Source Parameterization of Finite Faults in Earthquake Ground Motion Simulation

Document Type : Seismology and Engineering Seismology


International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), Tehran


The effect of interpolation function for describing spatial variations of slip on the fault surface is investigated using finite fault simulation. In analogy with h-p notion in finite element method, the effect of increasing the order of interpolation function and decreasing the size of elements is studied here. In this regard, the fault surface is discretized using different elements, namely, constant discontinuous elements with various sizes, and first order contentious elements with different sizes. In order of parameterization, a bilinear interpolation technique is introduced to represent variation of source parameters within the subfault area. To provide an objective basis for comparison, the September 28, 2004 Parkfield earthquake Mw 6.1 is considered and time-frequency, envelope-phase goodness-of-fit criteria is calculated to compare synthetic and observed waveforms quantitatively in time and frequency domains. It was revealed that by increasing the order of interpolation function, the overall consistency of observed and synthetic waveforms will increase, while the expense of computational analyses will also increase accordingly.


  1. Udias, A. (1999) Pr inciple of Seismology. Cambridge University Press.
  2. Hartzell, S. (1978) Earthquake aftershocks as greens functions. Geophys. Res. Lett., 5, 1-4.
  3. Irikura, K. (1978) Semi-empirical estimation of strong ground motions during large earthquakes. Bull. Disast. Prev. Res. Inst., Kyoto Univ., 33, 63-104.
  4. Boore, D. (1983) Stochastic simulation of high frequency ground motions based on seismological models of the radiated spectra. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 73, 1865-1894.
  5. Zeng, Y., Anderson, J.G., and Yu, G. (1994) A composite source model for computing realistic synthetic strong ground motions. Geophys. Res. Lett., 21, 725-728.
  6. Hartzell, S., Harmsen, S., and Frankel, S.L. (1999) Calculation of broadband time histories of ground motion: Comparison of methods and validation using strong-ground motion from the 1994 Northridge earthquake. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 89, 1484-1504.
  7. Aki, K. and Richards, P.G. (2002) Quantitative Seismology. 2nd Ed. University Science Books.
  8. Liu, P. and Archuleta, R.J. (2004) A new nonlinear finite fault inversion with three-dimensional Green's functions: application to the 1989 Loma Prieta, California, earthquake. J. Geophys. Res., 109. DOI 10.1029/2003JB002625.
  9. Custodio, S. (2007) Earthquake Rupture and Ground-Motions: The 2004 Mw 6 Parkfield Earthquake. Ph.D. Thesis, University of California, Santa Barbara.
  10. Hutton, J. (2004) Fundamental of Finite Analysis, Chap. 6: Interpolation Functions for General Element Formulation. University Science Books.
  11. Olson, A. and Apsel, R. (1982) Finite faults and inverse theory with applications to the 1979 Imperial Valley earthquake. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 72(6), 1969-2001.
  12. Custodio, S., Liu, P., and Archuleta, R. (2005) The 2004 Mw 6.0 Parkfield, California, earthquake: Inversion of near-source ground motion using multiple data sets. Geophys. Res. Lett., 32, 23312.
  13. Babuska, I. and Manil, S. (1994) The p and h-p version of the finite element method, basic principles and properties. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 36, 578-632.
  14. Babuska, I. and Manil, S. (1987) The h-p version on finite element method with quasiuniform meshes. Mathematical Modeling and Numerical Analysis, 21, 199-238.
  15. Kristekova, M., Kristek, P., and Day, S. (2006) Misfit criteria for quantitative comparison of seismograms. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 96, 1836-1850.
  16. Kristekova, M., Kristek, J., and Moczo, P. (2009) Time-frequency misfit and goodness-of-fit criteria for quantitative comparison of signals. Geophys. J. Int., 178, 813-825.
  17. Anderson, J.G. (2004) Quantitative measure of the goodness-of-fit of synthetic seismograms. 13th Wor ld Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, B.C., Canada.
  18. Ji, C. (2004) Slip history the 2004 (Mw 5.9) Parkfield Earthquake (Single-Plane Model), Caltech, Parkfield 2004, California.
  19. Dreger, D.S., Gee, L., Lomband, P., Murray, M.H., and Romanowicz, B. (2005) Strong ground motions: Application to the 2003 Mw 6.5 San Simeon and 2004 Mw 6 Parkfield earthquakes. Seismo. Res. Lett., 76.
  20. Johanson, I.A., Fielding, E.J., Rolandone, F., and Burgmann, R. (2006) Coseismic and Postseismic slip of the 2004 Parkfiled earthquake from space-geodetic data. Bull. Seismo, Soc. Am., 96, S269-S282.
  21. Mendoza, C. and Hartzell, S., (2004) Finitefault analysis of the 2004 Parkfield, California earthquake using Pnl waveforms. Bull. Seismo. Soc. Am., 98, 2746-2755.
  22. Barnhart, W.D. and Lohman, R.B. (2010) Automated fault model discretization for inversions for coseismic slip distribution. Journal of Geophys. Res., 115, DOI:10.1029/2010JB007545.
  23. Houlie, N., Dreger, D., and Kim, A. (2014) GPS Source Solution of the 2004 Parkfield Earthquake. Nature-Scientific Reports.
  24. Thurber, C., Zhang, H., Waldhauser, F., Hardebeck, J., Michael, A., and Eberhat-Phillips, D. (2006) Three-dimensional compressional wavespeed model, earthquake relocations, and focal mechanisms for the Parkfield, California, region. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 38-49.
  25. Coutant, O. (1989) Programme De Simulation Numerique Axitr a. Grenoble: Res. Report LGIT.
  26. Cotton, F. and Coutant O. (1997) Dynamic stress variations due to shear faults in a planelayered medium. Geophys. J. Int., 128, 676-688.
  27. Bouchon, M. (1981) A simple method to calculate Green's functions for elastic layered media. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 71, 959-971.
  28. Thurber, C., Roecker, S., Roberts, K., Gold, M., Powell, L., and Rittger, K. (2003) Earthquake locations and three-dimensional fault zone structure along the creeping station of the San Andreas fault near Parkfield. Geophys. Res. Lett., 1112.
  29. CESMD [Online]. Available [2016, March].
  30. eEQuake-RC [Online] Available [2016, March].