JpGU-AGU Joint Meeting 2017

講演情報

[EE] 口頭発表

セッション記号 S (固体地球科学) » S-SS 地震学

[S-SS06] [EE] From Earthquake Source and Seismicity Parameters to Fault Properties and Strong-motion Assessment

2017年5月25日(木) 10:45 〜 12:15 A05 (東京ベイ幕張ホール)

コンビーナ:内出 崇彦(産業技術総合研究所 地質調査総合センター 活断層・火山研究部門)、Enescu Bogdan(京都大学 大学院 理学研究科 地球惑星科学専攻 地球物理学教室)、曽根 大貴(University of Wisconsin-Madison)、座長:内出 崇彦(国立研究開発法人 産業技術総合研究所 活断層・火山研究部門)、座長:Enescu Bogdan(京都大学 大学院 理学研究科 地球惑星科学専攻 地球物理学教室)

11:15 〜 11:30

[SSS06-03] Precise Data Analyses toward the Update of Earthquake Source Spectral Model

*内出 崇彦1今西 和俊1 (1.産業技術総合研究所 地質調査総合センター 活断層・火山研究部門)

キーワード:Earthquake Source Spectra, Spectral Ratio Analysis

Earthquake source spectra are useful for simplifying, generalizing and differentiating properties of earthquakes rupture process. The standard model for source spectra is the ω2-model, in which the spectrum is flat at lower frequencies and decays as inversely proportional to the square of frequencies at high frequencies. The low and high frequency bands are bordered by the corner frequency, which is used for estimating stress drop under an assumption of a circular crack model.

One of the methods to improve the resolution of earthquake source spectra is the multiple spectral ratio analysis method [Uchide and Imanishi, BSSA, 2016], in which we employ multiple empirical Green’s functions (EGF) to cancel the path and site effects as well as errors due to the differences in source locations and focal mechanisms of a target and EGF events. They applied this method to small earthquakes (Mw 3.2 – 4.0) in Fukushima Hamadori and northern Ibaraki prefecture areas and found that the source spectra are well approximated by the ω2-model with bumps for some earthquakes, whereas for some other earthquakes the ω2-model fits very well. Then number of questions arise. Is this universal or only in this area? What is the physical meaning of bumps? What is the simple and inclusive model for earthquake source spectra?

In this study, we examined small inland earthquakes in Japan by the same method. The study area includes following areas: Kumamoto, where many of small earthquakes are preceded by the 2016 Kumamoto earthquake (Mw 7.0); Wakayama, where the seismicity is constantly active. The result indicated that the findings of Uchide and Imanishi [2016] are also the case in other areas.

The ω2-model with a bump around the corner frequency can be described as a double-corner-frequency model, while that with a bump at frequencies higher than the corner frequency can be that with a steeper slope at high frequencies. In the case of a double-corner-frequency model, the lower corner frequency will correspond to the source duration. Since the lower corner frequency will be generally smaller than the corner frequency in case of the single-corner-frequency model, such as the ω2-model, the double-corner-frequency model will give us a longer source duration and then lower stress drop.

Then what will the higher corner frequency represent? To answer this question, we need investigate the scaling relationship of two corner frequencies and the source process in detail, which are left as future work.