Coseismic Slip Distribution of the 2 July 2013 Mw 6.1 Aceh, Indonesia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. XX, No. XX, pp. –, – 2018, doi: 10.1785/0120180035 M Coseismic Slip Distribution of the 2 July 2013 w 6.1 Aceh, Indonesia, Earthquake and Its Tectonic Implications by Endra Gunawan, Sri Widiyantoro, Shindy Rosalia, Mudrik Rahmawan Daryono, Irwan Meilano, Pepen Supendi, Takeo Ito, Takao Tabei, Fumiaki Kimata, Yusaku Ohta, and Nazli Ismail Abstract This study investigates the coseismic slip distribution of the 2 July 2013 Mw 6.1 Aceh earthquake using Global Positioning System (GPS) data, measured geo- logical surface offsets, and an aftershock distribution for a period of four days after the mainshock. We use the aftershock distribution to constrain the fault-plane strike of a right-lateral fault identified as the Pantan Terong segment. We estimate the coseismic slip distribution with dip angle information from the Global Centroid Moment Tensor (CMT) (model 1) and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (model 2) catalogs. We also estimate the coseismic slip distribution using another two fault models. Model 3 is constructed on a left-lateral fault, the Celala segment, which is perpendicular to the Aceh segment of the Sumatran fault, and model 4 is constructed using the multiple faults in models 2 and 3. We further estimate the coseismic slip distribution of this earthquake by employing an elastic dislocation model, inverting only the GPS dis- placements for model 3 and jointly inverting GPS displacements and geological surface offsets for models 1, 2, and 4. Minimum misfit between data and model is obtained with model 3, suggesting that the earthquake slip occurred along a left-lateral fault. Analysis of stress transfer caused by the 2013 earthquake indicates that the stress level along the Pantan Terong segment is > 0:4 bar and the southeast part of Aceh segment was brought ∼0:3 bar closer to failure, suggesting a possible earthquake oc- currence in the future. This work demonstrates that the seismicity-derived fault plane fails to predict the surface displacement, and that the inferred Celala segment produces positive stress on Pantan Terong segment and potentially triggered all the aftershocks. Introduction The 2 July 2013 Aceh earthquake occurred in a tectoni- reported dead or missing. Economic losses were reportedly cally active region of northern Sumatra, Indonesia (Fig. 1). more than $50 million U.S. (BNPB, 2013). This region is characterized by relative motion between two This study aims to derive a distributed coseismic slip obliquely converging plates. However, overall shear force is model of the 2 July 2013 Aceh earthquake. Identifying a de- reduced because two separate faults share the shearing com- tailed mechanism of the earthquake’s coseismic deformation ponent, namely the subduction thrust and strike-slip faults is critical to understanding the slip accumulation along the (McCaffrey, 2009). The strike-slip fault, named the Sumatran Sumatran fault. Moreover, our analysis uses multiple data fault, has generated earthquakes of magnitude 6 or more. The from the Global Positioning System (GPS; Ito et al., 2016), latest geodetic estimation suggests that the fault-slip rate has along with measured geological surface offsets (Daryono and varied from 20 mm=yr for the Aceh segment in northern Tohari, 2016) and aftershock distributions recorded by the Sumatra (Ito et al., 2012)to15 mm=yr for the Semangko seismic network of the Indonesian Agency for Meteorological, Climatological, and Geophysics (BMKG). New previously segment in southern Sumatra (Bellier and Sebrier, 1995; unpublished information, especially new seismic information, Genrich et al., 2000). is also presented in this study. The 2013 Aceh earthquake devastated at least two re- gencies, Bener Meriah and Aceh Tengah, in Aceh province, Data Sets northern Sumatra, Indonesia. The Indonesian National Board for Disaster Management (BNPB) reported that the earth- This study utilizes near-field campaign GPS data from quake destroyed more than 18,000 houses, with 43 people the Aceh GPS Network for the Sumatran Fault System BSSA Early Edition / 1 2 E. Gunawan et al. 100° 110° 5°00′ 0° Sundaland 10 km Indo−Australian Global CMT plate 4°45′ −10° Pantan Terong segment Aceh segment USGS Celala segment 4°30′ Batee fault Sumatran fault 4°15′ 96°15′ 96°30′ 96°45′ Figure 1. Tectonic setting and mainshock epicenters of the 2 July 2013 Aceh earthquake from the Global Centroid Moment Tensor (CMT) and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) catalogs. Solid black lines indicate the locations of the identified Sumatran and Batee faults, with the Aceh segment located from 4.4° to 5.4° N (Sieh and Natawidjaja, 2000). Dashed lines represent the Pantan Terong and Celala segments (this study). (Inset) Simplified regional map. (AGNeSS) in northern Sumatra (Gunawan et al., 2014; Tabei