Search USGS⌕ Search

USGS · 70188378

Repeatability of testing a small broadband sensor in the Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory Underground Vault

Abstract

Variability in seismic instrumentation performance plays a fundamental role in our ability to carry out experiments in observational seismology. Many such experiments rely on the assumed performance of various seismic sensors as well as on methods to isolate the sensors from nonseismic noise sources. We look at the repeatability of estimating the self‐noise, midband sensitivity, and the relative orientation by comparing three collocated Nanometrics Trillium Compact sensors. To estimate the repeatability, we conduct a total of 15 trials in which one sensor is repeatedly reinstalled, alongside two undisturbed sensors. We find that we are able to estimate the midband sensitivity with an error of no greater than 0.04% with a 99th percentile confidence, assuming a standard normal distribution. We also find that we are able to estimate mean sensor self‐noise to within ±5.6 dB with a 99th percentile confidence in the 30–100‐s‐period band. Finally, we find our relative orientation errors have a mean difference in orientation of 0.0171° from the reference, but our trials have a standard deviation of 0.78°.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Adam T. Ringler, Austin Holland, David C. Wilson. 2017-04-25. Repeatability of testing a small broadband sensor in the Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory Underground Vault. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120170006

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Re-evaluation of shaking, dynamic strain, and the source of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

As the largest historical event in the eastern United States, the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, plays a prominent role in our nation’s seismological and human history and an outsized role in our probabilistic ground‐motion hazard estimates, affecting building codes, insurance rates, and geophysical monitoring. Thus, constraining the characteristics of the 1886 earthquake source, as well as the nature of its shaking distribution and impacts to the extent possible, is essential. Given its vintage, however, societal, geological, and geophysical datasets are limited compared with those used in modern seismological analyses. Because of these limitations, some characteristics of the rupture model are fundamentally nonunique. Still, by re‐evaluating all available data, I can constrain several key aspects of this earthquake. I show that several interpretations in recent analyses are inconsistent regarding the inferred source; shaking; ground failure; and, particularly, railway impacts. Importantly, I have shown that although dynamic strain caused the ground failure that led to track deformation, without the intermediate liquefaction step, dynamic strain alone was unlikely to be the source of rail deformation, contrary to earlier studies. Had earlier pronouncements that dynamic strain is a real concern for bending railways held true, there would be serious ramifications for railway engineering as well as for other above‐ and below‐ground linear infrastructure.

South Carolina↗

ETAS-positive: Extracting unbiased epidemic-type aftershock models from incomplete earthquake catalogs

Earthquake catalogs are inherently incomplete, and short-term fluctuations in catalog completeness can strongly bias estimates of seismicity parameters. Here, we extend the positive statistics framework recently introduced for estimating Gutenberg–Richter a and b values to the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model. The approach focuses on complete magnitude–time intervals defined by pairs of earthquakes in which the second event is larger than the first. Comprehensive synthetic tests demonstrate that the proposed ETAS + method retrieves nearly unbiased parameter estimates even from highly incomplete catalogs, whereas parameters obtained using classical estimation approaches are strongly biased. Application to Southern California reveals a similar trend, with the productivity scaling parameter α approaching the b value, consistent with self-similar earthquake triggering within estimation uncertainties. Owing to its robustness against catalog incompleteness and computational efficiency, the ETAS + method provides a powerful new tool for seismicity analysis and earthquake forecasting.

California↗