. The highest recorded acceleration in the greater metropolitanarea was 0.61 g in a suburb on the southern edge of the citythat has since proved to be prone to strong site amplification.On 22 February 2011, an Mw 6.3 thrust earthquake occurred1. Mw estimates for this earthquake have ranged from 6.1 (USGS) to6.2 (Beavan et al. 2011, page 789 of this issue). To be conservative inour comparison to observed ground motions, we have used Mw 6.3 inall calculations.on a structure below the southern suburbs of the city at about7 km epicentral distance from the center of Christchurch. Thisearthquake produced extreme motions in Christchurch (Fryet al. 2011, page 846 of this issue). Maximum PGA, consideringboth horizontal and vertical components, was over 2.2g with two other recordings in the city greater than 1 g andaverage PGA in the central business district between about0.6 and 0.8 g. This intense shaking damaged many buildingsin the central business district of the city (~5–8 km epicentraldistance) and triggered widespread liquefaction (Kaiser et al.2011). On 13 June 2011, the city was again subject to intenseshaking from a nearby, shallow Mw 6.0 earthquake (Beavan etal. 2011, page 789 of this issue). Measured accelerations fromthat event were also extreme, with measured PGA over 2 g in asoutheastern suburb of the city. Taken together, this sequencehas produced widespread destruction and more than 180 fatalitiesin Christchurch.HIGH APPARENT STRESS (τ a )The faults that failed in the September 2010 Mw 7.1, theFebruary 2011 Mw 6.3, and the June 2011 Mw 6.0 earthquakeswere likely very strong, with high amounts of friction.Typically, faults in slowly deforming areas with long earthquakerecurrence intervals exhibit this attribute, as increasingdeformation typically decreases fault strength by reducingheterogeneities on the fault surface (e.g., Ben-Zion andSammis 2003). Subsequently, the radiated energies (Es) forthe three events were high for their given moments. Radiatedenergy can be determined from high-frequency velocity records(Boatwright and Choy 1986) and can be used to directly calculateMe (Choy and Boatwright 1995). Compared to theseismic moment, which is derived from displacement records,energy magnitudes are more indicative of the shaking potentialof an earthquake. Es estimates from analysis of broadband Pwaves provide Me of Me = 7.99, Me = 6.75, and Me = 6.7 forthe three events (George Choy, personal communication).Apparent stress is defined as the product of rigidity (μ) and Esper unit moment (τ a = (μ × Es)/Mo) (Wyss and Brune 1968),or the amount of stress per unit moment. There is considerabledebate regarding the scaling of τ a with earthquake moment.Aki (1957) asserts that earthquakes are self-similar, implyingthat τ a is not dependent on seismic moment. This assertionis supported by numerous other studies (e.g., Boatwright anddoi: 10.1785/gssrl.82.6.833Seismological Research Letters Volume 82, Number 6 November/December 2011 833
- Page 28 and 29: Quigley, M., R. Van Dissen, P. Vill
- Page 30 and 31: slip on a 59-degree striking fault
- Page 32 and 33: ▲▲Figure 4. Convergence of inve
- Page 34 and 35: observations and other source studi
- Page 36 and 37: -42. 5-43. 0-43. 5-44. 0-44. 5-43.2
- Page 38 and 39: “Product CSK © ASI, (ItalianSpac
- Page 40 and 41: TABLE 2Solutions for fault location
- Page 42 and 43: -43.45(A)degrees N-43.50-43.552.52.
