Search for: All records

Abstract This paper reviews laboratory observations of earthquake initiation and describes new experiments on a 3‐m rock sample where the nucleation process is imaged in detail. Many of the laboratory observations are consistent with previous work that showed a slow and smoothly accelerating earthquake nucleation process that expands to a critical nucleation length scaleL_c, before it rapidly accelerates to dynamic fault rupture. The experiments also highlight complexities not currently considered by most theoretical and numerical models. This includes a loading rate dependency where a “kick” above steady state produces smaller and more abrupt initiation. Heterogeneity of fault strength also causes abrupt initiation when creep fronts coalesce on a stuck patch that is somewhat stronger than the surrounding fault. Taken together, these two mechanisms suggest a rate‐dependent “cascade up” model for earthquake initiation. This model simultaneously accounts for foreshocks that are a by‐product of a larger nucleation process and similarities between initialPwave signatures of small and large earthquakes. A diversity of nucleation conditions are expected in the Earth's crust, ranging from slip limited environments withL_c< 1 m, to ignition‐limited environments withL_c> 10 km. In the latter case,L_cfails to fully characterize the initiation process since earthquakes nucleate not because a slipping patch reaches a critical length but because fault slip rate exceeds a critical power density needed to ignite dynamic rupture. 

Abstract The interpretation of precursory seismicity can depend on a critical nucleation length scale h*, yet h* is largely unconstrained in the seismogenic crust. To estimate h* and associated earthquake nucleation processes at 2–7 km depths in Oklahoma, we studied seismic activity occurring prior to nine M 2.5–3.0 earthquakes that are aftershocks of the 3 September 2016 M 5.8 Pawnee, Oklahoma, earthquake. Four of the nine M 2.5–3.0 aftershocks studied did not have detectable seismicity within a 2 km radius of their hypocenters in the preceding 16 hr time windows. For the other five events, which did exhibit foreshock sequences, we estimated the static stress changes associated with each event of each sequence based on precise earthquake relocations and magnitude estimates. By carefully examining the spatiotemporal characteristics, we found all five of these M 2.5–3.0 aftershocks, and 70% of our studied events were plausibly triggered via static stress transfer from nearby earthquakes occurring hours to seconds earlier, consistent with the cascade nucleation model and a small h* in this region. The smallest earthquakes we could quantitatively study were M −1.5 events, which likely have 1–2 m rupture dimensions. The existence of these small events also supports a small nucleation length scale h*≤1  m, consistent with laboratory estimates. However, our observations cannot rule out more complicated earthquake initiation processes involving interactions between foreshocks and slow slip. Questions also remain as to whether aftershocks initiate differently from more isolated earthquakes.