JICA Training Course 2009

TSUNAMI NUMERICAL SIMULATION

APPLIED TO TSUNAMI EARLY WARNING SYSTEM
ALONG SUMATRA REGION
Wiko Setyonegoro * **
*Meteorological Climatological and Geophysical Agency INDONESIA
**2009, JICA Participant Training Course, Nagoya University JAPAN
wikosetyonegoro@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT
In the purposes of tsunami disaster preventions, required modeling scenarios of tsunami that will be
used to determine the tsunami hazard potential. To create a tsunami modeling for the TEWS,
required millions variations of fault parameter scenarios. Tsunami modeling have been made
previously will be used to quickly determine tsunami hazard potential and evacuation decisions for
the community. To create a tsunami modeling generally necessary information about the fault
parameters which can be done by observing such as crustal deformation or displacement in kind of
case relative or double-couple movement, so that the variation of the direction and values of the
fault parameters will be modified similar faults with fault conditions that would be occur to predict
the tsunamis in the future. In this study used several methods to determine the parameters of fault
scenarios, consisting of ; using historical data, calculate the selection parameters, and validation
with the reference of the survey results.

1. INTRODUCTION issues about the potential of tsunami. This

research is expected to further useful for
1.1. Active Tectonics determining the location of mitigation in the
Indonesia is the region of confluence of three development and an early warning system efforts
major plates such as subduction process in the in Indonesia.
Western part of Sumatra, the Indian plate
moving under the crust subducted to Sumatra
with velocity rate 50 mm/ year. Active tectonics
in the Sumatran region has often caused by the
earthquake, shown in Figure 1, plots by using
GMT (General Mapping Tools), which shows
the distribution of areas with shallow
earthquakes and has a high intensity. Several
events can generate earthquake-tsunami in the
western part of Sumatra, and the result will be
very destructive. In this case the focus
mechanism of data analysis according to the
USGS said that Sumatra has a kind of reverse
fault side, indicates that subduction activity is
not the only cause of earthquakes, but a several
"lock" positions on Sumatra, which caused
movement of double-couple, which will lead to a Figure 1. Active tectonic in Indonesia, ploting
series of displacement for the next earthquake. using GMT, shown earthquake distribution with
Earthquakes are often associated with serious depth parameters around Sumatran trench.

1
JICA Training Course 2009

The earthquake that occurred in western part of generate a storm surge, called a meteotsunami,
Sumatra has the potential to cause a tsunami, which can raise tides several metres above
with the coordinates of the earthquake source innormal levels. The displacement comes from
the ocean. low atmospheric pressure within the centre of
the depression. As these storm surges reach
1.2 Propagate Tsunami shore, they may resemble (though are not)
A tsunami is a series of water waves (called a tsunamis, inundating vast areas of land. Such a
tsunami wave train) that is caused by the storm surge inundated Burma (Myanmar) in
displacement of a large volume of a body of May 2008.[2][3]
water, such as an ocean. The original Japanese
term literally translates as "harbor wave." 1.3 Tsunami Causes
Tsunamis are a frequent occurrence in Japan, A tsunami can be generated when convergent or
approximately 195 events have been recorded. destructive plate boundaries abruptly move and
Due to the immense volumes of water and vertically displace fault the overlying water. It is
energy involved, tsunamis can devastate coastal very unlikely that they can form at divergent
regions. Casualties can be high because the (constructive) or conservative plate boundaries.
waves move faster than humans can run.[1] This is because constructive or conservative
boundaries do not generally disturb the vertical
displacement of the water column. Fault area
related earthquakes generate the majority of
tsunami.(Figure 3)[4]

Figure 2. Propagate of Tsunami.[1]
Earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and other
underwater explosions (detonations of nuclear
devices at sea), landslides and other mass
movements, bolide impacts, and other
disturbances above or below water all have the
potential to generate a tsunami. The propagation
of tsunami after disturbances will be faster wave
propagating speed in a deep sea, slower wave
propagating speed in a shallower sea and
decrease in wave length amplification of wave
height.(Figure 2)
The Greek historian Thucydides was the first to
relate tsunami to submarine earthquakes, but
understanding of tsunami's nature remained slim
until the 20th century and is the subject of
ongoing research. Many early geological,
geographical, and oceanographic texts refer to
tsunamis as "seismic sea waves”. Several
meteorological conditions, such as deep
depressions that cause tropical cyclones, can
Aceh
Fault
Figure 3. Sumatran fault in Aceh, with 1200 –
1600 km length and 10 – 15 km depth in western
part of Sumatra, plot using GMT.
Most tsunamis are caused by submarine
earthquakes which dislocate the oceanic crust,
pushing water upwards. Tsunami can also be
generated by erupting submarine volcanos
ejecting magma into the ocean. A gas bubble
erupting in a deep part of the ocean can also
trigger a tsunami. Tsunamis have a small
amplitude (wave height) offshore, and a very
long wavelength (often hundreds of kilometers
long), which is why they generally pass
unnoticed at sea, forming only a slight swell
usually about 300 millimetres (12 in) above the
normal sea surface. They grow in height when

