Search USGS⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70196712

Introduction to “Global tsunami science: Past and future, Volume III”

Alexander B. Rabinovich·Hermann M. Fritz·Yuichiro Tanioka·Eric L. Geist
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Twenty papers on the study of tsunamis are included in Volume III of the PAGEOPH topical issue “Global Tsunami Science: Past and Future”. Volume I of this topical issue was published as PAGEOPH, vol. 173, No. 12, 2016 and Volume II as PAGEOPH, vol. 174, No. 8, 2017. Two papers in Volume III focus on specific details of the 2009 Samoa and the 1923 northern Kamchatka tsunamis; they are followed by three papers related to tsunami hazard assessment for three different regions of the world oceans: South Africa, Pacific coast of Mexico and the northwestern part of the Indian Ocean. The next six papers are on various aspects of tsunami hydrodynamics and numerical modelling, including tsunami edge waves, resonant behaviour of compressible water layer during tsunamigenic earthquakes, dispersive properties of seismic and volcanically generated tsunami waves, tsunami runup on a vertical wall and influence of earthquake rupture velocity on maximum tsunami runup. Four papers discuss problems of tsunami warning and real-time forecasting for Central America, the Mediterranean coast of France, the coast of Peru, and some general problems regarding the optimum use of the DART buoy network for effective real-time tsunami warning in the Pacific Ocean. Two papers describe historical and paleotsunami studies in the Russian Far East. The final set of three papers importantly investigates tsunamis generated by non-seismic sources: asteroid airburst and meteorological disturbances. Collectively, this volume highlights contemporary trends in global tsunami research, both fundamental and applied toward hazard assessment and mitigation.

Explore related subjects

Pure and Applied GeophysicsArticle

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Alexander B. Rabinovich, Hermann M. Fritz, Yuichiro Tanioka, Eric L. Geist. 2018-04-19. Introduction to “Global tsunami science: Past and future, Volume III”. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-018-1851-8

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2021

Local variations in broadband sensor installations: Orientations, sensitivities, and noise levels

As seismologists continue to place more stringent demands on data quality, accurately described metadata are becoming increasingly important. In order to better constrain the orientation and sensitivities of seismometers deployed in U.S. Geological Survey networks, the Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory (ASL) has recently begun identifying true north with a fiber optic gyroscope (FOG) and has developed methodologies to constrain mid-band, vertical component sensitivity levels to less than 1% in a controlled environment. However, questions remain regarding the accuracy of this new alignment technique as well as if instrument sensitivities and background noise levels are stable when the seismometers are installed in different environmental settings. In this study, we examine the stability and repeatability of these parameters by reinstalling two high-quality broadband seismometers (Streckeisen STS-2.5 and Nanometrics T-360 Global Seismographic Network (GSN) version) at different locations around the ASL and comparing them to each other and a reference STS-6 seismometer that stayed stationary for the duration of the experiment. We find that even in different environmental conditions, the sensitivities of the two broadband seismometers stayed stable to within 0.1% and that orientations attained using the FOG are generally accurate to within a degree. However, one install was off by 5° due to a mistake made by the installation team. These results indicate that while technology and methodologies are now in place to calibrate and orient a seismometer to within 1°, human error both during the installation and while producing the metadata is often a limiting factor. Finally, we find that background noise levels at short periods (0.1–1 s) become noisier when the sensors are emplaced in unconsolidated materials, whereas the noise levels at long periods (30–100 s) are not sensitive to local geological structure on the vertical components.

Pure and Applied Geophysics↗
USGS2021

Inter-source interferometry of seismic body waves: Required conditions and examples

Seismic interferometry is widely applied to retrieve wavefields propagating between receivers. Another version of seismic interferometry, called inter-source interferometry, uses the principles of seismic reciprocity and expands interferometric applications to retrieve waves that propagate between two seismic sources. Previous studies of inter-source interferometry usually involve surface-wave and coda-wave estimations. We use inter-source interferometry to estimate the P-waves propagating between two sources rather than the estimation of surface waves and coda waves. We show that the recovered arrival times are dependent on the accuracy of the earthquake catalog of the two sources. Using inter-source interferometry, one can recover the waveform of the direct body waves and potentially reconstruct the waveform of coda waves, depending on the source-receiver geometry. The retrieval of these waveforms is accurate only when the wavefield is sampled with approximately 4 receivers per wavelength in the stationary phase zone. We show that using only receivers inside the stationary phase region for inter-source interferometry introduces the phase error of approximately 0.3 radians. In our study, we show an example of the P-wavefield reconstruction between two earthquakes using the seismic records from an array along San Andreas Fault. The retrieved P waves give a qualitative estimation of the thickness of the low-velocity zone of San Andreas Fault of approximately 4 km.

Pure and Applied Geophysics↗