Geology topics

Brad T. Aagaard

Publications and source records attributed to Brad T. Aagaard.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2026

Constraining the permeability and outer-rise hydration at the Central America margin

Subduction zones are important drivers of Earth's geochemical evolution; the presence of water within the subduction system has substantial implications for geohazards, including the style of seismicity and the volume of magma generated at arc volcanoes. We utilize estimates of pore fluid distributions in the outer-rise region of the Central American margin imaged using controlled-source electro-magnetic surveys and novel two-dimensional forward models simulating poro-elastic deformation of slab bending to constrain the background permeability structure of the Cocos Plate and within outer-rise fault damage zones. The model results suggest that a relatively low background permeability structure is required to match the observed porosity at depths greater than 3 km (less than ~10 −21 m 2 . Similarly, increasing the permeability within the damage zones of outer-rise faults by more than a factor of 10 also over-predicts observed porosity distributions at depths greater than 3 km. However, the simulations consistently underpredict pore fluid distributions between depths of 1–3 km, which may reflect nonlinear elastic or anelastic deformation processes not included in the simulations or inherent uncertainty in the conversion of resistivity measurements to porosity distributions. The best-fitting depth-permeability relationship is relatively low, which has important implications for the timing of pore fluid release down-dip of the trench, as it restricts shallow fluid release, likely leading to higher pore fluid pressures, more widespread hydraulic fracturing, and deeper release of pore fluid along the plate interface.

Journal of Geophysical Research, Solid Earth↗

USGS2026

Role of volcano-tectonic interactions during early-phase magma-assisted continental rifting

We study volcanic-tectonic interactions during the early phase of rifting in the Natron Rift, a magmatic segment of the East African Rift System. We use the open-source crustal deformation modeling code, PyLith, to model deflation during the 2007–2008 explosive eruptions and inflation during 2016–2023. We compare predictions of surface displacements resulting from magma reservoir inflation from 3D models with and without topography and homogeneous and heterogeneous material properties against Global Navigation Satellite System displacements from 2016 to 2023. We prefer the model with heterogeneous material properties and topography for fitting the observed displacements. Including topography improves the fit to GNSS data and modulates stress changes from shallow magma sources. Our numerical modeling of Coulomb stress changes suggests that deflation of a magma reservoir under the active Ol Doinyo Lengai volcano could trigger oblique normal slip on the Natron Fault with Coulomb stress increases exceeding ∼0.1 MPa on the volcano-adjacent fault segment. Fault slip on the Natron Fault is less likely during inflation of the magma reservoir because normal compressive stress increases on the fault. We also demonstrate that Coulomb stress changes are sensitive to the inclusion of topography in our model, particularly because the depth of the magma reservoir is similar to the amplitude of the topographic relief.

Ol Doinyo Lenga↗

USGS2026

2025 USGS National Seismic Hazard Model for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands: Overview of model and hazard results

The U.S. Geological Survey recently updated the National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands (PRVI). The first version of the PRVI NSHM was released in 2003, and therefore this 2025 update includes over 20 years of new geologic, geophysical, and engineering data, methods, and models. Updates follow similar efforts performed in the recent 2023 50-state NSHM. However, this is the first NSHM in which we: (1) apply an inversion methodology to subduction interface fault sources in the earthquake rupture forecast (ERF) model; (2) develop scaled backbone median ground-motion models and independent aleatory variability models that are applied in the ground-motion characterization (GMC) model; and (3) calculate epistemic uncertainty related to alternative scenarios in the ERF and GMC models for all grid points in the study region. Long-term time-independent mean hazard calculations were performed for peak ground acceleration and 5%-damped pseudospectral acceleration at 21 spectral periods from 0.01- to 10.0-s, for eight National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program site conditions ranging from V S30 = 150 to 1500 m/s, and for 2%, 5%, and 10% in 50-year probabilities of exceedance (return periods of 2475, 975, and 475 years, respectively). Epistemic uncertainty, in the form of selected percentiles, is also provided for a suite of test sites and all grid points in the study region for limited periods, site conditions, and probabilities of exceedance. Selected results, including comparisons with the 2003 PRVI NSHM, are shown and discussed for selected periods, site conditions, and probabilities of exceedance. When comparing the 2025 PRVI NSHM with the 2003 PRVI NSHM, hazard is generally higher at shorter periods and lower at longer periods, as a result of updates in both ERF and GMC models. The 2025 PRVI NSHM is applicable for return periods greater than ∼475 or less than ∼10,000 years.

Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands↗

USGS2026

Ground-motion characterization for the 2025 U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands

We develop the ground-motion characterization (GMC) for the 2025 U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands (NSHM-PRVI) for earthquakes in active crustal, subduction interface, and subduction intraslab regimes. Using ground-motion models (GMMs) from the Next-Generation Attenuation (NGA)-West2 and NGA-Subduction projects, the GMC is parameterized by scaled-backbone models for median ground motions and by independent logic trees of aleatory variability. We introduce several novel GMC features into the U.S. NSHM: (1) use of regional ground-motion data for modeling median ground motions; (2) development of scaled-backbone models for median ground motions; and (3) development of independent logic trees of aleatory variability from variance components of GMMs and computed from multiple ground-motion datasets, and incorporating regional ground-motion data effects on variability. We compute probabilistic seismic hazard curves and maps to evaluate the contributions from the GMC components and for comparison with the 2003 GMC. Contributions of the GMC to epistemic uncertainty in seismic hazard are evaluated through spatial variations in epistemic uncertainty in hazard maps, comparisons between mean hazard curves and fractiles, as well as investigations of the contributions of logic-tree branches to hazard maps and curves. Comparisons between seismic hazard from the 2025 and 2003 GMCs allow examination of the changes in hazard curves and mapped values with 2% and 10% probabilities of exceedance in 50 years. The 2025 GMC exhibits modest changes in median predictions, relative to the 2003 GMC; overall, values of aleatory variability are higher, except at long periods ( ), resulting in changes to probabilistic ground motions at low probabilities of exceedance (<10% probability of exceedance in 50 years). Changes in hazard at 2% and 10% probabilities of exceedance in 50 years are also relatively modest (within 20%) at most sites, with the impacts from the 2025 GMC exhibiting minor reductions and increases at 0.2 and 1.0 s periods, respectively, relative to the 2003 GMC.

Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands↗

USGS2026

Suitability of ground-motion models for seismic hazard assessment in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands

We perform linear mixed-effects analyses with a ground-motion dataset to evaluate how well ground-motion models (GMMs) fit active crustal, subduction interface, and subduction intraslab earthquakes in Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands. Most of the GMMs reproduce the spatial variation in peak ground motions with earthquake magnitude and rupture distance but predict ground motions 0.3–1.0 natural log units (35%–270%) greater than observations. Two GMMs developed for Puerto Rico that are based on ground-motion records from mostly magnitude 4–5 earthquakes do not perform as well. We attribute the period-dependent overprediction in observed ground motions to differences between the observed site response and the linear site response in the GMMs. Consequently, we developed region-specific GMMs by adjusting the period-dependent linear site response coefficients and period-dependent constant coefficients to remove most of the bias between predicted ground motions and observations. For the analysis, we compile ground-motion records and process waveforms to build a dataset with 10,127 records at 72 stations from 849 magnitude 4.0–6.4 earthquakes between 1 January 2006 and 31 March 2024. The earthquakes include active crustal, subduction interface, and subduction intraslab events. We evaluate the GMMs using the time-averaged shear wave speed in the top 30 m ( ), which we compile from site surveys and proxy values computed from horizontal to vertical spectral ratios. Site terms exhibit strong consistency across GMMs and crustal and subduction earthquakes, indicating that the linear mixed-effects analysis successfully isolates the effects of local site response. The event terms show little spatial correlation and more substantial variability than in other regions, which we attribute to uncertainties in the earthquake magnitudes. This analysis guides the selection of the GMMs for the 2025 update of the National Seismic Hazard Model for Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands.

Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands↗

USGS2026

The 2025 Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model Update: Ground motion model selection and comparison

We evaluate, select, and describe the ground-motion models (GMMs) used in the 2025 update of the U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands (PRVI). We identify the most appropriate models that align with GMM selection criteria for use in the PRVI region to improve the accuracy of seismic hazard assessments. The update incorporates globally applicable GMMs suited for the active crustal and subduction earthquakes in the region. We include region-specific adjustments to these GMMs derived from local site response analyses derived from ground motion records. The unadjusted and regionally-corrected GMMs are combined to create a robust model for predicting median ground motion. The model integrates epistemic uncertainty through a median ground motion logic tree that accounts for variations in magnitude and distance. This study compares the GMMs selected for the 2025 PRVI NSHM, including both as-provided and regionally adjusted NGA-West2 and NGA-Subduction models, with those used in the 2003 PRVI NSHM. We evaluate how changes in model selection, weighting, aleatory variability, and epistemic uncertainty influence seismic hazard estimates. Trends with distance, magnitude, and spectral period are analyzed to evaluate how the scaling behavior of the newer GMMs differs from that of earlier models. Relative to the GMMs used in the 2003 NSHM for this region, the 2025 models generally predict lower ground motions. Comparisons with additional GMMs indicate that the adjustments applied for PRVI are consistent with regional-specific modifications developed elsewhere globally. The increase in aleatory variability and epistemic uncertainty in the 2025 update results in a notable increase in hazard levels from these wider uncertainty bounds. These changes can result in as much as a 10%–20% variation in probabilistic ground motion at the 2% in 50 years exceedance level for hazard maps computed across the region for representative site classes and periods.

Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands↗

USGS2024

Automated, near real-time ground-motion processing at the U.S. Geological Survey

We describe automated ground‐motion processing software named gmprocess that has been developed at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in support of near‐real‐time earthquake hazard products. Because of the open‐source development process, this software has benefitted from the involvement and contributions of a broad community and has been used for a wider range of applications than was initially envisioned. Here, we give an overview and introduction to the software, including how it has leveraged other open‐source libraries. We highlight some key features that gmprocess provides, compare response spectra calculated with the automated processing approach of gmprocess to the response spectra provided by the Next Generation Attenuation projects, and summarize projects that have utilized gmprocess. These use‐cases demonstrate that this software development effort has been successfully leveraged in earthquake research activities both within and outside the USGS.

Seismological Research Letters↗

USGS2024

Empirical ground-motion basin response in the California Great Valley, Reno, Nevada, and Portland, Oregon

We assess how well the Next-Generation Attenuation-West 2 (NGA-West2) ground-motion models (GMMs), which are used in the US Geological Survey’s (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for crustal faults in the western United States, predict the observed basin response in the Great Valley of California, the Reno basin in Nevada, and Portland and Tualatin basins in Oregon. These GMMs rely on site parameters such as the time-averaged shear-wave velocity ( V S ) in the upper 30 m of Earth’s crust ( V S30 ) and depths to 1.0 and 2.5 km/s shear-wave isosurfaces ( Z 1.0 and Z 2.5 ) to capture basin effects and were developed using observations and simulations primarily from the Los Angeles region in southern California. Using ground-motion records from mostly small-to-moderate earthquakes and mixed-effects regression analysis, we find that the GMMs perform well with our local basin-depth models for the California Great Valley. With our local basin-depth models for Reno, the GMMs do not perform as well for this relatively shallow basin and exhibit little sensitivity to the basin parameters used in the NGA-West2 GMMs. We also find good performance for the local Z 1.0 model across the Portland region, whereas the local Z 2.5 model provides little predictive power except at sites in the deepest part of the Tualatin basin. Additional work could improve the performance of the site and basin terms in the NGA-West2 GMMs for regions with geologic structure different than the deep basins in southern California and the Great Valley. In addition, we find significant discrepancies among the GMMs in how the uncertainty in the ground motion varies with basin depth and pseudospectral period. Our results can help guide seismic hazard analyses on whether to include these local basin-depth models.