2
JICA Training Course 2009

they reach shallower water, in a wave shoaling previously been believed possible may be caused
process described below. A tsunami can occur in by landslides, explosive volcanic eruptions (e.g.,
any tidal state and even at low tide can still Santorini and Krakatau), and impact events
inundate coastal areas.[4] when they contact water. These phenomena
rapidly displace large water volumes, as energy
1.4 Background of Problem from falling debris or expansion transfers to the
On April 1, 1946, a magnitude-7.8 (Richter water at a rate faster than the water can absorb.
Scale) earthquake occurred near the Aleutian The media dub them megatsunami.[4]
Islands, Alaska. It generated a tsunami which
inundated Hilo on the island of Hawai'i with a 14 Tsunamis caused by these mechanisms, unlike
metres (46 ft) high surge. The area where the the trans-oceanic tsunami, may dissipate quickly
earthquake occurred is where the Pacific Ocean and rarely affect distant coastlines due to the
floor is subducting (or being pushed downwards) small sea area affected. These events can give
under Alaska. Examples of tsunami at locations rise to much larger local shock waves (solitons),
away from convergent boundaries include such as the landslide at the head of Lituya Bay
Storegga about 8,000 years ago, Grand Banks 1958, which produced a wave with an initial
1929, Papua New Guinea 1998 (Tappin, 2001). surge estimated at 524 meters (1,720 ft).
The Grand Banks and Papua New Guinea However, an extremely large landslide might
tsunamis came from earthquakes which generate a megatsunami that can travel trans-
destabilized sediments, causing them to flow oceanic distances, although there is no
into the ocean and generate a tsunami. They geological evidence to support this hypothesis.
dissipated before traveling transoceanic Tsunamis are often called tidal waves. This is
distances. The cause of the Storegga sediment misleading, because tsunamis are not related to
failure is unknown. Possibilities include an tides. [4]
overloading of the sediments, an earthquake or a
release of gas hydrates (methane etc.)[4] 2. PURPOSE
1. Determine the correct fault parameter to
The 1960 Valdivia earthquake (Mw 9.5) (19:11 make tsunami numerical modeling,
hrs UTC), 1964 Alaska earthquake (Mw 9.2), through calculation, historical data of
and 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake (Mw 9.2) earthquake and references validation
(00:58:53 UTC) are recent examples of powerful from research, survey and monitoring
megathrust earthquakes that generated tsunamis (GPS and seismology measurements)
(known as teletsunamis) that can cross entire 2. Applying scenarios of tsunami numerical
oceans. The deadliest tsunami recorded was on modeling to TEWS (Tsunami Early
December 26, 2004. It was caused by an Warning System, intended to disaster
earthquake. The earthquake was said to had mitigation and prevention for
magnitude 9.3 on the Richter scale. It was community.
centered in the ocean near the coast of Sumatra,
Indonesia. Over 215,000 people died from this 3. OUTLINE
disaster. The giant wave moved very quickly. 1. Observation of the crustal movement,
Hundreds of thousands of people in Indonesia, displacement, deformation and fault
Sri Lanka, Thailand, India, Somalia, and other parameters along Sumatra trench.
nations, were killed or injured by it. Smaller 2. Tsunami modeling for tsunami early
(Mw 4.2) earthquakes in Japan can trigger warning system as a step tsunami
tsunamis (called local and regional tsunamis) warning against. Modeling tsunami
that can only devastate nearby coasts, but can do simulation as a supporter of DSS
so in only a few minutes. In the 1950s, it was (Decision Support System) which has
hypothesised that larger tsunamis than had been done in BMKG 2010.

3
JICA Training Course 2009

4. METHODE AND PROCESSING parameters can be modeled to determine the run-

To create the model, necessary information of up and innundation in the area around the
focal mechanism (wphase moment tensor shoreline.(Figure 4)
solution), so that the direction and value of fault

Figure 4. Methodology on tsunami hazard potential

4.1. Using Historical Data 4.2. Using Calculations

Determine fault parameters using historical data Determine fault parameters using calculation
on this study with use data will be used to process, there are two assumptions that are used
determine the fault parameters in tsunami to input parameters fault, according to some
scenario is data fochal mechanism of wphase cases, as follows:
moment tensor solution. Further data will be
used as estimates for determining further more 1. In assumption fault length is not devided.
scenarios in the research area.(Figure 4) 2. In assumption fault length devided
become subfault.
Of an earthquake event, the essential data is the
focal mechanism of fault, such as : length of Data which use in tsunami numerical simulation
fault, width, slip, depth, dip, strike accuracy by Etopo2 (Bathimetry data).[6]
parameters which will determine the maximum
run-up that will occur along the Coastline. 4.2.1. Length of Fault Not Devided
Assumption on this case, an earthquake fault is
This relationship is very closely related to the extremely long, then the assumption is a long
relationship equation between the Magnitude, straight faults by eliminating the momentum
and wide area fault. (Wells and Coopersmith, correction. Here there is no difference angle
1994). Reference parameters data for fault correction for strike direction, or in general,
parameters by focal mechanism (wphase there is no correction factor for the actual
moment tensor solution) from USGS.[7] contours of faults which not exactly straight.
(Figure 6)

4
JICA Training Course 2009

4.2.2 Length of Fault Devided through survey result above is defining the best
of fault parameters as shown in figure 6 and
figure 7.

