Pure Appl. Geophys.
177 (2020), 2477–2492
Ó 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-020-02446-8
Post-Event Field Survey of the 22 December 2018 Anak Krakatau Tsunami
PURNA SULASTYA PUTRA,1,2 ASWAN ASWAN,1 KHOIRIL ANWAR MARYUNANI,1 EKO YULIANTO,2
SEPTRIONO HARI NUGROHO,2 and VINCENT SETIAWAN1
Abstract—On 22 December 2018, volcanic activity of Anak
Krakatau, Indonesia, triggered a tsunami that caused more than 437
casualties on surrounding coastlines. Soon after the event, before
the physical evidence of the tsunami disappeared, a postevent field
survey was carried out. Measurements of tsunami inundation and
impact are important to better model and understand the tsunami
triggering processes to support future tsunami mitigation efforts.
The impacted area on the western coast of Banten, Java Island, was
surveyed to acquire tsunami inundation and run-up height data,
together with field characteristics of the tsunami deposits. Data
were acquired at 36 locations along three transects of tsunami
deposits. From these, the maximum tsunami run-up height (up to
13 m) in the surveyed locations was identified on the southern part
of the Banten Coast in the Tanjung Lesung area, an area located to
the south of Anak Krakatau Volcano. The tsunami deposits were
relatively thin along the transect, including a fining upward
sequence without any clear evidence of fresh volcanic material, in
disagreement with other reported volcano-induced tsunami depos-
its. Characteristics of the 2018 Anak Krakatau tsunami deposits are
more similar to earthquake-induced tsunami deposits, hence com-
plicating the paleotsunami reconstruction in Sunda Strait, where
tsunami mechanisms are from both volcano and earthquakes along
the Sunda subduction zone.
Keywords: 2018 Anak Krakatau tsunami, postevent field
survey, tsunami deposit, volcanogenic tsunami, tsunami run-up,
flow depth.
1. Introduction
On 22 December 2018, at about 21:27 Western
Indonesian Time (WIB, UTC ? 7 h), the coastlines
of the Sunda Strait were struck by tsunami waves
generated from the flank collapse of Anak Krakatau
Volcano (Grilli et al. 2019; Takabatake et al. 2019;
1
Department of Geological Engineering, Institut Teknologi
Bandung, Bandung, Indonesia. E-mail: purnasp@students.itb.ac.id
2
Research Center for Geotechnology, Indonesian Institute of
Sciences (LIPI), Bandung, Indonesia.
Pure and Applied Geophysics
Williams et al. 2019). The tsunami resulted in 437
fatalities, over 30,000 people injured, and over
16,000 people losing their homes (BNPB 2019).
Williams et al. (2019) reconstructed the flank failure,
tsunamigenesis, and regrowth of Anak Krakatau
Volcano, and calculated the volume of the flank
collapse at about 0.1 km3, which is relatively small.
According to these authors, satellite imagery from
approximately 8 h after the tsunami clearly showed
the summit cone of the volcano to be still intact, so in
calculating the collapse volume, it (the cone) was not
included in the volume calculation. Grilli et al.
(2019) published a numerical model of the tsunami
based on a landslide mechanism constructed from
both subaerial (satellite) images and bathymetric
datasets. From these, they estimated the total collapse
volume to be 0.22–0.30 km3, which they used as the
basis for a tsunami generation and propagation
model.
Takabatake et al. (2019) and the Tsunami Disas-
ter and Mitigation Research Centre (TDMRC) of the
University of Syiah Kuala (2019) conducted field
surveys both in Java and Sumatra. In addition to the
physical surveys, they also assessed local residents’
perception of danger and evacuation behavior from a
questionnaire they distributed. From the question-
naire, they found that tsunami awareness was
relatively high, but a tsunami warning system in the
Sunda Strait was necessary to minimize the loss of
life in the event of a future volcanically generated
tsunami. Muhari et al. (2019) identified the maximum
surveyed run-up to be 13.5 m and the maximum
inundation distance 330 m. From their surveys, there
was a great variation in tsunami wave patterns and
inundations. The highest tsunami elevations were at
Cipenyu Beach, Tanjung Jaya, in the south of Tan-
jung Lesung, and Panimbang on Java Island.
2478 P. S. Putra et al.
Globally, volcano-induced tsunamis are very rare
phenomena. However, the 2018 event was not the
first to strike Sunda Strait. In 1883, the Krakatau
volcanic eruption and tsunami devastated the area,
causing over 36,000 fatalities (Simkin and Fiske
1983). Despite a number of studies on this event (e.g.,
Yokoyama 1987; Nomanbhoy and Satake 1995; Choi
et al. 2003; Pelinovsky et al. 2005; Maeno and Ima-
mura 2011), the generation mechanism of the tsunami
has not still been established. After the 1883 eruption,
Krakatau was subaerially quiet from February 1884
until late 1927 (Newhall et al. 1983), when Anak
Krakatau, constructed of relatively mafic magma,
surfaced within the caldera resulting from the 1883
eruption. The reconstruction of Anak Krakatau Vol-
cano continues today, even after the flank collapse
that generated the 2018 tsunami. Understanding the
triggering processes of volcano-induced tsunamis and
how to mitigate their risk and impact remains a major
challenge (Williams et al. 2019). It is therefore
important to record the coastal impact of tsunamis
from postevent field surveys. The present work not
only complements previous surveys after the event
but also provides new data on the 2018 tsunami
deposits, which are very important in characterizing
the volcano-induced tsunami deposits. The under-
standing of the 2018 tsunami deposit characteristics is
still very limited.
2. Posttsunami Field Investigation
The posttsunami field investigation of the Anak
Krakatau tsunami was carried out 8 days after the
event, from 30 December 2018 to 3 January 2019.
Almost 100 km of coastline from Anyer in the north
to Sumur on the south coast of Banten Coast, Java,
was surveyed. Tsunami impact data, including tsu-
nami elevation, tsunami flow depth, run-up height,
and inundation distance, together with damage
observations, were acquired at 36 locations/sites,
following the method of Satake et al. (2013). Tsu-
nami height, flow depth, run-up height, and inland
distance were measured with a laser range finder.
Measured elevations and heights were corrected to
mean sea level at the time of tsunami inundation
using the tide gauge at Marina Jambu Station. The
Pure Appl. Geophys.
deposits were observed along three transects located
in Tanjung Lesung and Sumur. The maximum inland
inundation distance of the tsunami was limited, and
the first inland evidence of the tsunami deposits
poorly preserved, so these three locations were cho-
sen because of the good deposit preservation.
2.1. Tsunami Height and Flow Depth
The documented tsunami heights and flow depths
in the surveyed area are summarized in Figs. 1 and 2,
and detailed tsunami measurements presented in
Table 1. At most locations, flow depth was measured
mainly from tsunami watermarks on structures
(Fig. 3) but also from marks on trees. Along with
these observations, where possible, measured tsunami
elevations were confirmed from eyewitness accounts.
The tsunami heights vary from 0 m (no tsunami) to
8 m. In general, in the northern part of the surveyed
area, from Anyer to Labuan, they varied from 2 to
4 m. In Panimbang Jaya, the tsunami was relatively
very small, and eyewitnesses reported tsunami inun-
dations of less than 10 m inland, similar to the normal
high tide. Just to the west of Panimbang Jaya,
however, in the Tanjung Lesung area, tsunami
heights were greater, ranging from 3 to 8 m. Farther
south, at Sumur, tsunami heights were still high,
attaining a maximum of almost 6 m. Between Anyer
and Panimbang Jaya, flow depths were mostly about
or less than 1 m, as shown by the flow depth mark on
the wall at Anyer (Fig. 3a). At some locations in this
area, the flow depth was more than 1 m. At a site in
Carita (CRT 1 at coordinates 105.8286389 E,
6.26344444 S), the flow depth was more than 1 m.
At Tanjung Lesung (coordinates 105.6533611 E,
6.480347222 S, point ID site TJL 04, Table 1), the
flow depth was the highest at almost 4 m. At Sumur,
flow depths ranged from 1 to 2 m (Fig. 3b).
2.2. Run-Up Heights
The tsunami run-up elevations in the surveyed
area range from less than 1 to 13 m (Fig. 4, Table 1).
The run-up heights at Anyer to Labuan were up to a
maximum of * 2.7 m, as observed at site Any 4. At
Tanjung Lesung, the run-up heights ranged from 4 to
nearly 13 m. At two sites, TJL 06 and TJL 07, the
Vol. 177, (2020) Post-Event Field Survey of the 22 December 2018 Anak Krakatau Tsunami 2479

Figure 1
Measured tsunami height along surveyed coastal area

run-up heights were 9.6 and 8.3 m, respectively. At
TJL 01 A3, the run-up height was the highest
(12.8 m). The sites with the highest run-ups (TJL
06 and TJL 01 A3) were located on a very steep
slope. At Sumur, the maximum run-up height, about
6 m, was at site SMR 04. Here, the topography was
not as steep as at TJL 06 and TJL 01 A3 sites. At
other locations in the Sumur area, run-up height
ranged from 0.8 to 2 m.
2.3. Inundation Distance
Along the surveyed coastal area, the maximum
inland tsunami inundation distance was about 260 m
(Fig. 5), but on average, about 120 m. The site of this
longest inundation distance observed at Tanjung
Lesung is different from the site of the highest run-
up. The inundation distance of the highest run-up in
this survey was very short, only around 9 m, due to
its location on a cliff-type beach (Fig. 6). In general,
the inundation distance was somewhat further inland,
in the middle part of the surveyed area. As with the
tsunami height, flow depth, and run-up height, the
inundation distance was also observed to be greatest
at a site in Tanjung Lesung. The greatest inundation
of the 2018 Anak Krakatau tsunami was 330 m, in
the north of Labuan (location 6.26 S, 105.83 E), in an
area with a flat (regular) topography, as observed by
Muhari et al. (2019). The inundation distances at the
Sumur area ranged from 100 to 200 m. At Labuan,
south of the location where Muhari et al. (2019)
reported their longest inundation distance, and at
some sites in Tanjung Lesung, the inundation
distance was relatively short, less than 50 m. At
almost all sites in Sumur, the topography was
relatively regular, reflected in the longest inundation
distance that reached almost 200 m inland.
3. Observation of Coastal Impacts
Besides measuring the physical parameters of the
tsunami, tsunami impacts on the coastal zone were
also recorded. Eyewitnesses reported inundation from
2480 P. S. Putra et al.
Figure 2
Measured tsunami flow depth in surveyed area
two to three successive waves, with the second or the
last wave being responsible for most of the destruc-
tion. At Anyer, Carita, and Labuan, concrete
buildings were not totally destroyed by the tsunami,
but mainly were heavily damaged on the seaward
side of the building (Figs. 7a, b). The tsunami impact
was much greater on buildings and structures of wood
or bamboo, which were totally destroyed and swept
away (Fig. 7c, d). Farther south from Labuan, the
tsunami effect decreased, as only minor damage was
observed. To the south of Labuan, the tsunami
destroyed a bamboo house located on the beach
(Fig. 8a). At Panimbang Jaya, no damage was
observed. Here, a bagang (fish aggregating device)
was still located at its original place on the water just
in front of the beach (Fig. 8b).
In the Tanjung Lesung, Panimbang Subdistrict
area, where the maximum tsunami height, flow depth,
and inundation distance were observed, the most
severe tsunami damage took place. Compared with
Anyer, Carita, and Labuan, the buildings in the
Pure Appl. Geophys.
Tanjung Lesung resort area were much more heavily
damaged (Fig. 9a–c). Some concrete buildings
almost collapsed, and in some areas, the tsunami
uprooted trees. A boat was transported inland about
60 m (Fig. 9d). Relatively similar damage was
observed at Sumur, where most concrete buildings in
the traditional fish market area were heavily damaged
(Fig. 10a), some houses were swept away, leaving
only their foundations. As at other locations, most
damage to the buildings was on the seaward side
(Fig. 10b). A fishing port at Sumur was destroyed
(Fig. 10c), and a fishing boat transported inland about
80 m (Fig. 10d).
Besides the destruction of buildings and struc-
tures, the tsunami also eroded and transported
different type of boulders. At Tanjung Lesung, a coral
boulder with a diameter of * 150 cm was trans-
ported 50 m inland (Fig. 11a). In the northern part of
Labuan, boulders of igneous rock of varied sizes
(diameter 50–100 cm) were transported inland almost
half of the inundation distance (Fig. 11b). At Sumur,
Vol. 177, (2020) Post-Event Field Survey of the 22 December 2018 Anak Krakatau Tsunami 2481

Table 1
List of station and tsunami measurements results (in meters) along surveyed area

No. Station Longitude Latitude TH RH FD ID

1 ANY 1 105.8546389 -6.153805556 4.0 0.6 71.0

2 ANY 2 105.8534722 -6.159472222 3.1 0.6
3 ANY 3 105.8532778 -6.160666667 4.2 0.6
4 ANY 4 105.8364444 -6.199805556 3.5 2.7 0.8 90.0
5 ANY 5 105.8268611 -6.244694444 2.8 0.4 98.0
6 CRT 1 105.8286389 -6.263444444 3.8 1.5 175.0
7 CRT 2 105.8288056 -6.266833333 3.2 0.7 114.0
8 CRT 3 105.8246111 -6.341000000 3.2 110.0
9 LBN 1 105.8198333 -6.381333333 3.1 1.0 160.0
10 LBN 2 105.8184167 -6.446138889 0.7 0.3 30.0
11 LBN 3 105.8118611 -6.464333333 2.3 145.0
12 TJL 1 105.6326667 -6.517333333 7.0 6.3 119.0
13 TJL 2 105.6288056 -6.524166667 4.2 6.7 113.0
14 TJL 3 105.6253611 -6.529277778 5.3 6.7 155.0
15 TJL 01 105.7081389 -6.528416667 1.1 0.8
16 TJL 02 105.6764167 -6.494250000 0.8 40.0
17 TJL 03 105.6593611 -6.480388889 2.3 1.3 103.0
18 TJL 04 105.6533611 -6.480347222 5.0 3.6
19 TJL 05 105.6385833 -6.507166667 4.9 6.3 260.0
20 TJL 06 105.6345833 -6.515083333 5.7 9.6 45.0
21 TJL 07 105.6381389 -6.522166667 8.3 109.0
22 TJL 08 105.6249444 -6.534027778 8.0 6.5 96.0
23 TJL 09 105.6239444 -6.543694444 3.5 5.0 112.0
24 TJL 10 105.6228333 -6.553083333 3.0 4.1 185.0
25 TJL 11 105.6172778 -6.567833333 3.6 4.3 214.0
26 TJL 01 A2 105.6340556 -6.516777778 9.0 10.0
27 TJL 01 A3 105.6343056 -6.532222222 12.8 9.0
28 SMR 01 105.5841111 -6.656166667 5.5 1.5 2.0 158.0
29 SMR 02 105.5855556 -6.654888889 1.7 130.0
30 SMR 03 105.5896667 -6.652638889 3.7 2.3 1.9 149.0
31 SMR 04 105.5946111 -6.650666667 1.6 113.0
32 SMR 05 105.5986389 -6.648638889 2.8 0.8 197.0
33 SMR 06 105.5995000 -6.646111111 3.9 1.1 193.0
34 SMR 07 105.5730556 -6.673916667 2.9
35 SMR 08 105.5726111 -6.679888889 2.4 1.0 120.0
36 SMR 09 105.5677500 -6.683444444 2.8 1.2
TH tsunami height, RH run-up height, FD flow depth, ID inundation distance

igneous boulders with similar sizes (* 50 to 100 cm
in diameter) were transported inland (Fig. 11c). At
Kelapakoneng Village, at a site to the west of the
highest run-up location, a 1.5-m-diameter coral
boulder was transported about 100 m inland
(Fig. 11d).
At many locations, as the tsunami flowed back
into the sea, there were strong backwash currents,
clearly indicated by the orientation of broken trees
(Fig. 12). The topography in the areas where back-
wash occurred is typically seaward sloping.
4. Field Characteristics of the Tsunami Deposits
Tsunami deposits were surveyed along three
transects where they were relatively undisturbed by
posttsunami process. The transects were TJL 10 TS
and TJL 3 at Tanjung Lesung and SMR 06 at Sumur
(Figs. 13, 14, 15). Two of the transects (TJL 10 TS
and SMR 06) were selected because the topography
was relatively regular, without any steep morphology
(Fig. 16). The slope of this regular topography was
around 1.5%. The topography at TJL 3 was relatively
irregular (Fig. 18), with a slope of around 4%. Along
2482 P. S. Putra et al. Pure Appl. Geophys.

Figure 3
Mark of tsunami flow depth observed on wall of broken houses in (a) Anyer (point code ANY 3, coordinate: 105.8532778 E, 6.160666667 S)
and (b) Sumur, showing highest flow depth at SMR 03 (105.5896667 E, 6.652638889 S)

Figure 4
Measured run-up height in surveyed area

the transects, the tsunami deposits covered most of 4.1. Tsunami Deposits Along a Regular Topography
the inundation area, to distances of 155, 185, and
Along transects TJL 10 TS and SMR 06, the
193 m inland, respectively (Table 1; Figs. 16, 18). At
deposit thickness was highly variable (Fig. 16). At
TJL 10 TS, the flow depth was about 3.0 m, and run-
TJL 10 TS, in the middle of the transect, the
up height, 4.1 m. At SMR 06, the tsunami height and
maximum thickness was 8 cm. At SMR 06, at the
flow depth were 3.9 m and 1.1 m, respectively. At
first point close to the coastline, there was a
TJL 3, the flow depth was 5.3 m, with run-up height
maximum thickness of 10 cm. At TJL 10 TS,
about 6.7 m.
Vol. 177, (2020) Post-Event Field Survey of the 22 December 2018 Anak Krakatau Tsunami 2483

Figure 5
Inundation distance along surveyed area

Figure 6
Location of highest run-up and short inundation distance in southern part of Tanjung Lesung area

although the topography was relatively regular, the In general, the deposits were sand-sized (Fig. 17).
thickness of the deposit varied and did not simply At some locations, especially near the inundation
thin landward. limit, the deposits were finer-grained. Where deposits
2484 P. S. Putra et al. Pure Appl. Geophys.

Figure 7
Observed tsunami damage on observed area of Carita (CRT 2, coordinates 105.8288056 E, 6.26683333 S): (a, b) front concrete walls
destroyed by wave; (c, d) wooden/bamboo houses totally destroyed; (c) Wrecked wooden houses accumulated in front of concrete house

Figure 8
Observed tsunami damage at (a) Labuan (LBN 2, coordinates 105.8184167 E, 6.446138889 S) and (b) Panimbang Jaya (coordinates
105.7900000 E, 6.49972222 S)

were thicker than 5 cm, they were fining upward
(Fig. 17a, c, d). At some locations, there were
multiple fining upward sequences. Along TJL 10
TS, for example, around 50 m from the coastline,
where the deposit was 7 cm thick, there were three
fining upward sequences. Other common sedimentary
features included rip-up clasts (Fig. 17b) and
laminations of heavy minerals (Fig. 17c, e). The
rip-up clast distribution was not consistent. At some
locations, for example at a site located around 60 m
from the coastline at TJL 10 TS transect, the clasts
were distributed throughout the deposit (Fig. 16b). At
some locations farther inland, rip-up clasts were
present only in the bottom, middle, or top. Along both
Vol. 177, (2020) Post-Event Field Survey of the 22 December 2018 Anak Krakatau Tsunami 2485

Figure 9
Observed tsunami damage on observed area in Tanjung Lesung: (a) broken first floor of resort building; (b) severely damaged house at
Tanjung Lesung Beach Hotel (TJL 04, coordinates 105.6533611 E, 6.480347222 S); (c) broken concrete fence and houses at Tanjung Lesung
Beach Hotel; and (d) transported boat around 60 m inland at TJL 3

TJL 10 TS and SMR 06 transects, heavy minerals
were distributed through the deposit and not as
laminations.
4.2. Tsunami Deposits Along an Irregular
Topography
The topography at TJL 3 transect was steeper
compared with TJL 10 TS and SMR 06 (Fig. 18). At
about 58 m from the coastline, there was a sudden
change in slope, from low and flat to steeply inclined.
Where the topography was relatively flat and low, the
deposit was thicker (up to 9 cm), and where steeply
inclined, it became thinner (around 2 cm) and then
patchy until its inland limit. As at the two previous
transects (TJL 10 TS and SMR 06), the deposit at TJL
3 was mainly sand-grade (Fig. 19). Along this
transect, at least up to 100 m inland, there were
pumice fragments of varied size but mostly up to
2 cm. Here the main sedimentary structures were
fining upward cycles. In thicker deposits (8 cm),
these could be a single fining upward sequence
(Fig. 18). In some thin deposits (3 cm), there were
two fining upward sequences with very coarse sand at
the base, grading upward into medium to fine sand at
the top (Fig. 19a). Deposits located farther inland
were thinner with no sedimentary structures; For
example, as shown in Fig. 19c, a 2-cm deposit is
composed of relatively fine sand without any pumice
fragments.
5. Discussion and Concluding Remarks
All tsunami measurements (tsunami height, flow
depth, run-up height, and inundation distance) sug-
gest that the area located directly south of Anak
Krakatau Volcano was most impacted by the tsuna-
mis. The Tanjung Lesung area, in the Panimbang
Subdistrict, experienced the highest tsunamis with the
greatest inland inundation. These results agree well
with previous studies (TDMRC 2019; Takabatake
2486 P. S. Putra et al. Pure Appl. Geophys.

Figure 10
Observed tsunami damage in Sumur area: (a) heavily damage in traditional market area (SMR 01, coordinates 105.5841111 E,
6.656166667 S); (b) damaged front wall house with flow depth around 2 m (SMR 03, coordinates 105.5896667 E, 6.65263889 E); (c) heavy
damage to fishing port; and (d) fishing boat transported inland around 80 m in the north of fishing port

et al. 2019). Muhari et al. (2019) found the greatest
inland inundation north of Labuan. Takabatake et al.
(2019) concluded that the high spatial variation on
the tsunami distribution was due to tsunami waves’
being affected by the small islands (Rakata, Panjang,
and Sertung) surrounding Anak Krakatau as well as
propagation through the Sunda Strait. Takabatake
et al. (2019) also pointed out that the coastline con-
figuration of Sunda Strait induces wave refraction,
leading to a variety of wave patterns and inundations.
Grilli et al. (2019), on the other hand, highlighted the
importance of bathymetry in the Sunda Strait as the
main factor controlling the direction of the waves.
Based on numerical modeling, they found that the
steep linear north–south trending scarp (located to the
west of Anak Krakatau Volcano) that divides the
shallow eastern half of the Sunda Strait from the
much deeper Semangka trough to the west was
responsible for focusing the tsunami onto coastal sites
to the south and southeast of the volcano. Similar
focusing by abrupt changes in coast direction and
offshore topography was also identified for vol-
canogenic tsunami wave behavior at the Soufriere
Hills volcanic event (Montserrat) in 2003, (Peli-
novsky et al. 2004). Pelinovsky et al. (2004)
calculated that the volume of the collapse that gen-
erated the 2003 Montserrat tsunami was also about
0.12 km3, similar to that of Anak Krakatau
(0.10 km3), as identified by Williams et al. (2019).
Takabatake et al. (2019) concluded that the most
severe damage was limited to within 100–200 m of
the coastline due to the relatively short wavelengths
of the 2018 Anak Krakatau tsunami, with the time
between the waves being in the range of
6:36–7:24 min (Muhari et al. 2019). These short
wavelength and period are typical of tsunamis gen-
erated by landslide. Heinrich et al. (1999) modeled
the potential of Montserrat volcano landslide-gener-
ated tsunami and identified the period to be even
smaller (around 2 min). Fine et al. (2003) proposed
that the maximum wave height and energy of gen-
erated surface waves of landslide tsunamis were
Vol. 177, (2020) Post-Event Field Survey of the 22 December 2018 Anak Krakatau Tsunami 2487

Figure 11
Boulders transported inland: (a) coral boulder at Tanjung Lesung (TJL 07, coordinates 105.6381389 E, 6.52216667 S); (b) Igneous rock
boulders at north of Labuan (LBN 3, coordinates 105.8118611 E, 6.46433333 S); (c) igneous rock boulders at Sumur; and (d) coral boulder
transported inland at Kelapakoneng Village, Tanjung Jaya

Figure 12
Tsunami backwash indication found in (a) northern area Tanjung Lesung (TJL 5, coordinates 105.6385833 E, 6.507166667 S) and
(b) southern part of Tanjung Lesung (TJL 6, coordinates 105.6345833 E, 6.515083333 S); red arrows by broken trees indicating sea side
direction

dependent on slide parameters and factors such as
volume, density, position, and slope angle. An
increase in slide volume, density, and slope angle
always increases the energy of the generated waves.
Eyewitnesses mostly reported that at least two
waves inundated the coast, with the second wave
being the largest and responsible for the destruction.
However, there were reports of three tsunami waves,
although the second was the largest. Most
2488 P. S. Putra et al. Pure Appl. Geophys.

Figure 13
Close up of TJL 10 TS transect and inundation limit of tsunami; red line indicating transect of tsunami deposit, and red dash line, limit of
inundation

Figure 14
Close up of Smr 06 transect and inundation limit of tsunami; red line indicating transect of tsunami deposit and red dash line, limit of
inundation

eyewitnesses also pointed out that there was a roaring
sound prior to the arrival of the tsunami. This roaring
sound may be a good indication of a tsunami and may
be used for tsunami mitigation, although the tsunami
might be expected to arrive very soon after the sound.
Tsunamis did not totally destroy many concrete
buildings in the inundated area, although the flow
depth at some locations was high enough (up to
nearly 4 m). This was probably because there was no
associated earthquake and related ground shaking
prior to the tsunami. No damage to the concrete
buildings before the tsunami arrival means that the
damage to the building was caused only by the
impulsive force of the tsunami. However, the pro-
tection structures along the coast where there were
resorts and villas prevented the tsunami from dam-
aging buildings (Muhari et al. 2019). We recommend
doing a further detailed study on this tsunami-induced
damage to buildings for mitigation efforts.
Vol. 177, (2020) Post-Event Field Survey of the 22 December 2018 Anak Krakatau Tsunami 2489

Figure 15
Close up of TJL 3 transect and inundation limit of tsunami; red line indicating transect of tsunami deposit and red dash line, limit of
inundation

Figure 16
Topographic profile and deposit thickness along transect: (a) at TJL 10 TS in Tanjung Lesung and (b) at SMR 06 in Sumur

Tsunami deposits from the 2018 Anak Krakatau
do not simply thin landward along the transects, even
where there is a relatively regular topography.
Thinning landward is a common characteristic of
tsunami deposits elsewhere (i.e., Sugawara et al.
2008; Matsumoto et al. 2016; Putra 2018). Where
there is more irregular topography, this is an impor-
tant control on deposition. As observed along the TJL
3 transect, the deposits were thickest at the relatively
low and flat topography along the first third of the
inundation distance. Farther landward on the steep
topography, the deposits became thinner and patchy.
The 2018 Anak Krakatau deposits also tend to be
very thin (maximum observed thickness was 10 cm),
with fining upward sequences being the most
common sedimentary structure, with heavy mineral
laminations at some sites. The occurrence of heavy
minerals in the tsunami deposits is locally dependent
(Jagodzinski et al. 2012; Nakamura et al. 2012).
Meanwhile, the relatively thin deposits with fining
upward structures were common characteristics of the
2018 Palu tsunami (Putra et al. 2019). The 2018 Palu
tsunami was generated by a coastal landslide (Ari-
kawa et al. 2018; Omira et al. 2019). Landslide-
induced tsunamis tend to have shorter tsunami
wavelength compared with the tsunami waves gen-
erated by earthquakes (Kulikov et al. 1996; Watts
2000). The 2018 Anak Krakatau tsunami generated
by flank collapse was also characterized by a shorter
tsunami wave (Takabatake et al. 2019). At least from
2490 P. S. Putra et al. Pure Appl. Geophys.

Figure 17
Tsunami deposits characteristics along the transects: (a) deposits showing three fining upward sequences at TJL 10 TS transect; (b) occurrence
of mud rip-up clasts in deposit at TJL 10 TS transect; (c) fining upward sequence of tsunami deposit at TJL 10 TS transect showing
intercalated heavy mineral lamination in lower part of deposit; (d) tsunami deposit 7 cm thick at SMR 06 showing repetition of fining upward
sequences, not as clear as at TJL 10 TS; (e) tsunami deposit at SMR 06 with very heavy mineral lamination; and (f) very thin (1 cm) tsunami
deposit near inundation limit at SMR 06

Figure 18
Topographic profile and deposit thickness along transect at TJL 3

Figure 19
Tsunami deposits characteristics along transects at TJL 3: (a) deposits showing two fining upward sequences with some pumice fragments (red
circle); (b) occurrence of pumice (red circle) in fining upward deposit at site around 40 m from the coast line; and (c) thin (* 2 cm) deposit at
site around 100 m from the coast line
Vol. 177, (2020) Post-Event Field Survey of the 22 December 2018 Anak Krakatau Tsunami
Figure 20
Correlation trend between tsunami height and sediment thickness
between the 2018 Palu tsunami deposit and the 2018 Anak
Krakatau tsunami deposit. Data of 2018 Palu tsunami deposit taken
from Putra et al. (2019)
these two events, we are able to temporarily conclude
that the possible general characteristics of tsunami
deposits generated from coastal and flank collapse are
relatively thin and fining upward deposits without any
complex sedimentary structure. However, these are
also the general characteristics of tsunami deposits
elsewhere, as discussed by Putra et al. (2019). Cor-
relation trend between tsunami height and sediment
thickness of the 2018 Palu tsunami and the 2018
Anak Krakatau tsunami indeed show that the 2018
Palu tsunami can be differentiated from the 2018
Anak Krakatau tsunami (Fig. 20). However, this
difference is probably caused by the difference in the
tsunami magnitude or differences in local conditions,
such as topography and sediment source character-
istics. Indeed, based on the correlation trend, the
higher tsunami resulted in the thicker deposit.
Nonetheless, most of the deposits in both locations
were less than 10-cm thick, deposited by a tsunami
less than 6-m high.
Nishimura (2008), in his review of volcano-in-
duced tsunami, deposits concluded that the most
distinct feature of these tsunami deposits is a
‘‘pumiceous sand’’ layer. This is a mixture of pumice
and/or ash and beach sand; both are transported and
deposited inland by a tsunami. For the case of the
2018 Anak Krakatau tsunami, the deposits were
2491
mostly not associated with any ash or fresh pumice
from the 2018 Anak Krakatau eruption. Indeed some
pumice fragments were observed in the 2018 depos-
its, but these fragments were not the result of the
2018 eruption. These pumice fragments were already
distributed and deposited on the beach prior to the
2018 tsunami (this information is from the direct
observation of the author a few years ago). This
means that the 2018 Anak Krakatau tsunami deposits
have general characteristics that are similar to the
sediments deposited by the earthquake-induced tsu-
nami, with no specific volcanogenic material that
could be used to distinguish these deposits from those
of an earthquake-induced tsunami. In the Sunda
Strait, the tsunami sources are varied, with tsunami
not only generated by Anak Krakatau but also
earthquakes on the Sunda subduction zone. The 2018
Anak Krakatau event demonstrates that the recon-
struction of paleotsunamis and identification of the
source mechanism in this area is very challenging.
Our understanding of the characteristics of the 2018
Anak Krakatau tsunamis and their deposits is there-
fore very important for interpreting the past records
of tsunami inundation in this region.
Acknowledgements
The fieldwork was funded by the Research Center for
Geotechnology. We would like to thank Prof.
Alexander Rabinovich (Editor-in-Chief of this jour-
nal) and anonymous reviewers for their comments
that significantly improved our manuscript. Prof.
David Tappin of British Geological Survey and
Jonathan Griffin of Geoscience Australia are thanked
for improving the English of this paper.
Author contributions P.S.P. led and coordinated the
fieldwork and wrote the manuscript. P.S.P., S.H.N., and V.S.
conducted the field survey. S.H.N. worked on almost all of the
figures and contributed to the draft writing. E.Y., A.A., and
K.A.M. contributed to the writing of this manuscript.
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps
and institutional affiliations.
2492 P. S. Putra et al. Pure Appl. Geophys.

REFERENCES 100th Year Development of Krakatau and its Surrounding,

Jakarta 23–27 August, 1983.
Nishimura, Y. (2008). Volcanism-induced tsunami and tsunamiites.
Arikawa, T., Muhari, A., Okumura, Y., Dohi, Y., Afriyanto, B.,
In T. Shiki, Y. Tsuji, T. Yamazaki, & K. Minoura (Eds.),
Sujatmiko, K. A., et al. (2018). Coastal subsidence induced
Tsunamiites—Features and Implications (pp. 163–181). New
several tsunamis during the 2018 Sulawesi earthquake. Journal
York: Elsevier.
of Disaster Research, 13, 1–3.
Nomanbhoy, N., & Satake, K. (1995). Generation mechanism of
BNPB (National Disaster Management Agency). (2019). Tsunami
tsunamis from the 1883 Krakatau Eruption. Geophysical
Sunda Strait. https://bnpb.go.id/tsunami-selat-sunda. Accessed
Research Letters, 22(4), 509–512.
14 Jan 2019.
Omira, R., Dogan, G. G., Hidayat, R., Husrin, S., Prasetya, G.,
Choi, B. H., Pelinovsky, E., Kim, K. O., & Lee, J. S. (2003).
Annunziato, A., et al. (2019). The September 28th, 2018, tsunami
Simulation of the trans-oceanic tsunami propagation due to the
in Palu-Sulawesi, Indonesia: A post-event survey. Pure and
1883 Krakatu volcanic eruption. Natural Hazards and Earth
Applied Geophysics, 176(4), 1379–1395.
System Science, 3(5), 321–332.
Pelinovsky, E., Choi, B.H., Stromkov, A., Didenkulova, I., Kim,
Fine, I., Rabinovich, A.B., Thomson, R.E., Kulikov, E.A. (2003).
H.-S. (2005). Analysis of tide-gauge records of the 1883 Kra-
Numerical modeling of tsunami generated by submarine and
katau tsunami. In Satake, K. (Ed.), Advances in Natural and
subaerial landlsides. In Yalciner, A.C., Pelinovsky, A., Okal, E.,
Technological Hazards Research (vol. 23). Dordrecht: Springer.
Synolakis, C.E. (Eds.), Submarine Landside and Tsunamis. The
Pelinovsky, E., Zahibo, N., Dunkley, P., Edmonds, M., Herd, R.,
Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
Talipova, T., Kozelkov, A., Nikolkina, I. (2004). Tsunami gen-
Grilli, S., Tappin, D.R., Carey, S., Watt, S.F.L., Ward, S.N., Grilli,
erated by the volcano eruption on July 12–13, 2003 at Montserrat
A.R., Engwell, S.L., Zhang, C., Kirby, J., Schambach, L., Muin,
Lesser Antilles. Science of Tsunami Hazards, 22(1), 44–57
M. (2019). Modeling of the tsunami from the December 22, 2018
Putra, P. S. (2018). Tsunami sediments and their grain size char-
lateral collapse of Anak Krakatau volcano in the Sunda Strait,
acteristics. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental
Indonesia. Scientific Reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-
Science, 118, 012035.
019-48327-6.
Putra, P. S., Aswan, A., Maryunani, K. A., Yulianto, E., & Kongko,
Heinrich, P., Gulbourg, S., Mangency, A., & Roche, R. (1999).
W. (2019). Field survey of the 2018 Sulawesi tsunami deposits.
Numerical modeling of a landslide-generated tsunami following
Pure and Applied Geophysics, 176(6), 2203–2213.
a potential explosion of the Montserrat Volcano. Physics and
Satake, K., Nishimura, Y., Putra, P.S., Gusman, A.R., Sunendar,
Chemistry of the Earth, 24(2), 163–168.
H., Fujii, Y., Tanioka, Y., Lateif, H., Yulianto, E. (2013). Tsu-
Jagodziński, R., Sternal, B., Szczuciński, W., Chagué-Goff, C., &
nami source of the 2010 Mentawai, Indonesia earthquake
Sugawara, D. (2012). Heavy minerals in the 2011 Tohoku-Oki
inferred from tsunami field survey and waveform modeling. Pure
tsunami deposits—Insights into sediment sources and hydrody-
and Applied Geophysics, 170, 1567–1582
namics. Sedimentary Geology, 282, 57–64.
Simkin, T., & Fiske, R. S. (1983). Krakatau 1883: A classic geo-
Kulikov, E. A., Rabinovich, A., Thomson, R. E., & Bornhold, B. D.
physical event. EOS, 64(34), 513–514.
(1996). The landslide tsunami of November 3, 1994, Skagway
Sugawara, D., Minoura, K., & Imamura, F. (2008). Tsunamis and
Harbor, Alaska. Journal of Geophysical Research, 101(C3),
tsunami sedimentology. In T. Shiki, Y. Tsuji, T. Yamazaki, & K.
6609–6615.
Minoura (Eds.), Tsunamiites—Features and Implications (pp.
Maeno, F., & Imamura, F. (2011). Tsunami generation by a rapid
163–181). New York: Elsevier.
entrance of pyroclastic flow into the sea during the 1883 Kra-
Takabatake, T., Shibayama, T., Esteban, M., Achiari, H., Nuris-
katau eruption, Indonesia. Journal of Geophysical Research.
man, N., Gelfi, M., Tarigan, T.A., Kencana, E.R., Fauzi, M.A.R.,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JB008253.
Panalaran, S., Harnantyari, A.S., Kyaw, T.O. (2019). Field sur-
Matsumoto, D., Sawai, Y., Tanigawa, K., Fujiwara, O., Namegaya,
vey and evacuation behaviour during the 2018 Sunda Strait
Y., Shishikura, M., Kagohara, K., Kimura, H. (2016). Tsunami
tsunami. Coastal Enginering Journal. https://doi.org/10.1080/
deposit associated with the 2011 Tohoku-oki tsunami in the
21664250.2019.1647963
Hasunuma site of the Kujukuri coastal plain, Japan. Island Arc,
TDMRC (Tsunami and Disaster Mitigation Research Centre, Syiah
25(5), 369–385
Kuala University). (2019). The latest update from post Sunda
Muhari, A., Heidarzadeh, M., Susmoro, H., Nugroho, H.D., Kris-
Strait tsunami survey. https://tdmrc.unsyiah.ac.id/the-latest-
wati, E., Wijanarto, A.B., Imamura, F., Arikawa, T. (2019). The
update-from-post-sunda-strait-tsunami-survey/. Accessed 21 Jan
December 2018 Anak Krakatau Volcano tsunami as inferred
2019
from post-tsunami field surveys and spectral analysis. Pure and
Watts, P. (2000). Tsunami features of solid block underwater
Applied Geophysics, 176, 5219–5233
landslides. Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal and Ocean
Nakamura, Y., Nishimura, Y., & Putra, P. S. (2012). Local varia-
Engineering, 126(3), 144–152.
tion of inundation, sedimentary characteristics, and mineral
Williams, R., Rowley, P., & Garthwaite, C. (2019). Reconstructing
assemblages of the 2011 Tohoku-Oki tsunami on the Misawa
the Anak Krakatau flank collapse that caused the December 2018
coast, Aomori, Japan. Sedimentary Geology, 282, 216–227.
Indonesian tsunami. Geology. https://doi.org/10.1130/G46517.1.
Newhall, C.G., Decker, R.W., Sudradjat, A., Tilling, R.I. Peteson,
Yokoyama, I. (1987). A scenario of the 1883 Krakatau tsunami.
D.W. (1983). A comparison of eruption and magma reservoirs of
Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 34(1–2),
Krakatau, Mount St. Helens, and Galunggung. In Symposium on
123–132.

(Received October 15, 2019, revised February 5, 2020, accepted February 8, 2020, Published online February 19, 2020)