- Page 44 and 45: is still a good fit to the horizont
- Page 46 and 47: Coulomb Stress Change Sensitivity d
- Page 48 and 49: mation takes on a larger strike-sli
- Page 50 and 51: P 9.4267BLDU45P 20.1213CASY39P 2.62
- Page 52 and 53: ERMJNUMAJOINUJHJ2CBIJMIDWJOWYHNBTPU
- Page 54 and 55: (A)6.146.13(B)6.246.36Misfit6.156.1
- Page 56 and 57: (A)(B)(C)(D)▲▲Figure 10. The co
- Page 58 and 59: (A)(B)(C)(D)▲▲Figure 12. The co
- Page 60 and 61: Luo, Y., Y. Tan, S. Wei, D. Helmber
- Page 62 and 63: −44˚00' −43˚00'4-Sep-2010Mw 7
- Page 64 and 65: TABLE 1Pairs of SAR imagery used in
- Page 67 and 68: Depth (km)Coulomb Stress Change(bar
- Page 69 and 70: Crippen, R. E. (1992). Measurement
- Page 71 and 72: AlpineFaultHope Fault38 mm/yr0+ +-1
- Page 73 and 74: σ 1dσ 3Nuσ 3CM w 7.1dw 6.2u70°M
- Page 75 and 76: Right-lateral Faults(A) Range Front
- Page 77: DISCUSSIONThe 2010-2011 Canterbury
- Page 81 and 82: ▲ ▲ Figure 2. Observed vs. pred
- Page 83 and 84: 10Obs SA(1s)AS1AS+SDAB 2006AB+SDSA(
- Page 85 and 86: Fine-scale Relocation of Aftershock
- Page 87 and 88: −43.25°OXZ0 10 20km−43.5°−4
- Page 89 and 90: A’0 km 4 8−43.5°B’B−43.6°
- Page 91 and 92: REFERENCESAvery, H. R., J. B. Berri
- Page 93 and 94: ▲ ▲ Figure 2. A) shows three-co
- Page 95 and 96: ▲ ▲ Figure 4. Vertical accelera
- Page 97 and 98: 0.8PRPC Z0.40Normalized (Max PGA +
- Page 99 and 100: Near-source Strong Ground MotionsOb
- Page 101 and 102: (A)Magnitude, M w876542009 NZdataba
- Page 103 and 104: Scale0.5 g5 seconds▲▲Figure 4.
- Page 105 and 106: (A)(B)Spectral Acc, Sa (g)North/Wes
- Page 107 and 108: Vertical-to-horizontal PGA ratio543
- Page 109 and 110: (A)(B)Station:CCCCSolid:AvgHorizDas
- Page 111 and 112: REFERENCESAagaard, B. T., J. F. Hal
- Page 113 and 114: ▲ ▲ Figure 1. Shear-wave veloci
- Page 115 and 116: Spectral Acceleration (0.3 s), (g)I
- Page 117 and 118: Spectral Acceleration (3 s), (g)In[
- Page 119 and 120: TABLE 1Mean (μ LLH ) and standard
- Page 121 and 122: Strong Ground Motions and Damage Co
- Page 123 and 124: ings and the Modified Takeda-Slip M
- Page 125 and 126: high, but there were no buildings d
- Page 127 and 128: REFERENCES▲▲Figure 8. Heavily d
Field, B. D., G. H. Browne, B. Davy, R. H. Herzer, R. H. Hoskins, J.L. Raine, G. J. Wilson, R. J. Sewell, D. Smale, and W. A. Watters(1989). Cretaceous and Cenozoic sedimentary basins and geologicalevolution of the Canterbury region, South Island, New Zealand.New Zealand Geological Survey Basin Studies 2. Wellington, NewZealand: Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, 94 pp.+ enclosures.Forsyth, P. J. (2001). Geology of the Waitaki Area. Institute of Geologicaland Nuclear Sciences 1:250,000 geological map 19, 1 sheet and 64pp. Lower Hutt, New Zealand: GNS Science.Forsyth, P. J., D. J. A. Barrell, and R. Jongens (2008). Geology of theChristchurch Area. Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences1:250,000 geological map 16, 1 sheet and 67 pp. Lower Hutt, NewZealand: GNS Science.Fry, B., and M. C. Gerstenberger (2011). Large apparent stresses from theCanterbury earthquakes of 2010 and 2011. Seismological ResearchLetters 82, 833–838.Fukuyama, E., W. L. Ellsworth, F. Waldhauser, and A. Kubo (2003).Detailed fault structure of the 2000 Western Tottori, Japan, earthquakesequence. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 93,1,468–1,478.Gledhill, K., J. Ristau, M. Reyners, B. Fry, and C. Holden (2011). TheDarfield (Canterbury, New Zealand) M w 7.1 earthquake of 4September 2010: A preliminary seismological report. SeismologicalResearch Letters 82, 378–386.Hicks, S. R. (1989). Structure of the Canterbury Plains, New Zealand,from gravity modelling. Research Report 222, Geophysics Division,Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Wellington,New Zealand.Keiding, M., B. Lund, and T. Árnadóttir (2009). Earthquakes, stress,and strain along an obliquely divergent plate boundary: ReykjanesPeninsula, southwest Iceland. Journal of Geophysical Research 114,B09306; doi:10.1029/2008JB006253.Laird, M. G., and J. D. Bradshaw (2004). The break-up of a long-termrelationship: The Cretaceous separation of New Zealand fromGondwana. Gondwana Research 7, 273–286.Leitner, B., D. Eberhart-Phillips, H. Anderson, and J. Nabelek (2001).A focused look at the Alpine fault, New Zealand: Seismicity,focal mechanisms and stress observations. Journal of GeophysicalResearch 106, 2,193–2,220.Mogg, W. G., K. Aurisch, R. O’Leary, and G. P. Pass (2008). TheCarrack-Caravel prospect complex: A possible sleeping giantin the deep Canterbury Basin, New Zealand. Proceedings of thePetroleum Exploration Society of Australia Eastern AustralasianBasins Symposium III, Sydney, Australia, 14–17 September 2008,369–378.Mount, V. S., and J. Suppe (1987). State of stress near the San Andreasfault. Geology 15, 1,143–1,146.Pearson, C. (1994). Geodetic strain determinations from the Okaritoand Godley-Tekapo regions, central South Island, New Zealand.New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics 37, 309–318.Pearson, C., J. Beavan, D. Darby, G. H. Blick, and R. I. Walcott (1995).Strain distribution across the Australian-Pacific plate boundary inthe central South Island, New Zealand, from 1992 GPS and earlierterrestrial observations. Journal of Geophysical Research 100,22,071–22,081.Quigley, M., P. Villamor, K. Furlong, J. Beavan, R. Van Dissen, N.Litchfield, T. Stahl, B. Duffy, E. Bilderback, D. Noble, D. Barrell, R.Jongens, and S. Cox (2010). Previously unknown fault shakes NewZealand’s South Island. Eos, Transactions, American GeophysicalUnion 91, 469–472.Rattenbury, M. S., D. B. Townsend, and M. R. Johnston (2006). Geologyof the Kaikoura Area. Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences1:250,000 geological map 13, 1 sheet and 70 pp. Lower Hutt, NewZealand: GNS Science.Robinson, R., and P. J. McGinty (2000). The enigma of the Arthur’s Pass,New Zealand, earthquake. 2. The aftershock distribution and itsrelation to regional and induced stress fields. Journal of GeophysicalResearch 105, 16,139–16,150.Sibson, R. H. (1985). A note on fault reactivation. Journal of StructuralGeology 7, 751–754.Sibson, R. H. (1986). Rupture interaction with fault jogs. In EarthquakeSource Mechanics, ed. S. Das, J. Boatwright, and C. H. Scholz, 157–167. American Geophysical Union Monograph 37 (Maurice EwingSeries 6). Washington, DC: American Geophysical Union.Sibson, R. H., F. C. Ghisetti, and R. A. Crookbain (forthcoming).“Andersonian” wrench faulting in a regional stress field duringthe 2010–2011 Canterbury, New Zealand, earthquake sequence.In Stress Controls on Faulting, Fracturing and Igneous Intrusionin the Earth’s Crust—Commemorating the Work of Ernest MassonAnderson, ed. D. Healy et al. Geological Society of London specialpublication.Thatcher, W., and D. P. Hill (1991). Fault orientations in extensional andconjugate strike-slip environments and their implications. Geology19, 1,116–1,120.Wallace, L. M., J. Beavan, R. McCaffrey, K. Berryman, and P. Denys(2007). Balancing the plate motion budget in the South Island,New Zealand, using GPS, geological and seismological data.Geophysical Journal International 168, 332–352.Wesnousky, S. G. (1988). Seismological and structural evolution ofstrike-slip faults. Nature 335, 340–343.Department of GeologyUniversity of OtagoP.O. Box 56Dunedin 9054, New Zealandrick.sibson@otago.ac.nz(R. S.)832 Seismological Research Letters Volume 82, Number 6 November/December 2011
Change language