Nonlinear Suppression of High‐Frequency S Waves by Strong Rayleigh Waves

Strong Rayleigh waves are expected to bring the shallow subsurface into frictional failure. They may nonlinearly interact with high‐frequency S waves. The widely applied Drucker and Prager (1952) rheology predicts that horizontal compression half‐cycle of strong Rayleigh waves will increase the strength of the subsurface for S waves and predicts that S waves with dynamic accelerations >1 g will reach the surface. We did not observe this effect. Rather, we observed that strong high‐frequency S waves arrived at times of low Rayleigh‐wave particle velocity. Physically, high‐frequency S waves cause failure on horizontal fractures in which Rayleigh waves do not change the normal traction. Failure then may depend on the ratio of the shear invariant to the ambient vertical stress. The shear invariant is the square root of the sum of the squares of terms proportional to the resolved horizontal velocity from Rayleigh waves and to the resolved high‐frequency dynamic acceleration from S waves. That is, an ellipse should bound resolved dynamic acceleration versus resolved particle velocity. Records from seven stations from the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and El Pedregal station during the 2015 Coquimbo Chilean earthquake exhibit this expected effect of this nonlinear interaction.

[1]  C. Ventura,et al.  Site characterization at Chilean strong-motion stations: Comparison of downhole and microtremor shear-wave velocity methods , 2015 .

[2]  N. Nakata,et al.  Nonlinear attenuation from the interaction between different types of seismic waves and interaction of seismic waves with shallow ambient tectonic stress , 2015 .

[3]  James Kaklamanos,et al.  Comparison of 1D linear, equivalent-linear, and nonlinear site response models at six KiK-net validation sites , 2015 .

[4]  D. Fäh,et al.  Expected seismic shaking in Los Angeles reduced by San Andreas fault zone plasticity , 2014 .

[5]  Caijun Xu,et al.  Sensitivity of Coulomb stress change to the parameters of the Coulomb failure model: A case study using the 2008 Mw 7.9 Wenchuan earthquake , 2014 .

[6]  Mark D. Zoback,et al.  Frictional properties of shale reservoir rocks , 2013 .

[7]  Anindya Chatterjee,et al.  Modal damping in vibrating objects via dissipation from dispersed frictional microcracks , 2013, Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[8]  Robert E. Kayen,et al.  A taxonomy of site response complexity , 2012 .

[9]  Susumu Iai,et al.  Numerical Analysis of Near-Field Asymmetric Vertical Motion , 2010 .

[10]  Dominic Assimaki,et al.  A Wavelet-based Seismogram Inversion Algorithm for the In Situ Characterization of Nonlinear Soil Behavior , 2009 .

[11]  K. Obara,et al.  Three‐dimensional crustal S wave velocity structure in Japan using microseismic data recorded by Hi‐net tiltmeters , 2008 .

[12]  John R. Rice,et al.  Frictional response induced by time-dependent fluctuations of the normal loading , 2001 .

[13]  M. F. Linker,et al.  Effects of variable normal stress on rock friction: Observations and constitutive equations , 1992 .

[14]  J. Byerlee.  Friction of rocks , 1978 .

[15]  J. Logan.  Friction in rocks , 1975 .

[16]  D. C. Drucker,et al.  Soil mechanics and plastic analysis or limit design , 1952 .

[17]  Robert Glenn Stockwell,et al.  A basis for efficient representation of the S-transform , 2007, Digit. Signal Process..