Book contents
- Glacially-Triggered Faulting
- Glacially-Triggered Faulting
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Methods and Techniques for Fault Identification and Dating
- 3 Earthquake-Induced Landforms in the Context of Ice-Sheet Loading and Unloading
- 4 The Challenge to Distinguish Soft-Sediment Deformation Structures (SSDS) Formed by Glaciotectonic, Periglacial and Seismic Processes in a Formerly Glaciated Area
- 5 Glacially Induced Fault Identification with LiDAR, Based on Examples from Finland
- 6 Fault Identification from Seismology
- 7 Imaging and Characterization of Glacially Induced Faults Using Applied Geophysics
- 8 Dating of Postglacial Faults in Fennoscandia
- 9 Proposed Drilling into Postglacial Faults
- Part III Glacially Triggered Faulting in the Fennoscandian Shield
- Part IV Glacially Triggered Faulting at the Edge and in the Periphery of the Fennoscandian Shield
- Part V Glacially Triggered Faulting Outside Europe
- Part VI Modelling of Glacially Induced Faults and Stress
- Part VII Outlook
- Index
- References
6 - Fault Identification from Seismology
from Part II - Methods and Techniques for Fault Identification and Dating
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 December 2021
Book contents
- Glacially-Triggered Faulting
- Glacially-Triggered Faulting
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Methods and Techniques for Fault Identification and Dating
- 3 Earthquake-Induced Landforms in the Context of Ice-Sheet Loading and Unloading
- 4 The Challenge to Distinguish Soft-Sediment Deformation Structures (SSDS) Formed by Glaciotectonic, Periglacial and Seismic Processes in a Formerly Glaciated Area
- 5 Glacially Induced Fault Identification with LiDAR, Based on Examples from Finland
- 6 Fault Identification from Seismology
- 7 Imaging and Characterization of Glacially Induced Faults Using Applied Geophysics
- 8 Dating of Postglacial Faults in Fennoscandia
- 9 Proposed Drilling into Postglacial Faults
- Part III Glacially Triggered Faulting in the Fennoscandian Shield
- Part IV Glacially Triggered Faulting at the Edge and in the Periphery of the Fennoscandian Shield
- Part V Glacially Triggered Faulting Outside Europe
- Part VI Modelling of Glacially Induced Faults and Stress
- Part VII Outlook
- Index
- References
Summary
Regions affected by glacial isostatic adjustment experience stress changes. The stress will be released either by slow aseismic movements along faults or by sudden stress release in form of earthquakes. Location and source mechanism of those earthquakes can play a major role in understanding past and ongoing geodynamic processes in a glacial isostatic adjustment-affected region. On the one hand, alignments of earthquake hypocentres may act as an indicator for active faults that might not be known from geology before. On the other hand, calculation and interpretation of earthquake focal mechanisms, represent a key to stress and stress changes. We present an overview of seismological methods and tools to retrieve fault geometry and motion.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Glacially-Triggered Faulting , pp. 100 - 117Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
Aki, K. and Richards, P. G. (1980). Quantitative Seismology: Theory and Methods. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Barth, L. and Plenefisch, T. (2020). Focal mechanisms for small to intermediate earthquakes in the northern part of the Alps and their seismotectonic interpretation. EGU, Vienna, doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu2020-12066.Google Scholar
Bormann, P. and Dewey, J. W. (2014). IS 3.3: The new IASPEI standards for determining magnitudes from digital data and their relation to classical magnitudes. In P. Bormann, ed., New Manual of Seismological Observatory Practice (NMSOP-2). Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum GFZ, Potsdam, pp. 1–44, doi.org/10.2312/GFZ.NMSOP-2_IS_3.3.Google Scholar
Brandes, C., Plenefisch, T., Tanner, D. C., Gestermann, N. and Steffen, H. (2019). Evaluation of deep crustal earthquakes in northern Germany – Possible tectonic causes. Terra Nova, 31, 83–93, doi.org/10.1111/ter.12372.Google Scholar
Dahm, T. and Krüger, F. (2014). IS 3.9: Moment tensor inversion and moment tensor interpretation. In P. Bormann, ed., New Manual of Seismological Observatory Practice 2 (NMSOP-2). Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum GFZ, Potsdam, pp. 1–37, doi.org/10.2312/GFZ.NMSOP-2_IS_3.9.Google Scholar
Di Stefano, R., Aldersons, F., Kissling, E. et al. (2006). Automatic seismic phase picking and consistent observation error assessment: application to the Italian seismicity. Geophysical Journal International, 165(1), 121–134, doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2005.02799.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donner, S., Igel, H., Hadziioannou, C. and the Romy group (2018). Retrieval of the seismic moment tensor from joint measurements of translational and rotational ground motions: sparse networks and single stations. In D’Amico, S., ed., Moment Tensor Solutions. Springer, Cham, pp. 263–280, doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77359-9_12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, P. M. (2005). Is there a future for passive seismic? First Break, 23(6), 111–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Efron, B. (1980). The Jackknife, the Bootstrap, and Other Resampling Plans. Stanford University, Department of Statistics, Technical Report, NSF 163, 135 pp.Google Scholar
Geiger, L. (1910). Herdbestimmung bei Erdbeben aus den Ankunftszeiten. Nachrichten von der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Mathematisch-Physikalische Klasse, June 1910, 331–349; trans. (1912) Probability method for the determination of earthquake epicentres from the arrival time only. Bulletin of St. Louis University, 8(1), 56–71, eudml.org/doc/58769.Google Scholar
