1 / 35

Eric Kirby Penn State University Collaborators:

Late Pleistocene Slip Rate Along the Owens Valley Fault. Eric Kirby Penn State University Collaborators: Sridhar Anadankrishnan, Fred Phillips, Shasta Marrero, Nancye Dawers, Doug Burbank. SCEC Fault System History January 31, 2008. Geodynamics of deformation in the ECSZ.

felton
Download Presentation

Eric Kirby Penn State University Collaborators:

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. Late Pleistocene Slip Rate Along the Owens Valley Fault Eric Kirby Penn State University Collaborators: Sridhar Anadankrishnan, Fred Phillips, Shasta Marrero, Nancye Dawers, Doug Burbank SCEC Fault System History January 31, 2008

  2. Geodynamics of deformation in the ECSZ • What is the significance of differences between geodetic velocities and geologic deformation rates? • Characteristic timescales of transient deformation • Postseismic relaxation • Seismic clusters • Fault switching • Role of spatial variations in fault slip • Fault growth and interaction Requires understanding the evolution of fault slip through space and time

  3. Interseismic deformation in Owens Valley • Fault parallel velocities range from ~ 3 - 6 mm/yr • Savage, Dixon Malservisi et al (2001) - data from Gan, Dixon Geodetic data from Gan, Dixon Thatcher

  4. Co-seismic deformation in Owens Valley • 1872 rupture ~ 100km • Mw 7.5-7.8 • 6 ± 2 m dextral slip • 1 ± 0.5 m vertical • Long-term slip rates ~1 - 2 mm/yr Looking north along the Lone Pine fault scarp

  5. How to reconcile? • Elastic dislocation models require 4 - 7 mm/yr slip at depth • Viscoelastic models suggest high velocity could be legacy of 1872 event How well do we know long-term slip rate? Dixon et al (2003)

  6. Long-term slip rate along OVF • What do we know? • Beanland and Clark (1994) • Lubetkin and Clark (1985; 1988) • Bierman et al. (1995) • Lee et al. (2001) • Bacon and Pezzopane (2007) • Records restricted to Late Pleistocene - Holocene: • Lone Pine fault • 0.8 ± 0.4 m/kyr • Owens Valley fault • South - 1.0 ± 0.5 m/kyr • Central - 1.8 ± 0.3 m/kyr Bacon and Pezzopane (2007)

  7. Long-term slip rate along OVF • Sources of uncertainty • Multiple fault strands • Restricted to 10 - 15 ka • 2 - 3 events • Assumptions of uniform recurrence, characteristic slip • Late Pleistocene - Holocene: • Lone Pine fault • 0.8 ± 0.4 m/kyr • Owens Valley fault • South - 1.0 ± 0.5 m/kyr • Central - 1.8 ± 0.3 m/kyr Bacon and Pezzopane (2007)

  8. Toward a budget of deformation…

  9. Long-term slip along northern OVF Geology adapted from Bateman (1968)

  10. Displacement at Crater Mountain Color orthophoto courtesy of Google Earth

  11. Displacement at Crater Mountain Kirby et al., (2008 - GRL)

  12. Displacement at Crater Mountain • East of OVF - abrupt transition across flow margin

  13. Displacement at Crater Mountain • East of OVF - abrupt transition across flow margin • West of OVF - flow margin is buried by Qfy

  14. Displacement at Crater Mountain • East of OVF - abrupt transition across flow margin • West of OVF - buried flow margin • Across fault - no evidence of buried flow

  15. Displacement at Crater Mountain Buried basalt flow 235 ± 15m • Restoration of flow margin yields ~ 235m of right-lateral slip

  16. ~110 ka ~130 ka Age of the Crater Mountain flow • K/Ar - 290 ± 40 ka • Turrin and Gillespie (1986) • Overlies alluvial fans ca. 130 ka • Zhefuss et al. (2001) • 3He - range from 35 - 115 ka • Stone/Gillespie (unpublished) 290±40 ka

  17. Production of 36Cl by cosmic rays high energy neutrons low energy neutrons n n n spallationreactions 40Ca n 35Cl 40K absorptionreaction 36Cl n

  18. 36Cl production “bulge” Gosse and Phillips (2001)

  19. 36Cl exposure ages - Crater Mtn. N=6 SW flows NE flows

  20. 36Cl exposure ages - Crater Mtn. N=6

  21. Effect of erosion on calculated age (equivalent to 10Be or other spallation-only nuclide) F. Phillips

  22. Influence of surface weathering - 1mm/kyr N=6

  23. Influence of surface weathering - 2mm/kyr N=6

  24. Influence of surface weathering - 3mm/kyr N=6

  25. Influence of surface weathering - 4mm/kyr N=6

  26. Most-likely age N=6

  27. Significance of rapid Late Pleistocene slip • Owens Valley fault at Crater Mountain exhibits slip rates of 3.5 (+1.0 / -0.7) m/ka • 235 ± 15 m • 67.5 ± 12.5 ka • Possible explanations: • Paleoseismic may underestimate slip inventory

  28. Significance of rapid Late Pleistocene slip • Owens Valley fault at Crater Mountain exhibits slip rates of 3.5 (+1.0 / -0.7) m/ka • 235 ± 15 m • 67.5 ± 12.5 ka • Possible explanations: • Paleoseismic may underestimate slip inventory • Spatial variations in slip rate

  29. Significance of rapid Late Pleistocene slip • Owens Valley fault at Crater Mountain exhibits slip rates of 3.5 (+1.0 / -0.7) m/ka • 235 ± 15 m • 67.5 ± 12.5 ka • Possible explanations: • Paleoseismic may underestimate slip inventory • Spatial variations in slip rate • Clustered strain release sometime between 20 ka and 50-80 ka

  30. Sierra pole of Dixon et al. (2000) • Velocity difference resolved parallel to OVF ~ 4.5 mm/yr • Orthogonal component ~ 1.5 mm/yr Is there a discrepancy with GPS? GPS data courtesy of P. LaFemina (unpublished)

  31. Is there a discrepancy with GPS? RL Shear - 340° 2.8 - 4.5 m/kyr Kirby et al. (2008) Extension - 070° 1.1 - 1.5 m/kyr Greene et al. (in prep) Not necessarily

  32. Patterns of strain release over ~ 100 ka 2.5 ± 0.4 0.5 ± 0.2 • Both major fault systems exhibit decreases in slip rate toward north • Requires… • Role for distributed deformation • Slip farther east (Frankel et al., 2007) • Temporal variations in slip (Kirby et al., 2006) 3.1 ± 0.4 3.5 ± 1.0 4.5 ± 1.5

  33. Patterns of strain release over ~ 100 ka ~3 - 4 ~1.5 - 3 2.5 ± 0.4 0.5 ± 0.2 3.1 ± 0.4 • Similar variations toward Garlock? • Possible, but chronologic basis not well established • Stay tuned… 3.5 ± 1.0 4.5 ± 1.5

  34. Conclusions/Implications • Slip rate at Crater Mountain is 3.5 +1.0/-0.7 m/kyr • Either previous estimates are missing slip, or slip is variable in space/time • Reduces geologic-geodetic ‘discrepancy’ across Owens Valley • But, seems to require shallow locking and/or creep • Emerging picture of systematic regional variations in slip rate along ECSZ • Are these maintained by interaction with barriers (Garlock, Mina Deflection), or do they represent nascent lengthening faults?

More Related