International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct. 2023, Vol. 25, Issue 110, pp.

87-97
ISSN: 2186-2982 (P), 2186-2990 (O), Japan, DOI: https://doi.org/10.21660/2023.110.3959
Geotechnique, Construction Materials and Environment

ANALYZING RECENT SEISMIC ACTIVITY OF THE OPAK FAULT

SYSTEM IN CENTRAL JAVA, INDONESIA, FROM 2009 TO 2021

*Ayu Krisno Ekarsti13, Subagyo Pramumijoyo2, Gayatri Indah Marliyani2, Agung Setianto2, and Dwikorita
Karnawati23

1
Doctoral Program in Geological Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Gadjah Mada,
Yogyakarta, Indonesia; 2Departement of Geological Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Gadjah
Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia; 3Agency for Meteorology Climatology and Geophysics (BMKG), Jakarta,
Indonesia

*Corresponding Author, Received: 31 May 2023, Revised: 27 July 2023, Accepted: 3 Aug. 2023

ABSTRACT: A strong earthquake occurred on May 26, 2006, at 22:53:58 UTC, with a magnitude of Mw6.4.
The shock was felt with an intensity of VI-VII MMI around Yogyakarta, Indonesia. The earthquake was
presumably caused by the movement of the Opak Fault. Following the strong earthquake, seismic activity along
the fault has remained high to this day. In order to explain the progression of seismic activity and understand
the mechanism of the Opak fault, we conducted catalog relocation, focal mechanism inversion, and statistical
analysis of the earthquake events from 2009-2021. The events were relocated using the Double Difference
Method. To improve the accuracy of the focal mechanism inversion, we updated the 1-D velocity model from
Crust 1.0 to a local velocity model. We inverted the mechanism of earthquakes with a magnitude of M≥3.0.
The results indicate that the recent hypocenters are clustered in the southeastern part of the Opak Fault. This
cluster is located within the rupture zone of the Mw6.4 2006 mainshock, providing further evidence that post-
earthquake deformation from 2006 is still ongoing and primarily involves left-lateral oblique-slip faulting. The
mechanism results are consistent with the observable morphological contrast on the surface. Cross-section plots
of seismicity and dip angle, perpendicular to the mainshock strike, reveal a flower structure pattern, indicating
a complex mechanism. The fault system is believed to be in the interseismic period, supported by the low b-
value. The suspicion is further strengthened by an increase in microseismic activity and a decrease in M>3.0.
This evidence suggests that the Opak Fault is currently experiencing strain accumulation.

Keywords: Opak fault, Double difference, Couple velocity hypocenter, Focal mechanism, Flower structure

1. INTRODUCTION risk.
The position, dimensions, segments, and
The tectonic region of Yogyakarta is primarily mechanism of the fault remain subject to debate
influenced by an active Sunda subduction zone. The among researchers. The Opak Fault’s position has
convergence between the Indo-Australian Plate and been depicted primarily along the Opak River [2],
the Eurasian Plate in this subduction zone has but the localization of the mainshock and aftershock
resulted in the presence of active faults, including distribution, as indicated by [5] and [6], does not
the Opak Fault system, as well as a mountain align exactly with [2]. Instead, it clusters in a
complex that consists of Mt. Merapi, Mt. Merbabu, parallel manner and shifts towards the southeastern
and Mt. Telomoyo located to the north of direction. Validation of these findings could be
Yogyakarta [1,2]. On 27 May 2006, a strong accomplished by identifying surface ruptures in the
earthquake associated with the activity of the Opak field. However, after the 2006 Yogyakarta
Fault occurred, measuring a magnitude of Mw6.4 earthquake, a field identification conducted by [7]
and reaching a maximum intensity of VI-VII MMI found no surface rupture around the Opak Fault.
[3]. This earthquake caused 6.324 fatalities, 36.299 Some researchers propose that the fault structure
injuries, and damage to 616.458 buildings [4]. The responsible for the 2006 mainshock is located east
historical record of destructive earthquakes (Fig. of the Opak River [6,8-11]. According to temporal
1(a)) indicates that shallow crustal earthquakes geodetic observation conducted by [12], the fault
have caused significant damage. It has been mechanism is primarily dip-slip. There is also
documented that at least three destructive suspicion of the existence of other faults with a
earthquakes have occurred along the Opak fault, sinistral strike-slip mechanism in the southern part.
suggesting that it has the potential to generate future According to reports from [13] and [14], the
destructive earthquakes. The presence of densely seismic activity along the Opak Fault remains high
populated settlements and urban areas surrounding to this day. Accurate determination of the
the fault increases the level of earthquake disaster hypocenter and earthquake source parameters is

87
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct. 2023, Vol. 25, Issue 110, pp.87-97

(a) (b)
Fig.1 (a) The map displays the historical record of destructive earthquakes in Yogyakarta. The earthquake
focal mechanisms are depicted using beachball plots [1] and [2]. The insert map showcases the Indonesian
region, along with the Indo-Australian plate motions relative to the Eurasian plate. The study area is marked
by a red rectangle. (b) The map illustrates the BMKG seismic network and the temporary seismic array
network. The topography is represented using DEM data [16]. The red dashed lines indicate the faults, both
active and inactive, in the vicinity of Yogyakarta, adapted from [1] and [2]. The black line indicates the
provincial administrative boundary, adapted from [17] and [18].

crucial in order to understand the origin of an Moreover, the clusters and focal mechanisms
earthquake. These parameters are necessary for contribute to understanding the morphological
identifying the characteristics of active faults. The characteristics around the Opak Fault. The findings
objective of this study is to characterize the recent of this research add to the existing knowledge and
behavior of the Opak Fault by utilizing the results enhance our understanding of the Opak Fault
of hypocenter relocation, focal mechanism system.
inversion, and statistical analysis. The findings
from this study can be utilized to update 3. METHODS
earthquake hazard maps in Yogyakarta.
The earthquake data utilized in this study is
2. RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE divided into three distinct periods. The first period
spans from January 1, 2009, to September 1, 2021.
In this study, we conducted a detailed The second period covers the timeframe of
investigation into the current development of September 2 to December 8, 2021. Finally, the
seismic activity along the Opak Fault. The brittle third period ranges from December 9 to December
zone was identified based on the clustered 31, 2021.
earthquake position obtained through relocation. For the first and third periods, we employ
By performing statistical analysis, we were able to earthquake parameter data along with the arrival
analyze the spatial and temporal seismicity and times of P-waves and S-waves acquired from the
temporal moment release trends. Additionally, the BMKG catalog as documented in references [13]
statistical analysis allowed us to determine the b- and [14]. However, during the second period, we
value, which is indicative of the stress level within supplemented the existing BMKG network with 86
the fault system. temporary arrays. These temporary arrays are
Furthermore, we updated the local velocity strategically installed to enhance the detection and
model specific to the Opak fault system. This characterization of micro-earthquake events. The
refined local velocity model enables more accurate configuration of the temporary station's arrays is
computation of the Green Function and calculation set at a distance of 5 km to ensure detailed analysis.
of kinematic parameters. The focal mechanism A distribution map illustrating the utilized seismic
model derived from this research provides insights network is presented in Figure 1(b).
into the fault system’s mechanism. Examining the
earthquake clusters alongside the focal mechanism 3.1 Temporary Network Specification and
helps determine whether the current seismic Preparation
activity is still associated with the 2006 Mw6.4
earthquake or represents independent activity. The BMKG seismic network consists of

88
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct. 2023, Vol. 25, Issue 110, pp.87-97

broadband seismographs. We supplement the velocity model [23] (as presented in Table 1).
BMKG seismic network with the portable seismic
network that consists of 12 portable broadband 3.3 Hypocenter Relocation
seismographs and 11 portable short-period
seismographs. Portable broadband seismographs We utilized P-wave and S-wave arrival time
are installed stationary at the edges and the middle data compiled from 2009 to December 2021 for
of the study area. Portable short-period our analysis. These events were relocated using the
seismographs are installed mobile, with an Double Difference method [24] implemented
operation time of about 15 days per point. A through the HypoDD program [25]. The method
portable broadband seismograph consists of a operates on the assumption that if there are two
Trillium Compact Posthole seismometer 0.008- earthquakes located closer to each other than the
100 Hz and a Pegasus Digital Recorder digitizer. A distance from their respective hypocenters to the
portable short-period seismograph consists of station, their ray paths and the medium can be
Lennartz LE-3Dlite MkIII seismometer 1-100 Hz considered equal.
and a Taurus digitier. Both pieces of equipment are For this study, we set the maximum distance
operated on three channels with a sampling (MAXSEP) between earthquakes to be considered
frequency of 100 Hz. There is no significant as having the same path as 15 km. The maximum
difference in the use of broadband or short-period distance between earthquake pairs and stations
seismographs because the target of deployment is (MAXDIST) was set at 500 km. Additionally, we
the detection of micro-seismic activity that limited the maximum number of earthquakes
dominantly happened over a short period. considered to form a group (MAXNGH) to 20
Before the seismographs were utilized, We did earthquakes. Through iterative updates, the
the recording intercomparison as a calibration. All earthquake kinematic parameters and residual
seismographs were installed in the same location. values for each parameter were refined. The
Then, seismographs were operated simultaneously parameters resulting from the final relocation were
for 30 minutes. The duration was enough to record obtained from the last iteration. In our analysis, we
the seismic wave up to the minimum frequency of also utilized Wagner's 1-D velocity model to
0.2 Hz [15]. This minimum frequency is more than relocate the hypocentres.
sufficient to detect microearthquake activity. We
Table 1 1-D Velocity model [23]
make sure all seismographs always have the same
recording response. When We found a record that
Depth (Km) Vp (Km/s) Vs (Km/s)
was different from other responses, the
abnormality might occur in the seismometer or the 0 4.3 2.4
recorder. Of course, We did not use the 3 4.9 2.9
seismograph that has the abnormality. 8 5.7 3.2
16 6.9 3.9
3.2 Detection and Hypocenter Localization 24 7.1 4

