united nations educational, scientific and cultural organization...
Post on 17-Jul-2020
0 views
Embed Size (px)
TRANSCRIPT
Available at: http://publications.ictp.it IC/2007/126
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and
International Atomic Energy Agency
THE ABDUS SALAM INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR THEORETICAL PHYSICS
SPECTRAL CHARACTERISTICS OF NATURAL AND ARTIFICIAL
EARTHQUAKES IN THE LOP NOR TEST SITE, CHINA
I.M. Korrat Geology Department, Faculty of Science, Mansoura University, Egypt,
A.A. Gharib, K.A. Abou Elenean, H.M. Hussein National Research Institute of Astronomy and Geophysics, NRIAG, Helwan, Egypt
and
M.N. ElGabry* National Research Institute of Astronomy and Geophysics, NRIAG, Helwan, Egypt
and The Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Trieste, Italy.
MIRAMARE – TRIESTE
December 2007
___________________ *Junior Associate of ICTP.
1
Abstract
A seismic discriminants based on the spectral seismogram and spectral magnitude
techniques has been tested to discriminate between three events; a nuclear explosion which took
place in Lop Nor, China with mb 6.1 and two earthquakes from the closest area with mb 5.5 and 5.3,
respectively. The spectral seismogram of the three events shows that the frequency content of the
nuclear explosion differs from that of the earthquakes where the P-wave is rich with high frequency
content in the nuclear explosion than the corresponding earthquakes. It is also observed that the
energy decays very rapidly for the nuclear explosion than that for the earthquakes. Furthermore, the
spectral magnitudes reveal significant differences in the spectra between the nuclear explosion and
the two earthquakes. These observed differences appear to be quite enough to provide a reliable
discriminant. The estimated stress drop from the magnitude spectra indicates a higher stress drop of
the nuclear explosion relative to the earthquakes of the same tectonic region.
2
Introduction
Discrimination between earthquakes and underground nuclear explosions is a difficult task which
has gained considerable attention in the seismological community. Seismic methods provide the
principal means for a verification of a nuclear test ban (Basham and Dahlman, 1988). The
discrepancies in signals from earthquakes and explosions arise from differences in source
mechanisms, source dimensions and duration. An underground nuclear explosion has a small point
source compared to an earthquake. It sends out compressional waves of equal strength in all
directions. An earthquake occurs along a rupture as a result of sliding rupture sides. Due to this
frictional sliding an earthquake emits more shear waves and surface waves than a nuclear explosion.
As the source dimensions of earthquakes tend to be larger than those of nuclear explosions,
wavelengths of the radiated seismic waves emitted are longer. Thus, earthquakes usually produce
signals with lower frequencies than explosions.
Classical Discriminates such as mb:MS, the ratio of body wave magnitude and surface wave
magnitude; M0:ML, the ratio of seismic moment and local magnitude and various spectral ratios
showed promising results in many instances. Denny et al. (1987) and Taylor et al. (1989) show that
mb:MS works well down to mb = 4. Generally, the explosion generates lower-amplitude surface
waves than an earthquake of equal size. However, in some cases these methods failed to
discriminate between natural earthquakes and nuclear explosions. For example, intermediate and
deep earthquakes can cause problems with mb:MS because they can result in relatively high mb:MS
differentials and sampling of Rayleigh waves near radiation nodes can bias the MS estimates
(Dreger and Woods 2002). Additionally, all nuclear explosions produce some nonisotropic radiation
(Wallace, 1991) and the mode of the nonisotropic radiation (strike-slip vs. dip-slip) can have quite
different effects on Rayleigh wave amplitudes and, hence, MS (Patton, 1991). Surface waves also
have source area dependent behavior (Stevens, 1986). As shown by Patton (1991), the degree of
such bias is a strong function of the F-factor, F= (α2M0/2β2MI), where α and β are the compressional
and shear wave velocities at the source, and M0 and MI are the nonisotropic and isotropic scalar
seismic moments, respectively. The ratio of mb:M0 and ML:M0 discriminants are based on the same
principle as the mb:MS method with the exception that M0 is determined by waveform modeling to
account for source depth and radiation pattern influences (Woods et al., 1993).
The seismic waves observed in earthquake records manifest clearly non-stationary
characteristics, as well as wide frequency content. Those characteristics are twofold (Huerta-López,
et al., 2003). The first characteristic involves variations of the intensity of ground motion with the
time. The second characteristic involves variation with the time of the frequency content, with a
tendency to shift to lower frequencies as the time increases. This phenomenon is well known as the
3
frequency dependent dispersive effect which is very complex and involves the arrival of different
seismic phases (P, S and surface waves), the intensity of ground motion, the magnitude of
earthquake, source and path effects, and the local soil conditions. Spectral characteristics of
different seismic waves have been used before for the discrimination analysis and source parameter
evaluations of different tectonic origins earthquakes (Hussein et al., 1998, Lyskova et al., 1998 and
Abou Elenean et al., 2000). Moreover, Chernobay and Gabsatarove (1999) applied the spectrogram
method for routine discrimination between regional earthquakes and chemical explosions of
comparable magnitudes in northern Caucasus. Recently, the spectrogram was implemented in the
routine analysis used by Comprehensive Nuclear-Test- Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO).
The need for a suitable tool for measuring strength of any seismic event, as well as for
discrimination between natural and artificial ones, is very important issue. Our study has been
forward to apply both the spectral seismogram (spectrogram) and spectral magnitudes tools for the
verification of a nuclear explosion at the Lop Nor test site, China and the two natural earthquakes
which occurred closer to the test site. These tools can help in resolving possible biases in the
identification of an explosion.
Data
In this study, we used three events; a known nuclear explosion and two natural earthquakes which
are both located in the China Lop Nor area. The selection is based upon event size (magnitude),
focal depth and location proximity. We search for the available natural earthquakes with relatively
comparable magnitudes to that of the explosion and very close to the test site. This ensures that
dissimilarities observed between both events would originate from the type of the source rather than
from different propagation paths and origin areas. Table 1 shows the parameters of the three tested
events. The broadband records of IRIS data base were utilized. We try to use the same stations with
the same time window during our analysis. Six seismic stations equipped with 3 components
Streckeisen STS-1 broadband seismometers (Fig. 1) which have good signal to noise ratio were
used. The available selected stations have epicentral distances ranging from 20°- 60°.
Spectral seismogram
The Fourier transform decomposes a signal into its constituent frequency components. Looking at
the Fourier spectrum we can identify these frequencies; however, we cannot identify their temporal
localization. Time-frequency distribution map converts a one-dimensional signal into a colored two-
dimensional function of time and frequency, and describes how the spectral content of the signal
4
changes with time. The basic idea of the method of analyzing the time-varying nature of the
spectral content is to compute the Fourier transform of the signal using a short sliding time window.
The absolute values of this function yield the spectrogram (Fasthoff and Lucan, 1996). The basis for
this approach has been developed by Gabor (1946). He defined the complex (analytic signal) from a
real one s(t):
z(t) = s(t)+iH[s(t)] (1)
where, H is the Hilbert transform which is defined as:
H[s(t)] = p.v. τ πτ τ dts )( −∫
+∞
∞− (2)
(p.v. stands for principal value of the integral). Moreover, Gabor (1946) demonstrated that the
analytic signal can be calculated as well in the frequency domain by Fourier transforming the signal
s(t), then doubling the amplitude of the positive frequencies and suppressing the amplitude of the
negative frequencies. For obtaining th