Gutenberg, B. and Richter, C. F. (1956). Magnitude and energy of earthquakes. Annali di Geofisica, 9, 1–15.Google Scholar
Harjes, H.-P. (1990). Design and siting of a new regional array in Central Europe. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 80(6), 1801–1817.Google Scholar
Havskov, J. and Ottemöller, L. (2010). Routine Data Processing in Earthquake Seismology. Springer, Dordrecht, doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8697-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jost, M. and Herrmann, R. (1989). A student’s guide to and review of moment tensor. Seismological Research Letters, 60(2), 37–57, doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.60.2.37.Google Scholar
Joswig, M. (1992). System architecture of seismic networks and its implications to network automatization. Cahiers Centre Européen de Géodynamique et de Séismologie, 5, 75–84.Google Scholar
Keiding, M., Kreemer, C., Lindholm, C. et al. (2015). A comparison of strain rates and seismicity for Fennoscandia: depth dependency of deformation from glacial isostatic adjustment. Geophysical Journal International, 202, 1021–1028, doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggv207.Google Scholar
Kilb, D. and Rubin, A. M. (2002). Implications of diverse fault orientations imaged in relocated aftershocks of the Mount Lewis, ML 5.7, California, earthquake. Journal of Geophysical Research, 107(B11), 2294, doi.org/10.1029/2001JB000149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kraft, T., Mignan, A. and Giardini, D. (2013). Optimization of a large-scale microseismic monitoring network in northern Switzerland. Geophysical Journal International, 195(1), 474–490, doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggt225.Google Scholar
Li, L., Tan, J., Schwarz, B. et al. (2020). Recent advances and challenges of waveform‐based seismic location methods at multiple scales. Reviews of Geophysics, 58, e2019RG000667, doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lomax, A., Virieux, J., Volant, P. and Berge, C. (2000). Probabilistic earthquake location in 3D and layered models: introduction of a Metropolis–Gibbs method and comparison with linear locations. In Thurber, C. H. and Rabinowitz, N., eds., Advances in Seismic Event Location. Kluwer, Amsterdam, pp. 101–134, doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9536-0_5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meier, M.-A., Ross, Z. E., Ramachandran, A. et al. (2019). Reliable real‐time seismic signal/noise discrimination with machine learning. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 124(1), 788–800, doi.org/10.1029/2018JB016661.Google Scholar
Omori, F. (1894). On after-shocks of earthquakes. The Journal of the College of Science, Imperial University of Tokyo, Japan, 7, 111–200.Google Scholar
Provost, F., Hibert, C. and Malet, J.-P. (2017). Automatic classification of endogenous landslide seismicity using the Random Forest supervised classifier. Geophysical Research Letters, 44, 113–120, doi.org/10.1002/2016GL070709.Google Scholar
Riggelsen, C. and Ohrnberger, M. (2014). A machine learning approach for improving the detection capabilities at 3C seismic stations. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 171, 395–411, doi.org/10.1007/s00024–012-0592-3.Google Scholar
Rost, S. and Thomas, C. (2002). Array seismology: methods and applications. Reviews of Geophysics, 40(3), 2-1–2-27, doi.org/10.1029/2000RG000100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmelzbach, C., Donner, S., Igel, H. et al. (2018). Advances in 6C seismology: applications of combined translational and rotational motion measurements in global and exploration seismology. Geophysics, 83(3), doi.org/10.1190/geo2017-0492.1.Google Scholar
Schuster, G. T., Yu, J. and Sheng, J. (2004). Interferometric/daylight seismic imaging. Geophysical Journal International, 157(2), 838–852, doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2004.02251.x.Google Scholar
Schweitzer, J. (2001). HYPOSAT – an enhanced routine to locate seismic events. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 158, 277–289, doi.org/10.1007/978-3-0348-8250-7_17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schweitzer, J., Fyen, J., Mykkeltveit, S. et al. (2012 online): seismic arrays. In Bormann, P., ed., New Manual of Seismological Observatory Practice 2 (NMSOP-2). Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum GFZ, Potsdam, pp. 1–80, doi.org/10.2312/GFZ.NMSOP-2_ch9.Google Scholar
Shearer, P. M. (2009). Introduction to Seismology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sick, B., Walter, M. and Joswig, M. (2014). Visual event screening of continuous seismic data by supersonograms. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 171, 549–559, doi.org/10.1007/s00024-012-0618-xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snoke, J. A. (2003). FOCMEC: FOCal MEChanism determinations. International Handbook of Earthquake and Engineering Seismology, pp. 1629–1630.Google Scholar
Stein, S. and Wysession, M. (2003). An Introduction to Seismology, Earthquakes, and Earth Structure. Blackwell Publishing, Malden, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Tanner, D. and Brandes, C. (2019). Understanding Faults: Detecting, Dating, and Modeling. Elsevier, Amsterdam, doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-815985-9.00001-1.Google Scholar
Udías, A. and Buforn, E. (2017). Principles of Seismology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Waldhauser, F. and Ellsworth, W. E. (2000). A double-difference earthquake location algorithm: method and application to the Northern Hayward Fault, California. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 90(6), 1353–1368, doi.org/10.1785/0120000006.Google Scholar
Wells, D. L. and Coppersmith, K. J. (1994). New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 84, 974–1002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar