Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | 7.0 and greater, during w orts have been addressed ff M 1 erent sensors with wave amplitudes vary- ff 1862 1861 , and F. Carrilho 1 8.1 and depths varying from 10 up to w M 6.7 to w , C. Marreiros 1 M , D. Vales 1,2 This discussion paper is/has beenSystem under Sciences review (NHESS). for Please the refer journal to Natural the Hazards corresponding and final Earth paper in NHESS if available. Instituto Português do Mar eInstituto da Dom Atmosfera, Luiz, IPMA, University I. of P., Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal IDL, Lisbon, Portugal a period of 1model year, evaluation, from numerical June modelling, 2013to and confirm sensors’ to the records generation analysis June or in not 2014.We order of also The a investigate tsunami and analysis following discuss the involves the occurrenceparameters sensitivity of of an recognized earthquake. tsunami to generation to controlmagnitude, the earthquake focal the mechanism tsunami and occurrence,nitudes ranging including rupture from the depth. A earthquake 585 km, total have been of analyzed 23 instrike-slip this events, faults, study. Among with and them, 13 mag- % 52 % are arein normal thrust faults. the faults, Most 35 Pacific analyzed % events . are havecaused been This occurred study that shows were that recorded about by 39 % di of the analyzed Abstract This paper is alarge contribution submarine to earthquakes. a Here, betterearthquakes understanding occurred we worldwide of analyse with tsunamigenic the magnitudes potential tsunamigenic around from potential of large ing from few centimetres tocoastal areas about and 2 significant m. damages Some inical of harbours. modeling On them shows the caused other that inundations hand,trigger some of tsunami of numer- small low-lying the tsunamis events, that considerednear-field as were areas. non-tsunamigenic, We not also might recordedearthquake find due focal that mechanism to the and tsunami the otherter generation absence parameters depth is of such and mainly as sensors the dependent thetsunami in magnitude. of earthquake catalogs. The the the hypocen- results of this study can help on the1 compilation of Introduction In the aftermath of theworldwide 2004 to Indian better Ocean understand tsunami, the many potential e of tsunami generation following the occur- Large submarine earthquakes occurred worldwide, 1 year period (JuneJune 2013 2014), to – contribution tounderstanding the of tsunamigenic potential R. Omira Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci-discuss.net/3/1861/2015/ Discuss., 3, 1861–1887, 2015 doi:10.5194/nhessd-3-1861-2015 © Author(s) 2015. CC Attribution 3.0 License. 1 2 Received: 19 February 2015 – Accepted: 23Correspondence February to: 2015 R. – Omira Published: ([email protected]) 11 MarchPublished 2015 by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union. 5 10 20 15 25 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | erent ff erent TWS around ff established by Blaser S w M and L/W ), required for tsunami numerical mod- w S M 1864 1863 8.1 have been analysed (Fig. 1). Most consid- w M erent focal mechanisms of generation and di ff 6.7 up to erences shallow water model. w ff M ) and the co-seismic slip ( 6.5. Most, but not all, known devastating tsunamis has been caused by W w , L M erent phases of a tsunami. ff The analysis involves source parameters evaluation, tsunami numerical modelling of Analysis of available sensors’records reveals that 39 % of the considered earth- This study aims to contribute to a better understanding of tsunamigenic potential In general, various parameters are recognized to control the generation of a tsunami nitudes ranging from ered events have occurred in theThese Pacific events Ocean took on/or places near the with plate di zones. after the event occurrence.dimensions To ( evaluate the additional parameters, such as the fault ation, such as thedepth of earthquake the magnitude, rupture. 67 the %near of type subduction caused zones. of We tsunamis finally resulted the discuss from the focal thrust performance mechanism, faults of occurred the and in/or di the generation and propagation, and sensorsment (tides gauges and (TD), reporting and deep ofor ocean tsunamis assess- not (DART)) records of that atre serve tsunami. location to Definition (from confirm of USGS), the its sourceavailable generation magnitude, parameters by its includes the depth, the and gCMT earthquake its (Global focal epicen- mechanism, Centroid–Moment–Tensor, which) http://www.globalcmt.org/ are quakes caused tsunami. Wemainly show dependent of that various the specific tsunami characteristics generation of earthquake from mechanism those gener- events is In this studyJune 23 2014, have large been submarine considered. earthquakes, Most analyzed occurred events between resulted from June thrust 2013 faults and earthquake hypocenter depths. elling, we use the earthquakeset scaling al. laws (2010). To simulaterupture the is possible supposed initial instantaneous -surfacethe and perturbation, half-space the elastic the sea-bed theory earthquake displacement (Okada,ing 1985). is a The validated computed finite-di tsunami using propagation is modelled us- the world to the triggered tsunami events. 2 Earthquake events: tectonic setting and focal mechanisms from sources of tectonicoccurred worldwide origin during by a period analyzing of the 1 year. tsunami 23 submarine generation earthquake from events of big mag- events rence of an earthquake. As results,der to: various (i) research identify works the have source beenunderstand zones performed the mostly in generation prone or- mechanism to of trigger tsunami tsunamivulnerability, sources, and around (iii) the risk assess world, along tsunami (ii) the hazard, ing coastal systems areas, (vi) (TWSs) reinforce and thewarning implement existing centres tsunami new (TWCs) warn- ones, toOne (v) issue detect improve that the the remains capability tsunamimitigate challenging of well the for tsunami any before tsunami TWC, it impacteration in hits on or order coastal the to not population, coastal avoid ofissue, false is zones. in a warning the particular and tsunami fast with after confirmationthe the earthquake the of absence epicentre, occurrence a remains of of gen- , a tsunami tectonic, an hard and detection geodynamic earthquake. task sensors of and Solving deployed thein requires region addition such close robust where to to an knowledge the robust earthquakes tsunami onthe are numerical the di generated modelling capabilities able to simulate properly following an earthquake event. Thesenitude, parameters mainly its include the location, earthquakedatabase mag- its from focal 2000tal mechanism, BC of to and 1425 present tsunami itsgreater historical (NGDC/WDS, than rupture events 2014) 80 % depth. shows wereearthquakes Available that caused triggered by tsunami among in earthquakes subduction the oftsunamigenic zones. to- magnitude earthquakes According to in Satake subductiontypical and zones interpolate Tanioka can (1999), events, be whichconcerning occurred classified earthquakes at into at the three the plate types: outerand interface, rise (iii) (i) (ii) “tsunami within earthquakes” interpolate the that subducting events takeseismogenic slab place zone, or at typically the overlying beneath shallow crust; the extension accretionary of the wedge. interplate 5 5 10 20 15 25 10 25 15 20 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | (DeMets 1 − shore Kuril- ff shore Honshu – , roughly 130 km ff 1 7.1 earthquake on − w 110 mmyr M ∼ 73 mmyr ∼ 6.7 earthquake was the result . This earthquake is immediately w near the northern end of the arc 1 M − 1 9.0 Tohoku earthquake. In the Bohol − w M 83 mmyr 7.6. These events took place in the Sea of 1866 1865 ∼ w M 6.7 to 200 km) is the New Britain Trench (see Fig. 2f), one of ∼ w 7.1 earthquake happened on 15 October 2013 (Fig. 2e) as M shore of Honshu, , occurred a ff w M in the south. The Kuril Island chain and the deep o 1 − , the subduction happens a few hundred kilometres to the east of the 15 1 − 7.0 earthquake at a depth of 26.7 km (Fig. 2c), as the result of thrust faulting 7.3 earthquake in 7 July 2013 that is associated with normal faulting at 385 km w w Figure 2 depicts the events occurred in the west Pacific source zone. Figure 2a In the Sea of Okhotsk, the 1 October 2013, a Assessing the tsunamigenic potential of the studied earthquakes requires an under- M 10 cmyr M (12 km) indicates that iton ruptured the a fault deeper within subduction theUSGS). zone crust plate The of boundary the Philippine interface Sunda Seaplates (the plate, plate and rather Philippine it than is Trench) (from moves bordered towards∼ the by west-northwest the relative Pacific, to Eurasia the Sunda and plate the at Sunda a rate of depth. Not far tothe the most south ( seismicallysubducted active beneath regions the in Pacific plate theet al., at world, 1994). a Three where convergence other rate the earthquakes of (see Australia Fig. Plate 2e) were is the result being of thrust faulting on origin of an unmapped reverse fault (Lagmay and Eco, 2014). The depth of the event up-dip of the source regionIslands, of the Philippines, March a 2011 October earthquake at the PhilippineNew Trench. Guinea Four events (Fig. have 2f) occurredNew in within Britain the two Trench. Papua tectonic Thecally regions, active Australia to namely slab, depths the northeast ofa over Australia of 400 km. slab Papua This and region New was the Guinea, responsible for is the seismi- generation of on/near the subduction zonethe interface Aleutian between trench the (Fig. Pacific 2c). andnorthwest Near North with the America hypocenter respect plates, thenorth to Pacific plate of North moves the towards America the Aleutianplate at trench. subducts a into The rate the Aleutianextends mantle of Arc, approximately beneath marking 3000 the km the North fromPeninsula region the America in where Gulf plate the of the (Benz west. Alaska et Pacific 25 O in October al., 2013, the 2011a), associated east with to aeast normal of the the faulting Kamchatka Japan in Trench oceanic (Fig. crust 2d).the of In Pacific the this and subduction Pacific plate, North zone alongto America the plates, the boundary between the North Pacific America plate plate moves at westwards a with respect rate of and at 83 mmyear a Kamchatka Trench (200 km east) (Fig.2010). 2b) are This the is result of one thisat of subduction such (Rhea the et great few al., regions depths. in In the the world Aleutian where Islands strong region, earthquakes took happen place on 30 August 2013 mechanisms of the studiedmagnitudes earthquakes ranging in from the west Pacific source zones that have of normal faulting atwhere a the Pacific depth Plate of subductsican 585 beneath plate) the Km (Fig. Okhotsk (Fig.to Plate 2b). 