Mon Oct 13, F. Flechtner
• Sorted by Date • Sorted by Last Name of First Author •
Konvisar, A. M., Mikhailov, V. O., Smirnov, V. B., and Timoshkina, E. P., 2024. Postseismic Processes in the Region of the July 29, 2021 Chignik Earthquake, Alaska: Part I. Modeling Results. Izvestiya Physics of the Solid Earth, 60(4):543–553, doi:10.1134/S1069351324700563.
• from the NASA Astrophysics Data System • by the DOI System •
@ARTICLE{2024IzPSE..60..543K,
author = {{Konvisar}, A.~M. and {Mikhailov}, V.~O. and {Smirnov}, V.~B. and {Timoshkina}, E.~P.},
title = "{Postseismic Processes in the Region of the July 29, 2021 Chignik Earthquake, Alaska: Part I. Modeling Results}",
journal = {Izvestiya Physics of the Solid Earth},
keywords = {earthquake, Chignik, Alaska, July 29, 2021, displacement fields, GPS, satellite radar interferometry, GRACE-FO, postseismic creep (afterslip), viscoelastic relaxation},
year = 2024,
month = aug,
volume = {60},
number = {4},
pages = {543-553},
abstract = "{{\textemdash}We analyze the postseismic processes in the region of the
M$_{w}$ 8.2 Chignik earthquake, Alaska, which occurred on July
29, 2021. Using the model of the seismic rupture surface
constructed in our previous work (Konvisar et al., 2023), we
have modeled the viscoelastic relaxation process. The results
indicate that by reducing the viscosity of the asthenosphere to
{}10$^{18}$ Pa s we an achieve the displacement velocities that
are close to those recorded at the coastal GPS sites. However,
the displacements on the islands near the source zone of the
earthquake differ significantly not only in magnitude but also
in direction. At the same time, the constructed postseismic
creep (afterslip) model agrees well with displacement data at
the GPS sites and with the line-of-sight (LOS) displacement map
derived from radar images taken from the descending orbit of the
Sentinel-1A satellite. We also analyze temporal variations of
gravity field in the earthquake region. The obtained coseismic
anomaly is consistent with the anomaly calculated from the
rupture surface model. Isolating the postseismic anomaly it is
not yet possible due to the insufficiently long time series of
gravity models for the time period after the earthquake. The
analysis of the postseismic processes is continued in the second
part of this work (Smirnov et al., 2024), where we compare
development over time of the postseismic displacements of
various GPS sites with the aftershock activity, which allows us
to draw conclusions about the creep nature of the postseismic
processes in the source region of the Chignik earthquake.}",
doi = {10.1134/S1069351324700563},
adsurl = {https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024IzPSE..60..543K},
adsnote = {Provided by the SAO/NASA Astrophysics Data System}
}
Generated by
bib2html_grace.pl
(written by Patrick Riley
modified for this page by Volker Klemann) on
Mon Oct 13, 2025 16:16:49
GRACE-FO
Mon Oct 13, F. Flechtner