IASPEI - Picture Gallery
IASPEI - Picture Gallery IASPEI - Picture Gallery
IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-13, 2007 Perugia, Italy (S) - IASPEI - International Association of Seismology and Physics of the Earth's Interior JSS008 Oral Presentation 1978 ULF seismomagnetic signals analysis Prof. Valery Korepanov Laboratory for EM Investigations Lviv Center of Institute of Space Research IAGA Baldev Arora, Fedir Dudkin, Gautam Rawat, Ashok Sharma The existence of electromagnetic (EM) precursors of earthquakes (EQ) is widely discussed. The EQ EM precursors in ULF band are the most promising between the known ones. They generally are based on movement of conductive fluid or charges in the Earths magnetic field (inductive effect), piezoelectric or piezomagnetic effects. However the problem of their reliable detection has not yet been solved first of all because of low level of precursor signal and of the comparatively high level of ambient EM interference. Many examples of their observations before the EQ are given in the scientific papers as well as in many cases the EQ occur without preliminary EM activity. So, it appears that these precursors are very different in their peculiarities and they vary not only at diverse places but also for different time even in the same place. Apparently this fact depends on the specifics of geological formation and the types of EM signal source in seismoactive zones and yields a rather modest progress in EQ prediction practice. This report is an attempt to explain some experimental facts with observed seismogenic ULF emissions. First the model of the source of EM variations connected with EQ preparation process is proposed and discussed. It is shown that the range of distances for which the components of anomalous EM field are detectable mainly depends on the signal-to-noise ratio at the observation place. The approach to the determination of the EQ epicenter location is proposed based on multi-points observations of ULF electromagnetic signals collected in the monitored area. The main principle of the data processing using this method is based on the assumption that at relatively small distance between EQ epicenter and observation points (no more than 100 200 km), we are always in near zone of electromagnetic wave propagation what allows us to use as informative carrier only signal amplitude. This peculiarity can be used for enhancing the signal-to-noise ratio by processing simultaneously the time-synchronous signals collected in different points. To realize this efficiently, the critical requirements to the observation system are discussed. The design features of the automatic ULF observation system LEMI-30 with large dynamic range and free from time mismatch necessary for continuous monitoring of EQ EM precursors are discussed and the example of its practical realization is presented. Some known examples of ULF magnetic pre-EQ activity successful registration are analyzed and a new multi-points observations results obtained with LEMI-30 systems in India during medium magnitude EQs at Koyna active fault are reported. This study was partially supported by STCU grant 3165. Keywords: electromagnetic, precursor, earthquake
IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-13, 2007 Perugia, Italy (S) - IASPEI - International Association of Seismology and Physics of the Earth's Interior JSS008 Oral Presentation 1979 Re-examining the reported magnetic precursor to the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake using magnetic field data collected in the US and Japan during September and October 1989 Dr. Jeremy Thomas National Geomagnetism Program USGS Denver, CO IAGA Jeffrey J. Love, Malcolm J. S. Johnston One of the most well-known and perhaps the most compelling reports of an electromagnetic precursor is the ultra low frequency (ULF, 0.01-10 Hz) magnetic variations measured prior to the Ms 7.1 Loma Prieta earthquake of October 17, 1989 in Northern California by Fraser-Smith et al., 1990, GRL, 17, 1465-1468 (referenced as FS90). According to FS90, an ULF search coil magnetic field sensor (magnetic latitude of 42.70), located 7 km from the epicenter, measured unusual activity for more than a month prior to the earthquake. A later study by Campbell, 2005, Eos Trans. AGU, 86(18), Abstract GP23A-01, using USGS magnetic observatory data, reported that the claimed precursory activity was probably not related to the earthquake, but was, instead, driven by solar-terrestrial phenomena. In this paper, we present geomagnetic-field data measured by the Kakioka Magnetic Observatory in Japan and by the USGS in Fresno and Tucson prior to, and during, the Loma Prieta earthquake. The 1-second magnetic field data from Kakioka (magnetic latitude of 28.90 and 8,284 km from the epicenter) are filtered into several frequency band-pass channels for direct comparison with the precursory activity reported by FS90. The 1-minute magnetic field data from Fresno and Tucson (magnetic latitudes of 43.2 and 39.90 and distances of 201 and 1,162 km from the epicenter, respectively) are filtered just below the frequencies reported by FS90, since the data rate at these observatories was too slow for a direct comparison. We investigate these data and explore whether the claimed precursor was a local, regional, or global phenomenon. We briefly present more recent measurements of ULF magnetic fields at similar band-passes to FS90 to quantify the typical noise background at these frequencies. Based on our analyses, we discuss the likelihood of possible sources for the claimed magnetic precursor, such as magnetospheric activity, man-made noise, and processes related to the earthquake. Keywords: geomagnetism, earthquakes