2b). (part the The Its of North location Pacific the America is North plate plate Amer- close is at to moving a the rate towards region of the 75 northwest mmyr in relation presents an overview of the west Pacific source zone. In Fig. 2b–e, we plot the focal of each earthquake. Weeration consider of four events main considered source inthe zones this south as Atlantic study. responsible They and for are: the the west the gen- Mediterranean west source Pacific, zones. the east Pacific, Okhotsk – Russia (Fig. 2b),Japan in (Fig. the 2d), Aleutian in Islands theand region Bohol Solomon (Fig. Islands Islands–Philippines 2c), regions (Fig. o (Fig. 2e), 2f). and in Papua New Guinea standing of the tectonic settingwe of describe the regions the where tectonic these setting events of have these occurred. regions Here, and the focal mechanism responsible located on/or near the plate subductioninclude zones New in Britain the Trench, Pacific Aleutians Ocean.Philippine Arc, These South Trench, Sandwich Japan Trench, Trench, Peru- Kuril-KamchatkaMiddle-American trench, Trench, Trench. Cascadia We Subduction alsociated and studied with in the the Hellenicassociated Mediterranean arc. with On Sea strike-slip the an motion otherand event and hand, Mediterranean asso- occurred Sea. some in of the the Atlantic considered Ocean, events Pacific were Ocean, 5 5 15 25 20 10 25 15 20 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | 8.1 8.1. 6.8, w w 6.8 to w M M M w M . The Mexico 1 6.7 to − w M (DeMets, 2011). In the 65 mmyr 1 (Angermann et al., 1999). ∼ − 1 − the coast of northern Califor- (DeMets et al., 2010). The re- ff 1 − the coast of Peru at 46.1 km depth 14 mmyr ff ∼ shore of western South America. Near ff (see Fig. 3b). On a broader view, this is 65 mmyr 1 ∼ − 1867 1868 the Chilean coast (Fig. 3c). The first event, on 16 ff 23 mmyr ∼ 7.7 event was an . All these earthquakes orig- w 6.9 earthquake occurred o 7.4, respectively, along a segment of the Australia–Pacific M w w M M 7.0 earthquake occurred o the coast of (Fig. 3b), near the Pacific coast of Mexico 6.7 was considered as a of the 1 April 2014 ff w w while sliding past the Antarctica plate with left-lateral motion along M 6.9 event magnitude that occurred at a shallow depth of 10 km. The M 1 7.3 earthquake happened near the Pacific coast of Mexico (Fig. 3b), w − 7.6 and 7.5 at depths of 45.8, 44.1 km and, 36 km, respectively. In the Solomon w M w w M the Peru Pacific coast (Fig. 3c), and in the northern coast of Chile (Fig. 3c). M M ff 7.3 magnitude, originated at 21.5 km depth, approximately 100 km east of the 7.8 with epicentres located around Bouvet Islands, in South Sandwich 7.1 and On 10 March 2014, a Figure 3 depicts the earthquake events occurred in the west Pacific source zone. At the South Sandwich Islands one strike-slip event occurred in 15 July 2013 with Figure 4 depicts the events occurred in the south Atlantic source zone. Figure 4a w w w (Fig. 3b), o nia resulting from a strike-slipregion motion of in the a Juan region de whereNorthwest Fuca the Plate) region Gorda subducts plate at (Cascadia (southernmost a subduction) beneath rate the of Pacific September 2013 a They have occurred o as the result ofslip thrust on motion or at nearsea the a plate plate shallow and boundary depth theplate interface (18.9 beneath North km), the between America North which the plate. America is subducting plate The consistent is Cocos northeastward moving with oceanic at subduction a of rate of the Cocos as thrust-faulting on/near the thrust interfaceica at and the boundary the between subducting theSouth South Nazca America Amer- plate plate at (Fig. the 3c). Peru–Chile trench The o subducts beneath the the region where takesfornia place coast) the of Mendocino the triple JuanApril de junction 2014, Fuca, a (located Pacific, west and of North the America Cali- plates (Fig. 3b). The 18 the earthquake location, thethe Nazca South plate America plate moves at to aIn the convergence Northern rate east-northeast of Chile, with 80 three mmyr respect21.6 earthquakes to and resulting 28.7 of km, thrust occurredMarch faulting, near at 2014, o shallow with depths 12, inated in the subduction zone alongplate which (Lay Nazca et plate al., underthrusts 2014) the South moving America at a rate of the South Sandwich at a rate of Figure 3a is an overview oftook the west place. pacific In source zone Fig.within where 3b six the of and the west studied c events Pacific we source plot zone the focal of mechanisms magnitudes of ranging the from earthquake events plate boundary (Fig. 2f). Thisto plate boundary transform is characterized between byHebrides the transitions Trench from farther New east thrust Britain (Benz et Trench al.,quake; to 2011c). while the The the first northwest event second was andpure a event, the strike-slip reverse only earth- New faulting. located 20 km SW, was associated with a nearly region is one oftectonic the plates, world’s Pacific, Cocos most and seismically North active American regions, plates laying (Benz above et three al., large 2011b). On 25 event and the 3 April 2014 M Islands, Scotia Sea and Southwest of the Falkland Islands regions. M betweenThe South South America, Americaaround plate Sandwich 13 mmyr currently and subducts Antarctica beneath plates the (Fig. Sandwich 4b). plate at a rate second one, occurred at a depth of 23.8 km, presents the largest strike-slip earthquake, the Australia–Pacific subduction zone, closeplace to on New 16 Britain October Trench. These 2013, events 11 took April 2014, andIslands 16 region April two 2014 earthquakes withmagnitudes magnitudes happened on 12 April 2014, and 13 April 2014 with gion of Iquique is known asgap responsible (Lay for et the 1877 al., earthquake, 2014). or the Iquique seismic presents an overview of theand south Atlantic focal source mechanisms zone. of In Fig. five 4b, earthquakes we plot with the magnitudes location ranging from South Scotia Ridge Transform (SSRT) platetic boundary, between plates, the two Scotia large andfirst Antarc- strike-slip