Relating stick‐slip friction experiments to earthquake source parameters

[1] Analytical results for parameters, such as static stress drop, for stick-slip friction experiments, with arbitrary input parameters, can be determined by solving an energy-balance equation. These results can then be related to a given earthquake based on its seismic moment and the maximum slip within its rupture zone, assuming that the rupture process entails the same physics as stick-slip friction. This analysis yields overshoots and ratios of apparent stress to static stress drop of about 0.25. The inferred earthquake source parameters static stress drop, apparent stress, slip rate, and radiated energy are robust inasmuch as they are largely independent of the experimental parameters used in their estimation. Instead, these earthquake parameters depend on C, the ratio of maximum slip to the cube root of the seismic moment. C is controlled by the normal stress applied to the rupture plane and the difference between the static and dynamic coefficients of friction. Estimating yield stress and seismic efficiency using the same procedure is only possible when the actual static and dynamic coefficients of friction are known within the earthquake rupture zone.

[1]  A. McGarr,et al.  On relating apparent stress to the stress causing earthquake fault slip , 1999 .

[2]  P. Okubo,et al.  Measurements of frictional heating in granite , 1983 .

[3]  N. Beeler Stress drop with constant, scale independent seismic efficiency and overshoot , 2001 .

[4]  J. Boatwright,et al.  Regional estimates of radiated seismic energy , 2001 .

[5]  W. Brace,et al.  Stick-Slip as a Mechanism for Earthquakes , 1966, Science.

[6]  N. M. Beeler,et al.  Laboratory-Based Maximum Slip Rates in Earthquake Rupture Zones and Radiated Energy , 2010 .

[7]  Joe B. Fletcher,et al.  A method for mapping apparent stress and energy radiation applied to the 1994 Northridge Earthquake Fault Zone , 2000 .

[8]  Thomas H. Heaton,et al.  The slip history of the 1994 Northridge, California, earthquake determined from strong-motion, teleseismic, GPS, and leveling data , 1996, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

[9]  A. McGarr,et al.  Some comparisons between mining-induced and laboratory earthquakes , 1994 .

[10]  A. McGarr,et al.  Maximum Slip in Earthquake Fault Zones, Apparent Stress, and Stick-Slip Friction , 2003 .

[11]  Gregory C. Beroza,et al.  Variability in earthquake stress drop and apparent stress , 2011 .

[12]  C. Scholz,et al.  Dynamic properties of stick‐slip friction of rock , 1976 .

[13]  A. McGarr,et al.  Near-Fault Peak Ground Velocity from Earthquake and Laboratory Data , 2007 .

[14]  S. K. Singh,et al.  Seismic energy release in Mexican subduction zone earthquakes , 1994 .

[15]  J. Dieterich Potential for geophysical experiments in large scale tests , 1981 .

[16]  J. Brune Tectonic stress and the spectra of seismic shear waves from earthquakes , 1970 .

[17]  A. McGarr,et al.  Broadband Records of Earthquakes in Deep Gold Mines and a Comparison with Results from SAFOD, California , 2009 .

[18]  J. D. Eshelby The determination of the elastic field of an ellipsoidal inclusion, and related problems , 1957, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences.

[19]  J. C. Savage,et al.  The relation between apparent stress and stress drop , 1971 .

[20]  J. B. Walsh Stiffness in faulting and in friction experiments , 1971 .