Earthquake Spectra↗

USGS2024

Integration of rupture directivity models for the US National Seismic Hazard Model

Several rupture directivity models (DMs) have been developed in recent years to describe the near-source spatial variations in ground motion amplitudes related to propagation of rupture along the fault. We recently organized an effort towards incorporating these directivity effects into the USGS National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM), by first evaluating the community's work and potential methods to implement directivity adjustments into probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA). Guided by this evaluation and comparison among the considered DMs, we selected an approach that can be readily implemented into the USGS hazard software, that provides an azimuthally varying adjustment to the median ground motion and its aleatory variability. This method allows assessment of the impact on hazard levels and provides a platform to test the DM amplification predictions using a generalized coordinate system, necessary for consistent calculation of source-to-site distance terms for complex ruptures. We give examples of the directivity-related impact on hazard, progressing from a simple, hypothetical rupture, to more complex fault systems, composed of multiple rupture segments and sources. The directivity adjustments were constrained to strike-slip faulting, where DMs have good agreement. We find that rupture directivity adjustments using a simple median and aleatory adjustment approach can impact hazard both from a site perspective and on a regional scale, increasing shaking off the end of the fault trace up to 30--40\% and potentially reducing it for sites along strike. Statewide hazard maps of California show that the change in shaking along major faults can be a factor to consider for assessing long-period (>ls) near-source effects within the USGS NSHM going forward, reaching up to 10--20\%. Finally, we suggest consideration of minimum parameter ranges and baseline requirements as future DMs are developed to minimize single approach adaptations, to enable more consistent application within both ground motion and hazard studies.

Earthquake Spectra↗

USGS2024

The 2023 US National Seismic Hazard Model: Ground-motion characterization for the conterminous United States

We update the ground-motion characterization for the 2023 National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for the conterminous United States. The update includes the use of new ground-motion models (GMMs) in the Cascadia subduction zone; an adjustment to the central and eastern United States (CEUS) GMMs to reduce misfits with observed data; an updated boundary for the application of GMMs for shallow, crustal earthquakes in active tectonic regions (i.e. western United States (WUS)) and stable continental regions (i.e. CEUS); and the use of improved models for the site response of deep sedimentary basins in the WUS and CEUS. Site response updates include basin models for the California Great Valley and for the Portland and Tualatin basins, Oregon, as well as long-period basin effects from three-dimensional simulations in the Greater Los Angeles region and in the Seattle basin; in the CEUS, we introduce a broadband (0.01- to 10-s period) amplification model for the effects of the passive-margin basins of the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains. In addition, we summarize progress on implementing rupture directivity models into seismic hazard models, although they are not incorporated in the 2023 NSHM. We implement the ground-motion characterization for the 2023 NSHM in the US Geological Survey’s code for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis, nshmp-haz-v2 , and present the sensitivity of hazard to these changes. Hazard calculations indicate widespread effects from adjustments to the CEUS GMMs, from the incorporation of Coastal Plain amplification effects, and from the treatment of shallow-basin and out-of-basin sites in the San Francisco Bay Area and Los Angeles region, as well as locally important changes from subduction-zone GMMs, and from updated and new WUS basins.

conterminous United States↗

USGS2024

A journey to the center of the USGS National Strong-motion Project processing and beyond

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Strong Motion Project (NSMP) has the primary U.S. government responsibility to acquire, process, and disseminate significant strong-motion earthquake ground motion records measured at surficial free-field stations, structures (buildings, dams, and bridges, and geotechnical arrays to the earthquake engineering community. As a result of the deployment of modern seismic instrumentation and growth of tools such as web-services, earthquake data from U.S. and international seismic networks are more accessible than ever. Our mission is to provide raw and processed strong-motion waveforms with PGA values greater than 0.1%g for M3.0 earthquakes and larger in California and M4.0 and larger within the conterminous US, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and Alaska. Datasets of interest to the engineering and geophysics communities, such as event sequences in areas of induced seismicity and significant global events, are also processed and posted at the Center for Engineering Strong Motion Data (CESMD) at strongmotioncenter.org when available through collaboration with the international strong-motion data community. Here we outline (1) the NSMP’s current workflow to acquire, process, and distribute data at CESMD; (2) our new endeavours and collaborations focusing on comparison and integration of waveform processing software, development of techniques for metadata quality checks before and after earthquakes, and construction of a dynamic site characterization repository; and (3) our topics for possible collaboration topics across the global strong-motion community.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2024

A partially nonergodic ground-motion model for Fourier amplitude spectra for the San Francisco Bay area, California, USA