one was events a took place on 16 November and 17 2013. The M 5 5 15 25 20 10 10 20 15 25 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | ). We W (DeMets 6.8 earth- 6.9 earth- 1 established − w w M M relation defined for the last 9 my L/W 1 w − w M M − 6–7 mmyr ) and a width ( o ∼ L M in respect to the Eurasia Plate 1 − ) are calculated, we use the seismic W 1 mmyr 7.8) (Fig. 4b). The Antarctica plate moves ± w and M L ) using the scaling laws 1870 1869 W 6.9. They both have occurred in the w and M 6.9 earthquake occurred on 24 May 2014 was located L erent focal mechanism ruptures. Within the total of 23 w ff M 6.8 and w M magnitude evaluated by the gCMT for each event and we compute 10.7 (2) w in an ENE direction (from USGS). On 15 April 2014 a − M o 1 ) definition of Aki (1972) (Eq. 1) together with the (from USGS). − o M 6.8 earthquake, happened on 12 October 2013 about 30 km west of Pla- 1 M w − log LWD (1) M 3 2 µ = = Table 1 summarizes the fault parameters computed for all the considered earthquake The studied events have di Once the earthquake fault dimension ( Figure 5 depicts the events occurred in the western Mediterranean source zone. The 9.9 mmyr w o events. These parameters are usedation. in the next section to compute the tsunami gener- Arabia Plate and is25 mmyr moving to west, in relation to the Eurasia Plate, at a rate about analyzed earthquakes, 52 % are thrust, 35 % are strike-slip, and 13 % are normal faults. 3 Tsunamigenic potential analysis 3.1 Earthquake source models For each analysed earthquake event werameters compute a required source for model tsunami including numerical theangular fault modelling. pa- shape For simplification, of we the adopt fault a rupture, rect- characterized by a length ( by Blaser et al.of (2010). Wells In and comparison Coppersmith with (1994),sidering the Blaser the most et al. frequently subduction (2010) used zoneearthquakes work scaling scaling events has relations relations. in the advantage the of database con- that theymoment used ( to establish the quake occurred in the southstrike-slip Atlantic motion Ocean (Fig. to 4b). the Aboutvet 250 east km Triple of to Junction Bouvet the where Island west the resultingPlates of boundaries from Bouvet meet Island of (Fig. we the 4b). find African,the The the Bouvet South Bou- most Fracture American prominent zones. and features Theand Antartic in Mid-Atlantic the Ridge the (MAR) region South separates are Americancenter the the of Plate African Conrad southernmost Plate in segments and of the the South MAR is Atlantic. about The of 30.5 velocity mmyr rate of spreading- consider the the corresponding dimensions ( known to date, along this plate boundaryeastward ( with respect to the Scotia Sea plate at a velocity of Figure 5a presentstwo an earthquakes overview struck . ofevents In of the Fig. magnitudes western 5b we Mediterranean display source the focal zone mechanisms where of these M et al., 2010).quake Southwest happened of on 25 the November 2013,and Falkland near Islands, the the boundary a Scotia of the strike-slip∼ Sea South faulting plate America plate (Fig. 4b). These plates slide past each other at a rate of (Marco et al., 1999). (Fig. 5b). tanos, Greece, was associated withwhere a the reverse motion Plate near subductsSea the beneath Plate Hellenic the is arc, Aegean moving the Sea southwest region Plate at (Fig. a 5b). rate The 30 Aegean by Kanamori and Anderson (1975) (Eq. 2) in orderM to calculate the earthquake slip. to the south ofof North Samothraki Aegean Island, Trough) Greece, (Fig.motion near 5b), earthquakes. a the The region Saros withportion faults Trough a of within (the predominance the North eastern of North similar end Aegean Anatolian strike-slip Trough fault, represent where the the Anatolian northern micro-plate is pushed by the (McClusky et al., 2000). The 5 5 20 15 10 10 15 20 25 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | ers ff 8.1 Chile event. w M erences numerical scheme for linear ff 1872 1871 8.1 Chile event that occurred the 1 April 2014. This event o w M Figure 6 depicts the results of tsunami numerical modeling for the Shallow water equations (SWEs) through the COMCOT code (Liu et al., 1998) are For all studied tsunamigenic events (39 % of the total events) we perform numerical Comparison of the simulated tsunami waveforms and the recorded signals from the In order to model tsunami generation andThe propagation initial sea a surface set perturbation is of generated for bathymet- the studied earthquakes. The the recorded and observed data. In this study, we have employed a validated shallow 4 Discussion 4.1 Tsunami numerical modelling Tsunami numerical modelling issystem. a key Recent component progress of intion, any numerical end-to-end propagation, modeling and tsunami allows coastal warning estimates impact of in a tsunami proper genera- way reaching good agreements with a good opportunity tonumerical results test against the the tsunami reliability signalsPacific Ocean. of recorded by the various DART numerical stations in model the and to compare the recorded the arrival of theshows first tsunami a wave good (Fig. agreement 6b). with Simulatedtime waveform the of (red about tsunami curve) 18 recorded min signal andd for the depicts maximum both wave the the amplitude tsunamifor of comparison travel about both between 0.25 DARTs m. the 32412 Figure and 6c2800 recorded km and 32413, and far respectively. These the away sensorstsunami simulated from are amplitudes tsunami the located (max. signals 1600 earthquake amplitude and for epicentre of DART-32413, blue and about signals therefore 6 in cmtions recorded Fig. of for 6c only DART-32412 and DART-32412, and DART-32413 and (red small d). signals aboutrecorded in The tsunami 3 Fig. simulated cm amplitudes, 6c waveforms relatively and at in d) the indicate agreement also loca- with small the recorded ones. used to simulate the tsunami propagation.using This code solves an linear and explicit non-linear SWEs staggered leap-frog finite di simulations of possible tsunami generationing and results propagation. for Here, the we present model- DART sensors (Fig. 6b–d)rival shows time relatively and good maximum agreementsulated wave in waveforms amplitudes. terms for In of the Fig. tsunamithe DART-32401 station 6a earthquake ar- that epicentre. we The is plot analysis locatedthe both of about DART the recorded station 290 sensor km captured, and record few west sim- (blue secondsdue curve) from after to indicates the its that event location occurrence, relatively the close seismic to signal the epicentre. Few minutes after, the DART-32401 tsunami generation. The earthquakebed rupture displacement is is supposed computed instantaneous usingvertical and the sea the half-space bottom elastic sea- displacement theory isassumption (Okada, then that 1985). both transferred The deformations to of the sea1970). free bottom ocean and ocean surface surface with are the equal (Kajiura, terms and an upwind schemecomputation for domains, the non-linear the terms codetions, (Wang, employs 2009). which In a have all radiation the considered through property (or the boundaries absorbing) that with boundary the no reflections wave condi- (Broeze motion and passes Van Daalen, from 1992). a domain to other The results clearly indicate1 m that close a to tsunami the was source area generated (Fig. with 6a). wave amplitude up to ric/topographic grid data isquakes generated took for place. each 30 s region gridded data of(GEBCO) from are interest the used General where Bathymetric in studied Chart this earth- of study. the earthquake fault parameters derived in Sect. 3.1 (Table 1) were used to simulate the 3.2 Tsunami numerical modelling and comparisonIn with this records section werecorded; focus on and the we earthquake areto events interested compare for to the which numerically recorded the model and tsunami the the signals modeled resulting were signals. tsunamis in order 5 5 25 15 20 25 10 15 20 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | 7.6 8.1, w w M M 8.1). How- w M erent earthquake 6.7 up to ff w M erences between these signals. ff 1873 1874 6.7 Chile earthquake). This fact clearly indicates that the event magni- w M erent depths of the analyzed events. This figure shows that significant tsunamis ff In order to highlight the sensitivity of tsunami potential to earthquake parameters, The studied events occurred with magnitudes ranging from An et al. (2014) assessed the source model of the 1 April 2014 tsunami using The results of tsunami numerical modeling (Fig. 6) produced relatively good esti- Solomon Islands earthquake) causeevents less (the tsunami amplitudes thantude smaller is magnitude not the onlyters factor of controlling significant the importance. tsunami In potential, Fig.the but 7b, di there we are plot other observed parame- tsunami wave amplitudes for magnitudes and rupture depths, astsunamigenic well events. as Figure the 7a proportion depicts ofvarious the mechanism earthquake focal observed types tsunami magnitudes. for wave This amplitudes(more figure for than the indicates 2 that m) theever, was not higher observed always wave the for amplitude higher thefigure magnitude also higher causes shows earthquake the that higher in magnitude tsunami some ( cases waves, because higher magnitude the earthquake events (the were recorded for lowtypes depths. in In order Fig. to 7cpotential. we highlight As plot the expected, the contributionwere the proportions of due of Fig. each to mechanism 7c rupture reverse/thrustthrust/reverse focal earthquake type shows ruptures fault to clearly are ruptures. the the thattion This tsunamigenic favorite as most is they earthquake are due tsunami mechanisms able to events to for the cause (67 tsunami %) a fact genera- vertical4.3 that displacement the of the Tsunami ocean warning bottom. The main goal oftion a when TWC a is possible toearthquake tsunami provide and is early the generated. alerts subsequent Depending tsunami, tothe of four the TWCs the types endangered of around severity coastal warning of the messagestsunami popula- the world are warning occurred including used message by warning, includes, in advisory, general, watch, information and on information. earthquake The parameters we plot in the Fig. 7 the observed tsunami wave heights for the di strike-slip, and thrust faults.confirmed 39 % from DART of and/or these TD earthquakes records. triggered tsunamis that were at depth between 10 and 585 km, with various focal mechanisms that include normal, tsunami waveforms at theproach stations is locations robust in usingtions. constraining a However, the shallow for earthquake early water sourcesource model. tsunami model is warning Their from essential. purpose ap- tsunami Tsunami a observa- first data fast wave, inversion which estimate requires leads of the tocant the use delays especially earthquake in of for tsunami local at and warning least regional dissemination the events. that complete can4.2 be signifi- Tsunamigenic potential and sensitivity toIn earthquake parameters addition totsunamigenic the potential, namely magnitude, thediscuss focal two the mechanism sensitivity main and of the parameters tsunami rupture generation are depth. and Here, potential recognized