What Can Strong-Motion Data Tell Us about Slip-Weakening Fault-Friction Laws?

By M. Guatteri, P. Spudich. 2000

231 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Civil and Structural Engineering, Geophysics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c4f6fba69644e25763dae20139ccdb1fac5a67fa

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Civil and Structural Engineering

In Geophysics

Citations in the corpus

Source Description of the 1999 Hector Mine, California, Earthquake, Part I: Wavelet Domain Inversion Theory and Resolution Analysis (2002, background): “However, Guatteri and Spudich (2000) have demonstrated that such complexity may be hard to constrain with only lowfrequency strong-motion data.”
Slip‐weakening behavior during the propagation of dynamic ruptures obeying rate‐ and state‐dependent friction laws (2003, background): “[3] Slip weakening is a characteristic feature of rate- and state-dependent constitutive laws [Okubo and Dieterich, 1984; Guatteri and Spudich, 2000; Cocco and Bizzarri, 2002] because it describes the dynamic traction drop associated with slip acceleration, which is a consequence JOURNAL OF…”
Earthquakes as multiscale dynamic ruptures with heterogeneous fracture surface energy (2005, background): “Gc can be estimated more robustly [Guatteri and Spudich, 2000] and is of the order of 1 MJ/ m2 for large earthquakes [Beroza and Spudich, 1988; Ide, 2003] and is smaller in laboratory experiments by 2–3 orders of magnitude [Scholz, 2002; Ohnaka, 2003].”
The Combined Inversion of Seismic and Geodetic Data for the Source Process of the 16 October 1999 Mw 7.1 Hector Mine, California, Earthquake (2002, background): “(r), a combination of these, or a large slip weakening distance (Guatteri and Spudich, 2000).”
Stress-Breakdown Time and Slip-Weakening Distance Inferred from Slip-Velocity Functions on Earthquake Faults (2003, background): “Another motivation is the clearly different shapes of the slip-velocity time histories on the fault for different slip-weakening distances ( Guatteri and Spudich, 2000 ).”
Afterslip and aftershocks in the rate‐and‐state friction law (2007, background): “Seismological inferences are, however, generally only upper bounds, due to bandwidth limitations [Guatteri and Spudich, 2000] The friction parameters A and B are of the order of 0.”
Estimation of the Critical Slip-Weakening Distance: Theoretical Background (2003, background): “Another motivation is the clearly different shapes of the slip-velocity time histories on the fault for different slip-weakening distances (Guatteri and Spudich, 2000).”
Conditions governing the occurrence of supershear ruptures under slip-weakening friction (2007, result): “This stands in contrast to the dependence of sub-Rayleigh rupture growth solely upon fracture energy due to a strong trade-off between slip-weakening distance and strength drop [ Guatteri and Spudich, 2000 ].”
Strong Ground-Motion Prediction from Stochastic-Dynamic Source Models (2003, background): “Guatteri and Spudich (2000) showed that a dynamic model having a short slip-weakening distance exhibits more sharply peaked SVFs compared to a corresponding model with a longer Dc.”
Observational constraints on the fracture energy of subduction zone earthquakes (2004, methodology): “However, due to the low-pass filtering used in most modeling studies, the current estimates of DC should be regarded as upper bound; thus only a lower limit of radiation efficiency can be determined [Ide and Takeo, 1997; Olson et al., 1997; Guatteri and Spudich, 2000].”
A Pseudo-Dynamic Approximation to Dynamic Rupture Models for Strong Ground Motion Prediction (2004, background): “Because for a given stress-drop distribution, different choices of Dc result in different peak-slip velocities (a small Dc results in a large Vmax, and a large Dc in a low Vmax) ( Guatteri and Spudich, 2000 ), we cannot provide a unique parameterization for Vmax for a given slip distribution; howeve”