New insights into the 2012 Emilia (Italy) seismic sequence through advanced numerical modeling of ground deformation InSAR measurements
We provide new insights into the two main seismic events that occurred in 2012 in the Emilia region, Italy. We extend the results from previous studies based on analytical inversion modeling of GPS and RADARSAT‐1 InSAR measurements by exploiting RADARSAT‐2 data. Moreover, we benefit from the availab...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Geophysical research letters Jg. 40; H. 10; S. 1971 - 1977 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Washington
Blackwell Publishing Ltd
28.05.2013
John Wiley & Sons, Inc |
| Schlagworte: | |
| ISSN: | 0094-8276, 1944-8007 |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| Zusammenfassung: | We provide new insights into the two main seismic events that occurred in 2012 in the Emilia region, Italy. We extend the results from previous studies based on analytical inversion modeling of GPS and RADARSAT‐1 InSAR measurements by exploiting RADARSAT‐2 data. Moreover, we benefit from the available large amount of geological and geophysical information through finite element method (FEM) modeling implemented in a structural‐mechanical context to investigate the impact of known buried structures on the modulation of the ground deformation field. We find that the displacement pattern associated with the 20 May event is consistent with the activation of a single fault segment of the inner Ferrara thrust, in good agreement with the analytical solution. In contrast, the interpretation of the 29 May episode requires the activation of three different fault segments and a block roto‐translation of the Mirandola anticline. The proposed FEM‐based methodology is applicable to other seismic areas where the complexity of buried structures is known and plays a fundamental role in the modulation of the associated surface deformation pattern.
Key PointsDetection of active seismogenic structures responsible for ground deformationEvaluate the role of tectonic constrain on the modulation of ground deformationProvide a detailed characterization of the rock failure mechanisms |
|---|---|
| Bibliographie: | ArticleID:GRL50290 ark:/67375/WNG-VRJTPJX3-1 Structural and geological map [Boccaletti et al., ] of the Emilia region superimposed on the 3 arcsec SRTM DEM of the zone.(a) Analytical model proposed by Bignami et al. [] projected along the RSAT-2 LOS (referred to as Model 2). (b) Residual map of Model 2 w.r.t. RSAT-2. (c) Analytical model proposed by Serpelloni et al. [] projected along the RSAT-2 LOS (referred to as Model 3). (d) Residual map of Model 3 w.r.t. RSAT-2. The blue stars indicate the locations of the two main shock events, while the blue triangles indicate the corresponding locations of the few earthquakes with Ml ≥ 5.0 that occurred after 20 May. The black rectangles represent the surface projection of the best fit plane solutions reported in Table .(a) RSAT-1 InSAR displacement map for the 12 May-5 June period, where Bperp is the perpendicular baseline and ϑ is the look angle. (b) Residual map of Model 1 w.r.t. RSAT-1. (c) Residual map of Model 2 w.r.t. RSAT-1. (d) Residual map of Model 3 w.r.t. RSAT-1. The blue triangles indicate the locations of the few earthquakes with Ml ≥ 5.0 that occurred after 20 May.Supporting Information istex:358947DB52A1740267A04BBE24323C27DBD24F63 ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 content type line 23 |
| ISSN: | 0094-8276 1944-8007 |
| DOI: | 10.1002/grl.50290 |