we to these to three parameters. control the the least squarecific inversion Ocean. of Considering tsunami this records source model from they three were DART able stations to properly in reproduce the the Pa- Figure 6b–d highlights these limitationsperiods especially regarding and the the estimates amplitudes ofof the of empirical wave scaling-law the to secondslip) estimate waves. as the This well earthquake is as fault particularlymethods adopting parameters to an (dimensions due constrain uniform and to the slip the fault(Fujii distribution slip et use along distribution al., the model 2011; fault require Wei plane. et inversion Appropriate al., of 2012; tsunami Satake data et al., 2013). mates of wave amplitudes andfrom arrival DART times stations. when Nevertheless, the compared lackslip) with and of the detailed precise recorded bathymetric source models signals information leads (dimensions, to some di water code in order towaveforms model with the those tsunami recorded propagation by and tsunami then compare sensors. the simulated 5 5 10 15 20 25 20 25 15 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | 7.7), w M 7.5). For w 30 km) and M < 8.1 and w M 7.1 earthquake that occurred in the Japan 8.1 leads to the following conclusions: w w M 7.4), and in Papua New Guinea ( 1876 1875 M w M 6.7 up to 7.6 and w w M M This work is funded by the Join Research Center (JRC) GTIMS project tsunamigenic potential of seismic events. thrust faults that took place on/or near the subduction zones. travel time estimations,bathymetric in data. spite of some limitations on sourceprovide evaluation first warning and within 10 min for more than 75 % of the tsunami events. For the 23 earthquake events, analyzed in this paper, tsunami alerts were issued Reducing the time delay to issue the first tsunami message after the earthquake oc- Chile, earthquake, Geophys. Res. Lett., 41, 3988–3994, 2014. America Euler vector, Earth Planet. Sc. Lett., 171, 329–334, 1999. 1. Significant number of events (39 %) was2. tsunamigenic. The earthquake depth and focal mechanism are important factors that control3. the Most tsunami events were caused by shallow earthquakes (depth 4. Numerical modeling of tsunami is a robust tool for wave amplitudes and tsunami 5. TWCs around the world have performed well for the most analyzed cases as they Aki, K.: Scaling law ofAngermann, earthquake source D., time-function, Klotz, Geophys. J. J., Int., 31, and 3–25, Reigber, 1972. C.: Space-geodetic estimation of the Nazca-South In summary the presentas study well can as help theregions. on characterization the compilation of of tsunami global decision tsunami matrixesAcknowledgements. catalog for the various(Global oceanic Tsunami Informationpartially Monitoring Service), by tenderTsunamis the no. in JRC/IPR/2013/G.2/13/NC, EU Europe. and Grantthis project 603839, work ASTARTE 7th were – FPGBCO made 30 (ENV.2013.6.4-3 s-arc Assessment, using ENV.2013.6.4-3). bathymetry The the background. STrategy maps GMT And in software Risk package (Wessel Reduction and for Smith,References 1998) and the An, C., Sepúlveda, I., and Liu, P. L. F.: Tsunami source and its validation of the 2014 Iquique, by various TWCs (international,Tsunami regional, Warning Center national (PTWC), and/or(WC/ATWC), the the local) Japan Meteorological West including Agency Coast/Alaska (JMA), theing Tsunami Joint Pacific Australian Center Warning Tsunami (JATWC), Warn- Center andmessages the of Indian warning type Tsunamisages were Early were issued disseminated Warning by for JMA Centre 30 for % the (ITEWC). of Alert these events. Warning level mes- (origin time, location, depth, magnitude)in as the well surrounding as coasts. an evaluation of the tsunami threat and by the PTWC for five earthquake events that occurred in Chile ( potential. The analysis ofmagnitudes ranging 23 from submarine earthquake events occurred worldwide with 5 Conclusions This study is a contribution tosubmarine a earthquakes better occurring understanding worldwide. of The the studyrameters tsunami considered evaluated potential for the from the preliminary large earthquake pa- eventssource and the evaluation tsunami models recorded together data and with used tsunami modeling to investigate the tsunami in the Solomon Islands ( within 10 min after theering occurrence the of tsunami the warning earthquakes messagetions for from of 75 the the % TWCs first of for message the the timemessage delay studied events. was indicate By events, issued that: the within gath- for propor- 2–5 6 min,for % less for of about than the 72 6 events % % the of first of warning the the events events within the 5–10 warning min, messages and were disseminated after 15 min. currence remains challenging forin any this early paper, the TWC. TWCs In have general, well for performed the by disseminating analyzed early events tsunami message the rest of the events the issued messages were of information type. 5 5 15 20 25 10 25 20 10 15 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | 8.1 earthquake w M ect of recent revisions to the geo- ff 1878 1877 the Pacific coast of Tohoku Earthquake, Earth Planets Space, 63, 815–820, 2011. ff rupture sequence, Geophys. Res. Lett., 41, 3818–3825, 2014. dation, Technical Report, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA, 1998. and Turko, N.: Bouvet triple junctionRes.-Sol. in Ea., the 104, South Atlantic: 29365–29385, geology 1999. and evolution, J. Geophys. burger, M., Hurst, K.,Mahmoud, Kahle, S., H., Mishin, Kastens, A.,Reilinger, Nadariya, K., R., M., Kekelidze, Sanli, Ouzounis, G., I., A., King,ing Paradissis, Seeger, R., System D., H., Peter, constraints Kotzev, Tealeb, Y., V., A., on Prilepin, Lenk, plate Toksöz,Caucasus, M., M. O., kinematics J. N., and Geophys. Res.