ORIENTATION OF THE PRINCIPAL STRESS AXES AS A POSSIBLE CAUSE OF GEOACOUSTIC RADIATION ANISOTROPY DURING EARTHQUAKE PREPARATION

The results of long-term investigations carried out in Kamchatka show that an increase in intensity of geoacoustic radiation and amplification of its anisotropy can be considered as an indicator of deformation process activation during earthquake preparation. One of the main characteristics of the stress-strain state of rocks is the orientation of the principal stress axes, and in particular of the maximum compression axis. The present paper deals with the experimental studies and mathematical modeling performed to detect the relation between the orientation of the axis of maximum compression of rocks and geoacoustic radiation anisotropy during earthquake preparation.

In 2008–2016, using the vector-phase method, an analysis was made of the direction of geoacoustic radiation, recorded at the "Mikizha" site in Kamchatka within a three-day interval before earthquakes. There were detected two main orthogonal maxima of radiation (average azimuths 312.5°±15° and 42.5°±15°), with one of them, in the authors’ opinion, perpendicular to the maximum compression axis.

In an elastic approximation of a medium, modeling has been performed for the orientation of the axis of maximum compression of rocks during the preparation of strong Kamchatka earthquakes in 1976–2020. According to the results, the axis was lying within the sector with the azimuths of 330.5 and 84.2°, the modal interval was 22.5 up to 45.0°, and the average value was 32.7°. The model-based average orientation of the axis of maximum compression agrees with the value determined from experimental observations of geoacoustic radiation at the "Mikizha" site.

The results of the study confirmed the assumption that the direction of geoacoustic radiation maxima occurring during earthquake preparation is determined by the orientation of the axis of maximum compression of rocks at the observation site. The obtained results can be used to study geodeformation process characteristics in seismic regions.

1. Aki K., Richards P., 2002. Quantitative Seismology. University Science Books, Sausalito, CA, 704 p.

2. Avdeiko G.P., Popruzhenko S.V., Palueva A.A., 2002. The Tectonic Evolution and Volcano-Tectonic Zonation of the Kuril-Kamchatka Island-Arc System. Geotectonics 36 (4), 312–327.

3. Bilek S.L., Lay T., 2018. Subduction Zone Megathrust Earthquakes. Geosphere 14 (4), 1468–1500. https://doi.org/10.1130/GES01608.1.

4. Chebrov V.N., Droznin D.V., Kugaenko Y.A., Levina V.I., Senyukov S.L., Sergeev V.A., Shevchenko Yu.V., Yashchuk V.V., 2013. The System of Detailed Seismological Observations in Kamchatka in 2011. Journal of Volcanology and Seismology 7 (1), 16–36. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0742046313010028.

5. Chebrova A.Yu., Chemarev E.A., Matveenko E.A., Chebrov D.V., 2020. Seismological Data Information System in Kamchatka Branch of GS RAS: Organization Principles, Main Elements and Key Functions. Geophysical Research 21 (3), 66–91 (in Russian). https://doi.org/10.21455/gr2020.3-5.

6. Dobrovolsky I.P., 2009. The Mathematical Theory of Generation and Prediction of a Tectonic Earthquake. Fizmatlit, Moscow, 240 p. (in Russian)

7. Dziewonski A.M., Chou T.-A., Woodhouse J.H., 1981. Determination of Earthquake Source Parameters from Waveform Data for Studies of Global and Regional Seismicity. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth 86 (В4), 2825. https://doi.org/10.1029/JB086iB04p02825.

8. Ekström G., Nettles M., Dziewoński A.M., 2012. The Global CMT Project 2004–2010: Centroid-Moment Tensors for 13017 Earthquakes. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors 200–201, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pepi.2012.04.002.

9. Gapeev M., Marapulets Yu., 2023. Modeling Locations with Enhanced Earth’s Crust Deformation During Earthquake Preparation near the Kamchatka Peninsula. Applied Sciences 13 (1), 290. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13010290.

10. Global CMT Catalog, 2025. Available from: https://www.globalcmt.org/ (Last Accessed March 27, 2025).

11. Gordeev E.I., Bergal-Kuvikas O.V., 2022. Structure of the Subduction Zone and Volcanism in Kamchatka. Doklady Earth Sciences 502 (1), 21–24. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1028334X22020088.

