ALBERT

Description: Primary and secondary microseism originating in the world oceans and peaking at around 14 and 7 s, respectively, characterize the Earth's background noise in that frequency range. Microseism generated in marginal seas with partly shorter periods and higher spatial and temporal variability is less studied and requires stations in immediate proximity to the source to be observed. Such studies can help to elucidate the exact microseism generation areas and mechanisms in a constrained area. We analyze 15 years of broadband data recorded at the seismic station on Helgoland island in the marginal North Sea. In addition to remote primary (RPM) and secondary microseism (RSM) originating in the North Atlantic, we observe strong and dominant local secondary microseism (LSM) with on average higher frequencies above 0.2 Hz, in accordance with shorter wave periods of about 4–8 s in the shallow North Sea. During times with low RSM activity we observe local primary microseism (LPM) at frequencies in agreement with local ocean wave periods. The higher horizontal to vertical (H/V) ratio of LPM with respect to LSM indicates a major non-Rayleigh wave contribution. LSM and LPM show a strong modulation with local semidiurnal ocean tides and microseism energy maxima preceding the water level maximum by 2.5 and 1.5 hr, respectively. This time shift might be influenced by stronger currents during rising than falling tides. Active sources of tide-modulated microseism migrate along the North Sea coast in sync with the ocean tidal signal as evidenced by comparison of LSM maxima at stations distributed along the coast.

Description: Primary and secondary microseism originating in the world oceans and peaking at around 14 and 7 s, respectively, characterize the Earth's background noise in that frequency range. Microseism generated in marginal seas with partly shorter periods and higher spatial and temporal variability is less studied and requires stations in immediate proximity to the source to be observed. Such studies can help to elucidate the exact microseism generation areas and mechanisms in a constrained area. We analyze 15 years of broadband data recorded at the seismic station on Helgoland island in the marginal North Sea. In addition to remote primary (RPM) and secondary microseism (RSM) originating in the North Atlantic, we observe strong and dominant local secondary microseism (LSM) with on average higher frequencies above 0.2 Hz, in accordance with shorter wave periods of about 4–8 s in the shallow North Sea. During times with low RSM activity we observe local primary microseism (LPM) at frequencies in agreement with local ocean wave periods. The higher horizontal to vertical (H/V) ratio of LPM with respect to LSM indicates a major non‐Rayleigh wave contribution. LSM and LPM show a strong modulation with local semidiurnal ocean tides and microseism energy maxima preceding the water level maximum by 2.5 and 1.5 hr, respectively. This time shift might be influenced by stronger currents during rising than falling tides. Active sources of tide‐modulated microseism migrate along the North Sea coast in sync with the ocean tidal signal as evidenced by comparison of LSM maxima at stations distributed along the coast.

Description: The analysis of the Coulomb stress changes has become an important tool for seismic hazard evaluation because such stress changes may trigger or delay next earthquakes. Processes that can cause significant Coulomb stress changes include coseismic slip, earthquake-induced poroelastic effects as well as transient postseismic processes such as viscoelastic relaxation. In this study, we investigate the spatial and temporal evolution of pore fluid pressure changes and fluid flow during the seismic cycle, their dependency on the permeability in the crust and the interaction with postseismic viscoelastic relaxation. To achieve this, we use 2D finite-element models for intra-continental normal and thrust faults, which include coseismic slip, poroelastic effects, postseismic viscoelastic relaxation and interseismic stress accumulation. In different experiments, we vary (1) the permeability of the upper and lower crust while keeping the viscosity structure constant and (2) the viscosity of the lower crust and lithospheric mantle, while we keep the permeabilities constant. (1) The modelling results show that the highest changes in pore fluid pressure during and after the earthquake occur within a distance of ~ 1 km around the lower fault tip at the transition between upper and lower crust. The evolution of pore pressure and fluid flow depends primarily on the permeability in the upper crust. With decreasing permeability, the possibility of the pore fluids to flow decreases and thus, in the postseismic phase, the duration of the poroelastic relaxation increases, from a few days to several years, until the pore pressure reaches the initial pressure of the preseismic phase. In contrast, the influence of variations of the permeability in the lower crust on the pore pressure changes is negligible. For high upper-crustal permeabilities, postseismic vertical velocities are high and decreases rapidly with time, from around 120 mm/a after the first year by two orders of magnitude after 10 years, whereas for low permeabilities they remain consistently low over the years after the earthquake. (2) Models with low viscosity of the lower crust show that the timescales of poroelastic effects and viscoelastic relaxation overlap and affect the postseismic velocity already in the early postseismic phase and that both processes decay within a few years after the earthquake. For higher viscosities, the velocity is initially dominated by pore pressure changes during the first few years, whereas viscoelastic relaxation lasts for decades. Both processes also show differences in their spatial scale. Poroelastic effects occur within a few kilometers around the fault, whereas viscoelastic relaxation acts on tens to hundreds of kilometers. As both processes can cause Coulomb stress changes on faults in the vicinity of the earthquake source fault, it is important to understand the spatial and temporal evolution, the effects on the individual faults and the interaction of both processes during the earthquake cycle. Future work will therefore include the calculation and examination of Coulomb stress changes on intra-continental normal and thrust faults using 3D models that include poroelastic effects and viscoelastic relaxation.