-Sol. dynamics and Ea., in Veis, 105, the G.: 5695–5719, eastern Global 2000. Mediterranean Position- and Database, National Geophysical Data Center, NOAA, doi:10.7289/V5PN93H7, 2014. Am., 75, 1135–1154, 1985. Earth 1900–2007, Kuril-Kamchatka arc and2010-1083-C, vicinity, available US at: Geologicalhttp://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1083/c/ Survey(last Open-File access:2010. Report January 2015), tion zones, in:Birkhäuser, Seismogenic Basel, and 467–483, 1999. Tsunamigenic Processes in Shallowslip Subduction of Zones, the 2011Soc. Am., Tohoku 103, earthquake 1473–1492, as 2013. inferred from tsunami waveform data, B. Seismol. B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 65, 1073–1095, 1975. of the magnitude 7.2 Bohol earthquake,2801, Philippines, doi:10.5194/nhess-14-2795-2014, Nat. 2014. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 14, 2795– magnetic reversal time scale on2191–2194, estimates 1994. of current plate motions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 21, Int., 181, 1–80,, doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.2009.04491.x 2010. o published on CD-ROM on behalfthe of International the Hydrographic Intergovernmental Organization, Oceanographic Liverpool, Commission 2003. and doi:10.1029/JB084iB05p02348, 1979. Tokyo, 48, 835–869, 1970. Seismicity of the Earth 1900–2010Report Aleutian arc 2010-1083-B, and vicinity, available US Geologicaluary at: Survey 2015), Open-File http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1083/b/ 2011a. (last access: Jan- and Rhea, S: SeismicitySurvey of Open-File the Report Earth(last 2010-1083-H, 1900–2010 access: available January New 2015), at: Guinea 2011b. http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1083/h/ and vicinity, US Geological Seismicity of theReport Earth 2010-1083-F, available 1900–2010 at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1083/f/ Mexico(last2015), and access: 2011c. January vicinity, US Geological Survey Open-File ,doi:10.1029/2001GC000252 2003. source parameter estimates with specialAm., focus 100, on 2914–2926, subduction 2010. environment, B. Seismol. Soc. wave equation from a variational principle, Math. Comput., 58, 73–82, 1992. Liu, P. L.-F., Woo, S.-B., and Cho, Y.-S.: Computer programs for tsunamiMarco, propagation L., Bonatti, and E., inun- Bortoluzzi, G., Carrara, G., Fabretti, P.,Gilod, D., Peyve, A., Skolotnev, S., McClusky, S., Balassanian S., Barka, A., Demir, C., Ergintav, S., Georgiev, I., Gurkan, O., Ham- NGDC/WDS: National Geophysical Data Center/World Data Service: Global Historical Tsunami Okada, Y.: Surface deformation due to shear and tensile faults inRhea, a S., half-space, Tarr, A. B. C., Seismol. Hayes, Soc. G., Villaseñor, A., Furlong, K. P.,and Benz, H. M.: Seismicity of the Satake, K. and Tanioka, Y.: Sources of tsunami andSatake, tsunamigenic K., earthquakes Fujii, Y., in Harada, subduc- T., and Namegaya, Y.: Time and space distribution of coseismic Kanamori, H. and Anderson, D. L.: Theoretical basis of someLagmay, A. empirical M. relations F. in and , Eco, R.: Brief Communication: On the source characteristics and impacts Lay, T., Yue, H., Brodsky, E. E., and An, C: The 1 April 2014 Iquique, Chile, DeMets, C., Gordon, R. G., and Argus, D.Fujii, F.: Y., Geologically Satake, K., current Sakai, plate S. motions, I., Shinohara, Geophys. and J. M., Kanazawa,GEBCO, T.: Tsunami British source Oceanographic of Data the 2011 Centre: Centenary Edition of the GEBCO DigitalHanks, T. Atlas, C. and Kanamori, H.: A ,Kajiura, J. Geophys. K.: Res., 84, Tsunami 2348–2350, source, energy and the directivity of wave radiation, B. Earthq. Res. I. Benz, H. M., Dart, R. L., Villaseñor, A., Hayes, G. P., Tarr, A. C., Furlong, K. P., andBenz, Rhea, H. S.: M., Herman, M., Tarr, A. C., Hayes, G. P., Furlong, K. P., Villaseñor, A.,Benz, Dart, H. R. M., L., Dart, R. L., Villaseñor, A., Hayes, G. P., Tarr, A. C., Furlong, K. P., andBird, Rhea, P.: S.: An updated digital model ofBlaser, plate L., boundaries, Krüger, Geochem. F., Geophy. Ohrnberger, Geosy., 4, M., 1027, and Scherbaum, F.:Broeze, Scaling J. relations and of Van earthquake Daalen, E. F. G.:DeMets, Radiation C., Gordon, boundary R. conditions G., for Argus, the D. two-dimensional F., and Stein, S.: E 5 5 10 30 15 20 25 25 30 20 15 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | 53 14 1.08 80 39 2.44 62 31 1.71 7046 35 13 2.42 1.19 47 25 1.40 28 17 0.90 53 14 1.27 53 1453 1.13 14 1.34 60 23 1.56 32 18 1.04 47 25 1.54 3832 16 18 0.82 0.98 42 23 1.61 42 23 1.24 96 19 2.21 77 27 1.83 149 24 3.00 177104 73 48 4.00 3.26 200 28 3.40 ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ 2 ◦ 18 70 171 107 − 177 7.6 and 17 Novem- , 5 , 3 − − , 87 , 87 , 54 , 2 , 85 , 84 ,-44 ◦ ◦ , − − , 77 , 106 , 103 , 80 , 86 ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ − , , ◦ ◦ , 159 , 130 ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ , , ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ , ◦ ◦ w ◦ , 81 , 44 , 18, 98 , 35 , 42 , 26 , 66 , 43 , 3 , 31 , 40 ◦ ◦ , 86 ◦ , 43 , 15 , 14 , 40 , 67 ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ , 85 , 47 ◦ ◦ M , 63 ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ , 80 , 43 ◦ ◦ ◦ , 85 ◦ ◦ ◦ Location Fault Plane L W Slip w 1880 1879 M ) (gCMT) (strike, dip, rake) (km) (km) (m) ◦ 70.76970.502 21.6 28.7 8.1 7.7 Chile Chile 355 358 70.702 12. 6.7 Chile 284 46.401 23.8 7.8 Scotia Sea 102 55.003 16. 6.9 Falkland Islands 158 47.062 10. 