In this case we only running one of the subfaults

(Figure 7 b). Fault with a length of 1200 km, not
be run directly in a single running program
(Figure 6), but separated into several segments
following the plate boundary on Aceh trench,
and than running of subfault one by one.
Because this is related to the direction of the
each segments of faults.[8]
Equation 1. Moment Magnitude [11][13]
Scenarios that will be made in one-time running
In case, assumption of fault is rectangle and of subfault, will be equal to one-time running
curvaceous (not exactly straight), The real form fault as a whole. So, subfault will represent the
of the fault its must be as figure 7 a, than divide entire fault.(Figure 7 b)
the fault length become a several subfault.
Based on Kanamori's equations above, which
reduce the wide area (A), should increase Slip.
By following fault wide area vs magnitude of
Wells and Copper Smith equation (Table 2), in
this case the fault with a length of 1200 km is
divided into several segments, such as red in
figure 7 a and figure 7 b, without removing the
influence of other segments effects, then set
value of the slip parameters as accumulation
amount of the other slip (Table 1). For example
we divide the length of fault into 4 subfaults and
do multiply the slip to be 4 times, in case do not Figure 6. Fault with the 1200 km long, straight
want to eliminate the effects of the incident shape, before reduce correction of force
energy of the actual fault deformation which momentum factor.
reach shoreline in research areas.(Figure 5) [11]
a)

Figure 5. Survey Sites, by Jose C. Borrero and Figure 7 a). Fault with the 1200 km long,
Costas E. Synolakis, find an evidentiary straight shape, after reduce force momentum
maximum run-up in the western part of sumatra, correction factor by devide fault length

5
JICA Training Course 2009

become a few fault (subfault).[8] By following Wells and Copper Smith equation
which explained the relation between large area
b) of fault and magnitude. So its mean, assumption
for for 9.2 SR area of fault is rectangular, than A
= 83571.16 km2, input parameters to the
Mamoru Nakamura's software for A will be in W
xL:

A=WxL
83571.16 = W x 1200 km
W = 69.64 km

Which A given by Table 1 and L given by Table

Figure 7 b) Divided fault into 4 subfault, and
2 . Than we divide W becomes Aw1 and Aw2,
than running which using one subfault, to get the
also divide L becomes Al1 and Al2 following
correction of momentum force from strike
Figure 8.
directions, the illustration is divide skets A to B,
which running subfault number 3 in skets B. No Mw A = W.L (km2)
1 6.5 239.9
2 7.0 741.3
According Newton's third law, than running for 3
4
7.5
8.0
2290.9
7079.5
subfault number three (Figure 7 b) become : 5 8.5 21877.6
6 9.0 67608.3
7 9.2 83571.16
F (subfault3) = F1 cos θ + F2 cos θ + F3 + F4 8 9.5 208927.91

Equation 2. Resultan force of slip (disl). Table 2. Table from Wells and Copper Smith
equation, recommendation wide area of fault.
Which F is dislocations of slip forces and θ is
momentum angle.[12]

Through the Mamoru Nakamura's software, we

try to make tsunami numerical simulations. The
essencial parameter for determine the maximum
run up of tsunami is ; slip, large area and
direction of the fault which the most of research
have a standard value for slip and large area,
which almost similar each other. Therefore here
we find a several references by table 1 below.
REFERENCE SLIP ( m ) LENGTH ( Km ) Figure 8. Setting parameters in Mamoru
Asia Resaearch 20 – 30 1000
Paramesh Banarje 15 1300
Nakamura's Software.
Leonardo Seeber None 1300
Zygmunt Lubkowski None 1000 To make one-tsunami scenario, the focal
Felix W aldhauser 20-25 1600
Kerry Sieh 13 1200
mechanism analysis is required, with the
Ishii et al None 1300 -1600 precision of analysis and comparison. In addition
Xiaoming Wang 20 – 30 1200 -1300 to bathymetry data, Slip (disl) which most
Kenji Hirata 30 1300
affects large and proportional to propagate
maximum run-up of tsunami. There are several
Table 1. References for slip and length of fault. reasons to define the slip on Mamoru
[4][5][8][9][10][11] Nakamura's software.

