Geology Reports⌕ Search

USGS · 70026190

Surface rupture and slip distribution of the Denali and Totschunda faults in the 3 November 2002 M 7.9 earthquake, Alaska

Abstract

The 3 November 2002 Denali fault, Alaska, earthquake resulted in 341 km of surface rupture on the Susitna Glacier, Denali, and Totschunda faults. The rupture proceeded from west to east and began with a 48-km-long break on the previously unknown Susitna Glacier thrust fault. Slip on this thrust averaged about 4 m (Crone et al. , 2004) . Next came the principal surface break, along 226 km of the Denali fault, with average right-lateral offsets of 4.5–5.1 m and a maximum offset of 8.8 m near its eastern end. The Denali fault trace is commonly left stepping and north side up. About 99 km of the fault ruptured through glacier ice, where the trace orientation was commonly influenced by local ice fabric. Finally, slip transferred southeastward onto the Totschunda fault and continued for another 66 km where dextral offsets average 1.6–1.8 m. The transition from the Denali fault to the Totschunda fault occurs over a complex 25-km-long transfer zone of right-slip and normal fault traces. Three methods of calculating average surface slip all yield a moment magnitude of M w 7.8, in very good agreement with the seismologically determined magnitude of M 7.9. A comparison of strong-motion inversions for moment release with our slip distribution shows they have a similar pattern. The locations of the two largest pulses of moment release correlate with the locations of increasing steps in the average values of observed slip. This suggests that slip-distribution data can be used to infer moment release along other active fault traces.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 58° to 65° latitude; -150° to -140° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Peter J. Haeussler, David P. Schwartz, Timothy E. Dawson, Heidi D. Stenner, James J. Lienkaemper, Brian L. Sherrod, Francesca R. Cinti, Paola Montone, Patricia Craw, Anthony J. Crone, Stephen F. Personius. 2004. Surface rupture and slip distribution of the Denali and Totschunda faults in the 3 November 2002 M 7.9 earthquake, Alaska. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120040626

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Re-evaluation of shaking, dynamic strain, and the source of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

As the largest historical event in the eastern United States, the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, plays a prominent role in our nation’s seismological and human history and an outsized role in our probabilistic ground‐motion hazard estimates, affecting building codes, insurance rates, and geophysical monitoring. Thus, constraining the characteristics of the 1886 earthquake source, as well as the nature of its shaking distribution and impacts to the extent possible, is essential. Given its vintage, however, societal, geological, and geophysical datasets are limited compared with those used in modern seismological analyses. Because of these limitations, some characteristics of the rupture model are fundamentally nonunique. Still, by re‐evaluating all available data, I can constrain several key aspects of this earthquake. I show that several interpretations in recent analyses are inconsistent regarding the inferred source; shaking; ground failure; and, particularly, railway impacts. Importantly, I have shown that although dynamic strain caused the ground failure that led to track deformation, without the intermediate liquefaction step, dynamic strain alone was unlikely to be the source of rail deformation, contrary to earlier studies. Had earlier pronouncements that dynamic strain is a real concern for bending railways held true, there would be serious ramifications for railway engineering as well as for other above‐ and below‐ground linear infrastructure.

South Carolina↗

ETAS-positive: Extracting unbiased epidemic-type aftershock models from incomplete earthquake catalogs

Earthquake catalogs are inherently incomplete, and short-term fluctuations in catalog completeness can strongly bias estimates of seismicity parameters. Here, we extend the positive statistics framework recently introduced for estimating Gutenberg–Richter a and b values to the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model. The approach focuses on complete magnitude–time intervals defined by pairs of earthquakes in which the second event is larger than the first. Comprehensive synthetic tests demonstrate that the proposed ETAS + method retrieves nearly unbiased parameter estimates even from highly incomplete catalogs, whereas parameters obtained using classical estimation approaches are strongly biased. Application to Southern California reveals a similar trend, with the productivity scaling parameter α approaching the b value, consistent with self-similar earthquake triggering within estimation uncertainties. Owing to its robustness against catalog incompleteness and computational efficiency, the ETAS + method provides a powerful new tool for seismicity analysis and earthquake forecasting.

California↗