6.9 Scotia Sea 96 74.511 46.1 7.0 Peru 307 25.144 21.5 7.3 South Sandwich Islands 271 100.972 18.9 7.3 Mexico 303 125.134 15. 6.9 California 230 175.230 26.7 7.0 Aleutian Islands 64 − − − − − − − − − − − ) Lon. ( ◦ 6.755 155.024 36. 7.5 Papua New Guinea 311 6.586 155.048 44.1 7.1 Papua New Guinea 310 6.446 154.931 45.8 6.8 Papua New Guinea 307 3.923 153.920 382.9 7.3 Papua New Guinea 167 53.497 8.722 16.4 6.8 Bouvet Island 128 11.27011.463 162.148 162.051 27.3 37.5 7.6 7.4 Solomon Islands Solomon Islands 17 91 19.610 20.572 19.981 60.274 53.945 60.263 15.838 60.868 Lat. ( − − − − − − − − − − − − − − − 7.8 South Scotia Ridge earthquakes, Earth Planet. Sc. Lett., 401, 215–226, w M Earthquake parameters for the 23 analyzed events. ◦ 2014. ber 2013 ing, Cornell University Ithaca, NYpll-group/doc/COMCOT_User_Manual_v1_7.pdf 14853,(last USA, available access: at: Decemberhttp://ceeserver.cee.cornell.edu/ 2014), 2009. tsunami: lessons for near-field forecast, Pure Appl. Geophys., 170, 1309–1331,length, 2013. rupture width,974–1002, rupture 1994. area, and surface displacement, B.Transactions Seismol. American Geophysical Soc. Union, Am., 79, 579–579, 84, 1998. Teferle, F. N.: Complementary slip distributions of the August 4 23 24 May 2014 40.289 25.389 12. 6.9 Greece 73 22 19 Apr 2014 2021 15 Apr 2014 18 Apr 2014 17.397 1819 12 Apr 2014 13 Apr 2014 151617 01 Apr 2014 03 Apr 2014 11 Apr 2014 14 16 Mar 2014 1113 17 Nov 2013 10 Mar 2014 40.829 12 25 Nov 2013 10 16 Nov 2013 9 25 Oct 2013 37.156 144.661 24.9 7.1 Japan 171 8 16 Oct 2013 67 12 Oct 2013 15 Oct 2013 35.514 9.880 23.252 124.117 15. 12. 6.8 7.1 Greece Philippines 42 339 5 1 Oct 2013 53.200 152.786 585.5 6.7 Sea of Okhotsk 293 4 25 Sep 2013 3 30 Aug 2013 51.537 2 15 Jul 2013 Event DateN 1 7 location Jul 2013 Depth (km) Table 1. Wang, X.: COMCOT user manual-version 1.7, School of Civil andWei, Y., Environmental Chamberlin, C., Engineer- Titov, V. V., Tang, L., and Bernard,Wells, E. D. N.: L. Modeling and of the Coppersmith, 2011 K. Japan J.: New empirical relationshipsWessel, among P. and magnitude, Smith. rupture W. H.: New, improved version ofYe, Generic L., Mapping Tools Lay, released, T., Eos, Koper, K. D., Smalley, R., Rivera, L., Bevis, M. G., Zakrajsek, A. F., and 5 10 Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | overview of the (a) location of the Alaska event (c) location of the Philippine event (red star), (e) 1882 1881 6.7 that were analyzed during a 1 year period from June 2013 ≥ w M location of the Okhotsk–Russia event (red star), its focal mechanism – normal (b) Earthquake events occurred in the west Pacific source zone: Locations of earthquakes (red dots), date of occurrence, and magnitudes for subma- location of the Honshu event (red star), its focal mechanism – normal faulting (red (d) locations of six events: four around the Papua New Guinea, their focal mechanisms: three rine earthquake events of beach ball), and the subductionits zone (yellow focal line); mechanism –(f) reverse faulting (red beach ball),are normal and faulting the and subduction one(red zone is star), (yellow thrust their line); faulting focal (red mechanisms:subduction beach a zone ball) strike-slip (yellow and line). and two a near reverse the faulting Solomon (red Island beach ball), and the source zone; faulting (red beach ball), and(red the star), subduction its zone focal (yellow line); mechanismline); – thrust fault (red beach ball), and the subduction zone (yellow Figure 2. Figure 1. to June 2014. Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | overview (a) overview of the (a) location of four events: the Peru event and (c) 1884 1883 location of five events: three around Scotia Plate, one near the Falk- (b) location of the California and Mexico events (red stars), their focal mechanism: (b) Earthquake events occurred in the east Pacific source zone: Earthquake events occurred in the south source zone: land Island and another one(red near beach Bouvet ball), Island, the theirspreading subduction focal center mechanisms zone and are (yellow fractures strike-slip line), zones faulting (orange the lines). transforms (magenta lines), the active Figure 4. of the source zone; thrust faulting and strike-slip faultingline) respectively and (red the beach ball), spreadingthree the centers events subduction (orange in zone northern lines); (yellow Chileball), (red and stars), the their subduction focal zone mechanisms (yellow are line). thrust faulting (red beach Figure 3. source zone; Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | overview of the (a) comparison between the simulated waveform (d) 1886 1885 comparison between the simulated waveform and (c) comparison between the simulated waveform and recorded (b) location of the Greece events (red star), their focal mechanisms: a strike-slip (b) Tsunami numerical simulation of the 1 April 2014 Iquique–Chile tsunami event: Earthquake events occurred in the Mediterranean source zone: maximum wave amplitudes distribution in the east Pacific Ocean and tsunami travel times Figure 6. (a) (dark lines separated each 1 h); signal for the station DART-32401; recorded signal for theand station recorded DART-32412; signal for the station DART-32413. Figure 5. source zone; faulting and a reverse faulting (red beach ball), and the subduction zone (yellow line). Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | Discussion Paper | erent depths of the ana- ff 1887 observed tsunami wave amplitudes for the di (b) proportions of mechanism focal types for the earthquake events that caused Observed tsunami wave amplitudes for the various magnitudes of the ana- (c) lyzed events; tsunamis. Figure 7. (a) lyzed earthquakes;