In situ stress magnitudes at the toe of the Nankai Trough Accretionary Prism, offshore Shikoku Island, Japan. Issue 2 (22nd February 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Huffman, K. A.; Saffer, D. M.
• Is Part Of: Journal of geophysical research. Volume 121:Issue 2(2016:Feb.)
• Page Start: 1202
• Page End: 1217
• Publication Date: 2016-02-22
• Subjects: Nankai Trough -- fault strength -- in situ stress; Geomagnetism -- Periodicals; Geochemistry -- Periodicals; Geophysics -- Periodicals; Earth sciences -- Periodicals; 551.1
• DOI: 10.1002/2015JB012415
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2169-9313

Abstract

Abstract: Quantifying the orientation and magnitude of tectonic stresses is essential toward understanding deformation and faulting in subduction zones. However, constraints on in situ horizontal stress magnitudes ( S hmin and S Hmax ) are rare. We estimate S hmin and S Hmax at Ocean Drilling Program Site 808 at the toe of the Nankai accretionary prism offshore Japan, using coupled constraints from (1) the width of wellbore breakouts together with estimates of rock strength and a model describing stress redistribution at the borehole wall and (2) limits on regional differential stress defined by failure on preexisting faults. Our analysis extends from 175 to 915 m below seafloor (mbsf) and spans the active frontal thrust. For an upper bound on rock unconfined compressive strength (UCS) and assuming hydrostatic formation pore pressure, S hmin and S Hmax (referenced to the seafloor) increase from 6.5 MPa at 175 mbsf to 17.4 MPa at 915 mbsf, with the stress state gradually transitioning from a thrust or strike‐slip faulting regime above 800 mbsf to a normal faulting regime below. For cases with higher formation pore pressure, horizontal stresses are slightly lower but follow a similar pattern. We show that estimated S hmin and S Hmax are strongly dependent on UCS, breakout width, and friction coefficient, all of which are characterized by uncertainty. Our results suggest that the prism is near thrust failure in the upper ~300 mbsf, but far from failure below. This may be reconciled with active thrusting if thrust faults are locally weaker than the surrounding rock or if S Hmax fluctuates during the seismic cycle. Key Points: Define and rigorously explore uncertainty of horizontal stress magnitude from wellbore failure Stress regime changes downhole from thrust or strike slip to strike slip or normal Weak faults/stress fluctuation during seismic cycle reconcile stress with active thrusting