Earthquake detection employed the 3.4 Statistics Analysis

characteristic function using the Lassie package The relocation results were specifically
[19] from the Pyrocko library [20] of the Python focused on earthquake events occurring in the
program. The waveform data underwent vicinity of the Opak Fault. To assess the seismicity,
normalization, smoothing, and stacking processes we applied the Guttenberg-Richter rule, plotting
to generate characteristic functions. A detection the cumulative magnitude against the number of
earthquake events [26]. The magnitude of
threshold was then set. The estimated origin time
completeness was determined from this plot using
was determined as the point when the the Maximum Likelihood method [27]. This
characteristic function value surpassed the analysis was conducted using the Zmap software
threshold value. Once the detection was completed, [28]. By obtaining the magnitude of completeness,
we obtained the estimated origin time, and location we can evaluate the effectiveness of the seismic
of the earthquake events. network in capturing seismic activity. To depict the
Subsequently, we utilized the detection results cumulative rate of energy release along the Opak
to manually pick the arrival times of P and S waves Fault, we plotted the temporal cumulative seismic
using the Seiscomp software package [21]. The moment. The seismic moment was derived by
earthquake parameters, including latitude, converting magnitudes using the Hanks and
longitude, depth, origin time, and magnitude, were Kanamori formula [29]. By examining the
calculated using the hypo71 plugins within cumulative energy rate, we can gain insights into
Seiscomp [22]. To compute the earthquake the total energy released by the fault system during
position and origin time, we employed the Wagner a specific period.

89
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct. 2023, Vol. 25, Issue 110, pp.87-97

Fig.2 Example of microearthquake detection result for M1.1, September 23, 2021. We used a threshold of
130. The characteristic function is valued at 240. The left column shows the raw waveform. The middle
column shows the normalized and smoothed waveform (characteristic function). The bottom right column
shows the stacked characteristic function. Right upper shows the estimated microearthquake location.
3.5 Local Velocity Modeling 3.6 Focal Mechanism Analysis
To ensure accurate calculations of the green
The purpose of modeling the earthquake focal
function, we updated the 1-D velocity model. For
mechanism around the Opak Fault system is to
the modeling, we employed the couple velocity
gain a deeper understanding of the fault's
hypocenter method. This method, similar to the
mechanism through moment tensor analysis. For
Double-Difference method, utilizes non-linear
this analysis, we utilized high-quality earthquake
inversion computation through a linear approach.
seismograms recorded by at least six seismic
However, the couple velocity hypocenter method
stations. The ISOLA program [33] was employed
simultaneously generates updated velocity models,
for modeling the focal mechanism. In order to
kinematic parameters, and station corrections
establish a reference, we utilized the mechanism
during the inversion process. The inversion was
determined by [5] for the mainshock of the Mw6.4
performed using the Velest [30,31]. The
Yogyakarta earthquake that occurred on May 26,
earthquake parameter and arrival time data used
2006.
for hypocenter relocation were also utilized in this
Modeling was conducted on earthquakes with
process. We utilized the Crust 2.0 velocity model
a magnitude greater or equal to Mw3.0. Prior to the
[32] as the initial model for local velocity modeling.
inversion stage, each seismogram underwent data
The Crust2.0 model details are provided in Table
preprocessing. This involved instrument response
2.
deconvolution, cutting, and initial filtering. We
Table 2 1-D Velocity model [29] applied a Bandpass filter with a corner frequency
ranging from approximately 0.1 to 0.6 Hz. The
Depth Vp Vs Rho
(km) (km/s) (km/s) (g/cm3) specific corner frequency for each seismogram
0 2.5 1.2 was determined through a trial and error process
2.1
1 4.0 2.1
during the inversion, aiming to achieve the best fit
2.4 between the calculated (synthetic) seismogram and
2.5 6.0 3.4 2.7 the observed seismogram.
13.5 6.6 3.7 2.9 To generate the calculated seismogram, we
23.5 7.2 4.0 3.1 utilized the Green Function and employed the

