Jökull


Jökull - 01.01.2010, Page 129

Jökull - 01.01.2010, Page 129
Holocene surface ruptures in the South Iceland Seismic Zone segment is (e.g. Angelier and Bergerat, 2002, Bergerat and Angelier, 2003). Other, much less conspicuous examples of conjugate faulting are found in the south- ern part of the Selfoss township (Imsland et al., 1998 a, b), at the Litlu-Reykir fault zone, where it crosses Highway #1, and in the fracture system active in the 1912 earthquake near the farm Haukadalur. Length of faults Since the largest seismogenic faults trend transversely to the seismic zone, the width of the zone should give an indication of the length of the faults. The zone of mapped fault structures, as seen e.g. in Figure 1, concides very well with the zone of background seis- micity. This width is about 20 km, almost uniformly along the zone. The lengths of the source faults of recent large earthquakes in the zone are consistent with this. Modeling of surface deformation fields of the two Mw 6.5 earthquakes of June 2000 gives fault lengths of 15 km (e.g. Pedersen et al., 2001, 2003) and the two faults responsible for the double event of May 2008 were 11 and 17 km long (Decriem et al., 2010). The mapped surface ruptures of the 1912 earthquake (MS7.0) are 11 km long (Einarsson and Eiríksson, 1982) and Bjarnason et al. (1993) suggest that the original rupture may have been as long as 30 km. It has been argued that the length of the de- struction zones of historical earthquakes in South Ice- land as shown by e.g. Einarsson and Björnsson (1979) and Björnsson and Einarsson (1981) may be taken as a proxy for fault length (e.g. Guðmundsson, 1995, 2000, Angelier et al., 2008) and therefore may be as long as 50 km. This is not so. Assuming a simple model where earthquake intensity is a function of only the distance to the nearest segment of the source fault, it is easy to show that the fault length should be equal to L-W, where L is the length and W the width of the destruction zone. This would give a fault length of about 30 km for the largest earthquakes with known destruction zones, i.e. those of 1784 and 1912. Strike of the faults All the larger faults, that are reasonably known, strike almost due N-S. This is clearly seen in the 1912 mapped fault traces, the 1896 second event fault traces (Einarsson et al., 1981), the aftershock distribution of the 1987 Vatnafjöll event (Bjarnason and Einars- son, 1991) and the earthquakes of 2000 (Hjaltadóttir, 2009). Modeling of the deformation fields of the 2000 and 2008 earthquakes shows the same results (Ped- ersen et al., 2001, 2003, Decriem et al., 2010). Yet there is frequent reference in the literature to a strike of NNE for the major faults (e.g. Gudmundsson, 1995, Gudmundsson and Brynjólfsson, 1993, Bergerat and Angelier, 2000). The reason for this misconception appears to be the en echelon arrangement of the fault structures. The first order en echelon is on the scale of a kilometer. One may therefore see a kilometer long strike-slip segment with a NNE strike (see e.g. Figure 7) but fail to see that it is a part of a larger structure with a strike of N-S. Detailed studies of the hypocen- tral distribution of the earthquake sequence of 2000 and modeling of the deformation field confirms that the en echelon fracture arrays at the surface are un- derlain by a continuous, near-vertical fault plane with a northerly strike. This relationship is to be expected where a strike-slip fault, initiated at depth, propagates towards the free surface. The Grímsnes volcanic system A population of NE-SW striking fractures in Gríms- nes, at the northern border of the SISZ is identified as belonging to a fissure swarm associated with the Grímsnes Volcanic System. The GVS is placed un- conformably on top of older crust (Jakobsson, 1966) and judging from the lack of long, continuous struc- tures, its fissure swarm is immature. The fractures are expressed as rows of sinkholes and depressions in the Holocene surface. They are mostly extensional and rarely exhibit a normal component. Their widths are implied to be of the order of 1–2 m and lengths are generally less than 1 km. En echelon arrangements are hardly seen at all, and push-ups are not known here. The fractures are fairly evenly distributed in a 6×20 km swarm. Total dilatation in the Holocene is estimated to be of the order of 10–20 m. Frac- tures judged to belong to the GVS are not included in Figure 1. JÖKULL No. 60 129
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
Page 49
Page 50
Page 51
Page 52
Page 53
Page 54
Page 55
Page 56
Page 57
Page 58
Page 59
Page 60
Page 61
Page 62
Page 63
Page 64
Page 65
Page 66
Page 67
Page 68
Page 69
Page 70
Page 71
Page 72
Page 73
Page 74
Page 75
Page 76
Page 77
Page 78
Page 79
Page 80
Page 81
Page 82
Page 83
Page 84
Page 85
Page 86
Page 87
Page 88
Page 89
Page 90
Page 91
Page 92
Page 93
Page 94
Page 95
Page 96
Page 97
Page 98
Page 99
Page 100
Page 101
Page 102
Page 103
Page 104
Page 105
Page 106
Page 107
Page 108
Page 109
Page 110
Page 111
Page 112
Page 113
Page 114
Page 115
Page 116
Page 117
Page 118
Page 119
Page 120
Page 121
Page 122
Page 123
Page 124
Page 125
Page 126
Page 127
Page 128
Page 129
Page 130
Page 131
Page 132
Page 133
Page 134
Page 135
Page 136
Page 137
Page 138
Page 139
Page 140
Page 141
Page 142
Page 143
Page 144
Page 145
Page 146
Page 147
Page 148
Page 149
Page 150
Page 151
Page 152
Page 153
Page 154
Page 155
Page 156
Page 157
Page 158
Page 159
Page 160
Page 161
Page 162
Page 163
Page 164
Page 165
Page 166
Page 167
Page 168
Page 169
Page 170
Page 171
Page 172
Page 173
Page 174
Page 175
Page 176
Page 177
Page 178
Page 179
Page 180
Page 181
Page 182
Page 183
Page 184
Page 185
Page 186
Page 187
Page 188
Page 189
Page 190
Page 191
Page 192
Page 193
Page 194
Page 195
Page 196
Page 197
Page 198
Page 199
Page 200
Page 201
Page 202
Page 203
Page 204
Page 205
Page 206
Page 207
Page 208
Page 209
Page 210
Page 211
Page 212
Page 213
Page 214
Page 215
Page 216
Page 217
Page 218
Page 219
Page 220
Page 221
Page 222
Page 223
Page 224

x

Jökull

Direct Links

If you want to link to this newspaper/magazine, please use these links:

Link to this newspaper/magazine: Jökull
https://timarit.is/publication/1155

Link to this issue:

Link to this page:

Link to this article:

Please do not link directly to images or PDFs on Timarit.is as such URLs may change without warning. Please use the URLs provided above for linking to the website.