Résumé
Wallace (1951) and Bott (1959) were the first to introduce the idea that the slip on each fault surface has the same direction and sense as the maximum shear stress resolved on that surface. However, this simplified hypothesis is questionable since fault mechanical interactions may induce slip reorientations. Earlier numerical geomechanical models confirmed that the slickenlines (slip vectors) are not necessarily parallel to the maximum resolved shear stress but are consistent with local stress perturbations. This leads us to ask as to what extent the Wallace and Bott simplifications are reliable as a basis hypothesis for stress inversion from fault slip data. Here, a geomechanical multi-parametric study using a 3D boundary element method, covering (i) fault geometries such as intersected faults or corrugated fault surfaces, (ii) the full range of Andersonian state of stress, (iii) fault friction, (iv) fault fluid pressure, (v) half space effect and (vi), rock properties, is performed in order to understand the effect of each parameter on the misfit angle between geomechanical slip vectors and the resolved shear stresses. It is shown that significant misfit angles can be found under specific configurations invalidating the Wallace and Bott assumptions, even though fault friction tends to minimize the misfit. We therefore conclude that in such cases, stress inversions based on fault slip data should be interpreted with care.