Left: ordinary frictional strengthening with depth followed by thermally activated material creep. Right: a very weak shallow faulted layer above a narrow strong region near 10 km, followed by essentially the same weakening material creep branch. These are the shapes actually plotted in Figure 2. The right curve is not a strong upper crust over a uniformly weak lower crust; neither diagram displays a second mantle-strength peak.
For the left curve, increasing overburden increases the effective normal load on faults. A schematic Coulomb friction law iswhere is cohesion, the coefficient of friction, the compressive normal stress and the pore pressure. With ordinary rock friction and approximately hydrostatic pressure, increases roughly linearly with depth. The stress needed for frictional sliding therefore increases, as in the straight shallow branch. Byerlee's law summarizes the relatively high friction found in many laboratory rocks.[ref]
At higher temperature, dislocation creep or another ductile mechanism accommodates the imposed deformation at lower stress. For example,Here is strain rate, an activation energy, the molar gas constant and absolute temperature. At fixed strain rate, increasing lowers the required stress. The operative envelope is approximately , expressed in a consistent stress convention; the peak marks the brittle-ductile transition. This accounts for the left curve's peak near 100 MPa and its decline toward small strength by about 20 km.
For the right curve, normal high-friction sliding with depth-independent fluid-pressure ratio cannot explain the nearly vertical weak shallow branch. Plausible weakening includes high pore pressure tracking the overburden, low-friction fault gouge, or a connected network of pre-existing weak faults. Roughly constant small yields roughly constant small frictional strength. The abrupt increase near the base of this layer requires a change of conditions: for example, the weak fluid-rich fault network terminates or becomes discontinuous, leaving stronger intact or less altered rock below. A change in mineralogy or deformation localization can also give a contrast. Simply saying “there are fluids” does not explain the return to high strength. Below the strong region, thermal material creep again lowers the strength.
The figure alone does not identify the weakening mechanism or a particular lithological boundary. In particular, a 10 km strength maximum is not evidence for a 10 km deep Mohorovičić discontinuity. The strong-fault/weak-fault evidence and the distinction between fault strength and surrounding crustal strength are discussed in Stress orientations at intermediate angles to the San Andreas Fault, California by Jeanne L. Hardebeck and Andrew J. Michael.