Next Article in Journal
Tree Species Classification and Health Status Assessment for a Mixed Broadleaf-Conifer Forest with UAS Multispectral Imaging
Next Article in Special Issue
Ground Deformation Modelling of the 2020 Mw6.9 Samos Earthquake (Greece) Based on InSAR and GNSS Data
Previous Article in Journal
A New Method for Automated Clearcut Disturbance Detection in Mediterranean Coppice Forests Using Landsat Time Series
Previous Article in Special Issue
Towards a PS-InSAR Based Prediction Model for Building Collapse: Spatiotemporal Patterns of Vertical Surface Motion in Collapsed Building Areas—Case Study of Alexandria, Egypt
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Multi-Segment Rupture Model of the 2016 Kumamoto Earthquake Revealed by InSAR and GPS Data

1
School of Geodesy and Geomatics, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430079, China
2
Key Laboratory of Geospace Environment and Geodesy, Ministry of Education, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430079, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Remote Sens. 2020, 12(22), 3721; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12223721
Submission received: 5 October 2020 / Revised: 6 November 2020 / Accepted: 9 November 2020 / Published: 12 November 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Ground Deformation Patterns Detection by InSAR and GNSS Techniques)

Abstract

The 2016 Kumamoto earthquake, including two large (Mw ≥ 6.0) foreshocks and an Mw 7.0 mainshock, occurred in the Hinagu and Futagawa fault zones in the middle of Kyushu island, Japan. Here, we obtain the complex coseismic deformation field associated with this earthquake from Advanced Land Observation Satellite-2 (ALOS-2) and Sentinel-1A Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) data. These InSAR data, in combination with available Global Positioning System (GPS) data, are then used to determine an optimal four-segment fault geometry with the jRi method, which considers both data misfit and the perturbation error from data noise. Our preferred slip distribution model indicates that the rupture is dominated by right-lateral strike-slip, with a significant normal slip component. The largest asperity is located on the northern segment of the Futagawa fault, with a maximum slip of 5.6 m at a 5–6 km depth. The estimated shallow slips along the Futagawa fault and northern Hinagu fault are consistent with the displacements of surface ruptures from the field investigation, suggesting a shallow slip deficit. The total geodetic moment release is estimated to be 4.89 × 1019 Nm (Mw 7.09), which is slightly larger than seismological estimates. The calculated static Coulomb stress changes induced by the preferred slip distribution model cannot completely explain the spatial distribution of aftershocks. Sensitivity analysis of Coulomb stress change implies that aftershocks in the stress shadow area may be driven by aseismic creep or triggered by dynamic stress transfer, requiring further investigation.
Keywords: 2016 Kumamoto earthquake; InSAR; GPS; slip distribution; shallow slip deficit; Coulomb stress change 2016 Kumamoto earthquake; InSAR; GPS; slip distribution; shallow slip deficit; Coulomb stress change
Graphical Abstract

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

He, Z.; Chen, T.; Wang, M.; Li, Y. Multi-Segment Rupture Model of the 2016 Kumamoto Earthquake Revealed by InSAR and GPS Data. Remote Sens. 2020, 12, 3721. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12223721

AMA Style

He Z, Chen T, Wang M, Li Y. Multi-Segment Rupture Model of the 2016 Kumamoto Earthquake Revealed by InSAR and GPS Data. Remote Sensing. 2020; 12(22):3721. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12223721

Chicago/Turabian Style

He, Zhongqiu, Ting Chen, Mingce Wang, and Yanchong Li. 2020. "Multi-Segment Rupture Model of the 2016 Kumamoto Earthquake Revealed by InSAR and GPS Data" Remote Sensing 12, no. 22: 3721. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12223721

APA Style

He, Z., Chen, T., Wang, M., & Li, Y. (2020). Multi-Segment Rupture Model of the 2016 Kumamoto Earthquake Revealed by InSAR and GPS Data. Remote Sensing, 12(22), 3721. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12223721

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop