File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Coseismic fluid-pressure response estimated from prediction-error filtering of tidal-band loading

TitleCoseismic fluid-pressure response estimated from prediction-error filtering of tidal-band loading
Authors
Issue Date1999
PublisherSeismological Society of America. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.bssaonline.org
Citation
Bulletin Of The Seismological Society Of America, 1999, v. 89 n. 6, p. 1439-1446 How to Cite?
AbstractA methodology combining prediction-error filters (PEFs) and transfer functions was developed to identify the quasi-static fluid-pressure response observed in wells due to coseismic strain. Water levels in confined aquifers respond to long-term and seasonal trends, recharge events, barometric and ocean tide loading, tidal strain, and tectonic strain. Low-frequency features can be neglected from the quasistatic coseismic response estimation. Transfer functions were constructed to deconvolve the fluid-pressure response due to measured barometric loading. Because direct tidal strain and ocean tide loading measurements are rarely available, theoretical tidal loading is often calculated from astronomical data. However, the calculations are subject to many assumptions. Because tidal driving processes are cyclic, PEFs are a natural choice for removing the fluid-pressure response without assuming a theoretical forcing function in the tidal band. The method was applied to hourly fluid pressure data collected over a 3-year period from two wells in the villages of Gaocun and Tayuan, China. Results of this analysis yielded coseismic fluid pressure heads of - 1.6 X 10-2 and + 7.6 X 10-2 m for the respective wells in response to the Datong-Yanggao earthquake swarm mainshock (M(s) 6.1), 18-24 October 1989. Epicentral distances to the wells were about 200 km. The coseismic fluid-pressure response for each well was also predicted from dislocation model strain scaled by material-dependent volumetric strain sensitivity parameters. These parameters were determined from the static confined response to O1 and M2 earth-tide strain constituents. The predicted response was - 2.9 X 10-3 m for the Gaocun well and + 2.1 X 10-3 m for the Tayuan well. Although predicted and observed response phases were consistent, both predictions underestimated observed response amplitudes, as has been true in other reported instances.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/151025
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 2.311
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 2.068
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMasterlark, TLen_US
dc.contributor.authorWang, HFen_US
dc.contributor.authorChan, LSen_US
dc.contributor.authorYongtai, Cen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-06-26T06:16:04Z-
dc.date.available2012-06-26T06:16:04Z-
dc.date.issued1999en_US
dc.identifier.citationBulletin Of The Seismological Society Of America, 1999, v. 89 n. 6, p. 1439-1446en_US
dc.identifier.issn0037-1106en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/151025-
dc.description.abstractA methodology combining prediction-error filters (PEFs) and transfer functions was developed to identify the quasi-static fluid-pressure response observed in wells due to coseismic strain. Water levels in confined aquifers respond to long-term and seasonal trends, recharge events, barometric and ocean tide loading, tidal strain, and tectonic strain. Low-frequency features can be neglected from the quasistatic coseismic response estimation. Transfer functions were constructed to deconvolve the fluid-pressure response due to measured barometric loading. Because direct tidal strain and ocean tide loading measurements are rarely available, theoretical tidal loading is often calculated from astronomical data. However, the calculations are subject to many assumptions. Because tidal driving processes are cyclic, PEFs are a natural choice for removing the fluid-pressure response without assuming a theoretical forcing function in the tidal band. The method was applied to hourly fluid pressure data collected over a 3-year period from two wells in the villages of Gaocun and Tayuan, China. Results of this analysis yielded coseismic fluid pressure heads of - 1.6 X 10-2 and + 7.6 X 10-2 m for the respective wells in response to the Datong-Yanggao earthquake swarm mainshock (M(s) 6.1), 18-24 October 1989. Epicentral distances to the wells were about 200 km. The coseismic fluid-pressure response for each well was also predicted from dislocation model strain scaled by material-dependent volumetric strain sensitivity parameters. These parameters were determined from the static confined response to O1 and M2 earth-tide strain constituents. The predicted response was - 2.9 X 10-3 m for the Gaocun well and + 2.1 X 10-3 m for the Tayuan well. Although predicted and observed response phases were consistent, both predictions underestimated observed response amplitudes, as has been true in other reported instances.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherSeismological Society of America. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.bssaonline.orgen_US
dc.relation.ispartofBulletin of the Seismological Society of Americaen_US
dc.titleCoseismic fluid-pressure response estimated from prediction-error filtering of tidal-band loadingen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailChan, LS:chanls@hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityChan, LS=rp00665en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0033510311en_US
dc.identifier.hkuros55312-
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0033510311&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_US
dc.identifier.volume89en_US
dc.identifier.issue6en_US
dc.identifier.spage1439en_US
dc.identifier.epage1446en_US
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridMasterlark, TL=6603614241en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWang, HF=16450727900en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridChan, LS=7403540528en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridYongtai, C=7801373837en_US

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats