An official website of the United States government
Tsunamis generated by seafloor displacements accompanying large submarine earthquakes provide sensitivity to absolute slip position and distribution for offshore faulting analogous to that of geodetic observations for landward faulting. Tsunami recordings at deep‐water and near‐shore ocean bottom pressure sensors and tide gauges, along with runup and inundation measurements, can now be reliably modeled using detailed bathymetric structures and robust numerical codes. As a result, tsunami observations now play an important role in quantifying coseismic slip distributions for large submarine earthquakes in subduction zones and other tectonic environments. Applications of joint modeling or inversion of seismic, geodetic and tsunami observations for recent major earthquakes are described, highlighting the specific contributions of the tsunami observations to source model resolution. Tsunami observations provide unique information on the up‐dip extent of earthquake coseismic slip on subduction zone megathrust faults and occurrence of near‐trench slip, which are usually not well constrained by seismic and land‐based geodetic signals. Tsunami signals also help to detect offshore slow slip that is not evident in seismic or land‐based geodetic data and to balance geophysical constraints on ruptures that extend from on‐shore to off‐shore. Tsunami runup measurements and stratigraphic deposits further provide unique constraints on large earthquake ruptures that occurred prior to modern geophysical instrumentation.
more »
« less
Benchmarking the Optimal Time Alignment of Tsunami Waveforms in Nonlinear Joint Inversions for the Mw 8.8 2010 Maule (Chile) Earthquake
Finite-fault models for the 2010 M w 8.8 Maule, Chile earthquake indicate bilateral rupture with large-slip patches located north and south of the epicenter. Previous studies also show that this event features significant slip in the shallow part of the megathrust, which is revealed through correction of the forward tsunami modeling scheme used in tsunami inversions. The presence of shallow slip is consistent with the coseismic seafloor deformation measured off the Maule region adjacent to the trench and confirms that tsunami observations are particularly important for constraining far-offshore slip. Here, we benchmark the method of Optimal Time Alignment (OTA) of the tsunami waveforms in the joint inversion of tsunami (DART and tide-gauges) and geodetic (GPS, InSAR, land-leveling) observations for this event. We test the application of OTA to the tsunami Green’s functions used in a previous inversion. Through a suite of synthetic tests we show that if the bias in the forward model is comprised only of delays in the tsunami signals, the OTA can correct them precisely, independently of the sensors (DART or coastal tide-gauges) and, to the first-order, of the bathymetric model used. The same suite of experiments is repeated for the real case of the 2010 Maule earthquake where, despite the results of the synthetic tests, DARTs are shown to outperform tide-gauges. This gives an indication of the relative weights to be assigned when jointly inverting the two types of data. Moreover, we show that using OTA is preferable to subjectively correcting possible time mismatch of the tsunami waveforms. The results for the source model of the Maule earthquake show that using just the first-order modeling correction introduced by OTA confirms the bilateral rupture pattern around the epicenter, and, most importantly, shifts the inferred northern patch of slip to a shallower position consistent with the slip models obtained by applying more complex physics-based corrections to the tsunami waveforms. This is confirmed by a slip model refined by inverting geodetic and tsunami data complemented with a denser distribution of GPS data nearby the source area. The models obtained with the OTA method are finally benchmarked against the observed seafloor deformation off the Maule region. We find that all of the models using the OTA well predict this offshore coseismic deformation, thus overall, this benchmarking of the OTA method can be considered successful.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1802364
- PAR ID:
- 10222291
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Frontiers in Earth Science
- Volume:
- 8
- ISSN:
- 2296-6463
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract The Shumagin seismic gap along the Alaska Peninsula experienced a major,MW7.8, interplate thrust earthquake on 22 July 2020. Several available finite‐fault inversions indicate patchy slip of up to 4 m at 8–48 km depth. There are differences among the models in peak slip and absolute placement of slip on the plate boundary, resulting from differences in data distributions, model parameterizations, and inversion algorithms. Two representative slip models obtained from inversions of large seismic and geodetic data sets produce very different tsunami predictions at tide gauges and deep‐water pressure sensors (DART stations), despite having only secondary differences in slip distribution. This is found to be the result of the acute sensitivity of the tsunami excitation for rupture below the continental shelf in proximity to an abrupt shelf break. Iteratively perturbing seismic and geodetic inversions by constraining fault model extent along dip and strike, we obtain an optimal rupture model compatible with teleseismicPandSHwaves, regional three‐component broadband and strong‐motion seismic recordings, hr‐GNSS time series and static offsets, as well as tsunami recordings at DART stations and regional and remote tide gauges. Slip is tightly bounded between 25 and 40 km depth, the up‐dip limit of slip in the earthquake is resolved to be well‐inland of the shelf break, and the rupture extent along strike is well‐constrained. The coseismic slip increased Coulomb stress on the shallow plate boundary extending to the trench, but the frictional behavior of the megathrust below the continental slope remains uncertain.more » « less
-
Abstract The 2018 Palu tsunami contributed significantly to the devastation caused by the associated7.5 earthquake. This began a debate about how the moderate size earthquake triggered such a large tsunami within Palu Bay, with runups of more than 10 m. The possibility of a large component of vertical coseismic deformation and submarine landslides have been considered as potential explanations. However, scarce instrumental data have made it difficult to resolve the potential contributions from either type of source. We use tsunami waveforms derived from social media videos in Palu Bay to model the possible sources of the tsunami. We invert InSAR data with different fault geometries and use the resulting seafloor displacements to simulate tsunamis. The coseismic sources alone cannot match both the video‐derived time histories and surveyed runups. Then we conduct a tsunami source inversion using the video‐derived time histories and a tide gauge record as inputs. We specify hypothetical landslide locations and solve for initial tsunami elevation. Our results, validated with surveyed runups, show that a limited number of landslides in southern Palu Bay are sufficient to explain the tsunami data. The Palu tsunami highlights the difficulty in accurately capturing with tide gauges the amplitude and timing of short period waves that can have large impacts at the coast. The proximity of landslides to locations of high fault slip also suggests that tsunami hazard assessment in strike‐slip environments should include triggered landslides, especially for locations where the coastline morphology is strongly linked to fault geometry.more » « less
-
Abstract On 19 September 2022, a major earthquake struck the northwestern Michoacán segment along the Mexican subduction zone. A slip model is obtained that satisfactorily explains geodetic, teleseismic, and tsunami observations of the 2022 event. The preferred model has a compact large-slip patch that extends up-dip and northwestward from the hypocenter and directly overlaps a 1973 Mw 7.6 rupture. Slip is concentrated offshore and below the coast at depths from 10 to 30 km with a peak value of ∼2.9 m, and there is no detected coseismic slip near the trench. The total seismic moment is 3.1×1020 N·m (Mw 7.6), 72% of which is concentrated in the first 30 s. Most aftershocks are distributed in an up-dip area of the mainshock that has small coseismic slip, suggesting near-complete strain release in the large-slip patch. Teleseismic P waveforms of the 2022 and 1973 earthquakes are similar in duration and complexity with high cross-correlation coefficients of 0.68–0.98 for long P to PP signal time windows, indicating that the 2022 earthquake is a quasi-repeat of the 1973 earthquake, possibly indicating persistent frictional properties. Both the events produced more complex P waveforms than comparable size events along Guerrero and Oaxaca, reflecting differences in patchy locking of the Mexican megathrust.more » « less
-
Abstract Two adjacent segments of the Chile margin exhibit significant differences in earthquake magnitude and rupture extents during the 1960 Valdivia and 2010 Maule earthquakes. We use the discrete element method (DEM) to simulate the upper plate as having an inner and outer wedge defined by different frictional domains along the décollement. We find that outer wedge width strongly influences coseismic slip distributions. We use the published peak slip magnitudes to pick best fit slip distributions and compare our models to geophysical constraints on outer wedge widths for the margins. We obtain reasonable fits to published slip distributions for the 2010 Maule rupture. Our best‐fit slip distribution for the 1960 Valdivia earthquake suggests that peak slip occurred close to the trench, differing from published models but being supported by new seismic interpretations along this margin. Finally, we also demonstrate that frictional conditions beneath the outer wedge can affect the coseismic slip distributions.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2020.585429
