Earthquake Relocation Studies near Local Scale Sources using Double-Difference Technique

Determination of the location of the hypocenter is very necessary to monitor the potential for seismic hazard. Positioning and seismic energy can help safety workers determine which areas can be mined or temporarily halted. Earthquakes in underground mines are caused by seismic induction due to mining activities such as blasting processes, hydrofracturing, vehicle activities, etc. Earthquakes that occur are generally clustering. Earthquake events generally occur in mine openings, this is caused by mass compensation taken. The data used in this study are synthetic micro-earthquake data around the mining area. To obtain a high level of accuracy and precision, especially in determining the location and depth in determining the hypocenter using the Double-Difference (DD) method. The results of the microseismic relocation in the study area are well covered, as evidenced by the residual histogram and shift distribution. The shift of the microseismic before and after being relocated spread in all directions with the dominant direction in the NE – SW direction. The value of the microseismic shift before and after being relocated ranged from 0.5 meters to 150 meters.

A new 3D velocity model of Central Apennines: insights from 2D/3D geological modelling and earthquake relocation.

<p>The Central Apennines fold-and-thrust belt (Central Italy) is characterized by the presence of several active faults, potentially capable of generating damaging earthquakes. To support seismic hazard studies over the area, a new 3D velocity model was built, integrating a wide range of surface and subsurface data.</p><p>The tectonic framework of the area (from Sulmona plain to Maiella Mt), is still debated in literature, also due to the lack of both an adequate geophysical data set and a reliable velocity model at the crustal scale.</p><p>In addition, the low number of seismic stations available for the acquisition of Vp/Vs arrival times, and the very low seismicity detected in the study area (the Sulmona and Caramanico Apennine valleys are considered as “seismic gaps”), lead to a difficult interpretation of the subsurface tectonic structures.</p><p>3D velocity modelling could well represent an important tool to support these deep crustal reconstructions as well earthquake relocation studies and could enhance the definition of seismogenic faults deep geometries, hence supporting a better risk assessment over the area of these potential locked faults.</p><p>Using the knowledge developed within the oil&gas industry as well in gas/CO<sub>2</sub> storage projects for the construction of 3D velocity models, extensively used to obtain subsurface imaging and define the geometry of the reservoirs and traps in the depth domain, a similar methodological approach was implemented over the study area.</p><p>The subsurface dataset was partially inherited by the past hydrocarbon exploration activities (e.g. seismic lines, exploration wells and sonic logs) and by the literature (e.g. time/depth regional models). Tomographic sections and relocated earthquake hypocentres were also integrated form geophysical studies. Geological maps (1:50.000 & 1:100.000 scale) represent the surface dataset that we used to create the surface interpretation of the regional geology.</p><p>As a first step, 18 2D balanced regional geological cross-sections, dip-oriented (W-E) across the Central Apennine, were built define the structural picture at regional scale. The cross-sections were built using MOVE (Petroleum Experts) and Petrel (Schlumberger) software. The following modelling step was the 3D model construction, in which the surface/subsurface data as well as all the geological sections were integrated in the final 3D structural and geological model.</p><p>The main geological layers reconstructed in the 3D model were than populated using the appropriated interval velocity values, building the final 3D velocity model in which the lateral velocity variation due to the presence of different facies/geological domains were considered.</p><p>As one of the results, we defined several 1D-velocity models coherent with the regional 3D velocity model, in which the key seismic stations and the earthquakes hypocentres dataset for the most potential seismogenic faults were included. 1D models were characterized by different degree of simplification, in order to test diverse approaches for the earthquake relocation. For this exercise, we used public dataset extracted by the analysis of microseismicity of the Sulmona basin.</p><p>We believe that the proposed approach can represents an effective method for combining geological and geophysical data to improve the subsurface and seismogenic faults interpretation, contributing to the seismic hazard assessment.</p>

Is the Aftershock Zone Area a Good Proxy for the Mainshock Rupture Area?

ABSTRACT The locations of aftershocks are often observed to be on the same fault plane as the mainshock and used as proxies for its rupture area. Recent developments in earthquake relocation techniques have led to great improvements in the accuracy of earthquake locations, offering an unprecedented opportunity to quantify both the aftershock distribution and the mainshock rupture area. In this study, we design a consistent approach to calculate the area enclosed by aftershocks of 12 Mw≥5.4 mainshocks in California, normalized by the mainshock rupture area derived from slip contours. We also investigate the Coulomb stress change from mainshock slip and compare it with the aftershock zone. We find that overall, the ratios of aftershock zone area to mainshock rupture area, hereinafter referred to as “aftershock ratio”, lie within a range of 0.5–5.4, with most values being larger than 1. Using different slip-inversion models for the same mainshock can have a large impact on the results, but the ratios estimated from both the relocated catalogs and Advanced National Seismic System catalog have similar patterns. The aftershock ratios based on relocated catalogs of southern California fall between 0.5 and 4.3, whereas they exhibit a wider range from 1 to 5.4 for northern California. Aftershock ratios for the early aftershock window (within one-day) show a similar range but of smaller values than using the entire aftershock duration, and we propose that continuing afterslip could contribute to the expanding aftershock zone area following several mainshocks. Our results show that areas with positive Coulomb stress change scale with aftershock zone areas, and spatial distribution of aftershocks represents stress release from mainshock rupture and continuing postseismic slip.

On the Segmentation of the Cephalonia–Lefkada Transform Fault Zone (Greece) from an InSAR Multi-Mode Dataset of the Lefkada 2015 Sequence

We use Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) to study the Cephalonia–Lefkada Transform Fault Zone (CTF) in the Ionian Sea. The CTF separates continental subduction to the north from oceanic subduction to the south, along the Hellenic Subduction Zone. We exploit a rich multi-modal radar dataset of the most recent major earthquake in the region, the 17 November 2015 Mw 6.4 event, and present new surface displacement results that offer additional constraints on the fault segmentation of the area. Based on this dataset, and by exploiting available information of earthquake relocation, we propose a new rupture process for the 2015 sequence, complementary to those published already. Our modelling includes an additional southern fault segment, oblique to the segment related with the mainshock, which indicates that the CTF structure is more complex than previously believed.