- Page 233 and 234: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 235 and 236: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 237 and 238: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 239 and 240: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 241 and 242: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 243 and 244: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 245 and 246: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 247 and 248: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 249 and 250: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 251 and 252: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 253 and 254: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 255 and 256: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 257 and 258: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 259 and 260: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 261 and 262: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 263 and 264: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 265 and 266: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 267 and 268: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 269 and 270: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 271 and 272: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 273 and 274: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 275 and 276: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 277 and 278: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 279 and 280: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 281 and 282: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 283: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 287 and 288: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 289 and 290: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 291 and 292: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 293 and 294: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 295 and 296: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 297 and 298: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 299 and 300: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 301 and 302: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 303 and 304: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 305 and 306: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 307 and 308: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 309 and 310: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 311 and 312: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 313 and 314: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 315 and 316: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 317 and 318: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 319 and 320: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 321 and 322: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 323 and 324: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 325 and 326: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 327 and 328: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 329 and 330: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 331 and 332: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
- Page 333 and 334: IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-1
IUGG XXIV General Assembly July 2-13, 2007 Perugia, Italy<br />
(S) - <strong>IASPEI</strong> - International Association of Seismology and Physics of the Earth's<br />
Interior<br />
JSS008 Oral Presentation 1978<br />
ULF seismomagnetic signals analysis<br />
Prof. Valery Korepanov<br />
Laboratory for EM Investigations Lviv Center of Institute of Space Research IAGA<br />
Baldev Arora, Fedir Dudkin, Gautam Rawat, Ashok Sharma<br />
The existence of electromagnetic (EM) precursors of earthquakes (EQ) is widely discussed. The EQ EM<br />
precursors in ULF band are the most promising between the known ones. They generally are based on<br />
movement of conductive fluid or charges in the Earths magnetic field (inductive effect), piezoelectric or<br />
piezomagnetic effects. However the problem of their reliable detection has not yet been solved first of<br />
all because of low level of precursor signal and of the comparatively high level of ambient EM<br />
interference. Many examples of their observations before the EQ are given in the scientific papers as<br />
well as in many cases the EQ occur without preliminary EM activity. So, it appears that these precursors<br />
are very different in their peculiarities and they vary not only at diverse places but also for different time<br />
even in the same place. Apparently this fact depends on the specifics of geological formation and the<br />
types of EM signal source in seismoactive zones and yields a rather modest progress in EQ prediction<br />
practice. This report is an attempt to explain some experimental facts with observed seismogenic ULF<br />
emissions. First the model of the source of EM variations connected with EQ preparation process is<br />
proposed and discussed. It is shown that the range of distances for which the components of<br />
anomalous EM field are detectable mainly depends on the signal-to-noise ratio at the observation place.<br />
The approach to the determination of the EQ epicenter location is proposed based on multi-points<br />
observations of ULF electromagnetic signals collected in the monitored area. The main principle of the<br />
data processing using this method is based on the assumption that at relatively small distance between<br />
EQ epicenter and observation points (no more than 100 200 km), we are always in near zone of<br />
electromagnetic wave propagation what allows us to use as informative carrier only signal amplitude.<br />
This peculiarity can be used for enhancing the signal-to-noise ratio by processing simultaneously the<br />
time-synchronous signals collected in different points. To realize this efficiently, the critical requirements<br />
to the observation system are discussed. The design features of the automatic ULF observation system<br />
LEMI-30 with large dynamic range and free from time mismatch necessary for continuous monitoring of<br />
EQ EM precursors are discussed and the example of its practical realization is presented. Some known<br />
examples of ULF magnetic pre-EQ activity successful registration are analyzed and a new multi-points<br />
observations results obtained with LEMI-30 systems in India during medium magnitude EQs at Koyna<br />
active fault are reported. This study was partially supported by STCU grant 3165.<br />
Keywords: electromagnetic, precursor, earthquake