Coseismic Slip in the 1964 Prince William Sound Earthquake: A New Geodetic Inversion

Holdahl, Sandford R.; Sauber, Jeanne

doi:10.1007/978-3-0348-7333-8_4

Cited by 42 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There were two areas of high moment release, representing the two major asperities of the 1964 rupture zone: the PWS asperity and the KI asperity (CHRISTENSEN and BECK, 1994). This result was very similar to those derived from several studies that involved joint inversion of different combinations of seismic, tsunami and geodetic data sets (HOLDAHL and SAUBER, 1994;JOHNSON et al, 1996;ICHINOSE et al, 2007). Analysis of historical earthquake data in PWS and KI regions (NISHENKO and JACOB, 1990) showed that the KI asperity produced both large and great earthquakes more frequently and also independently of the PWS asperity.…”

Section: Tsunami Hazard In South-central Alaskasupporting

confidence: 84%

“…HOLDAHL and SAUBER (1994) inverted geodetic and geologic measurements of the surface deformation for the slip distribution of the 1964 rupture, using a priori slip estimates from tsunami modeling on the oceanic part of the fault plane. The models by JOHNSON et al (1996) andICHINOSE et al (2007) are based on joint inversion methods, each of them using different combinations of seismic, geodetic and tsunami data sets.…”

Section: Tectonic Tsunami Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Combined Effects of Tectonic and Landslide-Generated Tsunami Runup at Seward, Alaska During the M W 9.2 1964 Earthquake

Suleimani

Nicolsky

Haeussler

et al. 2010

Pure Appl. Geophys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We apply a recently developed and validated numerical model of tsunami propagation and runup to study the inundation of Resurrection Bay and the town of Seward by the 1964 Alaska tsunami. Seward was hit by both tectonic and landslide-generated tsunami waves during the M W 9.2 1964 megathrust earthquake. The earthquake triggered a series of submarine mass failures around the fjord, which resulted in landsliding of part of the coastline into the water, along with the loss of the port facilities. These submarine mass failures generated local waves in the bay within 5 min of the beginning of strong ground motion. Recent studies estimate the total volume of underwater slide material that moved in Resurrection Bay to be about 211 million m 3 (Haeussler et al. in Submarine mass movements and their consequences, pp [269][270][271][272][273][274][275][276][277][278] 2007). The first tectonic tsunami wave arrived in Resurrection Bay about 30 min after the main shock and was about the same height as the local landslide-generated waves. Our previous numerical study, which focused only on the local landslidegenerated waves in Resurrection Bay, demonstrated that they were produced by a number of different slope failures, and estimated relative contributions of different submarine slide complexes into tsunami amplitudes (Suleimani et al. in Pure Appl Geophys 166:131-152, 2009). This work extends the previous study by calculating tsunami inundation in Resurrection Bay caused by the combined impact of landslide-generated waves and the tectonic tsunami, and comparing the composite inundation area with observations. To simulate landslide tsunami runup in Seward, we use a viscous slide model of Jiang and LeBlond (J Phys Oceanogr 24(3):559-572, 1994) coupled with nonlinear shallow water equations. The input data set includes a high resolution multibeam bathymetry and LIDAR topography grid of Resurrection Bay, and an initial thickness of slide material based on pre-and post-earthquake bathymetry difference maps. For simulation of tectonic tsunami runup, we derive the 1964 coseismic deformations from detailed slip distribution in the rupture area, and use them as an initial condition for propagation of the tectonic tsunami. The numerical model employs nonlinear shallow water equations formulated for depth-averaged water fluxes, and calculates a temporal position of the shoreline using a free-surface moving boundary algorithm. We find that the calculated tsunami runup in Seward caused first by local submarine landslide-generated waves, and later by a tectonic tsunami, is in good agreement with observations of the inundation zone. The analysis of inundation caused by two different tsunami sources improves our understanding of their relative contributions, and supports tsunami risk mitigation in south-central Alaska. The record of the 1964 earthquake, tsunami, and submarine landslides, combined with the high-resolution topography and bathymetry of Resurrection Bay make it an ideal location for studying tectonic tsunamis in coastal region...

show abstract

Section: Tsunami Hazard In South-central Alaskasupporting

confidence: 84%

Section: Tectonic Tsunami Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combined Effects of Tectonic and Landslide-Generated Tsunami Runup at Seward, Alaska During the M W 9.2 1964 Earthquake

Suleimani

Nicolsky

Haeussler

et al. 2010

Pure Appl. Geophys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Coseismic slip in the seismogenic zone can be inferred from shoreline change and geodetic data measured on shore (e.g., BARRIENTOS and WARD, 1990;HOLDAHL and SAUBER, 1994). For prehistoric earthquakes, geologic evidence of sudden coastal subsidence has also been used (e.g., ATWATER et al, 1995;CLAGUE, 1997).…”

Section: Down-dip Extent Of Seismogenic Zone and Crustal Deformationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sources of Tsunami and Tsunamigenic Earthquakes in Subduction Zones

Satake¹,

Tanioka²

1999

Pure and Applied Geophysics

193

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We classified tsunamigenic earthquakes in subduction zones into three types: earthquakes at the plate interface (typical interplate events), earthquakes at the outer rise, within the subducting slab or overlying crust (intraplate events), and ''tsunami earthquakes'' that generate considerably larger tsunamis than expected from seismic waves. The depth range of a typical interplate earthquake source is 10-40 km, controlled by temperature and other geological parameters. The slip distribution varies both with depth and along-strike. Recent examples show very different temporal change of slip distribution in the Aleutians and the Japan trench. The tsunamigenic coseismic slip of the 1957 Aleutian earthquake was concentrated on an asperity located in the western half of an aftershock zone 1200 km long. This asperity ruptured again in the 1986 Andreanof Islands and 1996 Delarof Islands earthquakes. By contrast, the source of the 1994 Sanriku-oki earthquake corresponds to the low slip region of the previous interplate event, the 1968 Tokachi-oki earthquake. Tsunamis from intraplate earthquakes within the subducting slab can be at least as large as those from interplate earthquakes; tsunami hazard assessments must include such events. Similarity in macroseismic data from two southern Kuril earthquakes illustrates difficulty in distinguishing interplate and slab events on the basis of historical data such as felt reports and tsunami heights. Most moment release of tsunami earthquakes occurs in a narrow region near the trench, and the concentrated slip is responsible for the large tsunami. Numerical modeling of the 1996 Peru earthquake confirms this model, which has been proposed for other tsunami earthquakes, including 1896 Sanriku, 1946 Aleutian and 1992 Nicaragua.

show abstract

“…1). Geodetic inversion indicates an area of reduced 1964 main-shock slip between the two asperities (HOLDAHL and SAUBER, 1994;JOHNSON et al, 1996), yet there is no corresponding upper plate tectonic feature here. Terrane boundaries and tectonic structure in the upper plate continue unbroken across the zone of reduced aftershock activity (VON HUENE et al, 1980).…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 80%

Relation between the Subducting Plate and Seismicity Associated with the Great 1964 Alaska Earthquake

Huene

Klaeschen

Fruehn³

1999

Pure and Applied Geophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tectonic studies of the great 1964 Alaska earthquake have underappreciated the nature of the subducted plate in influencing seismicity. We compare seismological observations in the Prince William and Kodiak areas that ruptured during this earthquake with the corresponding morphology and structure of the subducting plate. The upper plate geology (Prince William Terrane) and velocity structure are the same in both areas. In the Prince William area where the Yakutat Terrane subducted, the energy released and coupling were stronger than above the Kodiak subduction zone where thick trench sediment subducts. The conjecture that lower plate character or the amount of subducted sediment affects coupling helps explain variability in seismology, geodetic inversions and the horizontal velocity of GPS stations.

show abstract

Coseismic Slip in the 1964 Prince William Sound Earthquake: A New Geodetic Inversion

Cited by 42 publications

References 9 publications

Combined Effects of Tectonic and Landslide-Generated Tsunami Runup at Seward, Alaska During the M W 9.2 1964 Earthquake

Combined Effects of Tectonic and Landslide-Generated Tsunami Runup at Seward, Alaska During the M W 9.2 1964 Earthquake

Sources of Tsunami and Tsunamigenic Earthquakes in Subduction Zones

Relation between the Subducting Plate and Seismicity Associated with the Great 1964 Alaska Earthquake

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About