12. Gordienko V.A., 2007. Vector-Phase Methods in Acoustics. Fizmatlit, Moscow, 480 p. (in Russian)

13. Kearey Ph., Klepeis K.A., Vine F.J., 2009. Global Tectonics. Wiley-Blackwell, 482 p.

14. Liu H., Xiao Y., Sun H., Tong F., Heuser A., Churikova T., Wörner G., 2020. Trace Elements and Li Isotope Compositions Across the Kamchatka Arc: Constraints on Slab-Derived Fluid Sources. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth 125 (5), e2019JB019237. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JB019237.

15. Marapulets Yu.V., 2015. High-Frequency Acoustic Emission Effect. Bulletin KRASEC. Physical and Mathematical Sciences 10 (1), 39–48.

16. Marapulets Yu.V., Shcherbina A.O., 2018. Assessing the Orientation of the Axis of Maximum Compression of Rocks with a Combined Point Receiver System. Acoustical Physics 64 (6), 742–749. https://doi.org/10.1134/S106377101806009.

17. Marapulets Yu.V., Shevtsov B.M., Larionov I.A., Mishchenko M.A., Shcherbina A.O., Solodchuk A.A., 2012. Geoacoustic Emission Response to Deformation Processes Activation During Earthquake Preparation. Russian Journal of Pacific Geology 6 (6), 457–464. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1819714012060048.

18. Martínez-Garzón P., Poli P., 2024. Cascade and Pre-Slip Models Oversimplify the Complexity of Earthquake Preparation in Nature. Communications Earth & Environment 5, 120. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-024-01285-y.

19. Mindlin R.D., 1936. Force at a Point in the Interior of a Semi-Infinite Solid. Journal of Applied Physics 7 (5), 195–202. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1745385.

20. Mindlin R.D., Cheng D.H., 1950. Nuclei of Strain in the Semi-Infinite Solid. Journal of Applied Physics 21 (9), 926–930. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1699785.

21. Nazarova L.A., Nazarov L.A., Kozlova L.A., 2008. Simulation of the Foci of Dynamic Events on the Basis of Inverse Problem Solution Using Geodetic Data. Physical Mesomechanics 11 (1), 51–54 (in Russian)

22. Perezhogin A.S., Shevtsov B.M., 2009. Models of an Intense-Deformed Condition of Rocks Before Earthquakes and Their Correlation with Geo-Acoustic Emission. Computational Technologies 14 (3), 48–57 (in Russian)

23. Rebetsky Yu.L., Lermontova A.S., 2018. On the Long-Range Influence of Earthquake Rupture Zones. Journal of Volcanology and Seismology 12 (5), 341–352. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0742046318050068.

24. Reid H.F., 1910. The Mechanics of the Earthquake. In: The California Earthquake of April 18, 1906. Report of the State Earthquake Investigation Commission. Vol. II. Carnegie Institution, Washington, 192 p.

25. Saltykov V.A., Kugaenko Yu.A., 2012. Development of Near-Surface Dilatancy Zones as a Possible Cause for Seismic Emission Anomalies Before Strong Earthquakes. Russian Journal of Pacific Geology 6 (1), 86–95. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1819714012010113.

26. Segall P., 2010. Earthquake and Volcano Deformation. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 432 p. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400833856.

27. Shamina O.G., Ponyatovskaya V.I., 1993. Model Studies of Heterogeneous and Fractured Media. IPE RAS, Moscow, 179 p. (in Russian)

28. Steketee J.A., 1958. Some Geophysical Applications of the Elasticity Theory of Dislocations. Canadian Journal of Physics 36 (9), 1168–1198. https://doi.org/10.1139/p58-123.

29. Timoshenko S.P., Goodier J.N., 1970. Theory of Elasticity. McGraw-Hill, New York, 608 p.

30. Vinogradov S.D., 1976. Elastic Waves Radiated from Ruptures and from Shear Movement Along the Ready-State Fault. In: Yu.V. Riznichenko (Ed.), Earthquake Physics Research. Nauka, Moscow, p. 67–74 (in Russian)