6
JICA Training Course 2009

Through trial and error to determine moment Equation 2), with a few assumptions to
tensor solution of earthquakes : eliminate the effect of the moment force from
• Choose the best fault parameters to make strike direction. Based on :
tsunami scenarios, to fitting with the
observation data of Aceh tsunami on 1. Comparison of fault parameter model
December 2004. (Kanamori). with data moment tensor USGS (dip,
• Run-up tsunami is strong affected by the slip, strike, depth and magnitude).
large of slip and direction of fault. (Wells 2. Calculation of resultant force.
and Copper Smith) 3. Validations to survey results in Aceh by
following a few research papers.
Actual fault length is around 1200 - 1600 km
and slip is around to 15 – 80 m (Equation 1 and Then, obtained the output of processing results
which are described below.

4.2.3 Scenarios Simulation result of Run-Up Maximum on Aceh Tsunami 2004

FAULT PARAMETERS FOR EACH SCENARIOS USED FOR TSUNAMI SIMULATION

MODEL 1 MODEL 2 MODEL 3 MODEL 4 MODEL 5 MODEL 6

PARAMETERS SURVEY
(Min Value of ref.) (Loss Force) (Loss Wide) (Gain Strength) (Max Value of ref.) (Slip Amaunt)
Al1 600 600 300 150 800 75
Len gth (km)
Al2 600 600 300 150 800 75
Aw1 75 75 150 56 56 150
Width (km)
Aw2 0 0 0 0 0 0
Depth (km) 10 10 10 10 10 10
Str ike (De gr e e) 345 310 345 345 345 345 NONE
Dip (De gre e ) 15 15 15 15 15 15
Slip (m) 15 15 15 60 30 80
Mw (Ric hter ) 9.2 9.2 9.2 9.2 9.2 9.2
Cen ter Fau lt Latitude 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5
Coor din ate Longitude 93.85 93.85 93.85 93.85 93.85 93.85
Ru n Up Max in Lhokn ga, Ac eh 8.8 m 6.2 m 2. 79 m 3 1.8 31 .0 6 m 32 .5 3 1.3 m

Note : Wells and Copper Smith relation between large area of fault and magnitude (In assumption Fault is Rectangular)
Wide area fault for Mw= 9.2 SR is 83571.16 km2
REFERENCE SLIP (m) LENGTH (KM)
No Mw A=W.L(km2 ) Asia Reaearch 20 – 30 1000
1 6.5 239.9 Paramesh Banarje 15 1300
2 7.0 741.3 Leonardo Seeber None 1300
3 7.5 2290.9 Zygmunt Lubkowski None 1000
4 8.0 7079.5 Felix Waldhauser 20-25 1600
5 8.5 21877.6 Kerry Sieh 13 1200
6 9.0 67608.3 Ishii et al None 1300 -1600
7 9.2 83571.16 Xiaoming Wang 20 – 30 1200 -1300
8 9.5 208927.91 Kenji Hirata 30 1300

Table 3. Scenarios with each fault parameters to find the correct parameters by ; validation, data
and survey, to determine the correct parameters in Aceh tsunami 2004.

Model 1 in table 3 (represent by red color in fault position not straight face to Lhoknga (other
figure 9, is the smallest of the fault scenario parameter values the same as Model 1), the
according to Table 1 (About Reference for Slip result is the run-up max tsunami in Lhoknga
and length of Fault), the result is the run-up max validation not in accordance with the validation
tsunami in Lhoknga not in accordance with the survey result. The area fault following Table 2.
validation survey result. The area fault
following Table 2. Model 3 in table 3 (represent by the green color
in figure 9), decreasing wide area of faults
Model 2 in table 3 (represent by the yellow without increasing the slip, the result showing
color in figure 9, the scenario with the strike of run-up maximum tsunami in Lhoknga is not in

7
JICA Training Course 2009

accordance with the validation survey result. The 7 b) and to get the correction of the momentum-
area fault following table 2. force from strike directions. Then obtained a
model that can estimate the distribution pattern
Model 4, Model 5 and Model 6 in table 3 of maximum run-up from survey result in the
(Model 5 represent by orange color, Model 4 respective areas of research. For example, take
and Model 6 represent by pink color), an maximum run-ups in Lhoknga (Table 3),
adjustment value of the slip which following validation results ranging from 31-33 m run-ups
Hanks and Kanamori's equations; Mo = μ A S in Lhoknga.
(equations 1). In case devided fault area (figure

Figure 9. Scenarios modeling of Aceh earthquakes, December 2004, represent of Table 3,

plot by GMT.

