search

jgalazm / Nami

0 stars 1 forks source link

2010, Bio Bio - Chile: comparison against DART buoy #11

Open jgalazm opened 6 years ago

jgalazm commented 6 years ago

From @jgalazm on January 7, 2018 19:3

Using DeLouis et al. (2010) finite fault model (many segments) and comparing with maybe more than one dart buoy?

Using these dart buoys: 

    pois['dart'] ={
            location:[-86.374, -17.984 ]
        };

Copied from original issue: Inria-Chile/tsunami-lab#127

jgalazm commented 6 years ago

DeLouis earthquake: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2010GL043899/full

Slip model here: (lat lon z rake slip time) http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1029/2010GL043899/asset/supinfo/grl27207-sup-0003-ts02.txt?v=1&s=806ef3f4df8e35ab8494cf62f242d1eb148d2089

As mentioned in the paper (strike, dip) = (15,18), and L = W = 40km. See section 3, paragraph [11] image

jgalazm commented 6 years ago

From that paragraph, notice that (720,280) = (18, 7) and 18*7 = 126 which is the number of subfaults. So L = W = 40 is fine.

Just to be sure that W = 40 and not W = 40 cos(dip)

jgalazm commented 6 years ago

Time series now look like this:

image

Pretty satisfying, now I should run this with geoclaw and easywave, and maybe compare 2D plots.

jgalazm commented 6 years ago

The results of easywave are very similar also

image

jgalazm commented 6 years ago

Geoclaw also looks similar but less oscillatory, which is very good.

image