90
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct. 2023, Vol. 25, Issue 110, pp.87-97

Discrete Wave Number method [34]. The Green residual times approaching 0 [35], compared with
Function represents the medium through which the residual time before relocation (Fig. 3.a).
earthquake waves propagate from the earthquake The Guttenberg-Richter curve illustrates the
source to the station. In generating the Green relationship between the magnitude distribution
Function, we utilized the local velocity model and the cumulative number of earthquakes in the
specific to the Opak Fault region. Opak Fault (Fig. 4.a). From the plot, the magnitude
of completeness (Mc) determined from the
4. RESULT AND DISCUSSION relocated data is M1.2. The relatively small Mc
indicates that the seismic network consisting of
We successfully detected 62 earthquake events BMKG and the temporary network can detect
in the temporary network data from September 2 earthquakes up to M1.2 with reasonable
to December 8, 2021. After manual picking, confidence. Therefore, the network's ability to
earthquake parameter calculation, and relocation, detect microearthquakes is quite good. The b value,
we eliminated nine events that were located obtained from the plot, is 0.3. The magnitude
outside the Opak fault system. Consequently, we completeness and b value are lower than the
selected a total of 53 events for further analysis. calculation of [36] that was calculated using
The effectiveness of scanning earthquake events BMKG and combined with the global catalog. The
using the Lassie algorithm has been demonstrated. obtained relatively low b value could be attributed
The BMKG network can detect earthquake activity to two possibilities. The first possibility is the
on the Opak Fault up to M1.3. With the addition of increased network density resulting from the
a temporary seismic network, earthquake events addition of four stations by BMKG in 2019 and the
can be detected up to M0.7. This shows a deployment of the temporary network in 2021. A
significant increase in network capability for denser seismic network leads to a higher number
detecting earthquakes. An example of the detection of recorded microearthquakes. The second
results for a microearthquake that occurred on possibility is a natural increase in microearthquake
September 23, 2021, at 21:00:47 UTC, with a activity, suggesting that the Opak Fault may be
depth of 9.8 km and a magnitude of Ml1.1, is accumulating stress [37]. The fact is that
shown in Fig. 2. microseismic activity appears to have increased
We relocated the hypocenters of 192 events while the number of ML>3.0 events decreased (Fig.
around the Opak Fault out of the initial 229 events 4.b). The cumulative moment release (Fig. 4.c)
(Fig. 5.a). During the relocation process, 37 events indicates that from 2009 to 2021, the Opak Fault
were excluded based on parameterization (Fig. released an energy equivalent to Mw4.8, reaching
5.b). The earthquakes around the Opak Fault in the a total of 2.31x1016 Nm. This suggests that since
period from 2009 to 2021 had depths ranging from 2009, there has been no significant energy release,
0.9 km to 22.4 km and magnitudes ranging from and the Opak Fault may be in a period of
ML 0.7 to 4.8. The residual time histogram quiescence. During this period, strain accumulates
indicates a significant improvement in data quality due to fault interlocking.
after relocation (Fig. 3.b), with the majority of

(a) (b)

Fig.3 The travel time residual histogram (a) before relocation and (b) after relocation.

91
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct. 2023, Vol. 25, Issue 110, pp.87-97

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Fig.4 (a) The Guttenberg-Richter curve based on relocation data. (b) Seismicity Trend Around the Opak
Fault 2009-2021. (c) The cumulative moment release (d) The cumulative moment in moment magnitude.

(a) (b)
Fig.5 Distribution earthquake around Opak fault 2009-2021. (a) Before relocation. (b) After relocation. The
beach ball shows the solution to the focus mechanism of earthquakes around the Opak Fault. The black dots
show the events that excluded due to the parameterization. The red dash-line depicts the fault from [4] and
[5]. The topography is represented using DEM data [16]. The black line indicates the provincial
administrative boundary, adapted from [17] and [18].

The earthquake distribution map (Fig. 5) consistent with the aftershock cluster position of
clearly shows that the relocated earthquake the 2006 Yogyakarta earthquake analyzed by [38].
positions appear more lineated and less scattered The relocated data is slightly to the east compared
compared to before relocation. The relocated data to the results of [38] and primarily clusters in the
aligns with the southeastern part of the Opak Fault, Southern Mountain escarpment.

92
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct. 2023, Vol. 25, Issue 110, pp.87-97

Fig.6 Example of waveform fitting obtained from waveform focal inversion for Mw3.6, March 21, 2011
earthquake. Station used are UGM, YOGI, WOJI, PCJI, PWJI, SCJI, KRK, and CMJI. The red curve denotes
the synthetic waveform, and the black curve denotes the observed waveform.

These locations also correspond to the positive of the Opak fault are quite diverse but are
stress coulomb zone of the 2006 earthquake [40]. predominantly characterized by left-lateral
Therefore, the recent earthquake activity is oblique-slip faults. The southern part of the fault is
believed to still occur in the same zone as the 2006 dominated by a thrust fault, which is located in the
Yogyakarta earthquake. These findings support the southern mountain zone. According to [40,41],
hypothesis that post-earthquake deformation from continental plates collided in the Cretaceous period
the 2006 earthquake is still ongoing. beneath the southern mountain zone. This collision
The updated velocity model is presented in may be related to the reverse fault mechanism
Table 3. Overall, the updated model shows higher observed in the southern part.
values compared to the initial model, except for the To identify the vertical distribution of the
Vs values at a depth of 0 km and 2.5 km. hypocenters, cross-sections perpendicular to the
selected focal mechanism strikes were created. The
Table 3 1-D Velocity model cross-section positions are shown in Fig. 7a.
Cross-sections FM1-FM1' (Fig. 7.b), FM2-FM2'
Depth (km) Vp (km/s) Vs (km/s) (Fig. 7.c), FM3-FM3' (Fig. 7.d), and FM4-FM4'
0 4.49 0.48 (Fig. 7.e) are perpendicular to the strikes of the
1 4.49 2.9 Mw3.4 event on May 13, 2009, the Mw6.4 event
2.5 4.82 3.05 on May 26, 2006, the Mw3.6 event on April 30,
13.5 7.42 4.31 2016, and the Mw3.6 event on October 2, 2009,
23.5 7.77 4.31 respectively.
The cross-sections reveal that the selected
earthquakes dip to the east. On the cross-section
Focal mechanism inversions were performed
plots, dashed lines with slopes equal to the dip
for 18 events with magnitudes greater than M3.0.
angles for the earthquakes with focal mechanisms
The quality of the inversions was assessed by
are added. These lines delineate the positions
examining the fit between the synthetic and
where surface manifestations could potentially
observed seismograms. An example of the
occur. However, it is important to note that not all
seismogram fitting for the Mw3.6 earthquake on
earthquakes can generate surface manifestations.
March 21, 2011, is shown in Fig. 6. The complete
The green triangles indicate the projected positions
inversion results are displayed as beachball plots in
on the surface.
Fig. 5.b. The results indicate that the mechanisms

93
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct. 2023, Vol. 25, Issue 110, pp.87-97

(b)

(a)

(c)

(d) (e)
Fig.7 (a) The hypocenter cross sections perpendicular to the selected strike of the focal mechanism. (b)
Cross-sections FM1-FM1', (c) FM2-FM2', (d) FM3-FM3', and (e) FM4-FM4'. The dashed lines represent
the projected dip of the earthquake with the focal mechanism on the sections. The stars represent the
hypocenter of focal mechanisms. The orange squares represent the hypocenter. The green triangles represent
the projected earthquake with focal mechanisms by dip angle on the surface. The topography is represented
using DEM data [16]. The black line indicates the administrative boundary, adapted from [17] and [18].

