Exciting news! We're transitioning to the Statewide California Earthquake Center. Our new website is under construction, but we'll continue using this website for SCEC business in the meantime. We're also archiving the Southern Center site to preserve its rich history. A new and improved platform is coming soon!

Comment on "Material contrast does not predict earthquake rupture propagation direction" by R. A. Harris and S. M. Day

Yehuda Ben-Zion

Published July 12, 2006, SCEC Contribution #1364

Harris and Day [2005] (hereinafter referred to as HD) concluded from some numerical simulations and low resolution analysis of 8 M4-M6 earthquakes near Parkfield, CA, that material contrast in fault zone structures is not important for earthquake propagation direction. The limited theoretical and observational results of HD do not justify such a general conclusion. Considerations of a larger body of results suggest that material contrast may produce a statistically preferred direction of earthquake ruptures. The inferred diversity of the 8 discussed events is consistent with their small number and relatively small size. In addition, the behavior has a natural explanation in a structure with two material interfaces – the San Andreas Fault (SAF) and the Southwest Fracture Zone (SFZ) – on the opposite sides of a deformation/damage region. Large earthquakes propagating predominantly as mode II ruptures, and affected primarily by properties of the bounding crustal blocks (rather than the local structure), are likely to exhibit a smaller amount of diversity.

Citation
Ben-Zion, Y. (2006). Comment on "Material contrast does not predict earthquake rupture propagation direction" by R. A. Harris and S. M. Day. Geophysical Research Letters, 33, L13310. doi: 10.1029/2005GL025652.