We develop a partially nonergodic ground-motion model (GMM) for Fourier amplitude spectra for the San Francisco Bay Area, California, USA, using the Bayless and Abrahamson (2019) GMM as a reference ergodic GMM and developing location-dependent adjustments to the predicted median and variance. We compile regional ground-motion data from moment magnitude (𝑀 w ) >3 earthquakes occurring during 2000–2022 for which magnitude information is available in the U.S. Geological Survey Comprehensive Catalog (Guy et al., 2015). The data set predominantly consists of records from 𝑀 w 3.5–4.5 earthquakes but includes three well-recorded 𝑀 w > 5 events. Ground-motion residuals are evaluated using the time-averaged shear-wave velocity in the top 30 m (𝑉 S30 ) from the California-specific map of Thompson et al. (2018) and basin-depth site parameters from the seismic velocity model of Aagaard and Hirakawa (2021). The 𝑉 S30 dependence and basin-depth scaling of the reference ergodic GMM of Bayless and Abrahamson (2019) are evaluated and modified with the updated data set. We compute maps of site adjustments using a varying-coefficient model that considers the spatial correlation structure and uncertainties at each observation location. The spatial covariance model is developed using ground-motion residuals that are standardized by the uncertainty model, which allows for consideration of the aleatory variability in developing the site adjustments. The covariance model is fit considering the means and standard deviations of the site terms at all locations. The use of partially nonergodic median adjustments results in modified variance components of the within-event variability. Due to the low number of large-magnitude earthquakes that control seismic hazard in the data set, we do not modify between-event variance; however, we present adjustments to site-to-site variability for use in partially nonergodic hazard assessments.

California↗

USGS2024

Recent applications of the USGS National Crustal Model for Seismic Hazard Studies

The U.S. Geological Survey is developing the National Crustal Model (NCM) for seismic hazard studies to facilitate modeling site, path, and source components of seismic hazard across the conterminous United States. The NCM is composed of a 1km grid of geophysical profiles, extending from the Earth’s surface into the upper mantle. It is constructed from a threedimensional (3D) geologic framework and geophysical rules that use (1) a petrologic and mineral physics database; (2) a 3D temperature model; and (3) a calibrated rock type- and age-dependent porosity model. Parameters needed to estimate site response for existing ground motion models (GMMs), including the time-averaged velocity in the upper 30 meters (VS30), the depths to 1.0 and 2.5 km/s shear-wave velocity (Z1.0 and Z2.5), and sediment thickness, can be computed from the NCM. As GMMs continue to improve in the future, other metrics could also be extracted or derived from the NCM, such as fundamental period, site attenuation (ko), a fully frequency-dependent site response function, or 3D geophysical volumes for wavefield simulations. Application of the NCM may also benefit other aspects of seismic hazard analysis, including better accounting for path-dependent attenuation and geometric spreading, more accurate estimation of earthquake source properties such as hypocentral location and stress drop, and calculation of crustal strength profiles that inform estimates of the base of seismicity.

conterminous United States↗

USGS2024

2024 Crustal Deformation Modeling Workshop report

The 2024 Crustal Deformation Modeling Workshop was held June 10–14 at the Colorado School of Mines. The workshop included two days of tutorials on using PyLith for crustal deformation modeling, followed by three days of science talks and discussions. The workshop focused on four primary themes: ● Constraining long-term fault slip rates and their uncertainties using geodetic and geologic data; ● Earthquake cycle modeling with a focus on constraining models using seismic and geodetic data; ● Interaction of fluids and faulting; and ● Separating contributions of surface loading and tectonic loading in crustal deformation. The complete agenda is available on the CIG website.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2024

California community Earth Models for Seismic Hazard Assessments workshop report

The California Community Earth Models for Seismic Hazard Assessments Workshop (https://www.scec.org/workshops/2024/california-community-models) was held online March 4–5, 2024, with more than 200 participants over the two days. In this report, we provide a summary of the key points from the presentations and discussions. We highlight three use cases that drive the development of community Earth models, present an inventory of existing community Earth models in California, summarize a few techniques for integrating and merging models, discuss potential connections with the Cascadia Region Earthquake Science Center, and discuss what “community” means in community Earth models.