94
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct. 2023, Vol. 25, Issue 110, pp.87-97

Fig. 7b-e illustrates that the green triangles the quiescence segments to be the next earthquake
correspond to morphological contrasts on the sources.
surface. Only a few hypocenters are captured by
the FM1-FM1', FM3-FM3', and FM4-FM4' 6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
sections, while the FM2-FM2' section captures
more hypocenters than the others. The mechanisms The author expresses gratitude to the Sleman
observed in the FM2-FM2' section are primarily Geophysics Station of BMKG for their valuable
left-lateral strike-slip. Most hypocenters follow the support and assistance throughout this research.
dipping trend of the focal mechanisms in this Additionally, the author would like to extend
section. Based on the dipping and the hypocenter thanks to the Education and Training Center of
trend, the faulting pattern resembles a flower BMKG for providing the scholarship, the
structure. A flower structure is a geometry that Earthquake and Tsunami Center of BMKG for
resembles a flower, where fault segments bloom at their support in field equipment, and the Research
the top and accumulate at the bottom. This and Development Center of BMKG for their
structure is formed in the wrench zone of a strike- funding support.
slip fault [42]. This finding may explain the
existence of the Wonosari depression zone. The 7. REFERENCES
Wonosari depression exhibits low topography
around the earthquake cluster (Fig. 5 and Fig. 7). [1] Surono, Toha B., and Sudarno I., Geological
The depression zone around the wrench zone of the Map of the Surakarta–Giritontro Sheet, Jawa,
strike-slip fault confirms that the type of flower Scale 1:100.000, Geological Research and
structure observed is a negative flower structure
Development Center, Bandung, 1992. (in
[42]. Consequently, the Wonosari depression
could be formed by the flower structure beneath it. Indonesian)
[2] Rahardjo W., Sukandarrumidi, and Rosidi
5. CONCLUSION H.M.D., Geological Map of the Yogyakarta
Sheet, Jawa, Scale 1:100.000, Geological
The recent seismic activity on the Opak fault is Research and Development Center, Bandung,
clustered in the southeast, consistent with the 1995. (in Indonesian)
location described by [6]. This recent cluster falls [3] Setiyono U., Gunawan I., Priyobudi,
within the same zone as the Mw6.4 earthquake in
Yatimantoro T., Imananta R.T., Ramdhan M.,
2006. The dominant mechanism of the recent
earthquakes is characterized by a left-lateral Hidayanti, Anggraini S., Rahayu R.H., Hawati
oblique-slip fault, indicating a complex faulting P., Yogaswara D.S., JuIius A.M., Apriani M.,
mechanism. Some mechanisms align with Harvan M., Simangunsong G., and
morphological contrasts observed on the surface. Kriswinarso T., The Significant and
In the middle part of the fault, the earthquake Destructive Earthquake Catalogue of 1821 –
mechanism is primarily left-lateral strike-slip, 2018, Agency for Meteorology Climatology
forming a negative flower structure. The presence
and Geophysics, Jakarta, 2019, pp.1-280. (in
of the Wonosari depression may be attributed to
this flower structure. The temporal moment release Indonesian)
suggests the potential for strain accumulation [4] Irsyam M., Widiyantoro S., Natawidjaja D.H.,
along the fault. It is important to note the Meilano I., Rudyanto A., Hidayati S., Triyoso
possibility of a strong earthquake, considering the W., Hanifa N., Djarwadi D., and Faizal L.,
historical seismicity and the current state of Earthquake Source and Hazard Maps of
moment release. Indonesia 2017. National Center for
However, the subsurface conditions associated Earthquake Studies (PusGen), Research
with the unique seismicity trend and faulting
Center for Housing and Human Settlement,
complexity have not been thoroughly described in
this study. Therefore, further investigation, using Directorate General for Research and
local tomography, for example, is necessary to Development, Ministry oof Public Works and
provide a detailed understanding of the subsurface People Housing, Bandung, 2017, pp.1-376. (in
conditions within the Opak Fault system. Through Indonesian)
subsurface modeling, the dimensions, the detailed [5] USGS, M6.3 - 10 km E of Pundong, Indonesia,
dipping angle, and the blind segments of the Opak https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/even
fault can be identified more accurately. The tpage/usp000ej1c/moment-tensor.
identification of blind segments adds validation to
[6] Walter T.R., Wang R., Luehr B.-G.,
current seismic and morphological lineament
trends. Furthermore, the identification can reveal Wassermann J., Behr Y., Parolai S., Anggraini

95
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct. 2023, Vol. 25, Issue 110, pp.87-97