4.2.4 Validations
VALIDATION BETWEEN EACH MODEL

Slip= 15 Slip= 30 Slip= 60 Slip= 80

Area SURVEY
Length = 600 Length =1600 Length = 300 Length = 150
Srilanka 1.7 8.56 9.92 10.04 17
India 0.9 9.47 6.49 7.22 5
Myanmar (S) 0.83 3.35 4.28 3.96 None
Myanmar 2 (N) 1.62 1.09 1.52 2.78 None
Aceh (Lhoknga) 1.64 31.8 31.06 33.94 31.5
Simeuleu Indonesia 1.54 15.3 12.2 21.48 None
Nias Indonesia 1.65 13.55 11.6 4.25 None
Thailand 0.2 2.43 3.79 2.67 None
Bangladesh 1.65 6.36 3.32 6.77 None
Andaman & Nicobar (S) 2.9 20.06 17.38 24.46 33
Andaman & Nicobar (N) 1.27 6.69 8.92 22.92 20
Malaysia (N) 0.26 1.22 2.64 1.58 None

Note : The Width adjust from Kanamori's Equation, Mo = μ A S and Wells and Copper Smith relation between
large area of fault and magnitude (In assumption Fault is Rectangular),
Wide area fault for Mw= 9.2 SR is 83571.16 km2

Table 4. Validations of maximum run-up tsunami with variations of slip and length.

8
JICA Training Course 2009

Figure 10. Validations of maximum tsunami run-up with variations of slip and length, as a
represent of table 4.

4.2.5. Showing Tsunami Simulation Scenarios on Aceh Tsunami 2004

a) b)

c)

Figure 11. Plot by GMT, using Mamoru Nakamura's Software. Showing comparison between two
scenarios, a) Scenario for 1600 km length, slip (disl) = 30 m (Table 1) b) Scenario for 300 km
length, slip (disl) = 60, in case fault divided, resultant moment force based on Wells and Copper
Smith (Table 2), Kanamori's, Mo = μ A S (Equation 1) and Newton's third law (Equation 2), c)
Max run-up in each country represent by figure 11 b.[11][12]

9
JICA Training Course 2009

Tabel 5. Output of tsunami numerical modeling in Aceh tsunami, December 2004. List of analysis
in each research areas, scenario for 300 km length, slip (disl) = 60 m, in case fault divided, resultant
moment force based on Wells and Copper Smith (Table 2), Kanamori's, Mo = μ A S (Equation 1)
and Newton's third law (Equation 2).[11][12]

Figure 12. Travel time of tsunami simulation using Mamoru Nakamura's software. scenario for 150
km length, slip (disl) = 80 m, in case fault divided, resultant moment force based on Wells and
Copper Smith (Table 2), Kanamori's, Mo = μ A S (Equation 1) and Newton's third law (Equation
2).[11][12]

10
JICA Training Course 2009

Figure 13. Maximum tsunami height vs ocean bottom in Aceh region, output of Mamoru
Nakamura's software, showing how tsunami generate by ocean bottom. Scenario for 300 km length,
slip (disl) = 60 m, in case fault divided, resultant moment force based on Wells and Copper Smith
(Table 2), Kanamori's, Mo = μ A S (Equation 1) and Newton's third law (Equation 2).[11][12]

11
JICA Training Course 2009

4.3. References for Fault Determinations for sites in southern Sumatra are not well
To create tsunami simulation , in additional as a
constrained. And cannot be used to perform a
reference from research, survey and monitoring,
detailed analysis of deformation in the southern
also by using GPS and seismology Sumatran fault and forearc. Nevertheless, the
measurements are required to define the modelnorth components suggest that the southern part
of the fault by validation. Direction of fault
of the back arc moves similarly to the northern
according to the GPS measurement and analysispart. If we assume that the entire Sumatra back
of crustal deformation can be used as a arc is not deforming significantly, then the arc-
parameter to determine the fault parameters. parallel components suggest that the southern
Following the requirements of the strike fault
part of Sumatran fault slips at a lower rate than
directions will determine the moment of force to
the northern part (Figure 14). This observation
produce the run-up in the shoreline. (Figure 14)
would be consistent with the prediction of a
northward increase in slip rates on the fault
Fault determinations above consisting of : based on subduction earthquake slip vectors
1. Determine fault parameters using (McCaffrey, 1991), with geological slip rate
references from GPS measurements. estimates (e.g., 11 mm/yr), (Sieh et al., 1994)
2. Determine fault parameters using and 5.5 ± 1.9 mm/yr, (Bellier et al., 1999).
references from seismology analysis.

4.3.1. Using GPS Measurements References

Figure 15. Seismic active in Sumatra. Plot using

Figure 14. Crustal motion in indonesia using
GPS measurements, Y. Bock, L. Prawirodirdjo
and J. F. Genrich C, to be explained crustal
movements in the western part of Sumatra.[5]
Determine fault parameters by GPS validations
of velocity field in Sumatra and adjacent areas
relative to the estimated Sunda Shelf reference
frame. Arrows show the principal strain rate axes
for the northern, central, and southern parts of
the Sumatra forearc. GPS velocity vectors in the
estimated Sunda Shelf reference frame. Some
stations on Sumatra have been omitted to
preserve clarity. Heavy dashed lines indicate
crustal block boundaries. The velocity estimates
GMT, represent distribution earthquake with
focal mechanism between the Indonesian plate
boundary (yellow line) and Sumatran fault (red
line).
Through image above could certainly provide a
definition of focal mechanism, while to obtains
accurate data, available to download from the
USGS data of wphase moment tensor solution.
(Figure 15)
4.3.2. Using Seismology References
Below is an analysis of determine fault position
using seismology references, as one way of
defining fault with detection horizontal
displacements along the Sumatra region.

