EGU2020-10142
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu2020-10142
EGU General Assembly 2020
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Kinematic constraining of the multi-fault rupture dynamics of the Norcia, Mw 6.5, 30 October 2016, Central Italy earthquake

Elisa Tinti1,2, Emanuele Casarotti2, Alice-Agnes Gabriel3, Taufiqurrahman Taufiqurrahman3, Thomas Ulrich3, and Duo Li3
Elisa Tinti et al.
  • 1Università La Sapienza, Roma, Roma, Italy (elisa.tinti@uniroma1.it)
  • 2Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia, Roma, Italy
  • 3Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich

The 2016 Central Italy sequence showed a remarkable complexity involving multiple faults. Highly heterogeneous slip distributions were inferred from kinematic finite source inversions. The coverage and quality of the geodetic and seismic data allow resolving high-resolution details of rupture kinematics of the largest event of the sequence, the Mw 6.5 30 October 2016 Norcia earthquake. Composite fault rupture models suggest that two fault planes may have slipped simultaneously. Nevertheless, kinematic modeling cannot assess the mechanic viability of such multiple fault plane models.

Using SeisSol, a software package for simulating wave propagation and dynamic rupture based on the arbitrary high-order accurate derivative discontinuous Galerkin method, we therefore try to generate spontaneous dynamic ruptures models compatible with the two fault planes constrained by kinematic inversions. To this end, we adopt a simple slip-weakening friction law with spatially variable dynamic friction and initial strength parameters along multiple faults, compatible with the slip distributions found in the literature. Although we do not to aim to explore the full parameter space, our approach allows testing the feasibility of kinematic models in conjunction with successfully generating spontaneous dynamic rupture scenarios matching seismic and geodetic observations with geological constraints. Such linking enhances and validates the physical implications of kinematic earthquake source inversion.

How to cite: Tinti, E., Casarotti, E., Gabriel, A.-A., Taufiqurrahman, T., Ulrich, T., and Li, D.: Kinematic constraining of the multi-fault rupture dynamics of the Norcia, Mw 6.5, 30 October 2016, Central Italy earthquake, EGU General Assembly 2020, Online, 4–8 May 2020, EGU2020-10142, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu2020-10142, 2020.

Display materials

Display file

Comments on the display material

AC: Author Comment | CC: Community Comment | Report abuse

Display material version 1 – uploaded on 04 May 2020
  • CC1: This is a summary of Qs and As from the live chat, Henriette Sudhaus, 07 May 2020

    Q: Thank you. When you impose both heterogeneous distribution for stress and Dc in your model, does either one of them have more effect on the rupture complexity (rupture velocity, slip velocity etc.)?
    A: Yes, you are rigth! We can also observe supershear models!
    ... however, we have seen that synthetics for supershear models and subshear models at these low frequency are not soo different


    Q: are you getting slow up-dip rupture velocity on the main fault?
    A: yes the velocity is slow initially and accelerate in the main patch