Description: Earthquakes on faults in the brittle upper crust evoke sudden changes in pore fluid pressure as well as postseismic viscoelastic flow in the lower crust and lithospheric mantle but the relative importance of these processes during the postseismic phase has not been systematically studied. Here, we use two-dimensional finite-element models to investigate how pore fluid pressure changes and postseismic viscoelastic relaxation interact during the earthquake cycle of an intracontinental dip-slip fault. To isolate the effects from pore fluid flow and viscoelastic relaxation from each other, we performed experiments with and without pore fluid flow and viscoelastic relaxation, respectively. In different experiments, we further varied the permeability of the crust and the viscosity of lower crust or lithospheric mantle. Our model results show poroelastic effects dominate the velocity field in the first months after the earthquake. In models considering poroelastic effects, the surfaces of both hanging wall and footwall of the normal fault subside at different velocities, while they move upwards in the thrust fault model. Depending on the permeability and viscosity values, viscoelastic relaxation dominates the velocity field from about the second postseismic year onward although poroelastic effects may still occur if the permeability of the upper crust is sufficiently low. With respect to the spatial scales of poroelastic effects and viscoelastic relaxation, our results show that pore fluid pressure changes affect the velocity field mostly within 10–20 km around the fault, whereas the signal from viscoelastic relaxation is recognizable up to several tens of kilometres away from the fault. Our findings reveal that both poroelastic effects and viscoelastic relaxation may overlap earlier and over longer time periods than previously thought, which should be considered when interpreting aftershock distributions, postseismic Coulomb stress changes and surface displacements.

Description: The analysis of Coulomb stress changes has become an important tool for seismic hazard evaluation because such stress changes may trigger or delay subsequent earthquakes. Processes that can cause significant Coulomb stress changes include coseismic slip and transient postseismic processes such as poroelastic effects and viscoelastic relaxation. However, the combined influence of poroelastic effects and viscoelastic relaxation on co- and postseismic Coulomb stress changes has not been systematically studied so far. Here, we use three-dimensional finite-element models with arrays of normal and thrust faults to investigate how pore fluid pressure changes and viscoelastic relaxation overlap during the postseismic phase. In different experiments, we vary the permeability of the upper crust and the viscosity of the lower crust or lithospheric mantle while keeping the other parameters constant. In addition, we perform experiments in which we combine a high (low) permeability of the upper crust with a low (high) viscosity of the lower crust. Our results show that the coseismic (i.e., static) Coulomb stress changes are altered by the signal from poroelastic effects and viscoelastic relaxation during the first month after the earthquake. For sufficiently low viscosities, the Coulomb stress change patterns show a combined signal from poroelastic and viscoelastic effects already during the first postseismic year. For sufficiently low permeabilities, Coulomb stress changes induced by poroelastic effects overlap with the signals from viscoelastic relaxation and interseismic stress accumulation for decades. Our results imply that poroelastic and viscoelastic effects have a strong impact on postseismic Coulomb stress changes and should therefore be considered together when analyzing Coulomb stress transfer between faults.