TSUNAMI QUANTIFICATION HOW WE MEASURE THE OVERALL SIZE OF TSUNAMI (REVIEW OF TSUNAMI INTENSITY AND MAGNITUDE SCALES) V.GUSIAKOV WAPMERR, Representative Office in CIS Tsunami Laboratory, Institute of Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Geophysics Siberian Division Russian Academy of Sciences Email: [email protected] Global historical tsunami database covers the period from 2000BC to 2007, contains 2275 records in total, 2120 events with V=1-4) Mw=7.9 Mw=7.0 Mw=8.4 Source position and tide-gauge records of September 12, 2007 earthquakes Numerical modeling of the September 12, 2007 Sumatra Tsunami Three groups of top-ten largest tsunamis as compared by different parameters Ten trans-oceanic tsunamis Top-ten tsunamis with (H>5m at D>5,000km), highest run-up, sorted by NRN sorted by Hmax 630 1960 Chile 577 2004 Sumatra 478 1946 Aleutians 392 1964 Alaska 340 1952 Kamchatka 322 1957 Aleutians 115 1868 Chile 49 1755 Lisbon 39 1923 Kamchatka 23 1837 Chile 525m 1958 Lituya Bay 150m 1936 Lituya Bay 120m 1854 Lituya Bay 88m 1788 Aleutians 85m 1771 Ishigaki Is. 80m 1674 Indonesia 70m 1936 Norway 68m 1964 Alaska 63m 1737 Kamchatka 62m 1934 Norway Top-ten tsunamis with largest fatalities, sorted by NFAT 229,866 2004 Sumatra 36,417 1883 Krakatau 30,000 1755 Lisbon 30,000 1707 Nankaido 27,122 1896 Sanriku 26,000 1498 Enshunada 15,000 1741 Osima 13.486 1771 Ishigaky Is., 12,000 1952 Kamchatka 10,000 1765 Guanzhou Map of known historical tsunami sources. All the events are divided into three groups: red - transoceanic tsunami (10), magenta –regional tsunamis resulted in human fatalities (230), blue - non-fatal tsunamis (1880). One of the main problems in catalogization of historical tsunamis is the measure of the overall “size” or “force” of an event. To compare different tsunamigenic events, we need some scale to measure them. In general, there are two types of scales for measuring the “size” of a hazardous natural phenomenon – the magnitude scale and the intensity scale. The magnitude scale relates to the source of an event, while the intensity scale describes the resulted effect at impact locations. Examples of magnitude scales Richter scale for earthquakes (0 – 10) VEI scale for volcanic eruptions (1 -9) Saffir-Sympson hurricane scale (1 – 5) Examples of intensity scales Mercally scale for seismic shaking (I –XII) Beaufort wind scale (0 – 10) Both scales can be descriptive, based on descriptive characteristic of some “grades”, or quantitative, based on the value of some measurable physical parameter. The best parameter to estimate the size of different tsunamis would be their total energy. This true magnitude-type scale was proposed by T.Murty and H.Loomis (Murty, Loomis, 1980). Their ML value is defined as ML = 2 (log E - 19), where E is the tsunami energy (in ergs). n the original publication (Murty, Loomis, 1980), ML values were determined for about 25 largest Pacific tsunamis, since that time almost no new calculations of ML were made. The reason is that the ML value is not easy to calculate since it requires knowledge of initial displacement in a tsunami source or tsunami waveforms at different locations and azimuths, that is not always possible for real tsunamis. Maximum wave height distribution for the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami Historically, the first scale proposed for measuring a tsunami was the Sieberg scale (Sieberg, 1927). It was a descriptive 4-grade scale, based on the destructive effect of a tsunami, and it did not include any quantitative measures of tsunami wave height. N.Ambraseys (Ambraseys, 1962) slightly modified this scale, making it 6-grade, by dividing the upper grade into three additional steps. Sieber-Ambraseys scale is a typical examples of the intensity scale, because is based exceptionally on the effects of tsunami manifestation at the coast. However, from the very beginning it was used for characterization of overall size of a tsunami (i.e. as magnitude scale) by assigning to a tsunamigenic event its maximum observed intensity at the coast. In practice, it was mainly applied for quantifications of the Mediterranean tsunamis. In the Pacific, A.Imamura (Imamura, 1942) was the first who proposed a 5-grade descriptive scale, but the description of each grade contained some quantitative parameters – run-up height and extension of the coast flooded by tsunami. A.Imamura