stations (SKTN, CELA, TNDP, BTAT, and UJNG) detected et al., 2015; Pratama et al., 2017). The campaign GPS coseismic displacements. The locations of these GPS stations measurements were conducted using tripods on newly con- are shown in Figure 2. structed or existing benchmarks, the latter belonging to the At these GPS stations, coseismic displacements are de- National Agency for Land Administration of Indonesia or the rived by subtracting observed GPS data from just after the Geospatial Information Agency of Indonesia. Trimble 5700 earthquake, subjected to a fitting model, from time-series data GPS receivers were used for these measurements. taken before the mainshock. Because campaign GPS data col- Ito et al. (2016) reported coseismic displacements de- lected using tripods, potentially produce larger uncertainties tected by AGNeSS for three destructive earthquakes from in positioning due to human error, especially in the vertical M 2012 to 2013: the 11 April 2012 w 8.6 Indian Ocean earth- component, we estimated only horizontal components. M quake, the 21 January 2013 w 6.1 Aceh earthquake, and the In addition to these GPS data, we also utilize geological M 2 July 2013 w 6.1 Aceh earthquake. For the 2 July 2013 surface offsets and aftershock distributions as a reference to Aceh earthquake, Ito et al. (2016) showed that five AGNeSS identify fault ruptures. Daryono and Tohari (2016) reported BSSA Early Edition M Coseismic Slip Distribution of the 2 July 2013 w 6.1 Aceh, Indonesia, Earthquake 3 LHMI, MLSI, LASI, KCSI, and TSI (Fig. 2). We manually selected P- and LHMI S-wave arrival times, obtaining 15 after- shocks from 2 to 6 July 2013 with 5° Global CMT M > 2:5 L . Hypocenters of these after- shocks were determined using NonLinloc GEO3 (Lomax et al., 2000) based on the direct- GEO2 USGS GEO4 GEO1 search algorithm and probabilistic nonlin- ear inverse problem proposed by Tarantola LASI and Valette (1982). This method generates MLSI hypocenter locations from an estimate of the probability density function (PDF). To compute the PDF, NonLinloc provides 4° three algorithms: (1) a grid-search algo- rithm, (2) the Metropolis–Gibbs sampling algorithm, and (3) the OctTree sampling algorithm. KCSI TSI Here, we used the OctTree sampling algorithm, which generates accurate, effi- 50 km cient, and complete maps of earthquake location PDFs (Lomax et al., 2009). The 3° algorithm uses recursive subdivision of 97° 98° 99° cells to generate sampled cells, in which the density of sampled cells follows the Figure Data source distribution. Red squares indicate Global Positioning System 2. value of the PDF at the cell center. We gen- (GPS) stations, whereas green squares depict the locations of the geological surface off- sets. Yellow hexagons represent broadband stations. erated 50,000 scattered samples, with min- imum node size of 1 km. For the velocity model, we used the global ak135 model surface ruptures and ground failures in northern Sumatra due (Kennett et al., 1995). The aftershock distribution of the to the July 2013 Aceh earthquake. During their field survey, 2013 Aceh earthquake for a period of four days after the – the hilly morphology and widespread landslides made data mainshock is shown in Figures 3 5. Using the information collection difficult. From a total of 86 observations, only four from geological surface offsets and aftershock distributions, sites have clear and certain evidence of strike-slip offset: the we constructed the fault-plane model described below. GEO1, GEO2, GEO3, and GEO4 sites (Fig. 2). For each of these sites, the strike components of the surface offsets were Coseismic Slip Model 6, 30, 14, and 24 cm at GEO1, GEO2, GEO3, and GEO4, respectively. Table 1 shows the coseismic displacements For the 2013 Aceh earthquake, using GPS data alone led from GPS and measured geological offsets used in this study. to a solution of left-lateral motion on a northeast–southwest Meanwhile, the following BMKG seismic broadband fault plane (Ito et al., 2016). However, geological data sets stations recorded aftershocks of the 2013 Aceh earthquake: (Daryono and Tohari, 2016), when combined with seismic Table 1 Coseismic Displacement from Global Positioning System (GPS) and Measured Geological Offsets GPS Geology Site Longitude (°) Latitude (°) East (cm) North (cm) Angle (°)* Dextral Movement (cm) Reference STKN 96.69 4.99 0.40 ± 1.21 0.80 ± 1.04 —— Ito et al. (2016) UJNG 96.82 4.71 1.42 ± 1.34 0.64 ± 1.23 —— Ito et al. (2016) CELA 96.68 4.58 4.31 ± 1.32 1.35 ± 1.43 —— Ito et al. (2016) TNDP 96.63 4.52 2.20 ± 1.40 1.43 ± 1.25 —— Ito et al. (2016) BTAT 96.52 4.46 0.18 ± 0.98 1.11 ± 0.99 —— Ito et al. (2016) GEO4 96.84 4.63 ——300 24 ± 12 Daryono and Tohari (2016) GEO3 96.81 4.71 ——300 14 ± 10 Daryono and Tohari (2016) GEO2 96.74 4.71 ——300 30 ± 10 Daryono and Tohari (2016) GEO1 96.69 4.69 ——315 6 ± 3 Daryono and Tohari (2016) *From the north in the clockwise direction.