• Home
  • About
  • Email List
  • Past Speakers
  • SFNHS Coordinator
  • Upcoming Speakers

SF Natural History Series

A lecture series exploring nature in the San Francisco Bay Area

Feeds:
Posts
Comments
« Next Lecture – August 21st: The case for restoring Hetch Hetchy
Next Lecture – Sep 18th: How we’d like all our buildings to work »

Quake Talk – Measurements and Calculations

July 24, 2014 by Adrian Cotter

Julian Lozos came to talk to us on July 17th, 2014 on measuring earthquakes – how they are taken and how they are used with an important distinction between measured and calculated data.

Corona Heights where our Randall sits has very visible evidence of an earthquake. Julian referred to the fault on the side of the hill as a “slip & slide”. It is very rare to be able to see one so exposed — you can see the polish from the pressure and the striations showing which way the surfaces slipped relative to one another.

After a quake, we want to know where was it? How big? Will there be aftershocks? The audience was invited to weigh in on what questions come to mind immediately after feeling a moderately small shake. It turned into a long, interesting discussion. Tsunami turn out to be a low risk in the Bay Area due to distance from faults that cause them. One at north end of the San Andreas (“triple junction” zone) can produce tsunamis but they come at an angle that diminishes them. Northern CA and Oregon north would be hit hard. In the Bay Area, only a landslide displacing lots of water would cause a tsunami. The 1906 SF quake caused a one inch tsunami.

Another way water can be a problem is seiching–water in a basin sloshing around to the point of generating dangerous waves. This would not happen on the Bay, since it’s shallow, but it might be a problem in Lake Tahoe.

Bigger quakes get named, even though the names are often not very directly related to the quake location, in order to give them media handles for discussion and easy identity.

Sections of the Hayward fault are slipping in “seismic creep” that means you can see the gradual movement (about as fast as a fingernail grows) by breaks in walls, buildings, roads. Other parts of the fault, and most of the San Andreas, lock together, building up even more stress as the creeping parts move. The locked parts only move in a rupture, which is another term for an earthquake. Hayward’s old city hall was abandoned because the fault goes right through it. Now that fault is a couple blocks away.

There are various ways earthquakes are measured: Acceleration: which is compared to the acceleration of gravity. Sometimes an earthquake can be more than or even twice the force of gravity. The biggest quakes (by energy released) don’t necessarily produce more shaking movement; it depends on surface composition and all sorts of other factors. Saturated and soft soils shake more.

During a quake, we measure shaking, but some techniques are improving that may give the ability to measure displacement as it happens. Various things are measured: P waves (Pressure; Primary) are like a sound wave in rock. They are the fastest thing emitting from the rupture and arrive first as a result moving at the speed of 6km/second. They feel like the come from below. S waves (Shear; Secondary) are the side to side waves. Love waves (named after a person) come third, more slowly, and are like a tail wagging side to side. Rayleigh waves are most destructive and shake in elliptical motion up and back then down.

P & S waves are generated mostly by the fault itself. Love & Rayleigh are mostly lensing and interference patterns caused by “sloshing” within the bedrock and the soils, waves reflecting off the earth’s mantle, other rock formations, fault surfaces, etc. The bay doesn’t effect the waves’ movement because it’s shallow. If you actually see the ground move in waves that’s probably a big quake and a Rayleigh wave.

Shaking measurement can be a crowd-sourced thing, too. Modified Mercalli Intensity is calculated from “measurements” or qualitative descriptions of many observers reporting how much they felt or damage they saw. Anyone can report in and should report — even if you don’t feel a quake that you heard about — this helps keeps the data accurate. Accelerometers in laptops and other devices (which exist to protect hard drive when dropped) can be networked to be seismographic info sources — all you have to do is download a free small application.

Since the biggest and worst earthquake damage comes last, early warning systems analyze the relationship between the P wave and S wave then try to get things in order before the later waves. This can provide a minute or two warning, depending on the distance to the epicenter — the farther, the more warning. An early warning might allow enough time to turning off gas and machinery, for example. Early warning systems in place since 1986 in Mexico (due to huge Mex City 85 quake) and Japan since 2008. This kind of technology is available now, but currently not for the general public, due to budget shortages and the complexity of psychology of how to get people to react appropriately. Currently PG&E, Google, BART and some others have access to a beta version only.

Earthquakes are located by triangulation using three or more stations. The origin is complex, because multiple places on fault can rupture at once. It might take years of computer models and analysis to determine all the sources, interactions and effects.

Shaking is a direct measurement and is not logarithmic; magnitude is a calculation and is logarithmic. A magnitude 7 has 30 times the energy released in a magnitude 6. Intensity maps created by Mod. Mercalli system have a downfall: they depend on how many people in a region report and how the regions are defined. Historical reconstructions of past quakes can use this method to calculate approximate magnitude of long ago quakes from diaries and news reports. Richter scale is used sparingly, it was designed for the LA Basin specifically and sometimes used for the quick and dirty first approximation. The numbers can change later after humans take a careful look after the original machine analysis. How long an earthquake lasts is one of the main factors in determining total magnitude (energy) released.

An aftershock is another quake, if the aftershock is bigger, than the earlier quake is re-termed a “foreshock”. Aftershocks can help determine length of rupture and depth. If they are getting father apart in time, they are aftershocks. They may or may not get smaller, though.

We can also take measurements after quakes: the offset if the quake rips the surface. A fault may be single line deep down but at surface it splays and splits, so there can be lots of offset measurements. 1906 is the first time offsets were systematically measured and the book of the report is huge. Nowadays LIDAR (portmonteau of ‘light’ and ‘radar’) is done from helicopter lasers. This sends signals to measure things on the ground and change is measure by comparing measurements to old data. InSAR measures deformation from space satellites. GPS is used for ground deformation measurements. They can track locations of fixed points and see that they are really not so fixed. There are so many new sensors that the split itself can now be measured as it happens in some places.

Contrary to popular opinion, small quakes don’t release enough energy to help prevent big ones later. You’d have to have magnitude 4 quakes every few minutes to keep the big one from occurring later. Stresses present when a fault ruptures don’t disappear, they just go and “bother” other faults bringing them closer to failure. Along the ruptured fault, the stress is reduced. At ends and bends the fault  increased stress shoots out. This explains sequences of quakes. We also can’t release stress by bombs but we can measure fault locations by echoes from explosions or ambient vibrations such as traffic. To see what’s happening inside Parkside section of San Andreas, they dug 3km through it and are now getting lots of data from deep inside. It seems magnitude ones hit every 32 hours. Even though it seems like clockwork in some ways, the overall system and larger ruptures are impossibly hard to predict.

Pushing and pulling of the crust is always going to happen on our planet. Faults don’t move except by the end extending and they don’t go away ever, unless that piece of the crust is subducted. Once it’s there, it’s a weak place in the crust and it can break more easily than surrounding areas.

Seismometers have only existed since the 1880s. Layers of soil accumulation show different offsets, and break the old surface at different depths from which years can be calculated. On Hayward fault they’ve done trenching and seven or eight prehistoric quakes show up so they know an average of one big quake every 120 years. On the Red Sea, trenching shows thousands of years of non-frequent quakes with very little deposition due to desert conditions. We can find shaking by precariously balance rocks. How long has it been there without being knocked down? We can tell by sun exposure changes — how long since it eroded into it’s current balanced shape.

Anatolian fault: calculations show that the next part set to go off (if pattern continues) is right by Istanbul. The San Andreas part that is considered highest risk is furthest south in Palm Springs. San Gregorio is “decently high risk” but in water so it’s harder to tell what it’s doing.

Dynamic modeling: more efficient than waiting to see what behaviors a fault shows. Modeling lets you get at the physics of the observations, and allows picking the problem apart into smaller manageable chunks. They can compare the model to past measurements and tell what can we possibly can expect from possible future quakes. This kind of modeling was hard to do until strong recently with ever increasing computing power. Multi-cycle simulators over time use a stress and re-stress model.

All measurements come together to create rupture maps. UCERF maps (# 3 just out last week) includes all the models and measurements. UCERF4 will include current modeling.

