JDR Vol.18 No.3 pp. 199-208
doi: 10.20965/jdr.2023.p0199


Application of Stress Parameter from Liquefaction Analysis on the Landslide Induced Tsunami Simulation: A Case Study of the 2018 Palu Tsunami

Karina Aprilia Sujatmiko*1,† ORCID Icon, Koji Ichii*2, Soichiro Murata*2, and Iyan Eka Mulia*3,*4 ORCID Icon

*1Research Group of Oceanography, Faculty of Earth Sciences and Technology, Bandung Institute of Technology (ITB)
Jl. Ganesha 10, Bandung, West Java 40132, Indonesia

Corresponding author

*2Faculty of Societal Safety Sciences, Kansai University
Takatsuki, Japan

*3Prediction Science Laboratory, RIKEN Cluster for Pioneering Research, RIKEN
Kobe, Japan

*4Disaster Resilience Science Team, RIKEN Center for Advanced Intelligence Project, RIKEN
Tokyo, Japan

January 13, 2022
January 6, 2023
April 1, 2023
landslide, liquefaction, tsunami, shear-stress

The accuracy of numerical simulations of a landslide-induced tsunami depends on the landslide characteristics, such as landslide geometry and geotechnical parameters. However, owing to the difficulty in sampling and measuring submarine landslides, rough assumptions of landslide parameters typically lead to significant uncertainties. In the 2018 Palu event, the earthquake was followed by immediate cascading disasters of coastal subsidence, both land and submarine landslides and a tsunami. This scenario provides opportunities to analyze landslide phenomena on land to characterize the submarine landslide causing the tsunami. This study proposes a new approach of using shear-stress parameters obtained from liquefaction analyses as input for landslide-induced tsunami simulation. To obtain the submarine landslide parameter, using the finite element method we modeled the liquefaction happened in Jono-Oge located near Palu Valley area. The shear-stress in this area was quite small with the range 1.5–3.5 kPa. We found that tsunami simulation yielded better accuracy by applying the stress value range obtained from the liquefaction analysis on land (1.5 kPa) rather than the typically adopted stress value for general cases (20 kPa). The result from the tsunami simulation using two-layer method with identical landslide location and geometry showed that shear-stress value of landslide mass gave quite a significant effect to the tsunami height.

Cite this article as:
K. Sujatmiko, K. Ichii, S. Murata, and I. Mulia, “Application of Stress Parameter from Liquefaction Analysis on the Landslide Induced Tsunami Simulation: A Case Study of the 2018 Palu Tsunami,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.18 No.3, pp. 199-208, 2023.
Data files:
  1. [1] United States Geological Survey (USGS), “M 7.5 – 72 km N of Palu, Indonesia.” [Accessed January 17, 2020]
  2. [2] M. Heidarzadeh, A. Muhari, and A. B. Wijanarto, “Insights on the Source of the 28 September 2018 Sulawesi Tsunami, Indonesia Based on Spectral Analyses and Numerical Simulations,” Pure Appl. Geophys., Vol.176, No.1, pp. 25-43, 2019.
  3. [3] Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana Indonesia (BNPB) (in Indonesian). [Accessed February 3, 2020]
  4. [4] M. Heidarzadeh and K. Satake, “Possible Dual Earthquake–Landslide Source of the 13 November 2016 Kaikoura, New Zealand Tsunami,” Pure Appl. Geophys., Vol.174, No.10, pp. 3737-3749, 2017.
  5. [5] M. Heidarzadeh, A. R. Gusman, T. Ishibe, R. Sabeti, and J. Šepić, “Estimating the Eruption-Induced Water Displacement Source of the 15 January 2022 Tonga Volcanic Tsunami from Tsunami Spectra and Numerical Modelling,” Ocean Eng., Vol.261, 112165, 2022.
  6. [6] R. Sabeti and M. Heidarzadeh, “Numerical Simulations of Tsunami Wave Generation by Submarine Landslides: Validation and Sensitivity Analysis to Landslide Parameters,” J. Waterw. Port Coast. Ocean Eng., Vol.148, No.2, 05021016, 2022.
  7. [7] H. Takagi et al., “Analysis of Generation and Arrival Time of Landslide Tsunami to Palu City Due to the 2018 Sulawesi Earthquake,” Landslides, Vol.16, No.5, pp. 983-991, 2019.
  8. [8] M. Carvajal, C. Araya-Cornejo, I. Sepùlveda, D. Melnick, and J. S. Haase, “Nearly Instantaneous Tsunamis Following the Mw 7.5 2018 Palu Earthquake,” Geophys. Res. Lett., Vol.46, No.10, pp. 5117-5126, 2019.
  9. [9] K. Pakoksung et al., “Simulation of the Submarine Landslide Tsunami on 28 September 2018 in Palu Bay, Sulawesi Island, Indonesia, Using a Two-Layer Model,” Pure Appl. Geophys., Vol.176, No.8, pp. 3323-3350, 2019.
  10. [10] A. R. Gusman et al., “Source Model for the Tsunami Inside Palu Bay Following the 2018 Palu Earthquake, Indonesia,” Geophys. Res. Lett., Vol.46, No.15, pp. 8721-8730, 2019.
  11. [11] A. Jamelot, A. Gailler, P. Heinrich, A. Vallage, and J. Champenois, “Tsunami Simulations of the Sulawesi Mw 7.5 Event: Comparison of Seismic Sources Issued from a Tsunami Warning Context Versus Post-Event Finite Source,” Pure Appl. Geophys., Vol.176, No.8, pp. 3351-3376, 2019.
  12. [12] T. Ulrich et al., “Coupled, Physics-Based Modeling Reveals Earthquake Displacements are Critical to the 2018 Palu, Sulawesi Tsunami,” Pure Appl. Geophys., Vol.176, No.10, pp. 4069-4109, 2019.
  13. [13] K. Goda et al., “Cascading Geological Hazards and Risks of the 2018 Sulawesi Indonesia Earthquake and Sensitivity Analysis of Tsunami Inundation Simulations,” Front. Earth Sci., Vol.7, 261, 2019.
  14. [14] I. Sepúlveda, J. S. Haase, M. Carvajal, X. Xu, and P. L. F. Liu, “Modeling the Sources of the 2018 Palu, Indonesia, Tsunami Using Videos from Social Media,” J. Geophys. Res.: Solid Earth, Vol.125, No.3, e2019JB018675, 2020.
  15. [15] K. Nakata, A. Katsumata, and A. Muhari, “Submarine Landslide Source Models Consistent with Multiple Tsunami Records of the 2018 Palu Tsunami, Sulawesi, Indonesia,” Earth Planets Space, Vol.72, No.1, 44, 2020.
  16. [16] P. L.-F. Liu et al., “Coastal Landslides in Palu Bay During 2018 Sulawesi Earthquake and Tsunami,” Landslides, Vol.17, No.9, pp. 2085-2098, 2020.
  17. [17] M. Heidarzadeh and K. Satake, “A Combined Earthquake–Landslide Source Model for the Tsunami from the 27 November 1945 Mw 8.1 Makran Earthquake,” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., Vol.107, No.2, pp. 1033-1040, 2017.
  18. [18] R. Sabeti and M. Heidarzadeh, “A New Empirical Equation for Predicting the Maximum Initial Amplitude of Submarine Landslide-Generated Waves,” Landslides, Vol.19, No.2, pp. 491-503, 2022.
  19. [19] F. Imamura and M. A. Imteaz, “Long Waves in Two Layers: Governing Equations and Numerical Model,” Sci. Tsunami Hazards, Vol.13, No.1, pp. 3-24, 1995.
  20. [20] A. C. Yalçıner, B. Alpar, Y. Altınok, İ. Özbay, and F. Imamura, “Tsunamis in the Sea of Marmara: Historical Documents for the Past, Models for the Future,” Mar. Geol., Vol.190, Nos.1-2, pp. 445-463, 2002.
  21. [21] K. Kelfoun, T. Giachetti, and P. Labazuy, “Landslide-Generated Tsunamis at Réunion Island,” J. Geophys. Res.: Earth Surf., Vol.115, No.F4, F04012, 2010.
  22. [22] Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), “Boring Survey for Basic Response for Central Sulawesi Earthquake (Phase 1) Under the JICA Survey for Disaster Information Collection in Indonesia,” 2019.
  23. [23] K. A. Sujatmiko and K. Ichii, “Velocity of Liquefaction-Induced Landslide in Jono-Oge Triggered by 7.5 Mw Palu Earthquake,” J. Jpn. Soc. Civ. Eng., Ser. A1 (Struct. Eng. Earthq. Eng. (SE/EE)), Vol.77, No.4, pp. I_436-I_445, 2021.
  24. [24] W. D. L. Finn, “State-of-the-Art of Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering Practice,” Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., Vol.20, Nos.1-4, pp. 1-15, 2000.
  25. [25] P. de Alba and T. P. Ballestero, “Residual Strength After Liquefaction: A Rheological Approach,” Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., Vol.26, Nos.2-4, pp. 143-151, 2006.
  26. [26] O. C. Zienkiewicz and P. Bettes, “Soils and Other Saturated Media Under Transient, Dynamic Conditions General Formulation and the Validity of Various Simplifying Assumptions,” G. N. Pande and O. C. Zienkiewicz (Eds.), “Soil Mechanics – Transient and Cyclic Loads,” pp. 1-16, John Wiley & Sons, 1982.
  27. [27] S. Iai, T. Tobita, O. Ozutsumi, and K. Ueda, “Dilatancy of Granular Materials in a Strain Space Multiple Mechanism Model,” Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., Vol.35, No.3, pp. 360-392, 2011.
  28. [28] K. Ichii, K. Uemura, N. Orai, and J. Hyodo, “Numerical Simulation Trial by Cocktail Glass Model in FLIP ROSE for LEAP-UCD-2017,” B. L. Kutter, M. T. Manzari, and M. Zeghal (Eds.), “Model Tests and Numerical Simulations of Liquefaction and Lateral Spreading: LEAP-UCD-2017,” pp. 611-627, Springer, 2020.
  29. [29] S. Iai, “Paths Forward for Evaluating Seismic Performance of Geotechnical Structures,” B. L. Kutter, M. T. Manzari, and M. Zeghal (Eds.), “Model Tests and Numerical Simulations of Liquefaction and Lateral Spreading: LEAP-UCD-2017,” pp. 639-641, Springer, 2020.
  30. [30] T. Kiyota, H. Furuichi, R. F. Hidayat, N. Tada, and H. Nawir, “Overview of Long-Distance Flow-Slide Caused by the 2018 Sulawesi Earthquake, Indonesia,” Soils Found., Vol.60, No.3, pp. 722-735, 2020.
  31. [31] W. Yamamoto and T. Tobita, “Mechanism of Occurrence of Gentle Slope Landslide in the 2018 Sulawesi, Indonesia Earthquake,” The 15th Int. Symp. in Science and Technology, 2021.
  32. [32] M. Heidarzadeh, S. Krastel, and A. C. Yalciner, “The State-of-the-Art Numerical Tools for Modeling Landslide Tsunamis: A Short Review,” S. Krastel et al. (Eds.), “Submarine Mass Movements and Their Consequences: 6th International Symposium,” pp. 483-495, Springer, 2014.
  33. [33] T. Giachetti, R. Paris, K. Kelfoun, and F. J. Pérez-Torrado, “Numerical Modelling of the Tsunami Triggered by the Güìmar Debris Avalanche, Tenerife (Canary Islands): Comparison with Field-Based Data,” Mar. Geol., Vol.284, Nos.1-4, pp. 189-202, 2011.
  34. [34] R. Paris, T. Giachetti, J. Chevalier, H. Guillou, and N. Frank, “Tsunami Deposits in Santiago Island (Cape Verde Archipelago) as Possible Evidence of a Massive Flank Failure of Fogos Volcano,” Sediment. Geol., Vol.239, Nos.3-4, pp. 129-145, 2011.
  35. [35] I. E. Mulia et al., “Simulation of the 2018 Tsunami Due to the Flank Failure of Anak Krakatau Volcano and Implication for Future Observing Systems,” Geophys. Res. Lett., Vol.47, No.14, e2020GL087334, 2020.
  36. [36] S. Tinti, G. Pagnoni, and F. Zaniboni, “The Landslides and Tsunamis of the 30th of December 2002 in Stromboli Analysed Through Numerical Simulations,” Bull. Volcanol., Vol.68, No.5, pp. 462-479, 2006.
  37. [37] M. Heidarzadeh and I. E. Mulia, “A New Dual Earthquake and Submarine Landslide Source Model for the 28 September 2018 Palu (Sulawesi), Indonesia Tsunami,” Coast. Eng. J., Vol.65, Issue 1, pp. 97-109, 2023.
  38. [38] T. Arikawa et al., “Coastal Subsidence Induced Several Tsunamis During the 2018 Sulawesi Earthquake,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.13, Sci. Comm., sc20181204, 2018.
  39. [39] R. Omira et al., “The September 28th, 2018, Tsunami in Palu-Sulawesi, Indonesia: A Post-Event Field Survey,” Pure Appl. Geophys., Vol.176, No.4, pp. 1379-1395, 2019.
  40. [40] Syamsidik, Benazir, M. Umar, G. Margaglio, and A. Fitrayansyah, “Post-Tsunami Survey of the 28 September 2018 Tsunami Near Palu Bay in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia: Impacts and Challenges to Coastal Communities,” Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct., Vol.38, 101229, 2019.
  41. [41] T. Mikami et al., “Field Survey of the 2018 Sulawesi Tsunami: Inundation and Run-Up Heights and Damage to Coastal Communities,” Pure Appl. Geophys., Vol.176, No.8, pp. 3291-3304, 2019.

*This site is desgined based on HTML5 and CSS3 for modern browsers, e.g. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, Opera.

Last updated on Jun. 03, 2024