Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T00:32:24.916Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Use of electromagnetic radiation for potential forecast of earthquakes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 December 2017

AVINOAM RABINOVITCH*
Affiliation:
Physics Department, Ben-Gurion University, Beer-Sheva, Israel
VLADIMIR FRID
Affiliation:
Civil Engineering Department, Sami Shamoon College of Engineering, Israel
DOV BAHAT
Affiliation:
Department of Geological and Environmental Sciences, Ben-Gurion University, Beer-Sheva, Israel
*
Author for correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract

A forecast of an earthquake should identify the first stages of earthquake development: nucleation and stick-slip. We show that a forecast cannot be achieved by seismic measurements due to their high attenuation, but can be obtained by judicial filtering of electromagnetic radiation. Results show that electromagnetic radiation emitted from fractures (FEMR) during the early stages of an earthquake is less attenuated than seismic measurements due to the high frequencies involved, but could be cluttered by external noise. Based on our previous studies, an analysis of FEMR constructed on a profile of individual pulses can remove part of the clatter.

Type
Rapid Communication
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bormann, P. 2011. From earthquake prediction research to time-variable seismic hazard assessment application. Pure and Applied Geophysics 168, 329–66.Google Scholar
Eftaxias, E. & Potirakis, S. M. 2013. Current challenges for pre-earthquake electromagnetic emissions: shedding light from micro-scale plastic flow, granular packings, phase transitions and self-affinity notion of fracture process. Nonlinear Processes in Geophysics 20, 771–92.Google Scholar
Frid, V. & Vozoff, K. 2005. Electromagnetic radiation induced by mining rock failure. International Journal of Coal Geology 64, 5765.Google Scholar
Fujinawa, Y. & Takahashi, K. 1998. Electromagnetic radiations associated with major earthquakes. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors 105, 249–59.Google Scholar
Goldbaum, J., Frid, V., Bahat, D. & Rabinovitch, A. 2003. An analysis of complex EMR signals induced by fracture. Measurement Science and Technology 14, 1839–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, D. H., Toksöz, M. N. & Timur, A. 1979. Attenuation of seismic waves in dry and saturated rocks: II. Mechanisms. Geophysics 31, 691–71.Google Scholar
Korpisalo, A. 2014. Characterization of geotomographic studies with the EMRE system. International Journal of Geophysics 2014, ID 401654.Google Scholar
Koulouras, G., Balasis, G., Kiourktsidis, I., Nannos, E., Kontakos, K., Stonham, J., Ruzhin, Y., Eftaxias, K., Cavouras, D. & Nomicos, C. 2009. Discrimination between pre-seismic electromagnetic anomalies and solar activity effects. Physica Scripta 79 (4), 045901.Google Scholar
McLaskey, G. C. & Lockner, D. A. 2016. Calibrated acoustic emission system records M 23.5 to M 28 events generated on a saw-cut granite sample. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering 49, 4527–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menke, W., Levin, V. & Sethi, R. 1995. Seismic attenuation in the crust at the mid-Atlantic plate boundary in south-west Iceland. Geophysical Journal International 122, 175–82.Google Scholar
Rabinovitch, A., Bahat, D. & Frid, V. 2002. Similarity and dissimilarity of electromagnetic radiation from carbonate rocks under compression, drilling and blasting. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 39, 125–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rabinovitch, A., Frid, V. & Bahat, D. 2007. Surface oscillations: a possible source of fracture induced electromagnetic radiation. Tectonophysics 431, 1521.Google Scholar
Rabinovitch, A., Frid, V., Bahat, D. & Goldbaum, J. 2000. Fracture area calculation from electromagnetic radiation and its use in chalk failure analysis. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 37, 1149–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rai, S. S., Padhi, A. A. & Sarma, P. R. 2009. High crustal seismic attenuation in Ladakh–Karakoram. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 99, 407–15.Google Scholar
Solazzi, S. G., Rubino, J., Müller, T. M., Milani, M., Guarrcino, L. & Hollinger, K. 2016. An energy-based approach to estimate seismic attenuation due to wave-induced fluid flow in heterogeneous poroelastic media. Geophysical Journal International 207, 823–32.Google Scholar
Telford, L. P., Geldart, L. P. & Sheriff, R. E. 1990. Applied Geophysics, second edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 744 pp.Google Scholar
Toksöz, M. N., Johnston, D. H. & Timur, A. 1979. Attenuation of seismic waves in dry and saturated rocks: I. Laboratory measurements. Geophysics 44, 681–90.Google Scholar
Tsutsui, M. 2014. Behaviors of electromagnetic waves directly excited by earthquakes. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters 11 (11), 1961–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, E., He, X., Liu, X. & Wenquan Xu, W. 2012. Comprehensive monitoring technique based on electromagnetic radiation and its applications to mine pressure. Safety Science 50, 885–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, K & Li, D. 2007. Electromagnetic Theory of Microwaves and Optoelectronics. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Image

Rabinovitch et al supplementary material

Rabinovitch et al supplementary material 1

Download Rabinovitch et al supplementary material(Image)
Image 188.9 KB
Supplementary material: Image

Rabinovitch et al supplementary material

Rabinovitch et al supplementary material 2

Download Rabinovitch et al supplementary material(Image)
Image 357.2 KB
Supplementary material: Image

Rabinovitch et al supplementary material

Rabinovitch et al supplementary material 3

Download Rabinovitch et al supplementary material(Image)
Image 403.7 KB