A., Günther E., Sobiesiak M., Grosser H., [15] SESAME, Guidelines for the Implementation
Wetzel H.-U., Milkereit C., Brotopuspito of the H/V Spectral Ratio Technique on
P.J.K.S., Harjadi P., and Zschau J., The 26 Ambient Vibrations: Measurements,
May 2006 magnitude 6.4 Yogyakarta Processing and Interpretation, SESAME
earthquake south of Mt. Merapi volcano: Did European Research Project WP12, European
lahar deposits amplify ground shaking and Commission – Research General Directorate,
thus lead to the disaster?, Geochemistry 2004, pp.1-62.
Geophysics Geosystem, Vol. 9, Issue 5, 2008, [16] Geospatial Information Agency, National
pp.1-9. Seamless Digital Elevation Model (DEM) and
[7] Pramumijoyo S. and Sudarno I., Surface Bathymetry (DEMNAS),
Cracking Due to Yogyakarta Earthquake 2006, https://tanahair.indonesia.go.id/demnas, 2018.
The Yogyakarta Earthquake of May 27, 2006, [17] National Coordinator for Survey and Mapping
Karnawati D., Pramumijoyo S., Anderson R. Agency, Topographical Map of Indonesia,
and Husein S., Ed., Star Publisher, Los Sheet 1407 of Pracimantoro, Scale 1:250.000,
Angeles, 2008, pp.6.1 – 6.5. National Coordinator for Survey and Mapping
[8] Sadat D.I.K.F., Yudistira T., and Nugraha Agency, Bogor, 2003. (in Indonesian)
A.D., The Application of Ambient Noise [18] National Coordinator for Survey and Mapping
Tomography Method at Opak River Fault Agency, Topographical Map of Indonesia,
Region Yogyakarta. AIP Conference Sheet 1408 of Yogyakarta, Scale 1:250.000,
Proceedings 18 July 2018 , Vol. 1987, Issue 1, National Coordinator for Survey and Mapping
2018, pp.020028.1- 020028.7. Agency, Bogor, 2003. (in Indonesian)
[9] Nurbaiti Y., Ibrahim E., Hasanah M.U., and [19] López-Comino J. A., Cesca S., Heimann S.,
Wijatmoko B., Application of Double- Grigoli F., Milkereit C., Dahm T., and Zang
Difference Method for Relocating A., Characterization of Hydraulic Fractures
Aftershocks Hypocenters in Opak Fault Zone, Growth During the Äspö Hard Rock
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Laboratory Experiment (Sweden), Rock
Science, Vol. 311, Issues 2–4 July 2018, 2019, Mechanics and Rock Engineering, Vol. 50,
pp.1-6. No. 11, 2017, pp.2985–3001
[10] Handayani L., Active Fault Zone of the 2006 [20] Heimann S., Kriegerowski M., Isken M.,
Yogyakarta Earthquake Inferred from Tilt Cesca S., Daout S., Grigoli F., Juretzek C.,
Derivative Analysis of Gravity Anomalies, Megies T., Nooshiri N., Steinberg A., Sudhaus
RISET International Journal of Geology and H., Vasyura-Bathke H., Willey T., and Dahm
Minning, Vol. 29, No. 01, 2019, pp.1-11. T., Pyrocko - A Versatile Software
[11] Saputra H., Wahyudi W., Suardi I., Anggraini Framework for Seismology, EGU General
A., and Suryanto W., The waveform inversion Assembly 2020, 2017.
of mainshock and aftershock data of the 2006 [21] Helmholtz Centre Potsdam GFZ German
M6.3 Yogyakarta earthquake, Geoscence Research Centre for Geosciences and gempa
Letters, Vol.8, No.9, 2021, pp.1-22. GmbH, The SeisComP seismological
[12] Widjajanti N., Pratama C., Parseno, Sunantyo software package, GFZ Data Services, 2008.
T.A., Heliani L.S., Ma’ruf B., Atunggal D., [22] Lee W.H.K., and Lahr J.C., HYP071: A
Lestari D., Ulinnuha H., Pinasti A., and Ummi computer program for determining hypocenter,
R.F., Present-Day Crustal Deformation magnitude, and first motion pattern of local
Revealed Active Tectonics in Yogyakarta, earthquakes, USGS, 1972.
Indonesia Inferred from GPS Observations, [23] Wagner D., Koulakov I., Rabbel W., Luehr
Geodesy and Geodynamics, Vol. 11, Issue 2, B.-G., Wittwer A., Kopp H., Bohm M., Asch
2020, pp.135-142. G., and Scientists M., Joint inversion of active
[13] Ikhsan, The Earthquake and Tsunami Annual and passive seismic data in Central Java,
Report of 2021, Agency for Meteorology Geophys.J. Int, Vol. 170, Issue 2, 2007,
Climatology and Geophysics, Yogyakarta, pp.923-932.
2022, pp.1-239. (in Indonesian) [24] Waldhauser F., and Ellsworth W.L., A
[14] BMKG, Earthquake Catalog, double-difference earthquake location
http://repogempa.bmkg.go.id/repo_new. algorithm: Method and application to the

96
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct. 2023, Vol. 25, Issue 110, pp.87-97

northern Hayward fault, Bull. Seism. Soc. Indonesia, based on earthquake hypocenter
Am., Vol. 90, No. 6, 2000, pp.1353-1368. determination, relocation, and focal
[25] Waldhauser F., HypoDD: A computer mechanism analysis, Geoscience Letters, Vol.
program to compute double-difference 5, No.31, pp.1-10.
earthquake locations, USGS Open File Rep., [36] Muntafi Y. and Nojima N., Seismic Properties
2001. and Fractal Dimension of Subduction Zone in
[26] Gutenberg B., and Richter C. F., Frequency of Java And Its Vicinity using Data From 1906
Earthquakes in California, Bulletin of the to 2020, International Journal of GEOMATE,
Seismological Society of America, Vol. 34, Vol.21, ssue 85, 2021, pp.71-83.
No.4, 1944, pp.185–188. [37] Cattin R., and Avouac J., Modeling of
[27] Utsu T., A method for determining the value mountain building and the seismic cycle in the
of "b" in a formula log n = a-bm showing the Himalaya of Nepal, J. Geophys. Res., Vol. 105,
magnitude-frequency relation for earthquakes, Issue B6, 2000, pp.389 – 407.
Geophys. Bull. Hokkaido Univ., Vol. 13, 1965, [38] Anggraini A., The 26 May 2006 Yogyakarta
pp.99–103. earthquake, aftershocks and interactions
[28] Wiemer S., A Software Package to Analyze (Dissertation). Mathematisch-
Seismicity: ZMAP. Seismological Research Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät der
Letters, Vol. 72, No. 3, 2001, pp.373-382. Universität Potsdam. Postdam, 2013, pp.1-
[29] Hanks T. C., and Kanamori H., A Moment 107.
Magnitude Scale, Journal of Geophysical [39] Budiman R., Sahara D.P., and Nugraha A.D.,
Research,Vol.84,IssueB5,1979,pp.2348-2350. Determining Source Model and Aftershocks
[30] Kissling E., Ellsworth W.L., Eberhart-Phillips of 2006 Yogyakarta Earthquake, Indonesia
D., and Kradolfer U., Initial reference models using Coulomb Stress Change, IOP
in local earthquake tomography, Journal of Conference Series: Earth and Environmental
Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, Vol. 99, Science, Vol. 318, 2019, pp.1-8.
No. B10, 1994, pp.19635–19646. [40] Clements B., Hall R., Smyth H.R., and Cottam
[31] Kissling E., Program VELEST user's guide - M.A., Thrusting of a volcanic arc: a new
short introduction, Institute of Geophysics, structural model for Java. Petroleum
ETH Zurich, Zurich, 1995, pp.1-26. Geoscience, Vol. 15, No. 2, .2009, pp.159–
[32] Bassin C., Laske G., and Masters G., The 174.
Current Limits of resolution for surface wave [41] Sribudiyani, Muchsin N., Ryacudu R., Kunto
tomography in North America, Eos T., Astono P., Prasetya I., Sapiie B., Asikin S.,
Transactions American Geophysical Union, Harsolumakso A., and Yulianto I., The
Vol. 81, Issue F897, 2000. collision of east java microplate and its
[33] Sokos E.N., and Zahradník J., ISOLA a implication for hydrocarbon occurences in the
Fortran Code and a Matlab GUI to Perform east Java basin, Proceedings Indonesia
Multiple-point Source Inversion of Seismic Petroleum Association, 29th Annual
Data, Computers and Geosciences, Vol. 34, Convention, 2003, pp.1-12.
Issue 8, 2008, pp.967-977. [42] Huang L., and Liu C.-y., Three types of flower
[34] Bouchon M., A Simple Method to Calculate structures in a divergent-wrench fault zone,
Green's Functions for Elastic Layered Media, Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth,
Vol.22, Issue 12, 2017, pp.10478-10497.
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America, Vol. 71, No. 4, 1981, pp.959-971.
[35] Supendi P., Nugraha A.D., Puspito N.T., Copyright © Int. J. of GEOMATE All rights reserved,
including making copies, unless permission is obtained
Widiyantoro S., and Daryono D., from the copyright proprietors.
Identification of active faults in West Java,

97