This study is a part of the activity in the frameworks of ISTC 2975 project “New methods of interpretation of new satellite data on the Earth gravity field and its temporal variations: development and applications”

Launched in 2002, the GRACE satellite mission is aimed to monitor the time variations of the Earth gravity field. It provides high accuracy models of the Earth gravity field every 3-5 weeks.

The Earth’s gravity field changes with time, following mass redistribution (1) in the outer fluid envelops and (2) in the solid Earth

In particular, motion of the ground surface and of inner interfaces during an earthquake changes the gravity field in the vicinity of the epicenter.

Cumulative errors in geoid

GOCECHAMP : 7 yersGRACE : 5 yearsGOCE : 1 year

Gravity anomalies suing data of 10 years of satellite tracing

Model GGM02S based on 363 days of Grace measurements

Temporal variations of the Earth gravity field mirror mass Temporal variations of the Earth gravity field mirror mass

redistribution in the outer fluid envelops and inside the solid Earth. redistribution in the outer fluid envelops and inside the solid Earth.

Most of the variability in the gravity results from the dynamics of Most of the variability in the gravity results from the dynamics of

the atmosphere, oceans, and land hydrological systems. the atmosphere, oceans, and land hydrological systems.

Post-glacial rebound, tectonic, seismic and volcanic events also Post-glacial rebound, tectonic, seismic and volcanic events also

produce gravity variations, although of smaller magnitude. produce gravity variations, although of smaller magnitude.

To extract geodynamic signals it is necessry to remove signals from To extract geodynamic signals it is necessry to remove signals from

atmosphere and fluid envelops. atmosphere and fluid envelops.

For this study we used the following data bases: For this study we used the following data bases:

1. GRACE monthly geoid anomalies provided by CNES [Biancale et 1. GRACE monthly geoid anomalies provided by CNES [Biancale et

al. 2005], spanning the period between August 2002 and al. 2005], spanning the period between August 2002 and

September 2005. September 2005.

2. Atmospheric models of the European Center for Medium-range 2. Atmospheric models of the European Center for Medium-range

Weather Forecast (ECMWF);Weather Forecast (ECMWF);

3. Model MOG2D (CNES “3. Model MOG2D (CNES “modèle 2D d'ondes de gravitémodèle 2D d'ondes de gravité”)”) for the for the

ocean effect; ocean effect;

4. CNES FES-2004 model for correction for the ocean tides effect ;4. CNES FES-2004 model for correction for the ocean tides effect ;

5. Meteo-France ERA-40 reanalysis of the European CEP 5. Meteo-France ERA-40 reanalysis of the European CEP (Centre (Centre

Européen de Production) Européen de Production) model for correction for hydrology. model for correction for hydrology.

We started our study on geodynamical applications of satellite gravity data in 2003 using Chili-1960 and Alaska-1964 earthquakes as examples.

“Can tectonic processes be recovered from new gravity satellite data?” V. Mikhailov, S. Tikhotsky, M. Diament, I. Panet, and V. Ballu, EPSL, v. 228, 2004, p. 281– 297

We considered three following gravity inverse problems:

Problem 1: To check whether temporal variations of the geoid height contain a geodynamic signal from an earthquake.

We concluded that using the technique we developed, gravity field variations similar to those caused by Alaska-1964 earthquake should be recognizable in GRACE data.

-165 -160 -155 -150 -145 -140

-165 -160 -155 -150 -145 -140

55

60

65

55

60

65

-4000

-3000

-2000

-1000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

Fig. 3. The vertical com ponent of Earth surface displacem ent after A laska-1964 earthquake (contours are separated by 1000 m m ). The solid rectangle is the projection of the fault p lane on the surface. This fault p lane corresponds to the m odel 3 by Savage and Hastie [1966]. A rrows shows the horizontal d isplacem ent at the surface. M axim um arrow length corresponds to the 6 m displacem ent. The literals m ark: K - Kodiak island; Kn - Kenai peninsula; PU - G ulf of P rince W illiam .

K

Kn PW S

The vertical movement of the Earth surface during the Alaska-1964 earthquake (contours are separated by 1000 mm). The solid rectangle is the projection of the fault plane on the surface. This fault plane corresponds to the model 3 by Savage and Hastie [1966]. Arrows shows the horizontal displacement at the surface. Maximum arrow length

corresponds to the 6 m displacement.

Problem 2: To investigate if it is possible to discriminate among several possible fault plane models of an earthquake using satellite gravity data. We considered different fault plane models suggested for the Chile-1960 earthquake. We found that one can distinguish between these models with a probability approaching 70% at present level of GRACE accuracy.

2 8 2 2 8 4 2 8 6 2 8 8 2 9 0lattitu d e, g rad .

-100

00-5

000

050

0010

000

1500

020

000

Ver

tikal

def

orm

atio

n, m

m

100

500

dept

h, k

m.

A

B

C

C

BA

A comparison of three different fault plane models for the

Chile-1960 earthquake [Plafker, Savage, 1970] along the

latitudinal profile crossing the subduction zone. The

amplitude of the Earth surface vertical displacement and

the corresponding fault plane positions for the three

possible models are shown.

Problem 3: To recognize geodynamic gravity signal caused by partly locked fragment of a subduction zone.

We showed that if forthcoming gravity models are one order of magnitude more accurate compared to the first GRACE model then 5 years of data will allow recognition of time varying gravity signal associated with locked areas of the Alaska subduction zone.

Vertical (isolines in mm/year) and horizontal (arrows) displacements at the surface in the vicinity of the locked area of Alaska subduction zone (Zweck et al., 2002). According to this model there are two locked asperities separated by the zone of a post-seismic slip. The maximal arrow length corresponds to 6 cm.

3 years of geoid 3 years of geoid variations from GRACE variations from GRACE

and LAGEOS data at and LAGEOS data at 10-day intervals from 10-day intervals from July 2002 to March July 2002 to March

20052005

CNES/GRGS productCNES/GRGS product

Work with real data started in December 2005 thanks to our colleagues from CNES/GRGS (R. Biancale et al.) who delivered to the scientific community 86 GRACE and LAGEOS gravity field models expressed in normalized spherical harmonic coefficients from degree 2 to degree 50, which cover the period from July 29th, 2002 to August 24th, 2005. Therefore we could study both the December 2004 and March 2005 events.

Note that monthly more complete models (up to harmonics 120) became available from US or German agencies in May 2006, but higher harmonics appeared to be strongly contaminated by noise.

Comparison of 2 geoid models covering one month period before (left) and after (right) the Andaman-Sumatra earthquake.

Stripes are due to aliasing and definitely are errors.

There are hydrology effects (for example in Amazonia)

A strong negative signal appeared after the earthquake over the Andaman Sea.

December 2004 January 2005

Difference between January 2005 and December 2004 geoids.

A positive geoid signal in the area of the earthquake

A wide and stronger negative signal centered in the Andaman Sea.

GRACE geoid signal Synthetic gravity signal for model (Benerjee et al., 2005).

Comparison of geodynamic gravity signal obtained using different staking intervals (from 1 to 9 months) demonstrates that the signal is robust.

Data were corrected for hydrology.

1.GRACE data are compatible with models built on GPS and seismological data. GRACE satellites show geoid anomaly in the Andaman Sea associated with the earthquake.

2.We suggest that part of the negative signal (only observed by gravity) could result from subsidence caused by the compressional stress release in southern Andaman back arc basin.

3.Time variations of gravity also appear to be a promising tool to reveal silent earthquakes (slow aseismic slip events) and for monitoring of locked asperities of subduction zones.

Indeed, Sumatra-2004 earthquake showed that areas of large stress accumulation and release can be recognized not only by narrow relatively weak positive geoid anomalies along trench, but also by wider and stronger anomalies in back-arc basins.

Conclusions:GRACE