Tsunami hazard assessment for the central and southern pacific coast of Colombia

Figures & data

Figure 1. Study area and approximate rupture areas of documented historical tsunami precursor earthquakes

Figure 2. Slip deficit model scenarios considered in this study (Poveda and Pulido 2019): A worst-scenario, B 1906 scenario, and C 1979 scenario

Figure 3. Broadband slip model scenarios considered in this study (Poveda and Pulido 2019) A worst-scenario, B 1906 scenario, and C 1979 scenario

Table 1. Parameters used in the three slip deficit models and three broadband slip models (Poveda and Pulido 2019)

Slip model and scenario		Length (º)	Latitude (º)	Depth(km)	Fault length (km)	Fault width (km)	Strike (º)	Dip (º)	Rake (º)	Slip (m)
Slip deficit	Worst-case scenario	−79.9541	0.6237	23.2	10	10	30	15	118	20.9
	1906 scenario	−79.9541	0.6237	23.2	10	10	30	15	118	8.4
	1979 scenario	−79.4344	1.7900	18.0	10	10	30	15	118	5.4
Broadband wavelength slip	Worst-case scenario	−80.0753	0.5933	20.6	10	10	30	15	118	19.4
	1906 scenario	−80.0233	0.3474	25.8	10	10	30	15	118	9.1
	1979 scenario	−78.5727	2.8479	23.2	10	10	30	15	118	5.6

Figure 4. Average sea level regime determined for Tumaco

Figure 5. Average sea level regime determined for Buenaventura

Figure 6. Computer grids. A 1: 810 m resolution grid; B 2: 270 m resolution grid; C 3: 90 m resolution grid; D 4: 30 m resolution grid; E 5: 10 m resolution grid]

Figure 7. Vertical deformation of the seafloor for each of the three scenarios of slip deficit models in the Colombo-Ecuadorian subduction zone: worst-case scenario (left), 1906 scenario (center), and 1979 scenario (right)

Figure 8. Vertical deformation of the seafloor for each of the three scenarios of broadband slip models in the Colombo-Ecuadorian subduction zone: worst-case scenario (left), 1906 scenario (center), and 1979 scenario (right)

Table 2. Uplift and subsidence by segment for the scenarios

Esmeraldas segment	Maximum uplift (m)	Maximum subsidence (m)
Worst-case scenario, slip deficit model	6.0	−2.5
1906 scenario, slip deficit model	2.5	−1.0
1979 scenario, slip deficit model	0.5	0.0
Worst-case scenario, broadband slip model	3.5	−1.0
1906 scenario, broadband slip model	2.5	−1.0
1979 scenario, broadband slip model	0.5	0.0
Manglares segment
Worst-case scenario, slip deficit model	3.5	−2.0
1906 scenario, slip deficit model	1.5	−1.0
1979 scenario, slip deficit model	1.5	−1.0
Worst-case scenario, broadband slip model	3.0	−1.0
1906 scenario, broadband slip model	1.5	−1.0
1979 scenario, broadband slip model	1.5	−0.5
Tumaco segment
Worst-case scenario, slip deficit model	3.5	−0.5
1906 scenario, slip deficit model	1.0	−1.0
1979 scenario, slip deficit model	1.5	−1.0
Worst-case scenario, broadband slip model	5.5	−1.0
1906 scenario, broadband slip model	0.5	−0.5
1979 scenario, broadband slip model	1.5	−0.5

Figure 9. Variation of the free surface at selected points to record the evolution of the tsunami wave as it propagates into Buenaventura Bay: Worst-case scenario of the slip deficit model]

Table 3. Maximum tsunami height, maximum inundation distance, and inundation area for the tsunami simulations around Tumaco, Morro, and Cascajal Islands, for six scenarios

Tumaco Island	Maximum tsunami height (m)	Maximum run-up distance (km)	Inundation area (km^2)
Worst-case scenario, slip deficit model	4.66	0.839	3.48
1906 scenario, slip deficit model	2.11	0.156	1.38
1979 scenario, slip deficit model	2.30	0.347	1.71
Worst-case scenario, broadband slip model	3.2	0.34	2.07
1906 scenario, broadband slip model	1.45	0.01	1.6
1979 scenario, broadband slip model	1.88	0.30	1.62
Morro Island
Worst-case scenario, slip deficit model	4.34	1.1	3.42
1906 scenario, slip deficit model	1.91	0.78	0.84
1979 scenario, slip deficit model	2.19	0.85	1.06
Worst-case scenario, broadband slip model	2.75	0.65	1.68
1906 scenario, broadband slip model	1.13	0.55	0.50
1979 scenario, broadband slip model	1.45	0.78	0.72
Cascajal Island
Worst-case scenario, slip deficit model	0.53	0.47	0.33
1906 scenario, slip deficit model	0.22	0.21	0.14
1979 scenario, slip deficit model	0.29	0.27	0.15
Worst-case scenario, broadband slip model	0.52	0.45	0.30
1906 scenario, broadband slip model	0.19	0.0	0.0
1979 scenario, broadband slip model	0.31	0.0	0.0

Figure 10. Tsunami height and run-up for slip deficit model scenarios. The worst-case scenario shows the maximum tsunami run-up. The top view is of Tumaco Island, the center view is of Morro Island and the bottom view is of Cascajal Island; left: worst case scenario; center: 1906 scenario; and right: 1979 scenario

Figure 11. Tsunami height and run-up for broadband slip model scenario. The worst-case scenario shows the maximum tsunami run-up. The top view is of Tumaco Island, the center view is of Morro Island and the bottom view is of Cascajal Island; left: worst case scenario; center: 1906 scenario; and right: 1979 scenario

Figure 12. Inundation depth in meters, of the worst-case scenario of the slip deficit model for the Tumaco, Morro and Cascajal islands]

Poveda, E., and N. Pulido. 2019. “Earthquake Rupture and Slip Scenarios for Ecuador-Colombia Subduction Zone.” Colombian Geological Survey (SGC). seismo.sgc.gov.co:90. http://sismo.sgc.gov.co:90/

 Google Scholar