12
JICA Training Course 2009

The 3D observation data will be validated with
the results predicted, where the anomalies which
appear in the observation data, it will be
analyzed with the results predicted anomalies.
Validation is also performed on the GPS
measurement Vs Model (Wiko, 2007). (Figure
16). Indian plate was moving relatively from the
West to the East around Sumatra region, exactly
the trench which extends from Aceh to the
Andaman and Nicobar island with the movement
reached 55 mm / year. A simple analysis, the
magnitude accumulation area (concave-shaped
contour) indicated the “lock position” by points
A and B in figure 16 a. According to Kenneth
W. Hudnut, uses the model of Perfettini and
Avouac 2004 and GPS measurements by Figure
16 c and figure 16 d, a few area in Sumatra is
“lock”, given analysis validation between
model of Perfettini and Avouac, 2004 and model
of Wiko, 2007 (figure 16 b) it's showing
indicated the conkave contour area is not move.
[9]

Figure 16. a) In the vertical cross-section of Sumatra map, ploting by GMT, shows a very steep
topography on the plate boundary, which certainly can produce a tsunami run-up high on the
shorelines. b) Original output of Model, the 3D plot distributions of accumulation magnitude for
Sumatra with pseudo color, (Wiko, 2007), showing indication possibility in the points A and B is
“locked area” (seismic gaps). c) Kenneth W. Hudnut, 2005. Deep after slip patterns fit in neatly
downdip from each of the two largest coseismic slip patches, d) Postseismic slip resolved on the
plate interface 2005)[9], b) Validation GPS measurements Vs model (Wiko, 2007). The possibility
of the existence of seismic gaps or lock position of the crustal indicated by points A and B in figure
16 a and figure 16 b, the validations is the horizontal displacements in figure 16 c and figure 16 d
located between points A and B.[7]

13
JICA Training Course 2009

4.3.3. Validation The validated region is the western part of Aceh,

is shown in figure 17, then the data is made in
table 6, to shown the pattern estimate by plotted
in a curve as shown in figure 18, the objective is
to see the distribution pattern of maximum run-
up in each region. The result is a residue of the
validation is 6.47 m. [9]

Figure 17. Validations area of maximum run-up

tsunami in Western part of Aceh.

Table 7. Validation of maximum tsunami height

in each area.

Validation is also done in other areas outside of

Indonesia affected by tsunami, such as the
Andaman and Nicobar island, and Srilanka.
shown in figure 19, then the data is made in
table 7, according to the table, and then plotted
in a curve as shown in figure 19. Residue
obtained from the validation of measurement
Table 6. Validation maximum tsunami height on results is 3.56 m.
each area.
MODEL VS Eric L. Geist Eric L. Geist
Model 2
By doing validation, will be known to what 40
35
extent the accuracy of tsunami scenarios that 30
have been made, as an example is the validation 25
Max Tsu

20
of the model with the results of a survey 15
conducted by Jose C. Borrero, 2005. [9] 10
5
0
Jose C
MODEL VS Jose C. Borrero Borreo Lhoknga Car Nicobar
Model 1 Raya Island Great Nicobar Srilanka
35
Area
30
Max Tsu Run Up

25
20
15 Figure 19. Validation of maximum run-up
10 between model vs survey of Jose C Borreo in
5
0
each area (residual validation is 3.56 m).
Lhoknga Aceh Besar Panteraja
Raya Island Banda Aceh Kreung Raya Validation of the two figure above shows the
Points Area distribution pattern of the curve is following to
the results of the survey curve. Residual value
Figure 18. Validation maximum run-up can be minimized by counting the number
between model vs survey of Jose C. Borrero, corrected, consisting of : strike correction, wide
2005, in each area.(residu is 6.47 m) area and slip.(Equation 1 and Equation 2)

14
JICA Training Course 2009

Figure 20. Validation maximum run-up

Table 8. Validation of maximum tsunami
height in each area, which done with both
the survey results as well, so it can be
further examined on the accuracy of the
model. Average residual of the validation
results is 6.95 m.
between model vs survey references in each
area. Residue obtained from the measurement
is 6.95 m. Residue is too large for a
considerable distance. The pattern of the curve
shows the suitability of the maximum run-up
at each point. To predict accurately, it needed
more fault scenarios parameters obtained from
the reference GPS measurements, focal
mechanisms and moment tensor data. [9][10]

5. TSUNAMI HAZARD POTENTIAL of at least 5 minutes after the earthquake

Indonesian government, with the help of donor occurred.[14]
countries, has developed a Tsunami Early
Warning System for Indonesia (Indonesian Early Warning System has 4 components :
Tsunami Early Warning System - InaTEWS). 1. Knowledge of Hazard and Risk,
The system is centered on Meteorology, 2. 2. Forecasting, Warning, and Reaction,
Climatology and Geophysical Agency (BMKG) 3. 3. Observation (Monitoring of the
in Jakarta. This system allows BMKG sending a earthquake and sea level),
tsunami warning in the event of an earthquake 4. 4. Integration and Dissemination of
that caused the tsunami potential. Current system Information, Preparedness. (Figure 21)
is being perfected. In the future, this system will [14]
be issued a warning level 3, in accordance with
the results of calculations DSS (Decision Tsunami early warning system is a series of
Support System).[14] complex work systems involving many parties,
on the regional, national and international
Development of tsunami early warning system tributaries of the society.[14]
was involved many parties, both central
government agencies, local governments, In the event of an earthquake, the events were
international agencies, non-governmental recorded by means of seismograph (earthquake
agencies. Coordinator of the Indonesian side is recorder). Earthquake Information (strength,
the Ministry of Research and Technology location and time events) are sent via satellite to
(RISTEK). Meanwhile, the designated agency BMKG Jakarta. BMKG will release the next
responsible for issuing Info Earthquake and Quake Info delivered through technical
Tsunami Warning is BMKG. This system is equipment simultaneously. Earthquake data
designed to be issued a tsunami warning in time included in the DSS to consider whether the
earthquake has the potential to cause a tsunami.

15
JICA Training Course 2009
The calculation is based on millions of modeling
scenarios that have been made beforehand. Then,
may issue BMKG tsunami warning info. This
earthquake data will also be integrated with data
from devices other early warning systems (GPS,
Buoy, Obu and Tide Gauge) to confirm whether
a tsunami had actually been formed. This
information is also transmitted by BMKG.
BMKG deliver tsunami warning information
through an intermediary institutions, which
Figure 21. Chart of monitoring procedures of tsunami early warning system in Indonesia.[14]
5.1 Procedures
System Seiscom-P BMKG releases tsunami
potency earthquake parameter. Observation
censor buoys, tide gauge & GPS gives
verification report waving tsunami. Simulation
of tsunami is implemented automatically by DSS
based on earthquake parameter input Seiscom-P.
DSS gives image of tsunami analysis consisting 5.3 How it Works
of ; location of tsunami impact coast, arrival
time, wave height, level commemoration of
tsunami & alternative of decision. Information of 2. Locations have been grouped according
commemoration of tsunami is sent through
communications 5 in 1 system in BMKG to
evacuate community (Figure 21).[14]
5.2 Action Plan in BMKG
In this study, examples of research on tsunami
modeling has been done will be applied to the
picture 21 above. Work plan with the tsunami
16
include (Local Government and the Media). This
intermediary institutions that transmit warning
information to the public. BMKG also convey
information via SMS alerts to mobile phone
users who are registered in the database BMKG.
Earthquake Info ways of delivery for now is via
SMS, facsimile, telephone, email, RANET
(Internet Radio), FM RDS (Radio RDS have
facilities / Radio Data System) and through the
website of BMKG.[14]
scenario produces more than a million scenarios,
complete with risk and vulnerability modeling.
With a full predictive modeling tsunami, the
potential hazard of tsunami information intended
for the evacuation process will run as fast as
possible.(Figure 22)
1. Models are made in the form of tables of
data with sequently of each parameters.
to the fault position which nearest to the
shoreline.
3. Model that has been made in the
classification sequence: nearest distance
to fault, strike direction, extensive fault
and slip (dislocation).
4. Created tools (software) specifically to
identify the best simulation of the
JICA Training Course 2009

millions of tsunami scenarios. BMKG. Expected to accelerate the

5. Procurement of special instruments that evacuation decision for the community.
will be placed on Local Government and
the regional tsunami warning center of

Figure 22. Chart of step work from TEWS and tsunami numerical modeling scenarios

5.4 Action Plan on Scenarios

To speed the process of finding a model that has been made previously. Plan to be made is
structured on a server of BMKG. Millions of these models will be stored neatly in the server, be
prepared for when the real earthquake occured. Software for search engine to looking for the best
parameters when earthquake potential to generate tsunami already indicated. When the the
earthquake occur, the server in BMKG already have more than millions scenario. The combination
of keywords that will serve as the basis of search on the server BMKG is the momentum of each
subfault style nearest to the position of danger zone for determine maximum run-up, in this case for
example run-up in Lhoknga which actual length is 1200 km length and 30 m slip which will get
from aftershock of earthquakes data. There is four moment force (Figure 23), than the scenarios
that can be done is :

1. 1st Priority keyword in search engine on BMKG's server is slip (disl) and length of fault.
2. 2st Priority keyword on search engine ; F (Fault3) = F1 cos θ + F2 + F3 cos θ + F4 cos θ
which will running one time with using one fault which already devided to 4 subfaults, with
slip increasing to 4 times (Hanks and Kanamori's, Mo = μ A S (Equation 1)).
3. 3st Priority keyword on search engine ; F is mean slip momentum force, F (Total) = F1 cos
θ + F2 + F3 cos θ + F4 cos θ which will running 4th time with using one fault which
already divided to 4 subfaults. After that we add the output result in meter, the amount of 4 th
time running is the F (Total) run-up tsunami in Lhoknga.
4. The next combinations to search possibility of scenarios of fault is ; distance from danger
zone. For example, priority of combinations scenario for lhoknga is fault number three in
figure 23. After that, the other parameters such as ; depth, dip and other parameters will
follow.

17
JICA Training Course 2009

Figure 23. Scenarios of tsunami numerical modeling in Sunda arc, plot using GMT. Intend for
keyword which placed in search engine to looking for the best parameters when earthquake occured
which potential to generate tsunami.

18
JICA Training Course 2009
6. CONCLUSIONS
1. Validation measurements carried out
between the model and the survey would
be more accurate for areas which close to
the fault position. Instead validation with
remote areas of the fault, the value of
validation will be slightly off the mark.
This is caused by a correction factor of
bathymetry data, and stike angle of the
fault.
2. To calculate the maximum tsunami run-
up with a very long fault, it would be
more effective if used subfault, and
running the program be repeated several
times following the actual fault length.
3. Error factor which often occurs when
creating the scenarios modeling is
consisting of ; moment force from angle
position of faults (F-strike) (Figure 7 b),
the definition of fault length (L), the
nearest distance between the fault with
shoreline, and correction factor from the
bathymetry condition (ocean bottom).
7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thanks so much to JICA and RSVD – Nagoya
University for organizing this training course on
operating management of Earthquake, Tsunami
and Volcano eruption observation system. For
Prof. Kimata who arranged all training program,
and also for all teachers who give knowledge
which has supported this paper. Lastly, thanks
for all friends and colleagues at JICA and RSVD
for all support and cooperation along this
training.
8. RFERENCES
1. Fradin, Judith Bloom and Dennis
Brindell (2008). Witness to Disaster:
Tsunamis. Witness to Disaster.
Washington, D.C.: National Geographic
Society. pp. 42, 43.
Http;//shop.nationalgeographic.com/prod
uct/977/4389/971.html.
2. Http://www.answers.com/topic/tsunami
tsunami.
3. Thucydides: “A History of the
Peloponnesian War”, 3.89.1–4.
19
4. Smid, T. C. (Apr., 1970). 'Tsunamis' in
Greek Literature. 17 (2nd ed.). pp. 100–
104.
5. Y. Bock,1 L. Prawirodirdjo,1 J. F.
Genrich,1 C. “Crustal motion in
Indonesia from Global Positioning
System measurements”. JOURNAL OF
GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL.
108, NO. B8, 2367,
doi:10.1029/2001JB000324, 2003.
6. Etopo2,Http;//www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/
gdas/gd_designagrid.html.
7. Http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/e
qarchives/sopar/.
8. Kenji Hirata, The 2004 Indian Ocean
tsunami: “Tsunami Source Model from
Satellite Altimetry”, Program for Deep
Sea Research, IFREE, Japan Agency for
Marine-Earth Science and Technology,
Natsushima 2-15, Yokosuka 237-0061,
Japan, 2006.
9. Jose C. Borrero, Field Survey northern
Sumatra and Banda Aceh, Indonesia and
after the Tsunami and Earthquake of 26
December 2004, Department of Civil
Engineering, University of Southern
California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-2531,
USA, 2005.
10. Eric L. Geist, Vasily V. Titov, Diego
Arcas, Fred F. Pollitz, and Susan L.
Bilek, Implications of the 26 December
2004 Sumatra–Andaman Earthquake on
Tsunami Forecast and Assessment
Models for Great Subduction-Zone
Earthquakes, Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America, Vol.
97, No. 1A, pp. S249–S270, January
2007.
11. Hanks, Thomas C.; Kanamori, Hiroo
(05/1979). "Moment magnitude scale".
Journal of Geophysical Research 84
(B5): 2348–2350. Retrieved 2007-10-06.
12. Feynman, R. P., Leighton, R. B., Sands,
M. (1963). Lectures on Physics, Vol 1.
Addison-Wesley. ; Kleppner, Daniel;
Robert Kolenkow (1973). An
Introduction to Mechanics. McGraw-
Hill. pp. 133–134. ISBN 0070350485.
JICA Training Course 2009

13. Kanamori and Richard Allen, Rapid event source parameters in southern
magnitude determination for earthquake California for earthquake early warning,
early warning. Allen, R.M. and H. AGU 2001 fall meeting.
Kanamori (2001) Rapid determination of 14. Http;//www.bmg.go.id.

20