Geology topics

A. I. Chung

Publications and source records attributed to A. I. Chung.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2020

How often can Earthquake Early Warning systems alert sites with high intensity ground motion?

Although numerous Earthquake Early Warning (EEW) algorithms have been developed we still lack a detailed understanding of how often and under what circumstances useful ground motion alerts can be provided to end-users. Here we analyze the alerting performance of the PLUM, EPIC and FinDer algorithms by running them retrospectively on the seismic strong motion data of the 219 earthquakes in Japan since 1996 that exceeded Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) of 4.5 on at least 10 sites (Mw 4.5-9.1). Our analysis suggests that, irrespective of the algorithm, EEW end-users should be prepared that EEW can often but not always provide useful ground motion alerts. A majority of sites with moderate-strong ground motion (MMI 5-6) can generally get at least a few seconds of warning time from all algorithms. If such shaking is caused by a shallow crustal event, around 50% of such sites receive alerts with warning times >5 s. Many sites with severe-extreme ground motion (MMI >=8) can be alerted successfully in the case of very large offshore earthquakes, but less than 20% can be alerted ahead of time if such shaking is caused by a shallow crustal event. Our results provide detailed quantitative insight into the expected alerting performance for EEW algorithms under realistic conditions. The main caveat is that the largest shallow crustal event in our data set has Mw7.0, i.e. the data set does not contain very large strike slip events.

Journal of Geophysical Research↗

USGS2014

Investigation of the high-frequency attenuation parameter, κ (kappa), from aftershocks of the 2010 M w 8.8 Maule, Chile earthquake

The Bío Bío region of Chile experienced a vigorous aftershock sequence following the 2010 February 27 M w 8.8 Maule earthquake. The immediate aftershock sequence was captured by two temporary seismic deployments: the Quake Catcher Network Rapid Aftershock Mobilization Program (QCN RAMP) and the Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology CHile Aftershock Mobilization Program (IRIS CHAMP). Here, we use moderate to large aftershocks ( M L ≥ 4.0) occurring between 2010 March 1 and June 30 recorded by QCN RAMP and IRIS CHAMP stations to determine the spectral decay parameter, kappa ( κ ). First, we compare waveforms and κ estimates from the lower-resolution QCN stations to the IRIS CHAMP stations to ensure the QCN data are of sufficient quality. We find that QCN stations provide reasonable estimates of κ in comparison to traditional seismic sensors and provide valuable additional observations of local ground motion variation. Using data from both deployments, we investigate the variation in κ for the region to determine if κ is influenced primarily by local geological structure, path attenuation, or source properties (e.g. magnitude, mechanism and depth). Estimates of κ for the Bío Bío region range from 0.0022 to 0.0704 s with a mean of 0.0295 s and are in good agreement with κ values previously reported for similar tectonic environments. κ correlates with epicentral distance and, to a lesser degree, with source magnitude. We find little to no correlation between the site kappa, κ 0 , and mapped geology, although we were only able to compare the data to a low-resolution map of surficial geology. These results support an increasing number of studies that suggest κ observations can be attributed to a combination of source, path and site properties; additionally, measured κ are often highly scattered making it difficult to separate the contribution from each of these factors. Thus, our results suggest that contributions from the site, path and source should be carefully considered when interpreting κ values.

Bío Bío Region↗

USGS2014

Performance of several low-cost accelerometers

Several groups are implementing low‐cost host‐operated systems of strong‐motion accelerographs to support the somewhat divergent needs of seismologists and earthquake engineers. The Advanced National Seismic System Technical Implementation Committee (ANSS TIC, 2002), managed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with other network operators, is exploring the efficacy of such systems if used in ANSS networks. To this end, ANSS convened a working group to explore available Class C strong‐motion accelerometers (defined later), and to consider operational and quality control issues, and the means of annotating, storing, and using such data in ANSS networks. The working group members are largely coincident with our author list, and this report informs instrument‐performance matters in the working group’s report to ANSS. Present examples of operational networks of such devices are the Community Seismic Network (CSN; csn.caltech.edu), operated by the California Institute of Technology, and Quake‐Catcher Network (QCN; Cochran et al., 2009; qcn.stanford.edu; November 2013), jointly operated by Stanford University and the USGS. Several similar efforts are in development at other institutions. The overarching goals of such efforts are to add spatial density to existing Class‐A and Class‐B (see next paragraph) networks at low cost, and to include many additional people so they become invested in the issues of earthquakes, their measurement, and the damage they cause.

Seismological Research Letters↗