California↗

USGS2024

Developing international standards and guidelines for disseminating and validating simulated ground motions

We are leading an effort to develop international standards and guidelines for curating, disseminating, and validating simulated ground-motion data. This effort is organized as a working group within the Consortium of Organizations for Strong Motion Observation Systems (COSMOS). In 2022 we held online workshops on 7 and 8 June and 20 October. The first workshop focused on curating and disseminating simulated ground-motion data. The second workshop focused on validating simulated ground-motions for engineering applications. About 100 people participated in each of the workshops with strong representation from North America, Europe, and western Asia. In the coming year, we intend to form a technical committee to draft the international guidelines and standards while continuing to engage stakeholders from across the globe through online and in-person meetings. The key points from the workshops include: (1) Numerous groups are generating simulated earthquake ground motions and making them openly available; however there is very little coordination among groups to provide consistent interfaces for searching and retrieving data; (2) Standardizing interfaces for metadata and data access should consider agile approaches that can adapt to changing capabilities and user needs while building upon existing efforts; (3) A distributed architecture is preferred by most participants to allow institutions to host and manage their own data while broadcasting their holdings to a combined catalog; (4) Validation of ground-motion simulations applies to the entire workflow for simulating earthquake ground-motions, including the rupture model, seismic velocity model, and seismic wave propagation software; (5) Metrics to evaluate the validation are application dependent; more research is needed to tie structural response characteristics to ground-motion characteristics; and (6) Validation results should provide a clear, transparent, and quantitative assessment of the simulated ground motions.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2023

The 2023 US 50-State National Seismic Hazard Model: Overview and implications

The US National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) was updated in 2023 for all 50 states using new science on seismicity, fault ruptures, ground motions, and probabilistic techniques to produce a standard of practice for public policy and other engineering applications (defined for return periods greater than ∼475 or less than ∼10,000 years). Changes in 2023 time-independent seismic hazard (both increases and decreases compared to previous NSHMs) are substantial because the new model considers more data and updated earthquake rupture forecasts and ground-motion components. In developing the 2023 model, we tried to apply best available or applicable science based on advice of co-authors, more than 50 reviewers, and hundreds of hazard scientists and end-users, who attended public workshops and provided technical inputs. The hazard assessment incorporates new catalogs, declustering algorithms, gridded seismicity models, magnitude-scaling equations, fault-based structural and deformation models, multi-fault earthquake rupture forecast models, semi-empirical and simulation-based ground-motion models, and site amplification models conditioned on shear-wave velocities of the upper 30 m of soil and deeper sedimentary basin structures. Seismic hazard calculations yield hazard curves at hundreds of thousands of sites, ground-motion maps, uniform-hazard response spectra, and disaggregations developed for pseudo-spectral accelerations at 21 oscillator periods and two peak parameters, Modified Mercalli Intensity, and 8 site classes required by building codes and other public policy applications. Tests show the new model is consistent with past ShakeMap intensity observations. Sensitivity and uncertainty assessments ensure resulting ground motions are compatible with known hazard information and highlight the range and causes of variability in ground motions. We produce several impact products including building seismic design criteria, intensity maps, planning scenarios, and engineering risk assessments showing the potential physical and social impacts. These applications provide a basis for assessing, planning, and mitigating the effects of future earthquakes.

Earthquake Spectra↗

USGS2023

Multiphysics modelling in PyLith: Poroelasticity

PyLith, a community, open-source code for modelling quasi-static and dynamic crustal deformation with an emphasis on earthquake faulting, has recently been updated with a flexible multiphysics implementation. We demonstrate the versatility of the multiphysics implementation by extending the code to model fully coupled continuum poromechanics. We verify the newly incorporated physics using standard benchmarks for a porous medium saturated with a slightly compressible fluid. The benchmarks include the 1-D consolidation problem as outlined by Terzaghi, Mandel’s problem for the 2-D case, and Cryer’s problem for the 3-D case. All three benchmarks have been added to the PyLith continuous integration test suite. We compare the closed form analytical solution for each benchmark against solutions generated by our updated code, and lastly, demonstrate that the poroelastic material formulation may be used alongside the existing fault implementation in PyLith.

Geophysical Journal International↗