Hazard maps are made from the UCERF map and includes the likelihood of a rupture based on the underlying geology.

Fracking only produces small “induced” quakes and only if it’s done in an area where other faults exist and can be triggered. Southern CA for example would be a bad place to do fracking. They won’t make a fault, but any old place might have some old faults — like Oklahoma. The cause of these fracking quakes isn’t the frack but the reinjection of the water into the ground.

Quake predictions are not possible. The debate now is not: can we predict quakes with what we know; it’s, ‘Will we ever be able to know?’ These are inherently chaotic systems and may be too hard to ever predict.

Comparisons:

  • Most powerful quake measured: Chile 1960 was magnitude 9
  • 911 was about magnitude 3
  • Hiroshima was magnitude 6
  • A 50 megaton bomb would be magnitude 7
  • The space rock that killed the dinos was mag 13!

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Related

Posted in Lecture Notes | Tagged earthquakes, geology | 1 Comment

One Response

  1. on July 24, 2014 at 6:03 pm THINKWALKS » Earthquake Measurement – Lecture Notes

    […] relate to earthquakes. Julian Lozos gave a talk at the Randall Museum on July 17th and here are my […]



Comments are closed.

  • SFNHS

    Our lecture series explores all aspects of nature in the Bay Area, and seeks to understand our impact both past and present on those natural systems, and their impact on us.
  • Find Us Elsewhere

    • Facebook
    • Google+
    • Twitter
  • Local Science & History

    • Ask a Scientist SF
    • California Center for Natural History
    • California Naturalist Program
    • Friends of Five Creeks
    • Nature in the City
    • Shaping SF
    • The Long Now Seminars
    • Think Walks
    • Urban Adventures for Kids
  • Our Hosts

    • Exploratorium Bay Observatory Gallery
    • Green Apple Books
    • Rotary Nature Center
    • SF Public Library
    • The Randall Museum
  • Science in Other Cities

    • Bay to Beach Life
    • NYC Wildlife
  • Speaker

    • Cartographer's Notebook
    • Keith Hansen
    • Marin Carbon Project
    • Nowtopians
  • SF Naturalist

    • RT @Sierra_Jobs: Are you interested in developing web applications, and shaping technical solutions for complex use cases at a mission-cent… 6 months ago
    • @Longreads @jkehe @WIRED This does just essentially seem like a reboot of intelligent design. Why is it easier to b… twitter.com/i/web/status/1… 11 months ago
    • My couple minutes of Corvid fame on @kalw's @CrosscurrentsFM this week -- shoutout to friends who clued me in to th… twitter.com/i/web/status/1… 1 year ago
  • Archives

    • July 2018
    • January 2017
    • June 2016
    • April 2016
    • March 2016
    • February 2016
    • November 2015
    • October 2015
    • August 2015
    • July 2015
    • June 2015
    • May 2015
    • April 2015
    • March 2015
    • February 2015
    • January 2015
    • November 2014
    • October 2014
    • September 2014
    • July 2014
    • June 2014
    • May 2014
    • April 2014
    • March 2014
    • February 2014
    • January 2014
    • October 2013
    • September 2013
    • August 2013
    • July 2013
    • June 2013
    • May 2013
    • April 2013
    • March 2013
    • February 2013
    • January 2013
    • December 2012
    • October 2012
    • August 2012
    • July 2012
    • May 2012
    • April 2012
    • February 2012
    • January 2012
    • November 2011
    • October 2011
    • August 2011
    • July 2011
    • June 2011
    • May 2011
    • April 2011
    • March 2011
    • February 2011
    • January 2011
    • December 2010
    • November 2010
    • October 2010
    • September 2010
    • August 2010
    • July 2010
    • June 2010
    • May 2010
    • April 2010
    • February 2010
    • January 2010
    • November 2009
    • October 2009
    • September 2009
    • August 2009
    • July 2009
    • June 2009
    • May 2009
    • March 2009

Blog at WordPress.com.

WPThemes.


  • Follow Following
    • SF Natural History Series
    • Join 35 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • SF Natural History Series
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Copy shortlink
    • Report this content
    • View post in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
%d bloggers like this: