Data Requirements from Low–Frequency Seismology and the Dearth of STS-1 Sensors

Data Requirements from Low–Frequency Seismology and the Dearth of STS-1 Sensors a) Grading of available GSN and equivalent vertical recordings. A grade E record has some surface wave trains but no obvious spectral lines. An ‘F’ grade record has no seismic signal or large data gaps. b) Scoring for co-located sensors. Number of records (dark blue) and instances when the sensor provided the best seismogram (light blue).
<br /><br />
Free-oscillation seismology has exceptionally high demands on data quality. We need long, gap-free records, with consistently high signal-to-noise performance. The data harvest for a typical very large earthquake (scalar seismic moment M0 ≥ 5.0 x 1020 Nm is rather sobering. Only 75% of the records downloaded from the IRIS DMC can be used for study.
<br /><br />
For the 2004 IRIS Broadband Instrumentation workshop I summarized the experience I gathered from analyzing over 20 large earthquakes in the last 10 years. I inspected each vertical component spectrum visually and assigned grades A-F. A little less than 50% of the records of Wielandt-Streckeisen STS-1 vault sensors (132) meet the highest quality requirements, while the 46 Teledyne-Geotech KS5400 borehole installations (and its predecessor KS36000) yield less than 10% high-quality records. Surprisingly, the fraction of such records at 85 STS-2 and Guralp CMG3 (CMG-3t and CMG-3b) installations is almost as large. Overall, I find that 70% STS-1 records are ‘’acceptable’’ for analysis, 50% KS54000 records, but less than 30% STS-2/CMG3 records which clearly stresses the importance of observatory-quality very-broadband installations. It is often argued that KS54000s are typically deployed in noisy environments so that my comparison should not be used directly to judge the value of a KS54000. I have also inspected the data from co-located sensors for the 3 largest earthquakes in 2003. Typically, the primary sensor is either an STS-1 or KS54000 and the secondary sensor a STS-2 or CMG-3. In 92% of the cases when an STS-1 is involved, it provides the best records. The same is true for only 46% of the KS54000 records, which implies that in more than half of the cases the secondary sensor (STS-2 or CMG3) provides the better record. The new station at the South Pole, QSPA, hosts all four sensors. For two of the three largest earthquakes in 2003, the STS-1 delivered the best record, while the STS-2 delivered the best for one event. The quality of the CMG-3 is not far behind and, occasionally better, while the KS54000 delivers grade C data. For the Sumatra-Andaman earthquake, the CMG-3 delivered the best data at very low frequencies, while the STS-1 performed relatively poorly, the reason for which is not understood.
<br /><br />
Clearly, the STS-1 is the ultimate workhorse of low-frequency seismology. After the 2004 Sumatra earthquake, low-frequency modes could be seen on STS-2 records of many networks, not just the GEOFON network that has consistently been delivering good STS-2 records. The Sumatra earthquake and its March 2005 aftershock were extremely large and it is probably not a good idea to include its data to adjust GSN design goals. Rather, we need to find an adequate successor for the STS-1. This perhaps necessitates the co-deployment of several sensors rather than one very-broadband sensor that can do it all.
<br /><br />
Laske, G.. The Needs for/of Low-Frequency Seismology, IRIS Broadband Instrumentation Workshop, 2004. http://www.iris.edu/stations/seisWorkshop04/PPT/laske/Laske.html

Comments

No comments yet.

  •  

Welcome

Welcome to the IRIS Image Gallery – a diverse collection of photographs and visuals that encompass the range and breadth of seismology and the seismological community.

Please browse through our albums. These low and medium-resolution images can be freely used for personal and educational/academic purposes, but we request you recognize the image contributor by including in your product or presentation the credit displayed with each image.

More information is available in the Image Use Agreement.

If you have any comments, questions, or suggestions related to the IRIS Image Gallery, you can send them to gallery@iris.edu.

Photo info

Popular tags