Computing Scheme of Co-seismic Change of Deflection of the Vertical and Applied in the 2010 Chile Earthquake

  • Wenke SunEmail author
  • Xin Zhou
Conference paper
Part of the International Association of Geodesy Symposia book series (IAG SYMPOSIA, volume 139)


This paper introduces a scheme to compute co-seismic change of deflection of the vertical. To compare the theoretical deflection changes with the GRACE-observed ones, the dislocation Love numbers are truncated and the Green’s functions are computed with application of a Gaussian filter. This study further examines the problem of seawater correction to modeled geoid and deflection changes. As an application of the dislocation theory and the computing scheme, we consider the 2010 Chile earthquake (Mw8.8) using two fault slip models, to compute the co-seismic geoid and deflection changes considering seawater corrections. Results indicate that the co-seismic geoid and deflection changes can be detected clearly by GRACE observation, and the co-seismic geoid change is not sensitive to the fault slip models; whereas the co-seismic deflection changes are sensitive. These behaviors provide us a new and useful approach to invert seismic faults using GRACE-observed deflection changes as constraints.


2010 Chile earthquake Co-seismic deformation Deflection of the vertical Geoid 



The authors thank Dr. Vigny for providing the digital fault model, and are grateful to the constructive comments by three reviewers. This study was financially supported by the CAS/CAFEA International Partnership Program for Creative Research Teams (No. KZZD-EW-TZ-19) and National Nature Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 41174063).


  1. Chen JL, Wilson CR, Tapley BD et al (2007) GRACE detects coseismic and postseismic deformation from the Sumatra–Andaman earthquake. Geophys Res Lett 34:L13302Google Scholar
  2. Gross RS, Chao BF (2001) The gravitational signature of earthquakes, in gravity, geoid, and geodynamics 2000. In: Sideris MG (ed) IAG symposia, vol 123. Springer, New York, pp 205–210Google Scholar
  3. Han S-C, Shum CK, Bevis M et al (2006) Crustal dilatation observed by GRACE after the 2004 Sumatra-Andaman earthquake. Science 313:658–662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Heki K, Matsuo K (2010) Coseismic gravity changes of the 2010 earthquake in Central Chile from 163 satellite gravimetry. Geophys Res Lett 37:L24306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Imanishi Y, Sato T, Higashi T, Sun W, Okubo S (2004) A network of superconducting gravimeters detects submicrogal coseismic gravity changes. Science 306:476–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Linage C, Rivera L, Hinderer J et al (2009) Separation of coseismic and postseismic gravity changes for the 2004 Sumatra–Andaman earthquake from 4.6 yr of GRACE observations and modelling of the coseismic change by normal–modes summation. Geophys J Int 176(3):695–714Google Scholar
  7. Madariaga R, Métois M, Vigny C, Campos J (2010) Central Chile finally breaks. Science 328:181–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Okada Y (1985) Surface deformation caused by shear and tensile faults in a half-space. Bull Seismol Soc Am 75(4):1135–1154Google Scholar
  9. Okubo S (1992) Potential and gravity changes caused by shear and tensile faults. J Geophys Res 97:7137–7144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ogawa R, Heki K (2007) Slow postseismic recovery of geoid depression formed by the 2004 Sumatra–Andaman Earthquake by mantle water diffusion. Geophys Res Lett 34:L06313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Panet I, Mikhailov V, Diament M et al (2007) Coseismic and post-seismic signatures of the Sumatra 2004 December and 2005 March earthquakes in GRACE satellite gravity. Geophys J Int 171(1):177–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Piersanti A, Spada G, Sabadini R et al (1995) Global post-seismic deformation. Geophys J Int 120:544–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Pollitz FF (1992) Postseismic relaxation theory on the spherical Earth. Bull Seismol Soc Am 82:422–453Google Scholar
  14. Sabadini R, Piersanti A, Spada G (1995) Toroidal/poloidal partitioning of global post-seismic deformation. Geophys Res Lett 21:985–988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Saito M (1967) Excitation of free oscillations and surface waves by a point source in a vertically heterogeneous Earth. J Geophys Res 72:3689–3699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Soldati G, Piersanti A, Boschi E (1998) Global postseismic gravity changes of a viscoelastic Earth. J Geophys Res 103(B12):29867–29886CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sun W, Okubo S (1993) Surface potential and gravity changes due to internal dislocations in a spherical Earth, 1, Theory for a point dislocation. Geophys J Int 114:569–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sun W, Okubo S (2004) Co-seismic deformations detectable by satellite gravity missions – a case study of Alaska (1964, 2002) and Hokkaido (2003) earthquakes in the spectral domain. J Geophys Res 109(B4), B04405Google Scholar
  19. Sun W, Okubo S, Vanicek P (1996) Global displacement caused by dislocations in a realistic earth model. J Geophys Res 101:8561–8577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Sun W, Okubo S, Fu G (2006) Green’s function of co-seismic strain changes and investigation of effects of Earth’s curvature and radial heterogeneity. Geophys J Int 167:1273–1291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sun W, Okubo S, Fu G, Araya A (2009) General formulations of global co-seismic deformations caused by an arbitrary dislocation in a spherically symmetric Earth model – applicable to deformed Earth surface and space-fixed point. Geophys J Int 177:817–833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sun W, Zhou X (2012) Co-seismic deflection change of the vertical caused by the 2011 Tohoku-Oki earthquake (Mw9.0). Geophys J Int 189, 937–955. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.2012.05434.x
  23. Takeuchi H, Saito M (1972) Seismic surface waves. Methods Comput Phys 11:217–295Google Scholar
  24. Tanaka Y, Okuno J, Okubo S (2006) A new method for the computation of global viscoelastic post-seismic deformation in a realistic earth model (I). Geophys J Int 164(2):273–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Swenson SC, Wahr J (2006) Post-processing removal of correlated errors in GRACE data. Geophys Res Lett 33:L08402Google Scholar
  26. Vigny et al (2011) The 2010 Mw 8.8 Maule Megathrust Earthquake of Central Chile, Monitored by GPS. Science 332:1417. doi: 10.1126/science.1204132
  27. Wahr J, Molenaar M, Bryan F (1998) Time variability of the Earth’s gravity field: hydrological and oceanic effects and their possible detection using GRACE. J Geophys Res 103:30205–30230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wang R, Lorenzo-Martin F, Roth F (2006) PSGRN/PSCMP—a new code for calculating co- and post-seismic deformation, geoid and gravity changes based on the viscoelastic-gravitational dislocation theory. Comput Geosci 32:527–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Zhou X, Sun W, Zhao B et al (2011a) Geodetic observations detected co-seismic displacements and gravity changes caused by the Tohoku-Oki earthquake (Mw = 9.0). J Geophys Res 117:B05408. doi: 10.1029/2011JB008849
  30. Zhou X, Sun W, Fu G (2011b) Gravity satellite GRACE detects coseismic gravity changes caused by 2010 Mw 8.8 Chile earthquake. Chin J Geophys 54(7):1745–1749 (in Chinese)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Key Laboratory of Computational GeodynamicsUniversity of Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations