Basic concepts for Localization of...
Transcript of Basic concepts for Localization of...
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
Basic concepts for Localization of deformationBasic concepts for Localization of deformation
•Weakening vs. strengthening rheologies (P, T, porosity, fluids, grain size) –positive vs. negative feedbacks
•Stress vs. displacement/velocity boundary conditions - unstable/stable processes
•Effects of healing for displacement/velocity boundary conditions - ratio of healing/loading timescales
•Effects of heterogeneities (can suppress localization)
•Effects of inherited structures: bimaterial interfaces, weak zones, .....
•Effective behavior on different scales: single microcrack, macroscopic shear crack, cataclastic flow, fault zone, fault system, plate boundary, ……
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
•Weakening vs. strengthening rheologies (P, T, porosity, fluids, grain size) –positive vs. negative feedback mechanisms
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
Deformation band (Shear band)
Deformation zone
Goblin Valley, Utah
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
The Punchbowl fault: 44 km of slip (Chester and Chester, 1998)
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
•Stress vs. displacement/velocity boundary conditions - unstable/stable processes
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
Stability
Constant stress loading lead to dynamic instability once a critical crack length Lc has been archived (perhaps by creep).
Griffith experiments
In contrast, under constant displacement/velocity, failure is stable
Stability is NOT a material property but the response of the entire system (failure zone plus loading environment). Stability is determined by comparing rate of strength change in failure area with rate of loading reduction during failure (zero in a, finite in b). The latter is referred to as the “stiffness of the system”.
aa
aa
Constant displacement loading
Constant stress
Constant stress
unstable
stable
RK ∞∝τ
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
•Effects of healing for displacement/velocity boundary conditions - ratio of healing/loading timescales
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
We fix all the large scale parameters (e.g., dimensions, background elastic properties, viscosity) using data associated with the San Andreas fault.
The evolving results depend on the ratio of time scale for damage healing τH to time scale for tectonic loading τL
Coupled evolution of earthquakes and faults
Evolving ElasticUpper Crust
Viscoelastic Lower Crust
ViscoelasticMantle
(half space)
ν = 0.25
Distributed Damage(fault zones)
100 km
H = 15 km
Loading bydistributedsteady mantlemotion
h = 20 km
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
slow effective healing fast effective healing
α
Characteristic earthquakes Power-law statistics
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
•Effects of inherited structures: bimaterial interfaces, weak zones, .....
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
Weertman (1980): 2D analytical solution for steady state mode II slip pulse on a bimaterial interface governed by Coulomb friction.
In-plane slip: Moving coordinate system: ξ = x – ctDislocation density: B(ξ) = – dδ/dξ
δ(x,t)= u(x,y= 0+,t)−u(x,y= 0−,t)
The shear and normal stress on the interface are
u(x,y = 0+ ,t)u(x,y = 0− ,t)
•In a homogeneous solid μ* = 0; there is no coupling between slip and σσ.
•For subsonicsubsonic rupture on a bimaterial interface in the direction of motion ofthe compliant solid, μ*> 0 and σσ drops dynamicallydrops dynamically (producing local dilation).
•In the opposite direction, μ*< 0 and σσ increases dynamically increases dynamically (local compression).
••Adams (1995): The bimaterial effects Adams (1995): The bimaterial effects increase with propagation distance!increase with propagation distance!
compliantcompliant
stiffstiff)(),(*)( ξβμσξσ Bc Δ−= ∞
'')'(),()( ξ
ξξξ
πβμτξτ dBc
∫∞
∞−
∞
−Δ
+=
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
Wrinkle-like rupture on a bimaterial interface
Andrews and Ben-Zion, 1997; Ben-Zion and Andrews, 1998; Cochard and Rice, 2000; Ben-Zion, 2001; Ben-Zion and Huang, 2002, Shi and Ben-Zion, 2006; Ampuero and Ben-Zion, 2008; Brietzke et al., 2009; Dalguer and Day, 2009; …
compliant
stiff
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
Characteristic features of wrinkle-like rupture pulse:
1) strong correlation between variations of normal stress and slip
2) strongly asymmetric motion across the fault
3) preferred direction of rupture propagation
4) self-sharpening with propagation distance
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
Rupture migration in tri-material structure with multiple available rupture planes (Brietzke and Ben-Zion, 2006)
Parameter space study for different
•Nucleation locations
•Fault separation
•Initial shear stress
•Velocity contrasts
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
Example results
Coulomb friction Regularized Prakash-Clifton friction
faul
t num
ber
max. of slip−velocity on fault [m/s]
distance [m]−500 0 500
13579
20406080100
faul
t num
ber
max. of slip−velocity on fault [m/s]
distance [m]−500 0 500
13579
20406080100
faul
t num
ber
max. of slip−velocity on fault [m/s]
distance [m]−500 0 500
13579
20406080100120
faul
t num
ber
max. of slip−velocity on fault [m/s]
distance [m]−500 0 500
13579
50
100
150
faul
t num
ber
max. of slip−velocity on fault [m/s]
distance [m]−500 0 500
13579
246810
faul
t num
ber
max. of slip−velocity on fault [m/s]
distance [m]−500 0 500
13579
5
10
faul
t num
ber
max. of slip−velocity on fault [m/s]
distance [m]−500 0 500
13579
246810
faul
t num
ber
max. of slip−velocity on fault [m/s]
distance [m]−500 0 500
13579
246810
faul
t num
ber
max. of slip−velocity on fault [m/s]
distance [m]−500 0 500
13579
50
100
150
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
nucl
eatio
n lo
catio
n
faul
t num
ber
max. of slip−velocity on fault [m/s]
distance [m]−500 0 500
13579
0
5
10
faul
t num
ber
max. of slip−velocity on fault [m/s]
distance [m]−500 0 500
13579
0
5
10
faul
t num
ber
max. of slip−velocity on fault [m/s]
distance [m]−500 0 500
13579
0
100
faul
t num
ber
max. of slip−velocity on fault [m/s]
distance [m]−500 0 500
13579
0
100
faul
t num
ber
max. of slip−velocity on fault [m/s]
distance [m]−500 0 500
13579
0
10
faul
t num
ber
max. of slip−velocity on fault [m/s]
distance [m]−500 0 500
13579
0
50
100
faul
t num
ber
max. of slip−velocity on fault [m/s]
distance [m]−500 0 500
13579
0
50
100
faul
t num
ber
max. of slip−velocity on fault [m/s]
distance [m]−500 0 500
13579
0
5
10
faul
t num
ber
max. of slip−velocity on fault [m/s]
distance [m]−500 0 500
13579
0
5
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
nucl
eatio
n lo
catio
n
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
What happens if we add additional ingredients?
•Stress heterogeneities (Ben-Zion & Andrews, 1998; Andrews & Harris, 2005)
•Low-velocity fault zone layer (Harris & Day, 1997; Ben-Zion & Huang 2002; Brietzke & Ben-Zion, 2006)
•Viscosity in the bulk (Harris and Day, 1997; Brietzke and Ben-Zion, 2006)
•Prakash-Clifton friction (Cochard & Rice, 2000; Ben-Zion & Huang, 2002)
•Contrast of permeability structure (Rudnicki & Rice, 06; Dunham & Rice, 08)
•Slip-weakening friction (Harris & Day, 97; Shi & Ben-Zion, 06; Rubin & Ampuero, 2007; Brietzke et al., 2007, 2008 )
•Creation of off-fault damage (Ben-Zion and Shi, 2005; Duan, 2008)
•Multiple possible rupture plans (Brietzke and Ben-Zion, 2006)
•Velocity-weakening friction (Ampuero and Ben-Zion, 2008)
•3D effects (Brietzke et al., 2007, 2009; Dalguer & Day, 2009)
There is a diversity of phenomena. However, the results show collectively the results show collectively that ruptures evolve that ruptures evolve for broad ranges of realistic conditionsfor broad ranges of realistic conditions to slip pulses in to slip pulses in the preferred direction.the preferred direction.
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
•Effective behavior on different scales: single microcrack, macroscopic shear crack, cataclastic flow, fault zone, fault system, plate boundary, ……
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
Con
tinuu
m M
echa
nics
Gra
nula
r M
echa
nics
stat
istic
al
mec
hani
cs
Frameworks for studying brittle deformationσ1−σ3
σ1
σ3ε
K, GFracture mechanics
Rock strength
Friction studies
Damage rheology
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
When material is stressed it deforms
Faulting angle typicallyaround 30 degrees!
Rock strength experimentsRock strength experiments
BC are veryimportant!
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
ductileductilebrittlebrittle
Increasing pressure leads to ductility
brittlebrittleductileductile
Increasing temperature leads to ductility
Brittle-ductile: stress-strain curves with permanent inelastic brittle and ductile deformation
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
Stress-strain and AE locations for Westerly granite (Lockner et al., 1992)
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
Lockner’s animations
Acoustic emission in fracturing experiments with Westerly granite and Berea sandstone
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
x0
t Gc t + ΔtX0 + Δx
•Surface area•Radiation•Heat (friction)•Plastic strain and damage
•Surface area•Kinetic energy (radiation)•Plastic strain and damage
•Surface area
Dynamic shearDynamic tensileQuasi-static tensile
Energy sinks:
•Fracture, cracking:Deformation Mechanisms
General definition: localized deformation converting elastic strain energy to surface energy Gc associated with cohesion (analogous to latent heat in solid-liquid-gas phase transitions)
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
•Friction:
σn
τ
μ = τ/σn
τ
General definition: localized deformation associated with sliding on existing surface (no large-scale extension of surface area, but microscopic contact area decreases).
In pure frictional sliding across fault, the released strain energy is converted to heat and seismic radiation.
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
•Plastic flow:
General definition: distributed deformation of solid associated with internal motion of defects (“dislocations”) in lattice.
Surface area is conserved. The released strain energy is converted to heat (and some radiation).
Highly enhanced by increasing T, which improves the dislocations mobility, and P.
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
•Viscous flow:
General definition: distributed deformation associated with fluid-like flow satisfying
E.g., for linear Newtonian viscosity
which in 1D is
Strain energy is converted to heat.
Creep is a form of distributed or localized viscous flow associated with dislocations and diffusion of material
)(ετ &f=
klijklij D ετ &=
εητ &=
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
•Cataclastic flow:
Mega-breccia Micro-breccia
General definition: distributed brittle deformation associated with motion of rock particles on a large collection of cracks and/or frictional surfaces
Strain and gravitational energy converted to heat (and in dynamic events also radiation and fracturing)
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
•Viscoelasticity: distributed deformation that is elastic on short time scales and viscous on long ones.
(a) Maxwell viscoelasticity: ησσ
με += &&
1
E v
(b) Kelvin-Voigt viscoelasticity: εημεσ &+=
σσ0
t
εε0
t
Since there is no clear criterion on what are “small” and “large”time scales, most materials belong to this category.
In both Maxwell and KV viscoelasticity, the characteristic time scale for relaxation isT = η/μ.
The response of material at different time scales may be characterized by “Deborah number”D=T/t0, where T is relaxation time and t0 is time scale of interest
E.g., D >> 1 ~ elastic“Standard viscoelasticity” is (a) in parallel with a spring
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
Brittle failure Ductile flow
localized deformation with fracture, friction and increasing surface area
Sharp tip and/or surface
Stable or unstable (usually unstable)
Failure (stress drop) under small strain
Strong dilatancy: ΔV/V > 0 (“swelling”of the deforming material)
Strong dependency on σn (because of dilatancy and friction)
Weak dependency on T (in the brittle range) jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj
Favored by low T, P, e.g., z < 7.5 km
distributed deformation with viscous, plastic, creep (~constant surface area)
No sharp tip and/or surface
Stable or unstable (usually stable)
Ability to sustain large strain without failure
no dilatancy kjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj
weak dependency on σnkjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj
strong dependency on T (because of increasing mobility with increasing T)
Favored by high T, P e.g. 15 < z km
•Deformation in the range 7.5 < z < 15 km is mixed plastic-brittle or semi-brittle•The mode of deformation depends strongly on space-time scales!!!
http://www.cacr.caltech.edu/~slombey/asci/solids/fracture/
Introduction lecture notes of Yehuda Ben-Zion, Localization seminar Fall 2009
Brittle - Ductile transition:
frictionalgzWns )(7.0 ρρμστ −≈≈
creep nRTQeA τε /0
−≈&
Scholz2002
This only demonstrates plausibility! Other mechanisms can produce similar distributions. Be aware of non-uniqueness!