Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America; December 1999; v. 89; no. 6; p. 1428-1438
© 1999 Seismological Society of America
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gomberg, J.
Right arrow Articles by Bodin, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation

The strain in the array is mainly in the plane (waves below ~1 Hz)

J. Gomberg, G. Pavlis and P. Bodin

U.S. Geological Survey, Center for Earthquake Research and Information The University of Memphis, Memphis, Tennessee 38152gomberg{at}usgs.gov
Dept. of Geology Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405pavlis{at}indiana.edu
Center for Earthquake Research and Information The University of Memphis, Memphis, Tennessee 38152bodin{at}ccri.memphis.edu

Abstract

We compare geodetic and single-station methods of measuring dynamic deformations and characterize their causes in the frequency bands 0.5-1.0 Hz and 4.0-8.0 Hz. The geodetic approach utilizes data from small-aperture seismic arrays, applying techniques from geodesy. It requires relatively few assumptions and a priori information. The single-station method uses ground velocities recorded at isolated or single stations and assumes all the deformation is due to plane-wave propagation. It also requires knowledge of the azimuth and horizontal velocity of waves arriving at the recording station. Data employed come from a small-aperture, dense seismic array deployed in Geyokcha, Turkmenistan, and include seismograms recorded by broadband STS2 and short-period L28 sensors. Poor agreement between geodetic and single-station estimates in the 4.0-8.0 Hz passband indicates that the displacement field may vary nonlinearly with distance over distances of ~50 m. STS2 geodetic estimates provide a robust standard in the 0.5-1.0 Hz passband because they appear to be computationally stable and require fewer assumptions than single-station estimates. The agreement between STS2 geodetic estimates and single-station L28 estimates is surprisingly good for the S-wave and early surface waves, suggesting that the single-station analysis should be useful with commonly available data. These results indicate that, in the 0.5 to 1.0 Hz passband, the primary source of dynamic deformation is plane-wave propagation along great-circle source-receiver paths. For later arriving energy, the effects of scattering become important. The local structure beneath the array exerts a strong control on the geometry of the dynamic deformation, implying that it may be difficult to infer source characteristics of modern or paleoearthquakes from indicators of dynamic deformations. However, strong site control also suggests that the dynamic deformations may be predictable, which would be useful for engineering seismically resistant structures.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of AmericaHome page
C. A. Langston
Spatial Gradient Analysis for Linear Seismic Arrays
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, February 1, 2007; 97(1B): 265 - 280.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of AmericaHome page
C. A. Langston, P. Bodin, C. Powell, M. Withers, S. Horton, and W. Mooney
Explosion Source Strong Ground Motions in the Mississippi Embayment
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, June 1, 2006; 96(3): 1038 - 1054.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1999 by the Seismological Society of America.