called it tsunami magnitude scale, although this was a typical intensity scale, since it was based on the effects of tsunami manifestation at the coast and did not contain any correction for a source distance. Later K.Iida (Iida, 1963) modified this scale by adding one additional grade (m=-1) for characterization of weak tsunamis. He also directly connected the grade number m with a maximum observed run-up value at the coast Hmax by the formula m = log2 Hmax This so-called Imamura-Iida intensity scale was widely used in catalogization of historical Pacific tsunamis. Hmax m = log2Hmax Typical distribution of tsunami run-up heights along the coast calculated for seismic source equivalent to a magnitude 7.5 submarine earthquake for a model bottom relief typical for Island arc regions Model bottom relief for a typical subduction area Important modification of this scale was made by S.Soloviev (Soloviev, 1972), who proposed to calculate the tsunami intensity I according to the formula I = ½ + log2 Hav, where Hav is the average wave height along the nearest coast, arguing that this value is a more steady characteristic of a tsunami and closer relates to the total tsunami energy radiated from a source. In this scale, S.Soloviev evaluated the intensity for a large number of Pacific tsunamis during the compilation of his catalogs. The I scale is also used in the NGDC/NOAA and NTL/ICMMG global tsunami databases as the main parameter characterizing the tsunami size. Hav I = ½ + log2Hav Typical distribution of tsunami run-up heights along the coast calculated for seismic source equivalent to a magnitude 7.5 submarine earthquake for a model bottom relief typical for Island arc regions A new, tsunami magnitude scale Mt, based on instrumental measurement of tsunami height, was introduced in 1979 by K.Abe (Abe, 1979, 1981) who proposed calculate it based on a maximum amplitude of tsunami waves that were recorded by tide-gauges according to the formula Mt = a lg h + b lg R + D, where h is a maximum tsunami-wave amplitude (in m) measured by tide gauge, R is the epicentral distance (in km) and a, b and D are constants that are determined to make Mt scale closely related to Mw (moment-magnitude) scale. This is a real magnitude scale since it is based on the quantitative parameters (instrumental wave height) and includes the correction for a propagation distance. Important: R should be more than 100 km from a source Mt=a*lgh+b*lgB+D h Typical distribution of tsunami run-up heights along the coast calculated for seismic source equivalent to a magnitude 7.5 submarine earthquake for a model bottom relief typical for Island arc regions Run-up height distribution along the coast for different type of the tsunamigenic earthquake sources In further analysis of historical data we will use the tsunami intensity I on the Soloviev-Imamura scale, considering it as most closely related to the overall size of an event, and because the intensity I is now determined for more than 2/3 of all historical tsunamis worldwide thus allowing us to rank the different tsunamigenic events by their overall size. I = 3.1 I =2.4 I =1.7 I = 0.4 Distribution of tsunami run-up heights along the coast calculated for seismic sources with different magnitudes Mw I(Mw) diagram from (Chubarov, Gusiakov, 1985) with the data for Kurile-Kamchatka region overlaid 2.8 8.4 Dependence of tsunami intensity I on magnitude Mw for the tsunamigenic earthquakes occurred in the World Ocean in 1900-2007 Fraction of tsunamigenic events occurred in the Pacific in 1990-2000 in the different magnitude intervals 100 % 80 60 40 20 0 6.0-6.4 6.5-6.9 7.5-7.9 8.0-9.5 no tsunami. 233 76 24 10 0 I<-0.5 4 7 10 6 2 -0.5<=I<=1.5 1 4 7 5 3 I>1.5 0 0 5 4 3 7.0-7.4 Conclusions • Among all the existing tsunami magnitude and intensity scales, the Soloviev-Imamura scale I is the most appropriate scale allowing to compare different tsunamis by their “size” or “force” • For the “typical” subduction zone tsunamigenic earthquakes, it rather closely correlates to the moment-magnitude of an earthquake • Calculation of the I value cannot be formally defined and always involves some “expert knowledge” • Large difference (more than 2) between tsunami magnitude m and tsunami intensity I may be an indicator of involvment of secondary mechanism (slides or slumping) in the tsunami generation process

© Copyright 2021 Paperzz