1 / 23

Aftershock sequences in the Little Carpatian region following two earthquakes in 2006

AIM Third A nnual M eeting October, 10 .- 12 ., 201 2 Smolenice. Aftershock sequences in the Little Carpatian region following two earthquakes in 2006. Ji ří Málek and Lucia Fojtíková Institute of Rock Structure and Mechanics, v.v.i. Juraj Seker eš

daktari
Download Presentation

Aftershock sequences in the Little Carpatian region following two earthquakes in 2006

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. AIMThird Annual Meeting October, 10.-12., 2012Smolenice Aftershock sequences in the Little Carpatian region following two earthquakes in 2006 Jiří Málek and LuciaFojtíková Institute of Rock Structure and Mechanics, v.v.i. Juraj Sekereš Progseis, Ltd., Trnava, Slovakia

  2. Motivation Seismic activity 1987-2010 source.: Progseis, Ltd, GPI SAS, EQUIS, Ltd.

  3. Tectonic situation 2006, Ml=3.4 2006, Ml=2.2

  4. Focal mechanism

  5. Aftershocks

  6. New Stations

  7. Method • Master-event relative location • The shape of an aftershock cluster is determined. • Time differences between aftershock and the main shock (master event) are used. • The seismograms are compared only at the same station (not between stations). • Similarity of the seismograms enables to read time differences more accurately. • Relative locations are less sensitive to the velocity model. • Linear inverse problem, which can be easily solved.

  8. Method Data Index M means master-event (normaly the main shock) Index m means master-station (normaly the nearest station) Velocity model unit vector of the ray leaving j-th event to i-th station travel distance of j-th event and i-th station space vector from master-event to j-th event - unknown Linear inverse problem

  9. Application at WEBNET Z(m) X(m) Málek and Horálek, 2008

  10. Master-event

  11. Master-event

  12. Master-event

  13. Master-event

  14. Master-event

  15. Master-event

  16. Master-event

  17. Data SMOL KATA P Z Z KATA SMOL S N E

  18. Result and Model sensitivity

  19. Result and Model sensitivity

  20. Results Depth Y X

  21. Conclusions J. Hók, modified after Fusán et. al 1987

  22. Conclusions J. Hók, modified after Fusán et. al 1987

  23. Conclusions • Master-event method is a useful tool for determination of aftershock cluster shape • It can be applied even to small magnitudes (ML=2.2) • One of the nodal plane was selected as fault plane, with azimuth of about 300° • This fault was identified on tectonic map • Faults of NW-SE azimuths are active in the Little Carpathian region • and they are important for seismic hazard assesment

More Related