Physics-based dynamic rupture models capture the variability of earthquake slip in space and time and can account for the structural complexity inherent to subduction zones. Here we link tsunami generation, propagation, and coastal inundation with 3D earthquake dynamic rupture (DR) models initialized using a 2D seismo-thermo-mechanical geodynamic (SC) model simulating both subduction dynamics and seismic cycles. We analyze a total of 15 subduction-initialized 3D dynamic rupture-tsunami scenarios in which the tsunami source arises from the time-dependent co-seismic seafloor displacements with flat bathymetry and inundation on a linearly sloping beach. We first vary the location of the hypocenter to generate 12 distinct unilateral and bilateral propagating earthquake scenarios. Large-scale fault topography leads to localized up- or downdip propagating supershear rupture depending on hypocentral depth. Albeit dynamic earthquakes differ (rupture speed, peak slip-rate, fault slip, bimaterial effects), the effects of hypocentral depth (25–40 km) on tsunami dynamics are negligible. Lateral hypocenter variations lead to small effects such as delayed wave arrival of up to 100 s and differences in tsunami amplitude of up to 0.4 m at the coast. We next analyse inundation on a coastline with complex topo-bathymetry which increases tsunami wave amplitudes up to ≈1.5 m compared to a linearly sloping beach. Motivated by structural heterogeneity in subduction zones, we analyse a scenario with increased Poisson's ratio of ν = 0.3 which results in close to double the amount of shallow fault slip, ≈1.5 m higher vertical seafloor displacement, and a difference of up to ≈1.5 m in coastal tsunami amplitudes. Lastly, we model a dynamic rupture “tsunami earthquake” with low rupture velocity and low peak slip rates but twice as high tsunami potential energy. We triple fracture energy which again doubles the amount of shallow fault slip, but also causes a 2 m higher vertical seafloor uplift and the highest coastal tsunami amplitude (≈7.5 m) and inundation area compared to all other scenarios. Our mechanically consistent analysis for a generic megathrust setting can provide building blocks toward using physics-based dynamic rupture modeling in Probabilistic Tsunami Hazard Analysis.
<p>Earthquake rupture dynamic models capture the variability of slip in space and time while accounting for the structural complexity which is characteristic for subduction zones. The use of a geodynamic subduction and seismic cycling (SC) model to initialize dynamic rupture (DR) ensures that initial conditions are self-consistent and reflect long-term behavior. We extend the 2D geodynamical subduction and SC model of van Zelst et al. (2019) and use it as input for realistic 3-dimensional DR megathrust earthquake models. We follow the subduction to tsunami run-up linking approach described in Madden et al. (2020), including a complex subduction setup along with their resulting tsunamis. The distinct variation of shear traction and friction coefficients with depth lead to realistic average rupture speeds and dynamic stress drop as well as efficient tsunami generation.&#160;</p><p>We here analyze a total of 14 subduction-initialized 3D dynamic rupture-tsunami scenarios. By varying the hypocentral location along arc and depth, we generate 12 distinct unilateral and bilateral earthquakes with depth-variable slip distribution and directivity, bimaterial, and geometrical effects in the dynamic slip evolutions. While depth variations of the hypocenters barely influence the tsunami behavior, lateral varying nucleation locations lead to a shift in the on-fault slip which causes time delays of the wave arrival at the coast. The fault geometry of our DR model that arises during the SC model is non-planar and includes large-scale roughness. These features (topographic highs) trigger supershear rupture propagation in up-dip or down-dip direction, depending on the hypocentral depth.</p><p>In two additional scenarios, we analyze variations in the energy budget of the DR scenarios. In the SC model, an incompressible medium is assumed (&#957;=0.5) which is valid only for small changes in pressure and temperature. Unlike in the DR model where the material is compressible and a different Poisson&#8217;s ratio (&#957;=0.25) has to be assigned. Poisson&#8217;s ratios between 0.1 and 0.4 stand for various compressible materials. To achieve a lower shear strength of all material on and off the megathrust fault and to facilitate slip, we increase the Poisson ratio in the DR model to &#957;=0.3 which is consistent with basaltic rocks. As a result, larger fault slip is concentrated at shallower depths and generates higher vertical seafloor displacement and earthquake moment magnitude respectively. Even though the tsunami amplitudes are much higher, the same dynamic behavior as in the twelve hypocenter-variable models can be observed. Lastly, we increase fracture energy by changing the critical slip distance in the linear slip-weakening frictional parameterization. This generates a tsunami earthquake (Kanamori, 1972) characterized by low rupture velocity (on average half the amount of s-wave speed) and low peak slip rate, but at the same time large shallow fault slip and moment magnitude. The shallow fault slip of this event causes the highest vertical seafloor uplift compared to all other simulations. This leads to the highest tsunami amplitude and inundation area while the wavefront hits the coast delayed compared to the other scenarios.</p>
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.