Tsunami Modelling of the 8th September 2017 Mexico Earthquake of M 8.1, Using Two Different Software

World Multidisciplinary Earth Sciences Symposium

Partheniu, Raluca^1 ; Tolea, Andreea^1 ; Ioane, Dumitru^2 ; Tataru, Dragos^1 ; Grecu, Bogdan^1

National Institute for Earth Physics, 12 Calugareni Street, Magurele, Ilfov, Romania^1

Faculty of Geology and Geophysics, University of Bucharest, 6 Traian Vuia Street, Bucharest, Romania^2

关键词: Centroid moment tensors;    Earthquake parameters;    Fault plane solutions;    Maximum wave height;    Mexico earthquake;    Moment tensor solutions;    Research centres;    United states geological surveys;   

Others  :  https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/221/1/012058/pdf
DOI  :  10.1088/1755-1315/221/1/012058

来源: IOP

【 摘 要 】

On 8th of September 2017, an earthquake of magnitude Mw 8.1 was generated offshore Mexico, Chiapas area, at 04:49 UTC, with a depth of 72 km and the following coordinates: Latitude 15.02 N, Longitude 93.81 W, 98 km away from Pijijiapan (Mexico). The fault plane solution of the event was normal plane. Maximum tsunami waves of 1.1 m were measured at Salina Cruz sea level station, following the earthquake. Tsunami modelling simulations were accomplished using the earthquake's parameters (location, magnitude, depth) and moment tensor solutions given by 3 different agencies: United States Geological Survey (USGS), German Research Centre for Geosciences (GFZ) and Global Centroid Moment Tensor (GCMT). For every case studied, the affected locations, sea level estimates and maximum wave heights were computed. There are two software used for modelling, the Tsunami Analysis Tool (TAT), provided and developed by the Joint Research Centre, Ispra, Italy and TRIDEC Cloud, provided by the German Research Centre for Geosciences (GFZ), Potsdam, Germany. After analysing the modelling scenarios, a comparison between the results of the two software was accomplished, for the same earthquake parameters. The results show that the parameters of GCMT computed with TAT overestimate those computed with TRIDEC, of maximum 3.9 m wave height at Arista with TAT and 2.46 m with TRIDEC. For the GFZ parameters, the estimates give 3.5 m for Pasito de la Senora with TAT, compared to 1.64 m maximum waves at Puerto Madero with TRIDEC. For the USGS data set, the results are similar, maximum waves of 2.4 m at Pasito de la Senora with TAT, and 2.9 m at Puerto Madero with TRIDEC. The Salina Cruz station, where 1.1 m height waves were measured, gives results only for the simulations ran with TAT, with 1.0 m for the GFZ earthquake parameters, 0.6 m for USGS and 1.4 m for the GCMT parameters.